Scottish Parliament, 6 March 2025

283 contributions from 64 members. The official report.

General Question Time

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

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

Gordon MacDonald (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Pentlands)

To ask the Scottish Government how Scotland’s recorded crime rate compares with other areas of the United Kingdom. (S6O-04394)

Angela Constance (Scottish National Party, Almond Valley)

Scotland’s recorded crime statistics cannot be compared to those of the rest of the UK, due to the different counting and classification systems used to produce the data. However, with a 40 per cent fall in recorded crime across Scotland since 2006-07, including a 74 per cent fall in housebreaking and a 68 per cent fall in theft of a motor vehicle, the long-term trend is clear.

Crime surveys can provide some comparisons, with the latest findings suggesting that in Scotland as well as in England and Wales, around one in 10 adults experienced violent and property crimes. That has fallen significantly for both jurisdictions since 2008-09.

Gordon MacDonald (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Pentlands)

I welcome the fact that recorded crime has halved since 1991, but what impact will the £25 million increase in national insurance by the UK Labour Government have on Police Scotland?

Angela Constance (Scottish National Party, Almond Valley)

As this Government and, indeed, this Parliament have repeatedly made clear, the UK Government’s decision to increase employer national insurance contributions will have a major impact on all sectors, with the hike likely to result in higher costs, job losses and increased prices. The impact will also be felt by our front-line public services, such as Police Scotland, and we estimate that the change could add more than £700 million in costs for public sector staff. The Treasury must fully fund the actual costs for Scotland’s public sector and not just give a much lower-value Barnett share of the spending in England.

Liam Kerr (Conservative, North East Scotland)

Reports say that up to a quarter of crimes go unreported, with more than 215,000 calls to 101 having been discontinued between January and July 2024. Since 2013, more than 140 police stations and 100 police counters have been closed. There are nearly 1,000 fewer police officers than there were in 2020, with the Aberdeen pilot of not investigating all crimes having been extended across Scotland. Given those facts, is the cabinet secretary investigating their impact on recorded crime rates, or are simplistic comparisons to other parts of the UK simply easier?

Angela Constance (Scottish National Party, Almond Valley)

I have no interest in making simplistic comparisons, but it is important that we focus on the facts. The strength of the Scottish crime and justice survey is that it captures not just recorded crime but the experience of crime. It is testament to the hard work of Police Scotland and, indeed, other parts of the justice system that there has been a significant fall in reports of victimisation from around 20 per cent to around one in 10.

Miles Briggs (Conservative, Lothian)

To ask the Scottish Government, in light of the potential impact on state schools of the United Kingdom Government’s decision to make independent schools liable for VAT, how it plans to use any Barnett consequential funding resulting from this decision to support state schools. (S6O-04395)

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

The Barnett formula does not entitle the Scottish Government to consequentials that are raised under reserved powers. Block grant changes are calculated with reference to the UK Government spend in devolved areas.

The UK Government had previously indicated the VAT revenue would be ring fenced and applied to the Department of Education budget to increase teacher numbers in England. His Majesty’s Treasury has now advised that there will be no ring fencing of that revenue. Although the autumn budget contained additional funding for the Department for Education, which led to Barnett consequentials, I am not able to confirm the proportion that was funded by VAT on school fees.

Miles Briggs (Conservative, Lothian)

This issue is becoming a growing concern in Edinburgh in particular. In a response to me, the cabinet secretary has said that, already, 79 pupils from the independent sector have enrolled in the state sector. Moreover, in response to the Education, Children and Young People Committee, she gave the detail that around 40 per cent of all pupils who attend independent schools in Scotland are in Edinburgh. If we finally get clarification from the UK Government on Barnett consequentials, will she commit to allocating 40 per cent of that funding to the City of Edinburgh Council, which is the council that will be most impacted?

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

I thank the member for his interest in the matter, which we discussed recently at a meeting of the Education, Children and Young People Committee. I also responded yesterday to the member’s parliamentary written question, giving the detail that he has alluded to.

In response to the member, I have made it very clear that the distribution methodology that we use for our funding to local government will take into account the issues that he has raised. I recognise that the issue is particularly pertinent to the City of Edinburgh Council, because of the number of pupils in the area who attend private school.

I hope that the member will take some comfort from my response today. I apologise that I am not able to give him the granular detail that he asked for originally, but that is because of the decisions that have been taken by the UK Government.

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

Can the cabinet secretary outline how the 2025-26 budget has already earmarked funding for support to state schools and, specifically, how the Scottish Government is supporting the recruitment of additional teachers, which is a significant issue in my constituency?

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

The 2025-26 Scottish budget provides record block grant funding of more than £15 billion for local government, which is an increase of £1.1 billion, or 5.5 per cent in real terms, compared with 2024-25. The 2025-26 local government finance settlement also includes an extra £186.5 million for increasing teacher numbers to 2023 levels, and a further £28 million of funding for the additional support for learning workforce. An additional £1 million has been specifically earmarked to support national initiatives to help recruit and train more ASL teachers, including in the member’s constituency.

Pam Duncan-Glancy (Labour, Glasgow)

The UK Government has increased funding for the Department for Education by much more than what the VAT policy is raising, which means that Scotland is getting Barnett consequentials that are worth more than just the VAT policy. This week, the NASUWT published research showing worrying increases in incidents of violence in school and highlighting that 62 per cent of respondents were not aware of the Government’s national plan in that respect. Given that, will the cabinet secretary use some of the increased funding to implement commitments set out in her national action plan?

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

The increased funding to which the member alludes was included in the Scottish Government’s budget. As I outlined in my response to Ms Nicoll, that budget includes £186.5 million for increasing teacher numbers to 2023 levels and an extra £29 million for additional support needs in our schools to help with, for example, the recruitment of additional support needs teachers, which of course can help to respond to some of the challenges that the member has set out. I do not understand how, on the one hand, the member can come to the chamber today and praise the additionality that is coming to the Scottish Government while, on the other, her party can decide not to vote in favour of the Scottish Government budget, which delivers on the challenge set out in the NASUWT report.

Carol Mochan (Labour, South Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to the reported view of the Children and Young People’s Commissioner Scotland that proposed changes to legislation on religious observance diverge from the recommendation by the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child to allow young people to independently opt out of religious observance at school. (S6O-04396)

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

As the First Minister noted in the chamber last week, we have consulted a wide range of stakeholders on changes to legislation on religious observance and religious and moral education in schools. The public consultation closed on 26 January. We recognise that there is a wide range of views on the topic, and ministers will continue to discuss those issues with Parliament and other interested parties. We will consider all responses to the consultation and publish a consultation analysis report in due course, as well as outlining next planned steps.

Carol Mochan (Labour, South Scotland)

The 2022 census found that more than 60 per cent of school-age children in Scotland now identify as non-religious. In an increasingly secular and religiously diverse country, it is critically important that young people of all faiths and none have their beliefs and choices respected in school. Parents have always had the right to opt their children out of religious observance, and all state schools are legally required to provide that opt-out to parents; however, pupils have no equivalent right, no matter their age, maturity or personal beliefs. Can the cabinet secretary provide clarity on the timeframes for when we might get the information that she mentions in her answer? Is it her view that we should conform to the UN committee’s recommendations?

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

The legislative changes proposed in the consultation will strengthen the rights of children and young people in Scotland; I think that that is what the member is alluding to, and I am very supportive of it. The changes also build on our commitment under the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. The existing guidance, which the member also alluded to, encourages schools to discuss with both parents and children the question of opting out of religious observance.

As the member will understand, the consultation analysis has not yet been published. However, I am more than happy to write to her about the timescales associated with the consultation in due course, when I have received that advice from my officials.

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

Can the cabinet secretary outline how the Scottish Government is ensuring that children’s rights are incorporated across our education system?

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

We are committed to upholding the rights of children and young people across Scotland and supporting public authorities to understand and fulfil their UNCRC duties, including in our education system.

In May 2022, we awarded UNICEF UK a three-year grant to support it in raising awareness of children’s rights across the majority of Scottish schools though its rights-respecting schools award. I was pleased yesterday to visit Glenrothes high school in my constituency to see the impact of that award, which the school has received at gold level, on the rights of children in that school in Fife.

Patrick Harvie (Green, Glasgow)

If we believe in the principle of religious freedom, surely it is clear that any pupil who is mature enough to decide that they are not a believer should not be required to go through a pretence of religious observance. Can the cabinet secretary assure us that, in analysing the consultation responses, she will give due regard to the views of young people who want to make what is a perfectly reasonable choice for themselves?

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

Of course, I recognise the member’s views. It is important that we balance them accordingly, and I am also mindful of the range of different views on the topic. As I said in my response to Ms Mochan, I will give due consideration to those views once I have received the consultation analysis. I can then set out more detail on the associated timescales.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Question 4 was not lodged.

Emma Harper (Scottish National Party, South Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Government what steps it is taking to support increased levels of sport and physical activity in Dumfries and Galloway. (S6O-04398)

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

We are working in partnership with Public Health Scotland, sportscotland and colleagues in Dumfries and Galloway to identify evidence-based actions based on our physical activity for health framework, which will improve levels of physical activity in that area.

This year, sportscotland has provided £424,000 to Dumfries and Galloway Council to support its active schools programme, community sport hubs, community cycling, and coaching. Recent investment of £880,000 has been delivered through sportscotland’s sport facilities fund and cycle facilities fund, and £845,000 has been awarded via the transforming Scottish indoor tennis fund to construct a new indoor facility in Dumfries.

Emma Harper (Scottish National Party, South Scotland)

I was pleased to hear recent announcements that encouraged a higher uptake of physical activity for my constituents in that area—in particular, the announcement of the Stranraer water sports hub, which is expected to open in 2026, and the new indoor tennis courts development at the King George V complex in Dumfries.

Will the minister join me in welcoming those significant investments to the sports sector in Dumfries and Galloway, and will she consider joining me to visit both sites to see the marked improvement that they will make for local people?

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

I absolutely welcome those significant facilities investments. Both of those developments will have such a positive impact on the local community and will provide more and better opportunities to be physically active, either on the water or on a tennis court. I would be delighted to visit both sites to see the positive impact at first hand.

Stuart McMillan (Scottish National Party, Greenock and Inverclyde)

To ask the Scottish Government when it last discussed the future of Greenock police station with Police Scotland. (S6O-04399)

Angela Constance (Scottish National Party, Almond Valley)

I last discussed the police estate with the chief constable in January. We discussed Police Scotland’s estate master plan, which sets out its plans to modernise the police estate to ensure that it best serves communities and the Police Scotland workforce and that it is fit for the future.

Despite the unprecedented challenges to public finances in 2025-26, we will increase the police capital budget to £75 million—an increase of more than £10 million. That capital increase will support Police Scotland to commence delivery of its estate master plan, which will deliver a modern, fit-for-purpose estate that best serves the needs of communities and the policing workforce.

Stuart McMillan (Scottish National Party, Greenock and Inverclyde)

It is well documented that the Greenock police station is far past its sell-by date. The facility is no longer fit for purpose and the volume and cost of repairs will only continue to grow. Although I acknowledge that there is no question but that there will be a replacement police station in Greenock, there has been no firm commitment with regard to replacing the custody suite, which is absolutely crucial. Has the cabinet secretary received any assurances that any new Greenock police station will have a custody suite?

Angela Constance (Scottish National Party, Almond Valley)

Mr McMillan raises a very important point about the provision of custody suites and their location in his locality and across Scotland. I assure him that Police Scotland’s initial work on its estates master plan has identified Glasgow and the west of Scotland as priority areas for further work, and it is currently undertaking detailed work to understand the property requirements. That work will include consideration of the provision of custody facilities across those communities, to ensure that effective policing can continue to be delivered.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Time is tight, but I will allow a brief supplementary from Jamie Greene.

Jamie Greene (Conservative, West Scotland)

I endorse Mr McMillan’s comments. Two years ago, Police Scotland wrote to me to say that it was considering a replacement for Greenock police station. A replacement is now needed more than ever. Last year, in the Inverclyde area, common assault was up by 10 per cent, violent crime was up by 7 per cent and domestic abuse was up by 20 per cent, so surely the cabinet secretary can see the need for quick action on the issue.

