Scottish Parliament, 3 April 2025

291 contributions from 66 members. The official report.

General Question Time

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

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

Daniel Johnson (Labour, Edinburgh Southern)

To ask the Scottish Government what its position is on the reported prevalence and trend of crimes committed where the perpetrator was wearing a disguise, particularly in relation to antisocial behaviour. (S6O-04528)

Siobhian Brown (Scottish National Party, Ayr)

The wearing of disguises is not a new phenomenon, and it is a matter for Police Scotland to take account of as part of its operational response.

Any recorded instances are a very small proportion of reported crime. Police Scotland uses a range of powers to prevent and tackle antisocial and criminal behaviour. In certain circumstances, those can include stop and search and the removal of head and face coverings. A code of practice exists to ensure that that is done in a manner that is lawful, proportionate and accountable.

Daniel Johnson (Labour, Edinburgh Southern)

I thank the minister for that answer. We have become all too aware of instances of people wearing balaclavas in order to facilitate crime, whether that is riding illegal electric motorcycles or antisocial behaviour. It is definitely a component of the increasing violence against shop workers. Those issues have been rehearsed in the chamber.

It is frustrating for the police, because the simple act of wearing a balaclava to conceal one’s identity in order to facilitate a crime is not a crime in and of itself, although it is a crime in other countries. In England and Wales, in certain US states, in France and in Queensland in Australia, the use of a disguise with intent to commit crime is an offence. It stands to reason that, if a person conceals their face in order to facilitate crime, the police should be able to stop them and that it should be a crime. Does the minister agree with that, and will the Government review the legal situation?

Siobhian Brown (Scottish National Party, Ayr)

As I said, Police Scotland has stop and search powers. Where it is appropriate and necessary, Police Scotland also has powers under section 60 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994, which allows searches to be carried out in a particular locality for a specific period of time, and police can ask for the removal of face masks. The issue is important, and I am happy to meet the member to discuss it further.

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

An uptick has been reported in the utilisation of such disguises in some crime and antisocial behaviour in the capital. Those trends are developing partly through social media. What recent discussions has the Scottish Government had with its counterparts in the United Kingdom Government about the responsibility of social media platforms to prevent the spread of harmful content that promotes copycat crimes and antisocial behaviour, often involving face coverings?

Siobhian Brown (Scottish National Party, Ayr)

The member is right to refer to the influence of social media and the impact that it can have. Although regulation of the internet is reserved to the UK Government, we have been engaging extensively with UK ministers on its Online Safety Act 2023 to strengthen protections for young people.

We responded to Ofcom’s consultation on illegal harms online last year, which influenced its codes and guidance in relation to duties for online providers to protect users from harm, including threats, abuse and hate offences. We continue to engage with Ofcom and the UK Government to understand the impact and effectiveness of those actions, and I am happy to keep Ben Macpherson updated.

Elizabeth Smith (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

Before asking the question, I declare an interest in that I hold a protecting vulnerable groups certificate.

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on the protecting vulnerable groups scheme, including the most recent data for the number of registered persons with PVG certificates. (S6O-04529)

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

On Tuesday 1 April, it became a legal requirement for anyone carrying out a regulated role to be a member of the PVG scheme. There are currently 1,693,115 PVG scheme members. After a person joins the PVG scheme, Disclosure Scotland continuously monitors them to ensure that they have not become unsuitable to carry out a regulated role.

Elizabeth Smith (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

It is good to see that the law has been tightened up in that regard. However, I was not able to establish through my own research or that of a constituent whether the change to the law also includes changes to the criteria for the designation of qualifying voluntary organisations that are not required to pay the £59 fee for their employees.

Natalie Don-Innes

The two main sectors in which additional PVG checks will be required as a result of the legal requirement or the move to regulated roles are the health sector and the voluntary sector. The Disclosure (Scotland) Act 2020 puts greater emphasis on those who have power and influence over children and protected adults in determining whether an individual is in a regulated role. I would be more than happy to update Ms Smith about the fees following question time.

Richard Leonard (Labour, Central Scotland)

I remind members of my voluntary register of trade union interests.

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on staffing at ScotRail ticket offices. (S6O-04530)

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

This week, ScotRail has commenced its operation of ticket offices in accordance with the revised opening hours, which reflect the changing preferences of its customers. I am pleased to confirm that no jobs or working hours have been lost. ScotRail has assessed the requirement for staff to allow it to adhere to the revised opening times, and it currently carries out recruitment for ticket office staff where necessary.

Richard Leonard (Labour, Central Scotland)

Under this Government’s stewardship, peak fares have returned to Scotland’s railways. This week, all fares increased by 3.8 per cent and, on Monday, 2,800 hours were cut from staffing at ticket offices across Scotland. Those measures, which were approved by the Scottish Government, all diminish passenger service, passenger safety and passenger accessibility, and they all make the jobs of railway workers more difficult. Will the Government think again, take the bold action that is required and reverse those decisions?

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

Although opening hours at ScotRail’s ticket offices have remained unchanged over the past three decades, ticket office sales have reduced from 78 to 14 per cent during that period. Scottish Rail Holdings and ScotRail have rightly reviewed the situation to ensure that they are delivering services that meet customer expectations. The adjustments to the ticket office opening hours that have been implemented will enable ScotRail staff to be redeployed to focus more directly on supporting passengers. That touches on some of what the member has spoken about, such as accessibility for disabled passengers. It will enable better assistance for passengers and staff to be more visible in order to deter antisocial behaviour and reduce fare evasion.

Mark Ruskell (Green, Mid Scotland and Fife)

Women, particularly disabled women, experience sexual assault and harassment on public transport and have expressed concern about being less safe in unstaffed stations. What actions does the Government intend to take to guarantee women’s safety, particularly at the growing number of unstaffed stations?

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

ScotRail undertook research and carefully considered when tickets were being purchased and when passenger assistance was required, in order to ensure that stations would be staffed when those travelling needed it. As ticket offices are not closing, passengers will still be able to get that assistance from staff. ScotRail has also given assurances that, outwith those times, tickets can still be purchased on the train, including tickets for discounted fares. Those are important improvements that we all want to see in a publicly run railway service.