Angela Constance (Scottish National Party, Almond Valley)

I assure Jamie Greene that no decision has been taken on the future of Greenock police station at this time. It will be considered as part of the delivery of the wider Police Scotland estates master plan. I am aware of the important consultation that has been held with respect to services in Greenock. That consultation has now closed, and its results remain under review. In January last year, the divisional commander for Renfrewshire and Inverclyde attended Inverclyde Council’s police scrutiny panel to discuss the details. I am sure that members will be kept informed on those important matters.

Evelyn Tweed (Scottish National Party, Stirling)

To ask the Scottish Government how it will work with the national health service to ensure that infrastructure is in place to meet demand for adult attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and autism assessments, in light of reports that NHS Forth Valley has closed its service. (S6O-04400)

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

I recognise that the significant increase in adults seeking ADHD and autism assessments across Scotland is creating challenges for services. However, a diagnosis can be crucial to receiving the right support, and I expect the situation to be resolved at the earliest opportunity. My officials are liaising with national health service boards across Scotland, including NHS Forth Valley, to understand what provision they have in place, and they are exploring how to address current issues.

Evelyn Tweed (Scottish National Party, Stirling)

My constituent Jake has struggled with his mental health for many years. A child and adolescent mental health services professional suspected ADHD, but no formal diagnosis was forthcoming. Jake finally got a private diagnosis of ADHD, but now he cannot access NHS support. What pathways and support are available to people in that position?

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

As I said, we are working with local health bodies to improve services and support. The General Medical Council’s good practice guidance on shared care advises that decisions about who should take responsibility for continuing care or treatment after initial diagnosis or assessment should be based on the patient’s best interests. It is at the clinical discretion of each individual general practitioner to decide the best course of action for their patients. Although a recommendation from a private specialist does not entitle the patient to NHS prescriptions for the relevant medicine, medication can be considered as part of the shared care agreement.

I am concerned that GPs sometimes face pressure to prescribe when the assessment is sufficient and the patient is moving to the NHS, but they have not yet been accepted into the NHS psychiatry side of the shared care agreement. The challenge is that—

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Please be brief, minister.

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

—if the monitoring requirements that have been set by a private provider differ from the NHS recommendations, that leaves the GP prescriber in a very difficult, and potentially unsafe, situation.

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

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on action 20 of the housing to 2040 strategy to “streamline and accelerate the adaptations system”. (S6O-04401)

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

We are taking forward a review of the current housing adaptations system to consider how the process can be streamlined and made easier for people who need adaptations. We are also continuing to provide support to help registered social landlords meet their responsibilities to deliver housing adaptations. The 2025-26 budget will more than double the budget for that, taking it to £20.9 million.

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

I was pleased to take part in last week’s members’ business debate on protections for park home residents, during which I raised the issue of park homes being exempt from financial help towards home adaptations, as per the Housing (Scotland) Act 2006. What steps will the Scottish Government take to improve protections for park home residents?

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

We are committed to ensuring that park home residents have appropriate rights and protections. The adaptations review will consider funding and legislation, including the situation for mobile homes. In addition, the Housing (Scotland) Bill proposes changing the basis for pitch fee uprating from the retail prices index to the consumer prices index. I also intend to engage with local authorities to remind them of their powers in relation to site licensing, with the Office of Gas and Electricity Markets to raise the issues faced by park home residents in relation to oil, and with the United Kingdom Government to highlight the impact on Scottish consumers of the mis-selling of mobile homes.

First Minister’s Question Time

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

In recent weeks, I have had the privilege of meeting apprentices in businesses across Scotland, including at Thales in Govan, at Collins Aerospace in Prestwick and, yesterday, at Persimmon Homes in East Lothian, where I must report that it became clear that I will never make it as a brickie.

This week, my party started a public debate on reducing the school leaving age from 16. It has long been clear that far too many young people have been failed by the Scottish National Party’s education system, and we propose giving young people who are being left behind the opportunity of having a hybrid education with training in colleges and the workplace. Does John Swinney agree that that conversation is long overdue, and will he give any consideration to our proposals?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

That is a bold approach to First Minister’s question time, given that, when Mr Findlay set out his proposals yesterday, he conceded in a television interview that he was, in fact, not certain that those proposals would get anywhere near a Conservative manifesto. After that interview, I am not sure that Mr Findlay has quite as much confidence in the policy that he has put to me today.

I do not agree with the proposals. We have spent a great deal of time and effort on trying to encourage young people to maximise their engagement with education. That has resulted in more young people staying on at school and, as a consequence, more young people going into positive destinations when they leave school. [ Interruption. ]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Let us hear the First Minister.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Indeed, the numbers of those going to positive destinations are at record levels, so I do not intend to follow the policy approach that has been proposed by Mr Findlay, but I do not think that he does, either.

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

Scotland’s business community can see that the issue needs proper political attention. Last night, I attended a think tank event where senior people from business and education voiced their support. They can see that, over the past 18 years of SNP rule, far too many young people have been left behind. Former SNP Government economic adviser Jim McColl said:

“A lot of these youngsters at school don’t want to be there ... They’re not interested in it. And all of a sudden you’re giving them an opportunity to learn a trade and be earning money. So I feel it’s a brilliant move.”

[ Interruption. ]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Let us hear Mr Findlay.

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

This Parliament needs to focus more on encouraging opportunity and aspiration and on giving pupils the chance to thrive. Does John Swinney not see that we need to do things differently?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I am all for encouraging young people to thrive and for taking opportunities to ensure that that is the case. That is why this Government has reformed the approach to apprenticeships. For example, while young people are school pupils, they can take up foundation apprenticeships as part of work-based learning in the senior phase. That can result in young people spending a day per week, during the senior phase, working with an employer. Since their introduction in 2016, 15,371 pupils have enrolled in a foundation apprenticeship and have benefited from the value of work-based learning, and 5,000 places are now available each year.

That is the pragmatic approach that this Government takes to make sure that we address the issue that Mr Findlay has raised with me. School does not suit everybody, so we are adapting the curriculum to make sure that it does suit young people through the use of foundation apprenticeships. That is one of the excellent reforms that this Government has introduced.

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

As a former education secretary, John Swinney knows fine well that far too many young people are being left behind, no matter what statistics he selectively quotes at me. One in seven Scottish pupils leave school without a single qualification, and he thinks that that is good enough. Last year, half a million days were lost to unexplained absences of secondary 4 pupils. Thousands of bright, talented and dynamic young people simply drop out of the system. Far too many are being failed by this complacent Government. Is John Swinney really telling us that he is content to deprive thousands of young Scots of a brighter and better future?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

As I said in my earlier answer, I want young people to have the brightest possible future, which is why we have enabled schools to offer increased opportunities for young people to prepare for the world of work. Thirty-five per cent of 2023-24 school leavers gained a vocational or technical qualification at Scottish credit and qualifications framework level 5 or above, which is an increase of 7.3 per cent compared with the figure for 2013-14. That is the Government actually delivering practical steps to improve the work chances and life chances of young people in Scotland. This Government has reformed education to strengthen the opportunities for young people. As a consequence, young people are going on to positive destinations after leaving school at record levels in Scotland today.

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

The First Minister wants to quote statistics on standards, but we have the lowest rate of higher passes for a decade. [ Interruption .] The education secretary is providing a running commentary from a seated position. She will have to stay behind for detention. She is setting a very bad example to the pupils who are in the chamber today. [ Interruption .]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Let us hear one another.

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

The problems with Scotland’s schools run even deeper than the scandal of so many young people being left behind. More than 80 per cent of teachers say that violent and abusive behaviour has increased. In a teaching union survey that was published this week, they told of being assaulted with knives, chairs and hockey sticks. They have been bitten, spat on, head-butted, punched and kicked. They have had fireworks thrown at them and their cars vandalised. Teachers say that they are at breaking point and that pupils’ education is suffering. What does the First Minister have to say to teachers about the breakdown in classroom discipline?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The first thing that I will say is that I take deadly seriously the findings of the NASUWT survey that were published this week. That is why the education secretary has been working with local authorities and trade unions on a series of interventions in relation to behaviour at school.

It is important that, for completeness, we hear all the issues that are raised by the NASUWT survey. The NASUWT said:

“a greater focus on exploring correlation between behaviour issues and poverty is required.”

The general secretary of the Educational Institute of Scotland said:

“since the onset of austerity, we have seen rising incidents of violent, aggressive, dysregulated, distressed behaviour in classrooms and growing incidents of additional support needs.”

I acknowledge that, in the atmosphere and environment since Covid, there has been an increase in challenging behaviour in schools, but that is not unique to Scotland—every education system in the western world is reporting the same evidence. The Government will take action, working with our local authority and trade union partners, to try to address the issue, because that dysregulated behaviour in our schools is unacceptable.

What I will not do is what Russell Findlay does, which is to characterise all young people as behaving badly. [ Interruption .]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Thank you, members.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Most young people in our society behave well, and I compliment young people on the achievements that they make in our country.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

I start by congratulating the First Minister on the wonderful news that he has become a grandfather. [ Applause .] I emphasise that he is a young grandfather. [ Laughter .] I am sure that everyone across the chamber sends their best wishes to all his family on the birth of baby Rua.

A national health service that is available and free when we need it is the founding principle of our NHS, but under the Scottish National Party, that principle and promise have been broken. Right now, more than 100,000 Scots have been waiting more than a year for hospital treatment, so it is not there when they need it. In the past nine months, more than 36,500 private procedures have been paid for by Scots, so treatment is not free when they need it. Why is the NHS no longer available and free at the point of need under John Swinney and the SNP?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

First, I thank Mr Sarwar for his generous and kind comments about the birth of my first grandson. I also welcome his characterisation of me as “a young grandfather”. That is the most precious remark, and it is helping me to come to terms with all that is going on in my life just now. His kindness and good wishes are deeply appreciated by my daughter, her husband and Rua—as are those of many other members of the Parliament. I am grateful for them.

In relation to the NHS, Mr Sarwar knows from our exchanges that the issue commands my attention and is an absolute priority for me. I recognise that people are waiting too long for treatment in Scotland today, so the work that the health secretary and I are doing is very focused on reducing waiting list numbers—indeed, that was the subject of a lengthy discussion yesterday between me, the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care and NHS chief officers from around the country.

We are in a position in which progress has been made. Figures that were published in February show a 4 per cent decrease in the total waiting list size for diagnostic tests, which is one illustration of the improvements that are being made. We are determined to focus on further improvements by ensuring that we increase the capacity of the national health service, increase productivity at the local level and are able to meet the needs of the population.

The point that Mr Sarwar put to me, in principle, of an NHS being available free at the point of need when people require it, is exactly what I want to deliver for the people of Scotland.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

I think that that was an admission that the First Minister wants to deliver that, but that it does not exist for patients across the country.

The sad truth is that the NHS is not even free and available for all the people who work in it. Let us take the experience of an NHS support worker from the west of Scotland. She has worked in our NHS for 35 years. Due to being increasingly unable to walk because of her hip, she was left hobbling to work on crutches. She faced up to three years on an NHS waiting list and being forced to retire nine years early or paying to go private. She took the difficult decision of withdrawing from her modest pension to pay for a private hip operation. The total cost of that to her was £24,000. That was almost her entire annual salary spent on an operation that should have been free. That is scandalous.

Is John Swinney proud that even NHS workers are being forced to pay thousands of pounds of their own money to get the treatment that they need?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I do not want that to be the case. I want individuals—particularly those who are in circumstances such as Mr Sarwar has put to me—to be able to access healthcare services when they require them. That is why the health secretary and I are working so intensively with health boards to increase the capacity and capability of health boards around the country to deliver more procedures. It comes down to their being able to deliver more hip and knee operations, and to undertake more diagnostic activity. The investment that has been made available through the Government’s budget for the next financial year will help us to strengthen delivery through increased numbers of procedures.

As Mr Sarwar will know, there has been a significant expansion in waiting lists because of the interruption that was caused by Covid, which disrupted our healthcare services. We are working to recover from that as quickly as we can. I give him my assurance that ministers are entirely focused on that, and that we have put in place the financial support to ensure that we will be able to undertake more procedures than we have been able to undertake in the current financial year.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

That NHS worker is not alone. Based on the data for the first nine months of 2024, Scots have had to pay an estimated £17.6 million of their own money on cataract treatment, £30.8 million of their own money on hip replacements and an estimated £16 million of their own money on knee replacements.