Paul Sweeney (Labour, Glasgow)

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will accelerate the full implementation of bus franchising powers in the Transport (Scotland) Act 2019. (S6O-04531)

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

All local transport authorities in Scotland now have the power to start developing their franchising proposals. Later this spring, we will lodge a further set of regulations, which will focus on the process of transitioning from the current commercial market into a franchise, as well as transitioning out of a franchise. At the same time, officials are developing guidance for local transport authorities on the franchising process. That will cover the preparation of a franchising framework, the audit process, what an authority should expect when going through the franchising approval process, and the process for commencing a franchise.

Paul Sweeney (Labour, Glasgow)

Those provisions are more than welcome. This week, bus fares in Glasgow have increased. An adult day ticket now costs £5.90 and the cost of a single ticket has risen to £3.10. For too long, Glaswegians have paid the highest bus fares of any British city for an unreliable and fragmented service, while Manchester, Liverpool and Leeds are powering ahead with bus franchising. It is a huge opportunity for Greater Glasgow to take back control of its bus system. The next transport commissioner for Scotland will convene the panel that will decide whether the Strathclyde Partnership for Transport can establish that bus franchise. Does the minister agree that the next commissioner must not stand in the way of bus franchising, which has overwhelming democratic political support? Will he ensure that the regional transport partnership, SPT, is fully resourced for that purpose?

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

I could not agree more with Paul Sweeney. This is an absolutely fantastic opportunity for RTPs and other organisations to take control of the public service provision of buses. I absolutely accept that point.

From day 1, we have been quite clear that we want to give local authorities and transport authorities the ability to make that transition to franchising, and the provisions that we have put in place do exactly that.

Douglas Lumsden (Conservative, North East Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on when it will publish its energy strategy and just transition plan. (S6O-04532)

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

The judgments and issues in the energy strategy and just transition plan are informed and influenced by a range of recent developments in the United Kingdom Government’s energy policy and, indeed, by court decisions. Therefore, there remains a rapidly changing landscape—for example, the UK Government’s consultation on future oil and gas policy will be open for stakeholder input over the coming months. We are taking time to reflect on those on-going developments before drawing any conclusions and publishing any final strategy.

Douglas Lumsden (Conservative, North East Scotland)

This is becoming a joke. I have asked about the energy strategy 16 times in the past year, because businesses want to know whether investment will be welcomed here.

Last week, Offshore Energies UK said that another 7 billion barrels of oil could be extracted from the North Sea and that half of the oil and gas that the UK needs before 2050 could be produced domestically. In an increasingly unstable world, does the minister recognise that it is common sense to make use of our domestic supply of oil and gas rather than import it from abroad? Does he also recognise the damage that is being caused by the Scottish National Party’s presumption against new oil and gas developments? Will he ditch it today and finally confirm when his party’s long-overdue energy strategy will be published?

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

Douglas Lumsden will be aware that the decision will ultimately be made by the UK Government, but we are clear on our support for a just transition for Scotland’s oil and gas sector that recognises the maturity of the North Sea basin and is in line with our climate change commitments.

Offshore oil and gas licensing, as well as the consenting and associated fiscal regime and all the things that go with it—

Douglas Lumsden (Conservative, North East Scotland)

You have a presumption against oil and gas.

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

I do not know why Douglas Lumsden is shouting at me, because, as I was saying, all those matters are currently reserved to the UK Government.

Any further extraction and use of fossil fuels must be consistent with our climate obligations and just transition commitments. It is vital that we take an evidence-based approach to the energy transition. That is why we have consistently called on the UK Government to approach decisions about North Sea oil and gas projects on a rigorously evidence-led, case-by-case basis, with climate compatibility and energy security as key considerations.

Martin Whitfield (Labour, South Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Government what assessment it has made of the impact of the reported rising childcare costs on families, particularly those on low and middle incomes, in light of recent research by the Coram Family and Childcare charity. (S6O-04533)

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

Supporting families through access to high-quality, affordable and accessible childcare is critical to the First Minister’s mission of eradicating child poverty. That is why, since 2021, we have prioritised investment of £1 billion per year in funded early learning and childcare for all three-year-olds and four-year-olds, and the two-year-olds who need it most.

Our interim evaluation report, “Early Learning and Childcare Expansion to 1140 hours”, which was published in August 2024, found that the uptake of funded hours is high and that there are promising signs that the expansion is delivering improvements in quality, flexibility, accessibility and affordability. Our full evaluation report will be published later this year.

Martin Whitfield (Labour, South Scotland)

Although a part-time nursery place for a child under the age of two now costs an average of £70.51 per week in England, after working-parent entitlements are taken into account, that represents a 56 per cent decrease since last year. In Scotland, a part-time nursery place for a child under two costs an average of £122.38, which represents a 7 per cent rise since 2024. Clearly, that will hit lowest-paid workers hardest, with many families in Scotland having to pay £50 more a week than families in England are paying for the same childcare. What will the Scottish Government do to address that inequality?

Natalie Don-Innes

Mr Whitfield raises an important point, but I point out that Scotland is the only part of the United Kingdom that offers 1,140 hours a year of funded ELC to all three and four-year-olds and eligible two-year-olds, and our investment is fundamental to giving children the best start in life. By contrast, the Institute for Fiscal Studies made it clear that the poorest third of families in England will see almost no direct benefit from the UK Government’s childcare entitlements.

Let me be clear that this is about what is best for Scotland’s children. Our offer is built for the children who need it the most. That said, we continue to work with local authorities and stakeholders to see how we can provide more support for parents. Martin Whitfield is aware of all the work that we are doing in relation to our early adopter communities and other aspects of our childcare offer. I will continue to look for ways that we can support parents with childcare costs.

Roz McCall (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

Good-quality, accessible and affordable childcare is essential to addressing child poverty and enabling parents to re-enter the workforce. Thanks to the policies of the previous Conservative Government, as has been stated, the cost of a part-time childcare place has more than halved and the cost of a full-time place has been reduced by 20 per cent. I have been highlighting in the Parliament the issues with early years childcare for working parents for some time. Will the minister agree to examine the implementation of the 1,140 hours of free childcare and adjust the policy to ensure that parents can get back into employment?