Most shocking of all is that Scots have had to pay thousands of pounds of their own money to fund 700 rounds of chemotherapy: Scots have had to pay for cancer care under John Swinney and the SNP. That cannot go on. That is why, as First Minister, I will declare a waiting times emergency. [ Interruption .]

It is their constituents whom I am talking about, who are having to pay thousands of pounds for care, so SNP members should reflect on why they are groaning.

I will declare a waiting times emergency and do whatever it takes to cut waiting lists across the country, so that Scots get the care that they need. Is it not the case that the SNP broke our NHS, but can never be the party to fix it?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I think that Mr Sarwar has used that line on me once or twice before, and I dare say that I will hear it a few more times between now and the elections in May 2026.

I will try to address the substance of Mr Sarwar’s points. I am concerned about those points, and I will happily look in more detail at the issues that he has raised. On cancer care, under the 31-day standard, 94.3 per cent of patients were treated within 31 days of a decision to treat, with a median wait for treatment of just four days. That is exceptional performance. We are finding difficulty in meeting the 62-day standard, but the median wait is 49 days from urgent suspicion of cancer referral to first treatment.

In addition, through the work that is under way, the Government is putting in place provisions to deliver more than 150,000 extra appointments and procedures. In relation to some of the additional sites that we are bringing forward to undertake orthopaedic appointments—which Mr Sarwar asked me about—we expect to be able to deliver more than 2,500 extra procedures in those sites. That is possible only because the Government’s budget has been approved by Parliament and will invest a record amount of money in the national health service.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Briefly, please, First Minister.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Mr Sarwar can talk to the Parliament all he wants about his intentions for the years to come—if he gets that opportunity—but in the here and now, when Parliament was faced with deciding whether to fund the NHS to the required level, Mr Sarwar was posted missing.

Patrick Harvie (Green, Glasgow)

Happy news is a rare and precious thing in these times, so I echo the congratulations to the First Minister and his family on their new arrival.

In April, energy bills are set to rise for the third time in less than a year, and people across Scotland are worried about those bills. At the same time, energy companies are raking in vast profits at the expense of people and the planet. Our energy markets are broken. We could both say what we think the United Kingdom Government should do to fix those markets, but the Scottish Government has also promised action that has not been taken.

My most recent question to the First Minister was nearly three months ago. I asked him about his promise of a new law to end our reliance on gas for home heating—law that is vital to tackling the climate emergency and cutting people’s bills. The proposed law was, without explanation, already overdue back in December. Here we are in March, but there is still no legislation and no explanation.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Question, please.

Patrick Harvie (Green, Glasgow)

Where is it?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The Government is considering all the issues that were raised in the consultation on heat in buildings. We will respond as soon as we can.

I confirmed to Parliament that tackling the climate emergency is one of my key priorities—it is one of the four priorities of the Government. Heating our homes and workplaces causes around 20 per cent of our emissions, and we cannot achieve net zero without ending our use of gas boilers.

Patrick Harvie (Green, Glasgow)

The Government was considering the consultation a year ago, and the real concern is that it has been spending that time watering it down. That is my fear and the fear of the green-heat industry.

The reality is that Scotland is already well behind many other European countries on the issue. France and Germany have been accelerating their action, and Scandinavian countries are decades ahead of us. The only way to catch up and to give Scottish households the benefit of affordable and reliable heat, and to cut the pollution that is destroying our environment, is for the Government to act decisively and to show leadership. However, just as the Government has slowed down on other green measures by hiking rail fares and watering down rent controls, progress on clean heat has been stalled.

Will the First Minister commit to getting the overdue proposed legislation published this month, so that we get the clarity and leadership that have been lacking?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I am very happy to confirm to the Parliament that there will be leadership to take that issue forward, as there is on a wide variety of climate measures. That is evidenced by the financial commitments that the Government has introduced in the budget, which I was delighted that Mr Harvie and his colleagues were able to support.

I recognise the urgency and seriousness of the issue. Fuel poverty in our country is one of the key issues that underpins the question that Mr Harvie has put to me. The impact of changes in energy prices on fuel poverty rates in Scotland is clear, as those rates have almost doubled between 2019 and 2023. We must acknowledge the significance of the impact of fuel and energy prices on fuel poverty. That is why we must take action on the climate, which Mr Harvie has raised with me, why the matter is central to the Government’s agenda and why we will deliver progress as quickly as we can.

Marie McNair (Scottish National Party, Clydebank and Milngavie)

To ask the First Minister how the Scottish Government will mark international women’s day, and its theme of “Accelerating Action” to reach gender equality. (S6F-03867)

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The Scottish Government is accelerating action for a fairer Scotland for women and girls, working to ensure that women and girls have equal rights and opportunities and equitable access to resources and can live their lives free from abuse. That work includes delivering the women’s health plan, investing to tackle domestic violence against women and girls and survivors of abuse, supporting women to access fair work and helping to reduce the gender pay gap.

The Government will leave no stone unturned in our work towards equality. I know that many members will be attending events this international women’s day, which are taking place in local communities across the country. I wish everyone a successful day of celebration and action.

Marie McNair (Scottish National Party, Clydebank and Milngavie)

I am privileged to have already spoken at two fantastic international women’s day events in Clydebank, with Moments of Freedom and the Isaro Community Initiative, both of which are led by formidable women who push for the social and economic integration of new Scots in our communities.

Will the First Minister join me in welcoming the contributions that local groups in Clydebank and Milngavie are making and advise us what steps the Scottish Government is taking to accelerate action on gender equality for all women, in particular those who face overlapping forms of oppression based on their identity?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I am very happy to welcome the contribution of Moments of Freedom women and the Isaro Community Initiative to welcome new Scots. I know that Moments of Freedom was one of more than 80 organisations that hosted a community consultation as part of the work to update the “New Scots Refugee Integration Strategy” last year.

Through our cross-policy working on the “New Scots Refugee Integration Strategy Delivery Plan 2024-26”, we are taking account of intersectional approaches to gender equality, including engaging new Scots in the delivery of Scotland’s equally safe strategy and the wider work on violence against women and girls to ensure that the needs of new Scots are addressed. Intersectionality is key to our work with the National Advisory Council on Women and Girls for accelerating action on gender equality.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

I call Rachael Hamilton.

Rachael Hamilton (Conservative, Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire)

My constituent has been told that, based on the current outpatient waiting list, he is required to wait 59 weeks for an orthopaedic appointment.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

I am sorry, Ms Hamilton, but is your question in relation to question 4?

Rachael Hamilton (Conservative, Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire)

Oh, no. Well, the First Minister will have got the idea.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

We will get to general constituency supplementaries later. I call Tess White.

Tess White (Conservative, North East Scotland)

Women’s human rights are being abused in Scotland due to the treatment of biological males as females. A report was published this week by the Women’s Rights Network with spine-chilling figures on rapes and sexual assaults in Scottish hospitals. It is not only in our hospitals—women are being placed in harm’s way, both physically and psychologically, in Scottish prisons, rape crisis centres, toilets and changing rooms. In this week of international women’s day, if the First Minister is not alarmed by that, shame on him. If he wants to do something about it to accelerate action, which is this year’s theme for international women’s day, will he meet me and cross-party MSPs as a matter of urgency? How can any progress on women’s equality be made without that?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Anyone who has listened to anything that I have said during my tenure as First Minister will know that I am absolutely committed to protecting and asserting the safety of women and girls in our society.

I am exercising leadership, as I have done from the moment I became First Minister, to challenge the underpinning issue that affects the safety of women and girls in society, which is the behaviour of men. I will be unapologetic in setting out that point of view from my position as a male First Minister, and in exercising leadership to make sure that men face up to their responsibilities to ensure that women and girls can live safely in our society today.

Katy (Labour, West Scotland)

It has recently been reported that almost 10 per cent of the 2,000 women who have died at the hands of men in the United Kingdom over the past 15 years have been killed by their own sons. What more does the First Minister believe the Scottish Government can do to raise awareness of that risk and improve support for women?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Katy Clark puts an incredibly serious point to me. It comes back to the answer that I have just given, which is that there is a responsibility on all society to try to help boys and men to improve their conduct and actions. That will be the route to addressing the fundamental issue that Katy Clark puts to me, which will result in the protection of mothers and women who face danger. She has my absolute assurance, and I am very happy to work across the political spectrum to do all that we can to improve the cultural attitudes and approaches of men and boys in our society, because I believe that to be fundamental to addressing the serious issue that she puts to me.

Ash Denham (Alba, Edinburgh Eastern)

Despite the First Minister’s warm words during the answer to the question, I feel that he is woefully out of touch on the situation of women’s rights across Scotland. Therefore, it is utterly impossible to accelerate action towards gender equality when women’s human rights are under attack.

The Scottish Government must now apologise for its role in that and break from those state-sanctioned abuses. Will the First Minister make a clear commitment today to uphold the internationally protected human rights of women and girls in Scotland?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I will not accept the charge—I reject it entirely—of state-sanctioned abuses. I will not accept that charge from Ash Regan in any way, shape or form. I have put on the record my absolute commitment to the protection of women and girls in our society. That underpins the policy agenda of my Government and it will underpin my conduct as First Minister.

Annie Wells (Conservative, Glasgow)

To ask the First Minister what plans the Scottish Government has to tackle the reported rising number of cases of drug driving. (S6F-03870)

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

In 2019, a new drug driving offence was introduced, which added to the powers that are available to keep Scotland’s roads safe. Although I was concerned by the increase in the number of positive tests by Police Scotland, it is clear that its focused enforcement approach is helping to tackle the scourge of drug driving using the new law. We fully support the enforcement efforts of Police Scotland in addressing drug driving, and the budget will increase police funding by £70 million to £1.62 billion in order to support capacity and capability.

Annie Wells (Conservative, Glasgow)

Earlier this week, The Scottish Sun reported that drug driving in Scotland now eclipses drink driving by around three to one. It is even more incredible that when the police pull over someone suspected of drug driving, subsequent testing proves their suspicions correct on more than 50 per cent of occasions. In contrast, for drink driving, such tests are positive in only around one in 20 cases.

Over the years, drink driving initiatives have been hailed for their positive impact and their role in making drink driving far less socially accepted than it was in past generations, saving lives in the process. Does the First Minister have plans to do something similar with drug driving?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Yes—I agree with what Annie Wells puts to me. During the festive period just a few months ago, Police Scotland strengthened the drink and drug driving campaign. I hope that that gives Annie Wells assurance that it will now be woven into the approach that the Government and Police Scotland are taking.

I reassure Annie Wells that there is a very high conviction rate for drug driving. In 2022-23, 95 per cent, which is a very high level, of those who were accused were convicted as a consequence of charges being brought. I accept unreservedly the member’s point about the necessity of raising awareness of the dangers of drug driving. We will ensure that that is reflected in the overall messaging on the issue.

Foysol Choudhury (Labour, Lothian)

To ask the First Minister whether he will provide an update on how the Scottish Government is working to tackle Islamophobia in Scotland, in light of reports that anti-Muslim hate incidents across the United Kingdom reached record levels in 2024. (S6F-03871)

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The rise in anti-Muslim hate incidents is of serious concern. The Scottish Government unequivocally condemns all forms of Islamophobia and the impact that it has on individuals, families and communities. That is why we work co-operatively with a range of partners to tackle such pernicious behaviour. Our hate crime strategy and the associated delivery plan include strategic priorities for tackling hate crime and Islamophobia in Scotland. Importantly, the strategy was informed by those with lived experience of Islamophobia, which is central to understanding the challenges that we face.

Foysol Choudhury (Labour, Lothian)

The First Minister will know that last Friday was the beginning of Ramadan, which is a time of reflection, peace and hope for Muslims in Scotland and worldwide. However, Muslim communities across the UK and Scotland are now facing hatred at a higher level than ever. The UK Labour Government has convened a working group on Islamophobia, which will create a definition of it. Will the Scottish Government adopt that definition? When will we see real progress on the implementation of the recommendations from the inquiry into Islamophobia from the cross-party group on tackling Islamophobia?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Two recommendations were levelled at the Scottish Government in the cross-party group’s report. One was to increase the understanding of Islamophobia in the curriculum in our schools, and the other was to ensure that the public sector equality duty was enforced in schools. I assure Mr Choudhury that those priorities are being taken forward by the Scottish Government. It is vital that we do all that we can to ensure that we take steps on the issue. We will consider any decision that is made by the United Kingdom Government on the definition of Islamophobia and will consider any implications of that decision for our approach to adopting a definition.