Natalie Don-Innes

Ms McCall talks about the UK Conservative Government’s childcare policy. I seriously call into question the impact that Conservative policies have had on families across Scotland for a number of years.

As I pointed out, this is about helping children. Our offer of 1,140 funded hours is guaranteed to benefit three and four-year-olds, but the picture is a little different for children under three. How much those children benefit from early learning and childcare provision is determined by crucial factors such as their family background, the age that they start in ELC, the quality of the services and the balance of hours that they spend between care at home and in ELC settings. We have a number of workstreams under way to increase access to childcare for parents, but I emphasise that we want to get this right for our youngest children and their families. That is what we are working towards.

Kevin Stewart (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Central)

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on the potential impact of the United Kingdom Government’s spring statement on the Scottish budget. (S6O-04534)

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

As I set out to the Parliament yesterday, the Chancellor of the Exchequer has caused a great deal of concern across Scotland with her decision in the UK spring statement to short-change public services and deliver cuts to some of the most vulnerable in our society. I called on the UK Government to reject the failed approach of austerity, but, although the UK Government might deny it, for many people, this looks and feels like austerity. We are considering the impacts on Scotland’s public finances, and I will set out more detail in the medium-term financial strategy at the end of May.

Kevin Stewart (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Central)

Given that organisations are saying that, by 2030, the poorest 10 per cent will get poorer and the richest 10 per cent will get richer, what analysis has the Scottish Government conducted of the increase in inequality in Scotland as a result of the Labour Government’s spring statement, which takes from the poor while protecting the rich? Is it not now apparent that the only way to create a fairer Scotland is through independence?

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

Kevin Stewart is absolutely right. We are considering the impact of the UK Government’s planned cuts to welfare policies on Scotland. It is clear from the UK Government’s impact assessment that 250,000 people, including 50,000 children, will be pushed into relative poverty by 2029-30. That is likely to increase inequality, and it is shameful.

As I said to the Parliament yesterday, we will strain every sinew to protect disabled people from this deplorable action by the UK Government. We are committed to eliminating child poverty, but that job is being made harder by the actions of the UK Government.

Michael Marra (Labour, North East Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Government what it is doing to ensure adequate provision of teaching staff in secondary schools in Dundee. (S6O-04535)

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

The Scottish Government has provided local authorities with £186.5 million of increased funding this year as part of our agreement with local government to restore teacher numbers to 2023 levels. There is an additional £28 million in the budget to provide for additional support for learning, which can be used flexibly by our councils to invest in extra teachers in secondary schools, including in Dundee. The overall number of teachers in Scotland’s classrooms has increased by more than 2,500 over the past decade as a result of direct Scottish Government investment.

Michael Marra (Labour, North East Scotland)

The headteacher of St John’s high school in Dundee has written to parents to say that secondary 1 and 2 pupils will receive fewer maths lessons per week and that national 5 application of maths classes will see a qualified maths teacher only on a rotational basis. The responsibility for that mess lies with the Scottish National Party Government, which has slashed council budgets, presided over a decline in Scottish education and piled ever more responsibilities on to our teachers. In his letter, headteacher Seán Hagney apologises for the disruption to learning. Will the cabinet secretary join him in apologising?

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

Mr Marra highlights an issue that I note has received press coverage in today’s The Courier . I have asked my officials to engage substantively with Dundee City Council.

I remind Mr Marra of local authorities’ statutory responsibilities with regard to the delivery of education. As I intimated in my original response, Dundee City Council will receive an extra £5.1 million as a result of the Government’s investment through the budget, which will help the council to increase teacher numbers to alleviate the challenges that he rightly raises today.

It is thanks to that Scottish Government investment that we have the highest-paid classroom teachers, the lowest pupil to teacher ratio and the highest school spending per pupil across these islands. It remains deeply politically incoherent that Mr Marra and his party voted to abstain on further investment in Scotland’s classrooms, where we know and agree that it is needed most.

First Minister’s Question Time

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

Scotland exports around £4 billion of goods to the United States each year—it is our largest export destination. Donald Trump’s tariffs will cause significant harm to many of our industries, including food and drink, textiles, engineering and pharmaceuticals. Will the First Minister instruct the Government and its business agencies to do whatever they can to support businesses and protect Scottish jobs?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

That is absolutely what the Scottish Government and our enterprise agencies are doing. On all occasions, we work with the business community to strengthen the economic prospects of and opportunities for Scotland.

The imposition of tariffs is not good news. It will be damaging for economic activity not only in Scotland and the United Kingdom but across the world. What was applied yesterday will also have negative implications for the population of the United States.

We will, of course, engage with the United Kingdom Government, which carries the responsibility for international trade as part of the constitutional settlement. We have been engaging for some time, and we will continue to do so as part of our efforts to promote and protect Scottish business.

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

The Scottish Chambers of Commerce says that many of our firms will now struggle to survive. The US is the largest overseas market for Scotch whisky, which is worth almost £1 billion in annual sales. When US tariffs on Scotch were introduced, six years ago, they cost the industry £600 million in lost sales.

Deploying some diplomatic understatement, the Scotch Whisky Association says that it is “disappointed” by the new tariffs. Help is needed. Those tariffs follow an increase in whisky duty that was imposed by the UK Government six months ago. Will the Scottish Government back my call for the UK Labour Government to lower its record-high tax on whisky?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The United Kingdom Government will make its financial decisions, and Mr Findlay is well able to make his representations to it. I point out that, when the Conservative Government was in power, it was not shy about putting tax on Scotch whisky into the bargain. It is nice to know that Mr Findlay has had a conversion on the road to Damascus on that particular question.

Significant issues affect the Scotch whisky industry. That is why the Government has had extensive dialogue with the Scotch Whisky Association, and it is why I will be engaging with it when I am in the United States over the next few days to mark tartan week.

I assure Mr Findlay that the Government will leave no stone unturned in ensuring that we take forward the concerns of the industry and will work with the United Kingdom Government and the industry to protect its prospects, given that it contributes very significantly to the economic wellbeing of Scotland.

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

When I speak with representatives of the Scotch whisky industry, they tell me that it is the Scottish Government that they are worried about. We need to maximise the opportunities for Scottish businesses to sell their products abroad, which will help to grow our economy and to fund public services.

Last year, the Scottish Government announced a USA export plan to identify the best opportunities for Scottish businesses, but within months it was cancelled. We called that decision short-sighted at the time. Was it a mistake? Ahead of his trip to New York for tartan week, will John Swinney reverse that decision and produce a new USA export plan?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I find that line of questioning very odd, coming from a party that wants the Scottish Government to scale back—

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

Answer the question.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

—all our international representation.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Excuse me, First Minister. Mr Ross, please adhere to our standing orders.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I find that line of questioning absolutely bizarre, because the Conservatives are the ones who demand that the Government close our international offices, which are critical to the representation of Scotland abroad and the economic success of our country. I am proud of what Scottish Development International does on our behalf, and I know that the export strategies of the Scottish Government are focused on the needs of the industry.

I can assure Mr Findlay that the Scottish Government will take forward the interests of Scottish industry in all that we do. We will look at the opportunities to promote our products overseas, and we will stand shoulder to shoulder with Scottish industry as we promote our important products to overseas markets.

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

So, no answer to that question, then.

The new Trump tariffs will put Scottish jobs at risk, they will stop businesses from growing and they will slow economic growth. John Swinney cannot stop the tariffs, but he can lower bills in Scotland.

This week, Scottish families faced more tax rises because of the Scottish National Party and Labour. Our analysis shows that an average person’s bill will rise by around £1,000 because of higher income tax, national insurance, energy costs, train fares, water bills and council tax. The cost of tariffs surely makes it vital for John Swinney to look at lowering the burden on hard-working Scots and businesses—will he do so?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The budget that the Scottish Government has successfully put to Parliament, and which is now going to be implemented, involves more than £700 million of business rate reductions for companies in Scotland, and that is just one of the pro-business measures in the Scottish Government’s budget. There is also the investment that we make in the enterprise agencies and in our representation overseas, which, of course, the Conservatives are opposed to.

Mr Findlay makes his call for business tax reductions, but he also made a call in the budget for income tax reductions, which would reduce public expenditure by £1 billion and would undermine the investment that we are making in the economy.

I can reassure Mr Findlay that the Scottish Government has taken forward an economic agenda that has seen gross domestic product per person in Scotland grow by 10.3 per cent, compared with 6 per cent in the United Kingdom. That is the record of a Government that is investing in the economy to boost economic performance and to create jobs and wealth in this country. That is what my Government is all about, and that is what we are delivering for people in Scotland.

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

On Monday, the Scottish National Party published yet another national health service recovery plan—that makes it five plans in just four years. I know that Biffa is suing the Government, but that is not the kind of recycling that Scots are looking for.

A pledge for a digital front door was made in 2021 but have not been delivered. Fast-track cancer diagnostic centres in every health board were promised in 2021 but have not been delivered. The height of the SNP’s ambition is that patients will wait “only” a year for treatment. Does the SNP really think that that is success? It is little surprise that Colin Poolman, the director of the Royal College of Nursing Scotland, said that

“nursing staff reading this will be left scratching their heads wondering just how the aspirations in the plan will be achieved in reality.”

Is it not the case that the SNP Government is desperately scrambling around because it knows, as everybody else in Scotland does, that it has broken Scotland’s NHS?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

No—I do not agree with that. I accept that there are challenges in the national health service, and I am very candid about that.

I set out in my speech at the National Robotarium in January exactly how the Scottish Government is going about addressing that. Let me give Jackie Baillie some reassurance about the progress that we are making.

In April 2024, the Scottish Government provided additional funding to NHS boards to deliver 64,000 additional procedures by March 2025. By the end of January, 75,500 additional procedures had been delivered. We promised 64,000 over a whole year, and within 10 months we delivered 75,500. In addition to that, all four key radiology diagnostic tests have shown a 4 per cent decrease in the total waiting list size for diagnostic tests.

I accept that there are challenges, but the Scottish Government is focused on delivering progress for the people of Scotland, and that is what we are delivering now.

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

The First Minister talks as if this is year zero. It is not. After 18 years in charge of our NHS, there is no one else left to blame.

Let us take the crisis in primary care as an example. Back in 2018, the SNP unveiled a big new plan with the usual fanfare. It promised to deliver 800 more general practitioners. The result is that, today, there are fewer whole-time equivalent GPs while demand has soared. In fact, since 2013, the number of whole-time equivalent GPs has fallen by more than 200 while the SNP has cut funding time and again. It is the SNP’s constant cycle of failure: create a problem, announce a plan and things get worse, so rinse and repeat.

Dr Iain Morrison, chair of the British Medical Association’s Scottish GP committee, told the BBC that general practice is at “crisis point”. Is he wrong?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I accept that, as I have said throughout all my answers about the health service since I became First Minister, there are challenges. Jackie Baillie ignores the impact on population health of a global pandemic that has had a colossal impact not just on the health service in Scotland but across the United Kingdom and in every affected country in the world. I recognise the challenges in the NHS.

On GPs, we have seen an increase in numbers—the total headcount—by 307 since 2017. In Scotland, we already have 82 GPs per 100,000 of population, compared to 64 in England, 67 in Wales and 75 in Northern Ireland.

We have invested in general practice to ensure that it is strong to meet the needs of the current period. We have also invested in broadening the staff base in general practice and in recruitment through health boards to ensure that allied health professionals are able to contribute to meeting the demand that, as a result of the Covid pandemic, now presents itself in the national health service.

Let me assure Jackie Baillie that the Government is absolutely focused on delivering improvements in the national health service. We are beginning to see the fruits of that plan, which is resulting in more procedures, more activity and more engagement in the national health service. There will be more of that to come in the period ahead, because the Government has put a record sum of money in to support the service.