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

The growing levels of Islamophobia in the UK are deeply concerning. It is vital that we recognise that more must be done. Will the First Minister further outline how he hopes that the gathering of representatives from key organisations with the leaders of Scotland’s parliamentary parties, which was announced last week, will assist in creating a more cohesive society in which everyone feels at home?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Last week, I set out my aspiration to draw together leaders from across Scotland, including from our parliamentary parties, to consider how we can agree a common approach to asserting the values of our country in order to bring people together and create a cohesive society where everyone feels safe and at home. I am heartened by the response from civic society and parliamentary party leaders, and I hope that we will be able to convene that gathering on 23 April. My objective is to draw people together to encourage community cohesion, which will involve working to tackle the hatred and prejudice that Mr Choudhury raised—Audrey Nicoll echoed what he said. I look forward to using that gathering to create a firm foundation for the values of Scottish society.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

We move to constituency and general supplementary questions. If we are all concise, more members will have an opportunity for scrutiny.

Alexander Stewart (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

Police officers in my region and across Scotland are suffering from burnout and low morale and are working in desperate conditions, according to a report that was published this week. The report showed that 68,000 rest days were cancelled in just six months. The pressure that is being put on police officers to meet the demands that are placed on them is clearly unsustainable. What measures will the Scottish Government put in place to ensure that hard-pressed and pressured officers are given the support that they rightly deserve?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I value the work that police officers undertake in Scotland, and we support Police Scotland with the financial resources to enable it to deliver its services across the country. The chief constable has put in place a variety of measures to support the mental health and wellbeing of police officers. That is undertaken through an employee assistance programme, which focuses on mental health support and provides enhanced occupational health services for police officers. The your wellbeing matters programme offers a range of services to care for the psychological, physical, social and financial wellbeing of police officers, and I welcome the impact that that has on supporting police officers.

George Adam (Scottish National Party, Paisley)

Figures that were released this week show that more than 200 million free bus journeys have been made across Scotland by under-22s. As this is Scottish apprenticeship week, will the First Minister provide further detail about how the scheme is supporting apprentices in Paisley and across Scotland to work, learn and earn?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The concessionary bus travel scheme has been an unparalleled success. It has, crucially, given young people much greater mobility in our society and has enabled them to access a much wider range of employment and training opportunities around the country. That will have a profound effect in all communities in the country, and I know that the effect that it has had in the Paisley constituency will be precious to Mr Adam. From my dialogue with young people, I know about the positive impact of the policy instrument and the way in which it has increased opportunities and life chances for young people in Scotland.

Rhoda Grant (Labour, Highlands and Islands)

The First Minister will be aware that communities in South Uist and Barra are suffering a fifth year of extreme ferry failure, which is causing irreversible damage to the local economy. What resource can be set aside for a resilience fund for businesses and communities that are on the brink of collapse due to that failure?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I am very familiar with the issues that Rhoda Grant raises with me. I had discussions about that question when I was in South Uist some years ago, and I saw correspondence last night, which was sent to me by the local member, Dr Alasdair Allan, in relation to the very issues that have been raised by the South Uist business community.

I am sorry for the disruption that is being felt. We believed that, at this point, we would be in a stronger position with the resilience of the ferry network, but there have been delays regarding some of the ferries that we expected to be delivered—Rhoda Grant will be familiar with those issues, and Parliament has been advised of them.

I am considering the proposals that have been put to me by the South Uist business community, as is the Cabinet Secretary for Transport. We will update members, including Rhoda Grant, on any response from the Government to those proposals.

Clare Haughey (Scottish National Party, Rutherglen)

I remind members that I hold a bank nurse contract with NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde.

New figures show that child and adolescent mental health services targets were met in the final quarter of 2024, with 90.6 per cent of patients being seen within 18 weeks of referral. Although there is still more to be done to build on that progress, can the First Minister advise how his Government’s investment in mental health services in the 2025-26 budget will ensure that that target is consistently met in the future, to deliver the best possible outcomes for young people who rely on those services?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

It is important that we continue to make progress on the issue. I welcome the fact that the 18-week target was met in the final quarter of 2024.

To respond to the specific question that Clare Haughey put to me, £123 million has been allocated through the enhanced mental health outcomes framework in the budget for next year, which I hope will help to continue to build on the progress that has been made in the current financial year.

Edward Mountain (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

NHS Highland’s vascular services have been in terminal decline for years. Sadly, our last vascular surgeon has just resigned because he feels that the way that the service is delivered is a threat to life and limb.

Given that NHS Highland has hospital beds and vascular surgery theatres available, will the First Minister ask his health secretary to review the situation? It is unacceptable that patients in the Highlands are being put in taxis and ambulances late at night to get to the central belt in order to get surgery.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Mr Mountain raises an important point. Indeed, the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care and I discussed not that specific issue but the general question of how we deliver healthcare in areas where recruitment and employment can be a challenge but where, as Mr Mountain correctly puts to me, there is physical capacity to undertake some of that surgical activity in the health board facilities.

Part of what we are trying to work on is how we work collaboratively in health boards to address the circumstances that Mr Mountain puts to me, so that we can use that capacity to help us to reduce waiting times and meet the needs of his constituents and others. It is very much a live part of the activity that the health secretary and I are taking forward to ensure that the needs of constituents around the country are met.

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

This week, the United Nations Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights called on the United Kingdom Labour Government to immediately repeal its two-child cap, as it violates children’s rights and exacerbates poverty and social inequality. In that context, will the First Minister give an update on the work of our Scottish National Party Government to end the two-child cap in Scotland? Will he join my calls—yet again—for Westminster to scrap at source Labour’s cruel two-child cap, which, let us not forget, is deliberately designed to deny 1.6 million children in low-income families enough money simply to live on?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I reassure Mr Doris that the Government is taking forward work that involves the design of systems to enable us to lift the two-child cap, which is one of the policy priorities and commitments in the Government’s budget for the coming year. That is under way and we are making the necessary progress on it.

Obviously, that measure will help us to lift children out of poverty. That will not be assisted by some of the speculation that we have heard over the past few days about significant reductions in the welfare budget, which will undoubtedly have the effect of jeopardising the incomes of households in Scotland and, particularly, affect child poverty levels in our country.

Richard Leonard (Labour, Central Scotland)

I refer members to my entry in the register of members’ interests.

Does the First Minister share my concern that industrial action is set to begin at Scottish Water this weekend? What does he say to the Scottish Water trade union representatives who are gathered in the public gallery about his ministers sanctioning bonuses to the bosses of Scottish Water that are more than 10 times greater than the pay rise that is now offered to the workers of Scottish Water?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The first thing that I will say is that I saw during the week news that Mr Leonard intends not to seek re-election to Parliament. I express my warmest wishes to him and commend him for his service in the Scottish Parliament, which has been full of impact on many issues—including some of the issues that he puts to me on behalf of employees in Scotland today—for which I have the greatest respect.

Strike action at Scottish Water is obviously a matter for Scottish Water. I encourage the Scottish Water leadership and trade unions to try to find a solution that avoids disruption.

On the question of bonuses, because we have explained all the details to Parliament, Mr Leonard will be familiar with the point that, when it comes to the recruitment of leadership for Scottish Water, we are invariably in competition with other water companies around the United Kingdom. In that competition, the element of bonuses is part of the fabric of the financial settlements that are available to attract employees. Comparatively, bonus payments for the leadership of Scottish Water are much lower than those in other parts of the United Kingdom and the performance of Scottish Water is much higher than that of companies in other parts of the United Kingdom.

I acknowledge that those are difficult comparisons to make, but they are part of the judgments that the Government has to arrive at on how we attract the leadership to safeguard the important asset that is Scottish Water.

Rachael Hamilton (Conservative, Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire)

My constituent has been told that, based on current out-patient waiting times, he is required to wait 59 weeks for an orthopaedics appointment. If he then requires surgery, he will have to be added to the in-patient waiting queue and, currently, wait up to 91 weeks.

In response to Anna Sarwar’s question on waiting times, the First Minister said that progress had been made, but it has not, has it? Will the First Minister apologise personally to my constituent, who will wait for weeks in agony?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Progress is being made. As I said in my answer to Mr Sarwar and as I repeat in my answer to Rachael Hamilton, figures that were published in February show a 4 per cent decrease in the total waiting list for diagnostic tests, so we are making progress. For example, there has been a 44 per cent decrease in imaging waiting times at NHS Fife and a 22 per cent decrease in neurology waiting times at NHS Forth Valley.

Progress is being made, and it will be helped by the investment that the Government is making in the national health service, which I point out that Rachael Hamilton did not support. It is all very well coming here and complaining about issues in the national health service, but Rachael Hamilton is not prepared to support that financial investment; in fact, she represents a position of wanting to reduce public expenditure by £1 billion to afford a tax cut. How that will get orthopaedic appointments undertaken is beyond me. The Government is investing, and we are making much progress to reduce waiting lists. I will be happy to update Rachael Hamilton on the progress that we make in the weeks to come.

Neil Bibby (Labour, West Scotland)

According to Police Scotland, between April last year and February this year, there have been 132 road casualties in Renfrewshire. That is up by more than a quarter compared with the same period the year before. Since 2007, speed awareness courses have been in operation in England and Wales to help the police, but, as Chris Musson of The Sun wrote this week, there is still none available in Scotland, despite the Scottish Government first looking at the matter 16 years ago, in 2009.

In 2023, the Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Home Affairs stated that

“The Scottish Government agrees that speed awareness courses will have a positive impact on driver behaviour”

and that research on the matter

“shows that such interventions reduce reoffending”.—[Official Report, 7 September 2023; c 3.]

Does the Scottish Government still support speed awareness courses? Why are we still waiting for them to be rolled out, and when will they start?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I accept Mr Bibby’s point, and I will look at the question to see what action the Government can take to address that. Fundamentally, we have in place speed limits that are very clearly and manifestly advertised to individuals, so there is a level of personal responsibility at the start of all this. However, if there are speed awareness courses that can help to address the issue, I will happily consider the matter, and I will write to Mr Bibby about the steps that the Government is prepared to take.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

That concludes First Minister’s questions. There will be a short suspension to allow those leaving the chamber and the public gallery to do so before the next item of business begins.

United Kingdom Government Welfare Reforms

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

The next item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S6M-16536, in the name of Marie McNair, on the impact of UK welfare reforms in Scotland. The debate will be concluded without any question being put. I invite members who wish to participate in the debate to press their request-to-speak buttons.

I make a further plea to those who are leaving the public gallery to please do so as quietly as possible. I invite Marie McNair to open the debate.

Motion debated,

That the Parliament condemns the Labour UK administration for its reported intention to proceed with what it sees as punitive welfare reforms proposed under the previous Conservative administration; notes the calls on the UK Government to immediately reverse its plans, which, it considers, could seriously impact disabled people and increase financial insecurity in vulnerable households; further notes with alarm reports that, by 2029, over 450,000 disabled people and people with long-term conditions across the UK could be impacted as a result of the proposed reforms to Work Capability Assessment, with, it understands, many losing payments currently worth over £400 per month; is deeply concerned by what it sees as the callous language of UK Government ministers when discussing welfare reform, including the reported comment by the UK work and pensions secretary that some benefit claimants are “taking the mickey”; notes what it sees as the contrast between what it considers the demonisation of welfare recipients, under the UK Government, and the Scottish Government’s continued commitment to a devolved social security system based on dignity, fairness and respect; welcomes the reported investment of £1.3 billion above the UK block grant adjustment for social security expenditure in the draft Budget 2025-26, which reflects what it considers to be the social contract between the Scottish Government and the people of Scotland; understands that the Scottish Government is set to invest up to £210 million in measures to mitigate what it sees as UK Government austerity policies such as the so-called bedroom tax, benefit cap and cut to the Winter Fuel Payment in 2025-26, and notes the calls encouraging disadvantaged or low-income households across Scotland, including disabled and long-term ill people in the Clydebank and Milngavie constituency, to check their eligibility for social security payments and to claim the support to which they are entitled.