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

Once again, we see the SNP spin machine wanting to pretend that everything is fine, but John Swinney cannot escape his record. After a global pandemic, he was the one who cut hundreds of millions of pounds from Scotland’s GPs, social care and mental health budgets. What is the result? Cancer targets are missed, waiting lists are out of control, deadly disease diagnosis is delayed and thousands of patients are forced to go private. However, we should not worry—the fifth NHS recovery plan in four years will definitely sort it all out. When it does not, there is still time to fit in a few more before the election.

NHS nurses, doctors and ambulance workers are not fooled. Neither are 800,000 Scots who are stuck in pain on an NHS waiting list. They deserve more than the SNP’s hollow apologies and half-baked plans that never get delivered. Is it not the case that, after 18 years in charge, if the SNP had a plan to fix the NHS, it would have done it by now?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Well, that is just what we hear from Jackie Baillie every single week, and it ignores—[Interruption.] It ignores the facts of what is going on.

Jackie Baillie raised some really important issues about cancer care. I want to reassure members of the public—[ Interruption .]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Let us hear one another.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

It is not good enough for Jackie Baillie to create alarm by putting those questions. Let us take the 31-day treatment standard. Some 94.7 per cent of patients were treated within 31 days of a decision to treat. The median wait is four days. Those figures are a demonstration of the national health service’s achievements.

Most importantly, we are treating more cancer patients on time, within both standards, compared with the same quarter five years ago: the figures are 4.5 per cent more patients being seen within the 31-day standard and 1.6 per cent more within the 62-day standard. Jackie Baillie mentioned mental health services. For the first time, we are now meeting the 18-week treatment standard for child and adolescent mental health services, which reflects an important commitment to support the mental health of children and young people in our society.

Yes, there are challenges, but this Government is absolutely focused on delivering on the national health service. That is why we put record funding in place, and it is also why Ms Baillie could not find it within herself to back the Government’s budget. She is not interested in investing in the national health service—it is just politics, politics, politics for Jackie Baillie.

Patrick Harvie (Green, Glasgow)

On Monday this week, the Scottish Government withdrew critical protection against rent rises. For the first time in years, landlords will now have the power to instantly set rents back to uncontrolled free-market levels. Tenants will not be able to stop that, and they will not be able to afford it.

Let us be clear about the scale of the Scottish National Party’s rent hikes. Data from Generation Rent and Living Rent shows that, even when the recent protections were in place, some landlords still tried to break the rules. In Glasgow, one landlord tried to double the rent from £700 to £1,400 per month. However, until this week, thanks to the temporary rent protections that I was proud to introduce, people such as that could be stopped. That unbelievable increase was capped by the regulator, with the rent at £784 instead of £1,400. Does the First Minister now understand why tenants across Scotland are so fearful about what he has done?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Presiding Officer, before I answer the substance of Patrick Harvie’s question, I wonder whether you would allow me to express to Mr Harvie my good wishes on his decision to step down from co-leadership of the Scottish Green Party. I have always enjoyed our encounters—we will have many more of them before the summer—and I wish him well for the future.

On the substance of Patrick Harvie’s question, I will make two points. First, part of the answer that I would give is in the evidence that Mr Harvie put to the Parliament a moment ago. There are opportunities for tenants to seek a review of a rent increase that they believe to be unacceptable. That right was exercised, with success, in one of the examples that Mr Harvie put to me. Secondly, I underline the importance that the Government attaches to the principle that underlines Mr Harvie’s point, which is why we have introduced a bill that includes the concept of rent controls. Parliament is considering, at stage 2, the Housing (Scotland) Bill, which will make provision for such issues as we move forward.

Patrick Harvie (Green, Glasgow)

I am very grateful for the First Minister’s kind personal remarks, but I fear that his comments on the policy issue are complacent. He talks about the protections that I just described, but the point is that those protections ended this week—they are no longer there to protect people. Such complacency is similar to what we heard recently from the Minister for Housing. When those figures were put to him, all that he could say was that he was asking landlords to be sensible with these new, utterly uncontrolled powers.

In truth, there is now nothing to hold back a tide of unaffordable rent rises. The Scottish Government has not even published an assessment of the number of people who will lose their homes as a result. The protection that the Greens introduced succeeded in preventing eye-watering rent increases. Rents in Scotland are already too high—

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

A question, please, Mr Harvie.

Patrick Harvie (Green, Glasgow)

—and with energy bills going up and social security under attack, people need a Government here that will be on their side. Will the First Minister think again, stop watering down the new bill and ensure that it can cut rents instead of locking in ever more rent rises for the future?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The public can be assured that they have a Government that is on their side—that is the Government that I lead. That is why we introduced the Housing (Scotland) Bill, which contains the important protections that I set out.

It is important that we recognise that there are strict legal processes that ensure that private landlords and their agents follow very strict rules about ending any tenancies. Mr Harvie makes a point about evictions; that is not an area that is without protections under the current legislative arrangements. Measures are also in place to enable tenants to seek a review of a rent increase.

I assure Mr Harvie that the Government is absolutely committed to the terms of the Housing (Scotland) Bill that is before the Parliament. We will scrutinise that to its completion and make sure that we implement the protections that he is seeking. That is the process that the Parliament is going through, and the Government will see it through to its conclusion.

Kevin Stewart (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Central)

To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government’s response is to reported comments made by the chair of the North Sea transition task force that the North Sea’s future should be a “national mission”. (S6F-03982)

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The North Sea is vital to Scotland’s energy transition. However, decisions on offshore oil and gas licensing, consenting and the fiscal regime are all currently reserved to the United Kingdom Government. We have consistently called for the UK Government to approach those decisions on a rigorously evidence-led, case-by-case basis, with climate compatibility and energy security as key considerations. We are clear in our support for a just transition for Scotland’s oil and gas sector that recognises the maturity of the North Sea basin and is in line with our climate change commitments.

Kevin Stewart (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Central)

Among other things, the task force’s report recommends

“a long-term, large-scale investment in low carbon technology, and ensuring that the continued (and planned) oil and gas extraction is in line with ... net zero commitments.”

Does the First Minister share my view that, while it remains in charge of energy policy, the Labour Government must resource the transition appropriately to maintain and secure jobs and must map out credible energy security transition and net zero strategies in order to get this right for the future? Does he agree that, ideally, the national mission could and should be undertaken by an independent Scotland?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Mr Stewart and I share the aspiration that an independent Scotland should be able to take forward the issues and challenges that Scotland faces across all policy areas. That is what independence is all about.

The most constructive and immediate thing that can be done is that the United Kingdom Government can give an early—actually, an immediate—commitment to the Acorn carbon capture and storage project. That would transform the economic prospects of the north-east of Scotland and enable us to take forward the just transition.

Mr Stewart will know my frustration at the lack of progress that has been made with successive United Kingdom Governments on the Acorn carbon capture project, as it could enhance the opportunities for Scotland and deliver the future of the oil and gas sector and our net zero transition. I just wish that the UK Government would get on and take a positive decision about Acorn.

Douglas Lumsden (Conservative, North East Scotland)

The transition task force also said that, while we are transitioning towards renewables, it makes absolute sense to take what we can from the North Sea. Does the First Minister recognise the vital role that oil and gas will play in the transition? Will his party abandon its presumption against new oil and gas and ditch its hostility to the sector, which supports more than 80,000 jobs in the north-east?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The Scottish Government has no hostility to the oil and gas sector—[ Interruption .] I will say it again to reassure the Conservatives that they heard it the first time—[ Interruption .]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Let us hear the First Minister.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

There is no hostility in this Government to oil and gas. We are committed to a rational transition to net zero that enables us to fulfil our climate objectives. We will have to rely on elements of oil and gas for some time to come. That will be part of the approach that the Scottish Government takes, but we also have to fulfil our climate objectives.

I know that there has been another change of position in the Conservative Party. A few weeks ago, Russell Findlay said that it was refreshingly honest of Kemi Badenoch to say that we should abandon our climate change targets. What does that say about the Conservatives? It says that they are prepared to vote in this Parliament for climate change targets but, when it becomes opportune to cuddle up to Nigel Farage and Reform, they abandon the climate change targets. We all now know, because people are now deserting the Tory party, that the Tory party is in a dance with Farage. I will leave them to all of that.

Fergus Ewing (Scottish National Party, Inverness and Nairn)

The developers of the Rosebank and Jackdaw oil and gas fields have obtained their necessary exploration and other licences. They have complied fully with all Government regulations. On the strength of that, between them, they have invested well over £1,000 million thus far. If they are now declined final permission because the rules have changed and the goalposts have been moved, the UK Government will almost certainly be pursued for legal claims by those companies for recovery of the sunk costs and, possibly, for the loss of profits extending to several billion pounds or more, and there will be a consequential reduction in the Scottish budget of hundreds of millions of pounds. Will the First Minister, who is not hostile to the oil and gas sector, confirm that the Rosebank and Jackdaw projects must now go ahead?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

As Mr Ewing knows, I am a very strong believer in the rule of law. The issues that are—[ Interruption .]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Let us hear one another.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I will say that again, because my belief in the rule of law is part of my entire being. I know that the Conservatives are cavalier about the rule of law, but I am not—not one bit of it.

Some of the issues that Mr Ewing raises in his question are influenced by court judgments that have been made. The Scottish and United Kingdom Governments will have to consider the implications of those court decisions, and Mr Ewing, as an experienced parliamentarian and lawyer, will understand the importance of considering those particular rulings as we make decisions. Of course, there could be implications of those judgments. I assure Mr Ewing that the Scottish Government will always take a considered approach to those rulings, which we must bear in mind in any decisions that we take.

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

To ask the First Minister what engagement the Scottish Government has had with the United Kingdom Government regarding what assessment has been made of the potential impact of an extension of US tariffs on Scottish businesses that export to the US market. (S6F-03977)

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

There can be no doubt that the tariffs that have been announced by the United States will cause damage to the global, UK and Scottish economies. Scottish Government officials and ministers have been making representations to the UK Government on the matter for some time. Yesterday, the Minister for Business, Richard Lochhead, spoke with Douglas Alexander, the UK Minister for Trade Policy and Economic Security, and emphasised the need to ensure that Scotland’s interests are protected in the negotiations with the United States. Scottish Government agencies will work with businesses to advise and support them through this difficult and uncertain period.

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

I might take a slightly different tack to the issue. There is no doubt that the new tariffs that were announced last night will hit some of Scotland’s most valuable exports—Scotch whisky, salmon, pharmaceuticals and power-generating equipment among them. Will the First Minister use his visit to the United States this weekend to make the case for fair and reciprocal trade? Will he work closely with the UK Government to protect Scottish jobs and businesses? Rather than retaliate, we need to stay calm, keep a level head and focus on reaching a deal that shields Scotland from the worst economic impacts.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

There is a lot in Mr Kerr’s question with which I agree. I am a believer in free and open trade, and I am a believer in exporting and international business activity. That serves Scotland well. Organisations such as the Scottish Council for Development and Industry, which is now known as Prosper, have led the debate for most of my life on the importance of exporting and broadening the export base of the Scottish economy.

As I said, there is a lot in what Mr Kerr said with which I agree. However, we have to recognise the severity of the economic impact that will come as a consequence of the tariffs. Different responses to those can be formulated. I give him the assurance that there will be close dialogue with the UK Government on the question—as I said, Mr Lochhead discussed the subject yesterday. Before Lord Mandelson took up his role as His Majesty’s ambassador to the United States, he and I had a conversation about the important issues that mattered to Scotland in relation to that role. Lord Mandelson generously gave of his time to make sure that he was aware of those issues before he took up his office.

We will leave no stone unturned to promote and protect Scottish business and to find our way through the challenges, but we must all be aware that, based on what we heard yesterday, there will be negative implications.

Katy (Labour, West Scotland)

To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government’s position is on whether the reported increased annual cost of Scotland’s prisons to over £77,000 per prisoner represents good value for public money. (S6F-03996)

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The figure of £77,000 is wrong. It mistakenly includes capital spending in estimating the cost of a prisoner place in Scotland, by taking total spend and dividing it by population. The average cost of a prisoner place in 2023-24 was £47,140. That information was released by the Scottish Prison Service in February.