Marie McNair (Scottish National Party, Clydebank and Milngavie)

I am pleased to have secured today’s debate to discuss the impact of United Kingdom welfare cuts, and I thank all the members who have supported my motion. I also thank Age Scotland for the briefing that it provided.

Today’s debate comes at a very important time. Instead of a change of direction, we have a Government at Westminster that seems intent on making disabled people, children and pensioners the victims of austerity. The biggest lie of any election campaign was the statement, “Read my lips: no austerity.” The Labour Government has declared its intention to proceed with the cruel and inhumane welfare cuts that were proposed by the previous Tory Government. They are cuts that the respected disability charity Scope has described as “catastrophic”. It quotes Naomi who says,

“I feel abandoned by the Government ... It feels like they don’t see disabled people’s needs as important. I don’t think they care, and it makes me feel insignificant.”

Scope is calling for Labour to invest in an equal future for disabled people and not to increase poverty by cutting benefits.

Paul O'Kane (Labour, West Scotland)

Will the member take an intervention?

Marie McNair (Scottish National Party, Clydebank and Milngavie)

I will only take it if I can get the time back, because I am really tight for time.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

You will get the time back.

Paul O'Kane (Labour, West Scotland)

Does Marie McNair accept that an important part of dignity for disabled people is ensuring that disabled people who want to access work can do so. Does she accept that simple premise?

Marie McNair (Scottish National Party, Clydebank and Milngavie)

Of course I do. I thank Paul O’Kane for his intervention. However, I thought that you would stand up to apologise for how your party is treating our most vulnerable in Scotland and the wider UK.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

Speak through the chair please, Ms McNair.

Marie McNair (Scottish National Party, Clydebank and Milngavie)

Instead, Labour plans to proceed, with those on essential social security benefits being an easy target. We should not be surprised by that. Dr David Webster of the University of Glasgow has pointed out that, under the previous Labour Government, benefit sanctions rose to some of their highest levels. The stigmatisation of those on benefits has terrible consequences for individuals and for a fair society in which no one should be left behind.

In its report, “Jumping through hoops”, Independent Age quotes Susan, who described her experience of claiming UK benefits as

“Reducing me to tears and even making me feel suicidal several times. Not only were the questions difficult to understand, dwelling on all of the things that I am no longer capable of doing sent me into a very dark place.”

That is not someone who is looking for a “handout”; it is not someone “gaming the system”; and it is not someone “taking the mickey”.

For an easy political hit, Labour plans to adopt austerity on stilts instead of dignity, fairness and respect. It will hurt real people in my constituency and across Scotland. Under its plans, disabled people will be seriously impacted, and the financial insecurity of vulnerable households will increase. To put that into figures, there are reports that, by 2029, more than 450,000 disabled people and people with long-term conditions across the UK could be impacted as a result of the proposed reforms to the work capability assessment, with many losing payments that are currently worth more than £400 per month. Only yesterday, the BBC reported that

“The Chancellor has earmarked several billion pounds in draft spending cuts to welfare”.

In a 2024 report from the Poverty Alliance in Scotland for its collaborative project with the Scottish Government to assess the impacts of poverty related stigma on benefit take-up—

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

Will the member give way?

Marie McNair (Scottish National Party, Clydebank and Milngavie)

I will not.

The report found that—

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

Will the member give way?

Marie McNair (Scottish National Party, Clydebank and Milngavie)

I have already said that I will not take an intervention.

According to the report:

“Most Panellists agreed that stigma had gotten worse with austerity, UK government’s ‘welfare reform’, and the cost-of-living crisis”,

and

“Several spoke of putting off claiming for as long as they possibly could, to the point of hunger and destitution.”

That is really concerning, and we have heard it so many times in the Social Justice and Social Security Committee. It is up to us to combat the stigma and to change the narrative around benefits. Benefits are a safety net, and they are normal. But Labour is promoting a narrative of the scrounger and the undeserving—I will say this again: please, let us be mindful of the language that we are using.

By contrast, Scotland’s social security system is based on fairness, dignity and respect. The Poverty Alliance’s report highlighted the different approach in Scotland and noted that dealing with Social Security Scotland was viewed as a far less stigmatising experience than dealing with the Department for Work and Pensions. The difference was noted as “night and day”. We will keep going further to protect our constituents who require benefits. That is clear from the budget for 2025-26, which will invest £6.9 billion in social security and is expected to support around 2 million people in 2025-26.

However, although we will continue to do everything that we can to protect those in need, we are continuously hindered by UK austerity measures. The austerity policies of 2010, which were put in place by our Tory and Liberal Democrat colleagues, have led to severe suffering for the Scottish community, particularly those on low incomes. Those policies have been described by economists and economic historians as “disastrous” and “reckless”. The United Nations special rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights went even further in 2023, condemning the UK Government’s shameful record on poverty, saying that the UK’s “grossly insufficient” welfare system, after a decade of austerity, is “simply not acceptable” and may be in violation of international law.

That reckless approach has resulted in the Scottish Government having to spend a large portion of its budget to counteract those damaging policies to protect the Scottish people. In 2025, the Scottish Government is set to invest up to £210 million in measures to mitigate UK Government austerity policies, such as the so-called bedroom tax, the benefit cap and the cut to winter fuel payments. We will go further by scrapping Labour’s abhorrent two-child benefit cap, which will lift approximately 15,000 children out of poverty.

The Scottish Government’s social security policies are significant, and they are the reason why Scotland is the only part of the UK where child poverty rates are predicted to fall. Under the Scottish National Party, the Scottish Government will continue to value and protect benefit claimants, but only with full control over welfare policies will we be able to truly address poverty and inequality. Therefore, I am calling on my Labour colleagues to push the UK Government to take the right approach and reverse its punitive welfare reform plans. If they do not do that, they can at least call out those plans and support the full devolution of social security and employment policy. Only then will we have a fair and compassionate welfare system that leaves no one behind.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

We move to the open debate.

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

Marie McNair, I congratulate you on the debate, but that speech was something else. You quote the UN rapporteur in relation to UK welfare—

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

Speak through the chair.

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

We spent £350 billion this year on welfare in this country. It is about time that we had an honest debate about welfare. We should be honest. The reality is that too many people in this country are able to work but have chosen not to engage in employment. That is not just an economic crisis but a moral one.

I wanted to speak in the debate because I firmly believe in the ennobling and fulfilling importance of good work. The welfare system was intended to be a safety net—I think that we agree on that. It is not a lifestyle choice. It should support people back into employment and not trap them in dependency.

Emma Roddick (Scottish National Party, Highlands and Islands)

On the point of morality, does the member acknowledge that disability benefits are not all out-of-work benefits? Does he realise the impact that cutting those welfare payments to disabled people would have on their ability to stay in work and to feed and clothe themselves?

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

Therefore, the system should be geared around helping people to stay in work and to have as much self-reliance and independence as possible, but we should not be designing systems that trap people in dependency.

According to the Office for Budget Responsibility, UK welfare spending this year is—as I have already mentioned—£350 billion. It is spiralling unsustainably, and reaching levels that even a Labour Government has acknowledged cannot continue.

In 2025-26, the Scottish Government intends to spend £1.3 billion more than the UK block grant adjustment on social security, with further increases anticipated. Despite repeated requests, notably from the Finance and Public Administration Committee, the Government has yet to outline a sustainable long-term funding plan—maybe the minister is going to conjure one out of her speech at the end of this debate. The SNP’s proposal to remove the two-child benefit cap would add at least another £200 million a year just to start with. None of that expenditure has been properly accounted for.

The welfare system that we have created is not financially sustainable, and there is no point in pretending otherwise. I welcome the acceptance across the parties that we need to reduce the number of people dependent on welfare. A successful Government sets goals to cut the number of people on welfare, not to increase it. The SNP’s approach is not compassionate. It is cruel, because it is designed to keep people stuck where they are, instead of to help people to move forward.

We need to rebalance our economy. Alongside the welfare crisis, we have too many people working for the Government, while the private sector—our best source of new jobs—struggles. We must extend the tax base by making more people self-reliant—as they would desire to be—and less dependent on the state. We should be investing in skills, training and apprenticeships, yet, under the SNP, the opposite is happening: cuts to further education, an artificial cap on apprenticeships and a lack of investment in upskilling.

That is a failure of ambition for Scotland. What a strange nationalist party we have in government that it lacks such ambition for our people.

We must also be mindful of working people, who should not be left feeling that their hard-earned money is being used to fund people who are capable of working but who are choosing not to. We need to create the conditions for the creation of good work.

Work must always pay. We must help people to feel that they have an opportunity to upskill, to make choices for themselves and to increase their capability to earn and to provide for their families. Instead of being penalised by punitive taxes, people should be encouraged to work and have ambition. Aspirations should be rewarded, not punished. We need a Government that believes in work, self-reliance and growth.

Paul O'Kane (Labour, West Scotland)

I want to try to be generous to Marie McNair, but I would describe the motion and the debate as unserious. I say that because we are debating a motion that seeks to discuss proposed reforms to UK social security payments that have not, in fact, been announced and the detail of which none of us has seen. The proposals have appeared publicly in the press in a way that I think the Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice referred to in the Social Justice and Social Security Committee this morning as “rumours”.

It is important that we look at the context of where we are right now.

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

To be fair to Marie McNair and the motion, is it not the Labour Government’s intention to cut the welfare bill by helping people back into work?

Paul O'Kane (Labour, West Scotland)

I have just said that there are reforms that have not yet been consulted on. It is the Labour Government’s intention to ensure that people who want to work can access work and are supported to do so. I will say more about that in my speech.

It is important to deal in the facts about what seven months of a UK Labour Government have meant for those issues. There is no mention in the motion of the changes that have been made, such as the fair repayment rate on debt, which means that 110,000 Scottish households will be, on average, £420 a year better off because of our universal credit reforms.

There is no mention of the changes to the earnings threshold for carers allowance to allow unpaid carers to earn more while they keep their entitlements. That is the biggest change to carers allowance since 1974 and a move that the Scottish Government took weeks to confirm that it would follow.

There is no mention of the changes to statutory sick pay that were announced this week, which mean that 1.3 million of the lowest paid Britons can access sick pay from day 1 of their sickness, and that they do not have to choose between their health and earning a living. That goes alongside the UK Employment Rights Bill, which I will speak about in my contribution.

From reading the motion and listening to the opening speech in the debate, members would think that Social Security Scotland is completely flawless in this space. However, the roll-outs of adult disability payment and child disability payment have involved significantly higher processing times than their DWP equivalents have. Tragically, in 2023 alone, almost 100 people died while they were waiting for their ADP applications to be approved. More than £1 million of social security overpayments will not be recovered, which creates an unnecessary fiscal pressure. There have been significant issues setting up the agency, including a £39 million spend on information technology systems and a low staff occupancy rate at its Dundee headquarters, which has annual running costs of £1.5 million.

As the motion highlights, the spend on social security above the block grant adjustment is ever rising, which puts pressure on tax receipts in Scotland and other spending portfolios. At this morning’s meeting of the Social Justice and Social Security Committee, the cabinet secretary acknowledged—perhaps for the first time—that there is pressure on the budget and that the implications are “stark”.

I make it clear that it is legitimate for such decisions to be taken in this Parliament. My party, as the party that founded this Parliament, supports the principle of the devolution of decision making, but we cannot escape the fact that we must have a discussion about how we pay for such things. I called the debate unserious because we are not having that discussion and it is not mentioned in the motion. We must have an open and honest discussion about the purpose of social security and how we can ensure that people get the right support to get into work and to arrive at true and meaningful positive destinations.

I am happy to try to inject some nuance into the debate by saying that the positive steps that I have outlined that the Labour Government has taken so far must be coupled with further reform work. That is why the reform of universal credit and the UK Government’s on-going review are so important. Any changes that are made, especially those that relate to people who are in receipt of sickness benefit or who are disabled, must be geared towards investment in ensuring that people can be supported into work. Just this morning, the DWP and the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions announced that 1,000 extra job coaches will be deployed in the jobcentre network to support people to get into work. Such interventions will be crucial.

I am happy to acknowledge that many challenges exist across the variety of issues that contribute to poverty in our country, but we must have a serious, grown-up and nuanced debate about how we can tackle all those facets through the social security system and access to work. It is clear to me that members of the Government party have no intention of doing that today.

Stuart McMillan (Scottish National Party, Greenock and Inverclyde)

I thank Marie McNair for securing this important debate, which emphasises the detrimental impact that the UK welfare system is having on society’s most vulnerable.

At the outset, I want to touch on a couple of Stephen Kerr’s comments. He said that the SNP’s approach is not compassionate but cruel. He also spoke about the cutting of apprenticeships and the lack of upskilling, and he highlighted the idea that work must always pay. When Stephen Kerr’s party took control at Westminster in 1979, many communities, including mine in Inverclyde, were absolutely decimated because of the Government’s cruel approach. Apprenticeships were culled and there was a lack of upskilling, because the introduction of the youth training scheme—the YTS—to replace apprenticeships did not upskill people.

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

Stuart McMillan deflects from my comments by referring to events that took place 44—no, 46—years ago. He must reflect on the fact that it is desperation on his part to reach back so far to deflect from the valid criticisms that are being made by many outside the Parliament about the SNP Government’s lack of commitment to skills training and further education.

Stuart McMillan (Scottish National Party, Greenock and Inverclyde)

I am sorry, Mr Kerr, but the fact is that my community has still not fully recovered from the decimation—[ Interruption .]

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

Please speak through the chair.

Stuart McMillan (Scottish National Party, Greenock and Inverclyde)

My community has not fully recovered from the decisions that were taken by Mr Kerr’s party in 1979. The same is true of Marie McNair’s community and the communities of other members of the Parliament.

The policy positions that were adopted under consecutive Westminster Governments are the polar opposite of how benefit support should work—it should lift people up when they need a helping hand, rather than make life harder for them. I am therefore pleased that, in Scotland, we have taken a different approach through Social Security Scotland. I recognise what Paul O’Kane said about the challenges that exist, which clearly must be worked on, but the principles of dignity, fairness and respect are at the heart of the organisation.

I will give an example. The Scottish child payment is unique to Scotland. Currently, the payment is worth £26.70 per week per eligible child but, following the passing of the budget last week, it will increase to £27.15 per week from 1 April. Since the Scottish child payment was established in 2021, more than £17 million has been paid out to assist families in my Greenock and Inverclyde constituency, benefiting 5,360 children as of December last year and demonstrating the SNP Government’s commitment to putting more money into people’s pockets. That is in stark contrast to the operation of the DWP, which seems to be tasked with finding any reason to deduct money from people’s benefits.

I will touch on some elements of a case that my office has been dealing with.

Paul O'Kane (Labour, West Scotland)

Will the member accept an intervention?

Stuart McMillan (Scottish National Party, Greenock and Inverclyde)

I am sorry, but I am short of time.

I am not going to reveal the constituent’s name or much of their case, but that individual approached me for support due to rent arrears. Numerous personal circumstances, many of which were outwith my constituent’s personal control, had led to them falling behind on their rent, but they had agreed a repayment plan with the DWP. The DWP then penalised my constituent for missing an appointment, which, once again, was for reasons outwith their control. The penalty was that they got no universal credit payments for 80 days.

As I said, I will not go into all the details, and my constituent accepts that they have made mistakes along the way, but I fail to see how that approach achieves anything other than making people feel more vulnerable. For my constituent, that almost resulted in eviction, at which point other services had to step in to provide support. I firmly believe that, if the DWP had employed a more caring and person-centred approach, staff might have identified the acute challenges that my constituent was facing. Instead, the modus operandi is to treat people with suspicion rather than view them as human beings in need of help.

I imagine that colleagues across the chamber will have experience of similar actions from the DWP, but whether they consider that to be a horror story depends on their point of view. It is abundantly clear to me that the UK welfare system is not fit for purpose, and I echo Marie McNair’s comments about benefits being devolved to this Parliament. I consider that for Labour to come into power and adopt the Tories’ cruel and callous so-called reforms and, in some cases, to perpetuate them further, is an utter betrayal.

I again thank Marie McNair for bringing the debate to the chamber.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

The final speaker in the open debate is Maggie Chapman, who joins us remotely.

Maggie Chapman (Green, North East Scotland)

I thank Marie McNair for securing this important debate. Her motion reflects an alarm that I believe is shared by a great many members of the Parliament, although not all might be able to express it.

The continuation of Tory policies by a Labour Government is, of course, not new, but the speed and scale with which Sir Keir Starmer has sloughed off his former principles is both breathtaking and terrifying. Perhaps the idea, in line with the mantra of the brotocracy, is to move fast and break things, but if the things that are broken are the welfare state, the social security system and the social contract of which the motion speaks, is that really a price worth paying for the illusion of any growth, either benign or malignant?

Marie McNair is right to identify the policies as those of austerity, whether or not the Labour Government uses that word. Like the policies of the previous UK Government, those policies have, or threaten to have, a threefold impact on Scotland. First, they impose direct harm on individuals, families and communities: the harms of poverty, anxiety, exclusion and stigma. Many of our constituents know those harms intimately, as they are their constant companions through days of desperation and nights of sleepless fear.

Secondly, by the nature of the so-called devolution settlement, those policies make the creation of alternatives much more difficult. Financial and constitutional barriers corral us into doing what Westminster does, however much our instincts rebel.

Thirdly, and most perniciously, the ideology of austerity makes the alternatives hard to express and even to imagine. It is an ideology of punishment, not for what people do but for what they are—for their bodies and homes and for their failure to get themselves born into greater comfort. The only release is through what is called striving—not for a better future but for a fuller bank account, and not for the common good but for the private and to build walls that keep the world outside.

I believe that our shared responses must confront all three of those impacts. First, we must continue to extend and deepen our work of creative mitigation, finding ways, even within our current confines, that can protect those who are most in need and prevent the greatest harms. I am grateful that, in some limited ways, we are able to do some of that work in Scotland.

Secondly, we must not lose sight of the horizon of our progress towards greater agency. For most of us who are speaking in the chamber this afternoon, that horizon means Scottish independence—the freedom to shape a future that more closely embodies our values.

Thirdly, we must urgently articulate those values. Vulnerability is not a defect to be cured by bullying and deprivation; it is a universal human condition that is masked only by a privileged few for a few years of pretended autonomy. We depend upon one another. We depend upon the earth. We depend upon care, compassion and creativity, upon sustainability and solidarity. Those are our sources of growth and of roots, as well as fruit and flowers. We can and should be proud to speak of them.

The motion that we are debating is about welfare cuts, but it could have been about immigration policy, Gaza or the plan to ravage UK aid commitments to fatten the defence budget, shamelessly turning ploughshares into swords. In each of those situations, the same pattern appears. There is the same betrayal of those with least and the same refusal to acknowledge our shared vulnerability. For it is only together that we are resilient and only together that we are human. We can and should do so much more to express that humanity for everyone.

Kaukab Stewart (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Kelvin)

I thank Marie McNair for bringing this debate to the chamber. I have listened carefully to the comments that have been made and I hope to respond to some of the points that have been raised.

Any one of us might find ourselves at any time in our lives unable to get paid work due to sickness or disability or because we are caring for a loved one. If that happens, social security should provide us with a safety net. It should provide protection from poverty and financial insecurity no matter what life has thrown at us. That is what social security should be.

However, what we are seeing from the current UK Government, ahead of the publication of its green paper later this month, raises significant concerns for the future of that social security safety net. When the previous UK Government initially set out proposals for changes to the work capability assessment, the Scottish Government, along with poverty campaigners and disabled people’s organisations, roundly condemned the targeting of vital benefits that support disabled people and those with long-term health conditions. It is deeply disappointing that the current UK Government is continuing with those plans.

With reference to Paul O’Kane’s intervention, I know that this is a very uncomfortable space for Labour. Although the reforms originated with the previous Conservative Government, Labour has defended them. In fact, at the judicial review it was found that the consultation on the reforms was based on the need to save money as opposed to getting people back into jobs. The UK Government is now reconsulting, and we will see the results of that reconsultation in the green paper that is meant to be forthcoming.

As Marie McNair points out in her motion, the UK Government’s language when discussing disabled people and people with long-term health conditions is deeply concerning, as it seeks to further stigmatise and blame the sick and disabled for accessing social security benefits that they are legally entitled to and on which they rely.

In Scotland, we know that there is a different way to deliver social security. As a devolved nation, we are able to do that, as Maggie Chapman pointed out. The Scottish Parliament unanimously created the Social Security (Scotland) Act 2018, which enshrines the principles of dignity, fairness and respect, reducing poverty, and advancing equality and non-discrimination at the heart of a radically different social security system. As Stuart McMillan so eloquently pointed out, we must retain compassion at the heart of any social security system, and those are the principles that guide this Government’s social security decision making.

While the UK Government is focused on reducing the amount of money that is spent on supporting the disabled and others who need help, the Scottish Government believes that social security is an essential collective investment in Scotland’s people, its communities and its future. It is an investment because, as we all know, inequality is bad for our health, our communities and our economy.

In the recently passed budget, the Scottish Government made a conscious decision to invest in social security for the people of Scotland by investing around £6.9 billion in benefits and payments for 2025-26. That investment will support approximately 2 million people and amounts to around £1.3 billion more than the funding for social security that was received from the UK Government.

In Scotland, we are taking a positive and compassionate approach to delivering the adult disability payment. That approach is ensuring that more disabled people get the support to which they are entitled while making sure that accessing that support is as straightforward as possible. In 2025-26, we will invest around £3.6 billion in the adult disability payment, which is £314 million more than we are forecast to receive from the UK Government through the social security block grant adjustment.

We are also using our limited budget to mitigate some of the UK Government’s most damaging policies. Over the past 14 years, we have spent around £1.2 billion on mitigating the effects of policies such as the bedroom tax and the benefit cap, including almost £154 million in 2024-25. Furthermore, from 2026, we will mitigate the effects of the pernicious two-child cap, thereby helping to keep thousands of children out of poverty and reducing the depth of poverty that many more face.

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

The minister mentions the numbers in the 2025-26 budget—the £1.3 billion more that is being spent over what has been allocated through the block grant. Would she share with members in the chamber exactly how the Government plans to fund its proposed exponential increases in spending in this area?

Would she also accept that the Government should perhaps set its sights on creating jobs and helping people who are currently on benefits to move into work? That never seems to be part of anything that ministers say in this place when it comes to the welfare system. The whole point of the welfare system for many, if not most, people is to help them temporarily while they get back into good work. Why does the Government never talk about that?

Sustainability of budgeting and work—what is the minister’s response to that?

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

I can give you the time back, minister.

Kaukab Stewart (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Kelvin)

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer, for giving me the time back for Mr Kerr’s lengthy intervention.

I do not accept that this Government does not support people getting into work. We have a raft of investments in ways to do that.

This debate is uncomfortable both for the Tories and for Labour because their approach to welfare benefits is based on punishment and stigma, and this Government rejects that approach whole-heartedly.

Despite the fixed budgets and limited powers of devolution, we have transformed social security provision in Scotland and we are committed to ensuring that finances remain on a sustainable trajectory. We will publish our next medium-term financial strategy later this year, alongside a fiscal sustainability delivery plan.

In conclusion, as I and many members in the chamber have highlighted, the recent statements by UK Government ministers on welfare reform and benefit cuts show no regard for the reality of people’s lives. I will close the debate with a clear and urgent message to the UK Government: remember your pledge of no austerity; do not punish those who most need our help; recognise the hardships that mean that people may require help from the benefits system; and join us, in the Scottish Government, in working to banish stigma from social security rather than amplifying it through aggressive soundbites and rhetoric.

Covid-19 Day of Reflection

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

The next item of business is a debate on the Covid-19 day of reflection, which is an opportunity for us, as a Parliament, to reflect on the impact of the pandemic and its effect on communities across Scotland.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The annual day of reflection for Covid commemoration takes place this Sunday, 9 March. This year marks the fifth anniversary of the outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic in Scotland and across the United Kingdom. This is a significant milestone, and I welcome the opportunity to gather in the chamber to remember all those who have been affected.