Katy (Labour, West Scotland)

As the First Minister knows, Scotland has the highest number of prisoners in western Europe, per head. If we want to reduce prison costs, we must reduce the number of people in custody and the levels of offending. Some people must be kept in custody but, as a country, we spend comparatively little on community justice. Does the First Minister accept that we need to shift resources significantly to robust alternatives to custody, which the evidence suggests are more effective at reducing offending for many prisoners?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Fundamentally, I agree with the point made by Katy Clark. We incarcerate a greater proportion of our population, per head, than almost all other European countries do. That results in a larger prison population. Katy Clark and other members will know from the transparent engagement of the Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Home Affairs with the Parliament that the size of the prison population is a significant challenge that we are managing.

Katy Clark made a point about the importance of investment in community justice. I agree with her. That is why, over a two-year period, there has been a £25 million increase in investment in community justice activity. The Government will look for opportunities to ensure that we expand that capacity, because doing so is one way of ensuring that we achieve better outcomes and avoid the situation that we are experiencing of record levels of incarceration.

Kenneth Gibson (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame North)

In November 2022, when flat cash funding was proposed for the Scottish Prison Service, Katy Clark said:

“The most basic functions of our criminal justice system and prison service are under threat because of these cuts ... A properly supported criminal justice system is fundamental to our democracy—but these dangerous and disastrous cuts threaten its very existence.”

Today, in her initial question, she complained that too much is being spent on our Prison Service. Does the First Minister agree that that type of opportunistic nonsense simply discredits the Labour Party, and that Scotland’s Prison Service deserves much better?

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

First Minister, your answer should be only on matters for which you are responsible.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The Government is working carefully to ensure that we have a sustainable prison estate. That involves ensuring that we have adequate capacity in the prison estate but that we also take measures to shift the balance of criminal justice, where it is safe to do so, to enable individuals to have different approaches to remedy as a result of criminal justice cases, rather than simply the option of incarceration.

Liam Kerr (Conservative, North East Scotland)

The lack of a holistic strategy has led to the cost of our overcrowded prisons spiralling. In response, the Government dropped a proposal to let long-term prisoners out early, but it did not rule out doing so in future. Victim Support Scotland, Rape Crisis Scotland and Scottish Women’s Aid all say that such a move would be a threat to victims and to the public. Will the First Minister put the public interest first and rule out the early release of long-term prisoners—yes or no?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

In a sense, that question sums up the problem that we have here. [ Interruption .]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Let us hear one another.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Apparently, the Conservatives believe in free speech—unless it is me who is speaking. Really!

Liam Kerr has said that there is a lack of a holistic strategy, and he has then gone on to suggest one of the options that could be considered as part of such a strategy. I dispute Mr Kerr’s claim—I think that we have a holistic strategy. The Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Home Affairs has been completely open with the Parliament about all the challenges that we face, and, in my opinion, she has handled those challenges superbly well.

Liam Kerr has asked me for a holistic strategy but has ruled out one of the possible options in that regard. If the Conservatives want to be treated seriously—it is becoming increasingly difficult to treat them seriously because of the way in which they go about exercising their politics, as one of their members has found out and has today publicly made clear is the case—they should engage constructively in a debate about how we can meet the real challenges that this Government is focused on addressing.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

We move to constituency and general supplementary questions. As ever, I am keen to enable as many members as possible to take part, so concise questions and answers would be appreciated.

Emma Harper (Scottish National Party, South Scotland)

What discussions has the Scottish Government had with Dumfries and Galloway Council, Transport Scotland and partners regarding the closure of Kirkcudbright bridge, which is causing massive disruption for everyone in the town? As well as impacting lifeline services, it will have an impact on the busy tourist season ahead. What practical support can be offered to enable the bridge to be repaired and reopened or even replaced?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Government officials have been in dialogue with Dumfries and Galloway Council on the issue. Obviously, the bridge is part of the local authority infrastructure, and the local authority has an obligation to bring forward plans to ensure that the closure of the bridge, which I understand is disrupting connections between communities in Kirkcudbright, is properly addressed. The local authority cannot ignore the issue of public safety, but if there is any advisory support that the Government can make available, I would be happy to arrange such discussions with the local authority.

Miles Briggs (Conservative, Lothian)

The only way that ministers have been able to meet their target on waiting times for child and adolescent mental health services has been by removing from the waiting times figures young people and children who were waiting for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and autism diagnoses. That is a fact. It is a shameful situation.

I have been contacted by many parents in Edinburgh who have been forced to go private to seek a diagnosis for their children. In follow-up meetings, their general practice has told them that it will not accept responsibility for the continuing care of those children or deliver the prescriptions that they need. Will the First Minister review that policy? More specifically, will the Government distribute national guidance on prescribing for such young people?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I addressed some of those points in the answer that I gave to Murdo Fraser last week, in which I made it clear that I thought that the approach that was being taken in Tayside to seek to provide earlier intervention to support young people who presented with mental health challenges had been ill communicated. I think that that approach is the right way to proceed. We should move forward by providing early intervention that meets the support needs of young people, but that provision must be properly planned, delivered and communicated in all localities.

I will not dictate what the prescribing policy should be. It would be ridiculous for me, as First Minister, to set that out. Clinical judgments must be made by clinicians who are trained to undertake such expert analysis, and I trust them to make those judgments.

Claire Baker (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

The First Minister is aware of yesterday’s announcement that Carse medical practice will close in September, which will leave 3,600 people without a local practice. Unless a solution is found, patients will face significant travel to alternative practices in Dundee or Perth, to which there are no direct buses. For years, staff have been operating in an inappropriate temporary surgery, with an insecure and uncertain future. The situation is totally unacceptable. What does the First Minister think the solution is?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I should be transparent in saying that the issue affects my constituency and that I am closely connected to the concerns of my constituents on the matter. NHS Tayside has the responsibility for working with the local community and general practitioners on the provision of physical facilities to meet the needs of the local population, and I am engaging in those discussions in my capacity as the local member of Parliament. It seems unacceptable to me that patients in the Errol area and in surrounding villages in the Carse of Gowrie would have to travel the extensive distances that Claire Baker has set out. I will work with NHS Tayside to address the issue and find a solution to that particular challenge.