The day of reflection offers a chance to come together to remember everyone who died during the pandemic. Losing a loved one is one of the greatest challenges that many of us will experience, and we know all too well that those who experienced bereavement and grief during the pandemic faced unique challenges, dealing with loss and grief at a distance.

The day of reflection gives us an opportunity to remember the suffering that was endured during the pandemic, to remember the impact that was felt by all in our society, to remember the fear that we all experienced and to remember the heroic actions of many to support us all.

The day of reflection has its origins in the recommendations of the UK commission on Covid commemoration and in the work of Marie Curie. I put on record my thanks to both groups for all that they have done to support bereaved families and to ensure that, as a nation, we continue to make time to remember those who lost their lives.

Today, as First Minister, I express my deepest condolences to all those who lost family and friends, including those who are able to join us in the gallery today. It is our solemn duty, as leaders and as public servants, to mark the day of reflection and to ensure that those who died are remembered by us all.

In May 2022, it was my great privilege to attend the unveiling of Scotland’s national Covid memorial—the “I remember” walk in Glasgow’s Pollok park. At that event, I was struck by the dignity and strength of those who had suffered loss in such difficult circumstances. On Sunday, I will attend a memorial in Glasgow and lay a wreath in memory of those who lost their lives. The commemoration is organised by Covid-19 families Scotland, a group of bereaved families that was founded by Connie McCready during the pandemic. I pay tribute to Connie, Peter McMahon and Carolyn Murdoch, who serve as the group’s administrators, for all that they do on behalf of the families affected to ensure that the legacy of their loved ones lives on.

To support that legacy, in 2021, the Scottish Government funded the Remembering Together project, which commissioned creative practitioners and artists in all 32 local authority areas to co-create Covid-19 memorial projects. The Remembering Together project is about being part of a process to commemorate those who have lost their lives and those who have experienced loss and whose lives were changed for ever.

The annual day of reflection offers us all the opportunity to remember lives lost, to reflect on the sacrifice of many and to provide space for people to consider their experiences of the pandemic in a way that suits them best. On Sunday, as always, we will remember.

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

On behalf of my party, I pay my deep respects to the many thousands of people in Scotland, and the many millions of people elsewhere, who lost their lives to Covid. At moments such as these, we reflect on how our world changed so rapidly and dramatically in March 2020. At first, news reports warned of a mystery virus in China, then of its spreading to Italy, and I still remember the sense of unease—even foreboding.

Very quickly, the state passed legislation that required the population and all but essential workers to stay at home. Mixing with friends and family was mostly prohibited, businesses were shut down, masks had to be worn, prisoners were set free and children were told not to come into the classroom. Those measures were necessary at first, but how effective they were and why they continued for so long are questions for the on-going public inquiries.

In April 2020, while working as a journalist, I reported on a group of heroic care home workers in Forfar who spent 32 nights locked down with elderly residents in a bid to protect them. Later, it emerged that elderly hospital patients who were known to be Covid positive were sent into Scottish care homes, where more than 4,000 residents died. The Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service said that those deaths are part of

“the single largest investigation of deaths in Scottish history”,

which is on-going.

All of that had, and continues to have, far-reaching consequences. The schooling and social lives of young people were curtailed, with on-going consequences for learning, development and wellbeing. The national health service’s pandemic focus meant that other treatments were suspended while waiting lists grew and grew. Many businesses fought for survival but failed—through no fault of their own.

On Sunday, we will mark the fifth anniversary of the pandemic. Our thoughts are with all those who lost loved ones. However, we have now reached a stage at which the Scottish Government can no longer deploy Covid as an excuse for all its failings. Two inquiries are attempting to answer serious questions, on behalf of the public, about why harsher lockdown measures were imposed in Scotland, why ministers deleted messages that they knew would be needed by those inquiries and why elderly people were knowingly sent into care homes after testing positive.

Today, we remember, but we can never forget.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

Five years ago, our country and our world were turned upside down. After weeks of rising warnings from across the globe, Covid-19 reached Scotland and the UK. We all remember the anxiety and uncertainty of those early days—a country plunged into lockdown overnight, with restrictions on daily life unseen in generations.

Yet, in the face of such upheaval, people came together. Sacrifices were made not out of obligation but out of care for family, friends and neighbours. It was a powerful reminder of our shared humanity and the kindness that defines our communities. However, the human cost of the pandemic was profound: lives were lost, families were separated and communities faced unimaginable challenges.

Amid it all, the spirit of the nation shone through. People stepped up to support one another, looking after the vulnerable in their neighbourhoods; businesses adapted to support their communities; and, week after week, the public clapped to recognise the incredible dedication of NHS and care workers, who put themselves in harm’s way to protect others.

As we reflect on the past five years, we must acknowledge the strength that we showed and the lessons that we must learn. The pandemic exposed vulnerabilities in our society and placed extraordinary pressure on our public services. Mistakes were made and, too often, people on the front line did not get the support that they needed.

Today, we remember not just the emotional and social toll of the pandemic but the challenges that remain for communities that were once thriving but are struggling to recover. For too many families, the pain of losing loved ones without a proper goodbye remains raw. Perhaps most of all, we remember the children who, even today, are still paying the price for lockdown and who, if we do not act with urgency, will be left to bear the scars of two years of missed learning for a lifetime.

While we reflect today on the human cost of the pandemic, we cannot pretend that it is just a memory. For too many Scots—young and old—the wounds remain unhealed, the pain remains fresh and the support that was promised has, in some cases, not come. Before the last election, this entire Parliament committed to a national recovery, and we must all ask ourselves whether we are living up to that promise.

In remembering the people we lost, we cannot forget our debt to those who live and who contributed so much. That is why, as we honour those we lost, we must also renew our commitment to those who are still in need today. Our reflections must be matched with action, so that we learn from the past and build a stronger future.

On behalf of the Scottish Labour Party, I commit myself to learning the lessons of the pandemic, restoring our public services and ensuring that we honour everyone who lost their lives with meaningful action. Ahead of the day of reflection, my thoughts and prayers, and those of my entire party, are with all the families who lost a loved one and everyone who was impacted by the pandemic.

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

This year—2025—marks five years since Covid-19 changed our lives, our communities and our world. In March 2020, we did not know what was ahead of us. We could see the rows of coffins in news footage from Italy, and we knew that something was happening, but we did not know how profoundly it would affect our lives or how many friends and family members we would lose.

Some people say, “We made it through the pandemic.” We did not, though, did we? We did not all make it, and I am so sad for everyone whom we lost. Each life taken was a beloved family member, friend or colleague. Their absence leaves a void that words cannot fill, but their memories live on in our hearts.

Today, we reflect on the sacrifices that were required and the ever-changing impact that the pandemic had on the nation and on people’s daily lives. Many people still face debilitating symptoms, with repercussions for their life and work. We pay tribute to the dedicated work of the health and social care staff and essential workers whose grit, valour and vital work saved lives and kept the country running. We will forever be in debt to the front-line workers who died during the pandemic.

We were all affected by Covid, but, as is always the case, people whose lives were already hard suffered even more—disabled people, people on low incomes, people who live in crowded housing, older people and people with suppressed immune systems. No child or parent will forget the impact of the pandemic on their schooling and family life, and no young person will forget how Covid hampered their start in adult life.

Difficult times can bring out the best in us. We got to see what it looks like when we decide to house the homeless. We got to see who really is essential to our society and how much we take them for granted at all other times. We got extra space to walk in our towns and cities safely, without cars, noise and pollution. We got to show that we care about our neighbours, checking in on them and wearing masks to keep one another safe. We got to see how transformative vaccines are in protecting us from lethal diseases.

Everybody who lived through the pandemic will remember it their whole lives. People affected by long Covid or poor mental health or who lost someone close to them will live with the pandemic their whole lives. Let us take the lessons of respect for essential workers, of helping our neighbours and of making sacrifices to help others, and use what we have learned to build a better future.

Alex Cole-Hamilton (Liberal Democrat, Edinburgh Western)

My first memory of the threat that was posed to our country by Covid-19 is of the images that were broadcast on the evening news of primary school children passing around a basketball that was covered in chalk dust so that they could learn about viral transmission. Within a matter of days, we had gone from those cheerful and charming images to the Government commissioning the NHS Louisa Jordan and requisitioning private ice rinks to bolster mortuary capacity.

I do not think that anyone in the chamber or in wider public life will ever forget the enormous impact that the pandemic had on all our lives, an impact that reverberates to this day. In some ways, it will always define part of us, just as it has defined our politics and our society for the past five years. Indeed, it has pulled on every thread that makes up the fabric of our communities, dominating our health system and impacting on education and the economy.

So many of our young people are still suffering under the long shadow of lockdown. That is borne out by the huge number who are still waiting for help with their mental health. Waiting times across our national health service have not improved, and 168,000 Scots are still living with the debilitating effect of what Covid can become. Adults and children alike are fighting against long Covid every day.

Moreover, many of Scotland’s high streets are still empty compared with how they were before the pandemic. All of us are, at some level, still recovering from the trauma of not being able to see or hug our loved ones, of not being able to attend their funerals when they passed away—as so many thousands sadly did—and of the disaster in our care homes.

We all hope that we will never have to live through such an experience ever again, but in the Parliament, we need to deal with events as we find them, rather than how we would wish them to be. As such, we must be guided by the lessons of the previous pandemic when it comes to dealing with the next. There is a lot that can be said about our response to Covid—for better and for worse—and about the decisions that were made, the transparency of the decision making and the way in which rules were made and followed, but that discussion is not for now.

Today, we remember the many people who have died and the many who fought to keep them alive, including our key workers and our health and care workers. Today, we remember all those who are still living with the pandemic’s cruel impact, and we wish comfort to those who grieve and those who still live and toil under its shadow.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

That concludes the debate. There will be a brief pause before we move to the next item of business.

Portfolio Question Time

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

The next item of business is portfolio questions on net zero, energy and transport. As always, I call for brief questions, brief supplementaries and brief answers, in order to get in as many members as possible.

Question 1 has been withdrawn.

Annie Wells (Conservative, Glasgow)

To ask the Scottish Government what recent assessment it has made of the feasibility of its target to achieve net zero emissions by 2045. (S6O-04403)

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

The Government’s commitment—[ Interruption .]

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

We need your microphone moved.

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

A schoolboy error, Presiding Officer.

The Government’s commitment to reaching net zero by 2045 is absolutely unwavering. We are continuing to develop and take forward climate policies ahead of the Climate Change Committee’s advice on new carbon budget levels, which is due this May. Once we have received that advice, we will bring forward the carbon emission targets via secondary legislation, which will set a deliverable course towards net zero, with the aim of publishing a draft climate change plan to achieve those targets in the autumn.

Annie Wells (Conservative, Glasgow)

We are beginning to see what happens when the Scottish Government sets ambitious targets for the climate without any concrete plan for how to achieve those goals.

Last year, the Scottish Government ditched its target of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 75 per cent by 2030, and, in January, Audit Scotland said that the Scottish Government is unlikely to meet its 2030 target to reduce car use by 20 per cent, due to a lack of leadership. It has now been reported that environmental consultancy Ricardo-AEA has told the Scottish Government that its 2045 net zero target is at risk of being missed. Can the minister assure the Parliament that the Government’s failure to keep the 2045 target on track will not lead to higher net zero costs being imposed on Scottish households?

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

It should be said, by way of response to those important questions, that some of the commentary that anticipates the missing of the 2045 targets is applicable only if emission reductions from land use, for example, are not considered and if no further policies are brought forward.

As I said, the Scottish Government is entirely committed to the 2045 target. In 2022, the Scottish Government commissioned an analytical report on the estimated projection of Scottish emissions from 2019 to 2045, which is published on the Scottish Government’s website. That was a snapshot in time, and since then we have been developing policies for the next climate change plan. The figures for that are available.

Technology reductions were excluded from emission reduction considerations, and land use will form an important part of our forthcoming climate change plan.

Sarah Boyack (Labour, Lothian)

When the Scottish Government dropped its annual and interim targets, Màiri McAllan announced a package of 19 reheated old policies to show that the Scottish Government is supposedly taking action. However, I have received a response to a freedom of information request in which the Scottish Government admits that only four of the 19 policies have been delivered, and that even some of those are questionable. Can the minister outline the measurable actions that are being taken now? Our constituents cannot afford our missing the 2045 target, given the impact on their lives and businesses.

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

I can certainly list measurable activities in many areas, such as peatland restoration, where good progress is being made, with more than 75,000 hectares having been restored to date. I can also mention forestry—in relation to which we have the most ambitious woodland creation targets in the United Kingdom—farming reform, and many other areas where progress is being made.

As I said, the Scottish Government is committed to the 2045 target, and the next climate change plan is being developed to ensure that we get there.

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

Scotland is on a journey to becoming a renewable energy powerhouse, facilitated by our just transition to net zero. However, that will require the co-operation of the United Kingdom Government on initiatives such as the Acorn carbon capture and storage project. Will the minister provide an update on engagement with the UK Government on the Acorn project, which is of huge importance to the north-east?

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

The member is right. Scottish ministers regularly engage with our counterparts in the UK Government to push for a decision on Acorn. Carbon capture is vital for achieving our climate targets—the Climate Change Committee described it as being a necessity, not an option, that we achieve net zero emissions. The Scottish cluster is essential not just to Scotland’s target of reaching net zero by 2045, but to the UK’s 2050 target.

So that progress and investor confidence can be maintained, we are pushing for the UK Government to make a clear and meaningful public announcement by return, and certainly ahead of June, confirming that the UK Government is committed to awarding track 2 status to the Acorn project and the Scottish cluster.

Meghan Gallacher (Conservative, Central Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on when it plans to introduce its proposed heat in buildings bill. (S6O-04404)

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

We are considering the responses to our consultation on proposals for a heat in buildings bill and will respond as soon as is practicable.

We also know that further action by the United Kingdom Government in reserved areas is essential for the heat transition. That includes rebalancing gas and electricity prices, clarity on its intentions for phasing out gas boilers in existing homes and a swift decision on the future role of the gas grid, in line with the Climate Change Committee’s recent advice.

Meghan Gallacher (Conservative, Central Scotland)

I say to the minister that we have only 14 months left, but the housing sector needs certainty about substantial proposals and changes that the Government has suggested. The fact that the Government is no further forward with introducing the bill in the Parliament leaves unanswered serious questions about energy performance certificate ratings.

I understand that the Government is consulting on EPCs. However, the current deadline for landlords to comply with the requirement to have an EPC rating of C is 2028. Is that target achievable when less than half of private homes are EPC C rating compliant and the Government might shift the goalposts on the scope of EPC ratings? Will the Government consider the current timelines to ensure that what it proposes and what it expects of private home owners are in sync?

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

It is important to separate two issues in that question. The first is EPC reform, which is progressing and on which the Scottish Government has been taking views and will ensure that change is made.

The second issue to which Meghan Gallacher alluded is, I think, whether legislation should require a certain EPC rating of home owners and those who rent out properties. That is a separate question. It is connected to some of the questions around the proposed heat in buildings bill. The Scottish Government will return to that as soon as is practicable.

Brian Whittle (Conservative, South Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to ensure that the process for approving renewable energy developments above 50MW encourages developers to carry out high-quality consultations and gives communities sufficient information and opportunity to engage meaningfully. (S6O-04405)

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

Meaningful consultation of local authorities, communities and members of the public is key to the determination process for renewable energy developments above 50MW. Developers are instructed to follow our good practice guidance on pre-application consultation involving communities, as that is the best stage for communities to help to shape a development before an application is submitted.

The Scottish Government is committed to further strengthening the engagement process for communities by making pre-application consultations a statutory requirement, as part of the United Kingdom Government’s proposed reforms to electricity infrastructure consenting in Scotland.

Brian Whittle (Conservative, South Scotland)

As the minister might be aware, the proposed Rogerhill solar farm near Blackwood is set to be one of the largest solar sites in the UK if it is approved. However, I have been struck by concerns from the community about the impact that the development could have on the area’s children, because it borders an outdoor learning facility.

Concerningly, there appear to be conflicting views as to whether the development should trigger a child rights and wellbeing impact assessment under the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (Incorporation) (Scotland) Act 2024. The energy consents unit argues that the decision on the development is exempt and is not strategic in nature, while the Children and Young People’s Commissioner Scotland has said that it sees no reason why the ECU would not conduct such an assessment.

Will the minister consider instructing the ECU to carry out an assessment? If not, will he confirm what the unit considers to be a decision of a strategic nature, if the construction of one of the country’s largest solar farms does not qualify?

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

As Brian Whittle identified in his question, the case is a live planning application. I am part of the planning process, so he will understand why I simply cannot comment on a live application. He is, of course, entitled to raise issues that are of concern to him and his community as part of that process, but I cannot prejudice matters by commenting on it. I am afraid that that is all that I can add.

Emma Harper (Scottish National Party, South Scotland)

The ability to make pre-application community engagement mandatory is reserved to the UK Government under the consenting regime in the UK Electricity Act 1989, which limits our ability to reform energy policy. Will the minister advise me what engagement the Scottish Government has had with the new UK Government on reforms to ensure that planning processes can be taken forward swiftly while giving local communities a voice?

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

Scottish Government officials have been working—I should say that they have been working positively—with their UK Government counterparts on proposed reforms to the Electricity Act 1989 since February 2024, which is before the current Administration took office.

We helped to inform the content of the UK Government’s consultation, which was published in October last year. One of the most important proposals is that we give local communities a stronger voice in the consenting process. For the first time, a pre-application consultation would be statutory, thereby guaranteeing that communities can express their views early in the process to help to shape developments.

Ultimately, the legislation is reserved, so we must wait to see how the proposals are managed through the Westminster parliamentary process.

Mercedes Villalba (Labour, North East Scotland)

New renewable energy developments across north-east Scotland are crucial for Scotland and for the UK if we want to decarbonise our energy supply and ensure that we meet Labour’s goal of making the UK a clean energy superpower by 2030.

However, the developments must have the informed consent and support of the communities in which they are built. A best-case example is Aberdeen Community Energy’s Donside hydro, which was established and is owned and run by the local community to generate clean electricity for nearby homes. How is the Scottish Government working to promote community ownership and control of new renewable energy?

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

Mercedes Villalba has raised interesting and important points on those issues. One of the things that the Scottish Government is seeking to do is to open a conversation with the UK Government about mandating community benefits. That is a reserved issue, but I hope that we can have a fruitful conversation on it. The Scottish Government is supportive of all communities that seek, in various ways, to ensure that they get community benefit from projects in their areas.

Claire Baker (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

To ask the Scottish Government what measures it is taking to improve road safety. (S6O-04406)

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

The Scottish Government is committed to making Scotland’s roads safe for all. Backing this commitment is a record £36 million investment, which is set to increase to £48 million in 2025-26, to fund targeted initiatives that are aimed at reducing road casualties and enhancing safety. This includes national behaviour change campaigns, targeted road safety schemes on trunk and local roads, and effective speed management through the national strategy for 20mph and the national speed management review. We are also strengthening expertise by training more than 500 road safety practitioners in the internationally recognised safe system approach by June 2025.

Claire Baker (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

Addressing driver behaviour must be part of the approach to reducing fatality rates. National speed awareness courses have been in place in England and Wales for a number of years, and studies have shown that they can be more effective at reducing reoffending than a fine and penalty points. The Scottish Government has been asked about this on a number of occasions—most recently today at First Minister’s question time—but we still do not have an answer as to why those courses are not available in Scotland. Is the Scottish Government committed to introducing the courses, and what are the next steps?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

As the transport secretary, I am very supportive of speed awareness courses as part of the process of addressing the issue. The Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Home Affairs is taking the matter forward with justice and police colleagues, and I will report to Parliament when there is progress.

On the importance of speed awareness courses, I think that they are required as a diversion. After this question session, I will chair the road safety strategic partnership board. Police Scotland is a member of that, and I will press it in order to understand what progress is being made.

Mark Ruskell (Green, Mid Scotland and Fife)

It is clear that councils are doing important work this year, using the Scottish Government budget, on road safety, enforcement of pavement parking restrictions and the roll-out of 20mph limits. However, does the cabinet secretary agree that the success of those measures comes down to improved driver awareness, particularly in built-up areas and particularly about the dangers of speeding and dangerous parking? What national road safety campaigns can be deployed to get the message across that speeding kills, that we should slow down in town and that drivers should park responsibly?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

I have just indicated that there are a number of national behaviour change campaigns, the most recent of which is on distracted driver behaviour. It is alarming that some people think that it is acceptable to look at their phones while they are driving; that is a concern on any of our roads.

There are also campaigns on speed, which highlight among other things the fact that the impact of travelling at speed—in some cases, people also do not even wear their seat belts—not just on the driver but on other people can be extremely severe and result in death and harm. Those aspects are part of the campaigns that I am talking about, and that is why we are putting a record amount of funding into road safety.

Kenneth Gibson (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame North)

To ask the Scottish Government how the proportion of ScotRail trains that were cancelled in 2023-24 compares with other rail operators across the United Kingdom. (S6O-04407)

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

ScotRail performs better than most operators in Great Britain. ScotRail cancellations in the previous financial year averaged at just over 2 per cent of all services. That means that there were fewer cancellations than there were immediately before public ownership and that the rate was lower than the 2023-24 GB average of 3.8 per cent.

Most recently, ScotRail cancellations were recorded to be at 1.9 per cent, whereas they are at 4.2 per cent for the GB network as a whole. That demonstrates ScotRail’s continued progress and its commitment to providing a reliable service for the people of Scotland.

ScotRail also compares favourably with other operators in Scotland. For example, for privately operated Avanti West Coast and CrossCountry, recorded cancellation rates in 2023-24 were around 7 per cent and 8 per cent respectively. For London North Eastern Railway and TransPennine Express, cancellations were recorded at 4.8 per cent in that year.

Kenneth Gibson (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame North)

Figures from the Office of Rail and Road show that ScotRail has one of the lowest cancellation rates for train operators in the UK, as we have just heard, and that Network Rail was responsible for more than half of the delayed minutes on ScotRail, with 551,873 minutes being lost last year. Given that responsibility for Network Rail lies exclusively with the UK Labour Government, will Scottish ministers continue to raise with that Government the need for improvements?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

All delays are disappointing. My officials at Transport Scotland are working closely with Network Rail to ensure that it delivers value for the £4.2 billion that the Scottish Government is providing to it between 2024 and 2029.

Responsibility for Network Rail is reserved to the UK Government—that has not stopped the Conservative MSP Douglas Lumsden asking excessive numbers of written questions about it, and I am not sure whether we will get a rebate on them—but I expect ScotRail and Network Rail to work together under the alliance agreement to deliver the best service possible for the people of Scotland. However, I know that the only way to truly ensure the best outcomes for Scotland’s railway is through the full devolution of rail to Scotland. That is why Scottish ministers continue to call for that.

Willie Rennie (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife)

Rail services that stop at Newburgh in Fife have been cancelled for decades. Will the cabinet secretary update the chamber on when she plans to reopen that railway station?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

I compliment Willie Rennie’s attempt to make a question about cancellations over a period, which amount to a closure, into a pitch for a station. He raises an important point. If we look ahead at investment in rail, there are issues not only around the track and the procurement of fleet services but around availability and accessibility. In a cost benefit analysis and in the consideration of a multimodal approach and other alternatives, assessments of investment in stations such as Newburgh should be looked at in the round.

Sue Webber (Conservative, Lothian)

Last week, 70 passengers were evacuated from a ScotRail intercity train, and trains between Edinburgh and Aberdeen were suspended, after a power car caught fire near the Tay rail bridge, which caused disruption for hours. In the light of that, what actions are being undertaken to foster resilience in the ScotRail fleet, particularly at a time when key routes often rely on older trains? Will the cabinet secretary provide a timeline for when the new inter7city fleet will be procured?

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

I assume that the focus of that question is on cancellations.

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

As a result of that incident, there was clearly an impact in terms of cancellations across the network. I take the opportunity to compliment the professionalism of everybody who was involved in dealing with that incident and the safe evacuation.

Lessons have to be learned. There will be reporting on the cause of the particular fire, but I was extremely impressed by everyone who was involved in ensuring safety, and I put on record my thanks to them.

On the replacement of fleets, I will be able to update Parliament appropriately. It is important that we progress that to ensure that we have the train services that we require for the modern age.