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

The UK Government’s austerity agenda is putting significant budgetary pressure on Scotland as we try to protect the most vulnerable here, who are increasingly being targeted by the Labour Party. Given the devolved impact, will the First Minister urge Keir Starmer to act on a new study, published by the London School of Economics, that says that, if the UK Government were to follow Scotland’s policies, 700,000 children would be lifted out of poverty? How could Scotland reinvest that money to benefit my Maryhill and Springburn constituents, and those beyond, if it did not have to pick up the failures of the UK Government?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Mr Doris raises an issue that matters enormously to me. He knows, as the Parliament does, that the focal point of my Government’s agenda is the eradication of child poverty. In the London School of Economics study that he cited, Professor Ruth Patrick said:

“The progress Scotland has made on driving poverty rates down shows another way is possible.”

We certainly need another way when the United Kingdom Government has voluntarily set out welfare reforms that, based on analysis by a Labour Government, will push 50,000 children into poverty. What on earth is the point of a Labour Government that is forcing more and more children into poverty? We are taking better decisions in Scotland, where child poverty rates are falling, whereas they are rising in every other part of the United Kingdom. That demonstrates that the Labour Government in Westminster is not delivering for the people of Scotland.

Rachael Hamilton (Conservative, Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire)

The number of banks on Scottish high streets declined by 60 per cent between 2015 and 2023. Getting access to cash in rural towns is like searching for water in a desert. Will the First Minister back my calls for the establishment of more shared banking hubs in towns such as Eyemouth and Selkirk so that residents and businesses do not feel so far removed from essential services?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

There is a lot of merit in the concept of shared banking facilities. I have been exploring that very possibility in the highland Perthshire area of my constituency, so I understand the difficulties that Rachael Hamilton cites.

I encourage banks to work together on that proposition. There are a number of examples in Scotland of banks coming together as a way of trying to broaden access to cash in rural areas. I understand the viability challenges that individual banks find in particular towns, but there are solutions to be sought on a collaborative basis, and I encourage the various banks to engage constructively in local areas on that question.

Michael Marra (Labour, North East Scotland)

On 19 March, the management of the University of Dundee and the leaders of the Scottish Funding Council committed to the Parliament to providing a new recovery plan for the university within two weeks. That deadline passed yesterday, but there is no new plan. That could not be more urgent, because every day that passes without a plan further imperils the most important institution in my city. There is a complete absence of leadership. When will a voluntary severance scheme open, and when will we see a new plan?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I assure Mr Marra that there is no absence of leadership on that question, which is commanding a huge amount of the Government’s time, attention and focus and was discussed extensively at the Cabinet meeting on Tuesday. The Deputy First Minister, who is leading cross-Government work, is working closely with the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills, who has portfolio responsibility for universities, with the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care, because of the extraordinary significance of life sciences in the University of Dundee, and with the Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Home Affairs in relation to the role of the Leverhulme research centre, which is fundamental to the university.

I have made it absolutely clear that the original financial recovery plan is completely unacceptable and that there has to be an alternative. That work is under way. There were discussions this morning that have narrowed down some of the options that are being taken forward, and the Government will consider further proposals.

I assure Mr Marra that there is a real focus on ensuring that we chart a pathway forward, but it is also important that I make it clear that there is a secure future for the University of Dundee. I want students to accept their offers from the university confident in its future, and I want researchers to be confident that they can continue their involvement in the university, because this Government is determined to secure that future for the university.

That will take us time. We have put in place the financial liquidity support, as requested by the University of Dundee, to make sure that it is secure in what it does in the period ahead, but the design of an alternative recovery plan is an absolute prerequisite for the next steps that we must take, and the Government is determined to take them.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

As the First Minister knows, this is lambing season in farming communities across Scotland, but he will also be aware that there has been an alarming rise in attacks by ravens on lambs and ewes, leading to shocking and often fatal injuries. In Orkney, I have heard from distressed farmers who have lost stock in horrendous circumstances and from vets who talk about serious animal welfare concerns.

Given that it is clear that the raven population has increased significantly in recent years, does the First Minister agree that a survey of raven numbers is now urgently required? Will he ask NatureScot not just to carry out that survey but to provide whatever support farmers need, through licensing, to deal with attacks, ideally before they occur?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I acknowledge the significance of the point that Mr McArthur raises. Indeed, the issue was raised with me by farming representatives when I visited Orkney recently. There is the opportunity for licences to be issued by NatureScot to tackle the issue that Mr McArthur raises. If local farmers wish to take that up, that can be encouraged. I will certainly encourage NatureScot to engage with the farming community in Orkney and other communities to address the issue.

On the specific question about whether a population survey is the best way forward, I am not certain that that is the answer, but I will explore that issue with NatureScot and write to Mr McArthur with a response.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

That concludes First Minister’s question time.

May I have your attention, please? A fire has been reported in this area. Visitors in the public gallery should please follow the directions of security staff and evacuate to the public foyer immediately. People who require assistance to evacuate and those with a personal emergency evacuation plan requiring the use of a refuge point should move to the nearest available refuge point now. Members and other chamber occupants should evacuate immediately to the garden lobby. Further directions will be broadcast presently. Thank you.

University of the West of Scotland Foundation Academy

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

Welcome back. The next item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S6M-16633, in the name of George Adam, on celebrating the University of the West of Scotland’s groundbreaking foundation academy. The debate will be concluded without any question being put. I invite members wishing to participate to press their request-to-speak buttons.

Motion debated,

That the Parliament applauds the work of the University of the West of Scotland (UWS) and what it sees as the groundbreaking work that it is doing with the Foundation Academy, which is a 12-month programme helping pupils across S5 and S6 to develop academic skills, experience university-level study, and visit a university campus in order to boost their confidence in pursuing higher education and strengthen university applications; understands that the programme is the first of its kind in Scotland and has been recognised by various institutions as an alternative pathway to meeting the required qualifications to enter university; acknowledges how successful the academy has reportedly been for the thousands of pupils who have benefited from the additional support offered since the launch of the programme in 2022, and praises the time and effort of all those involved in the creation and running of the programme for the impact that this is having on pupils, including those in the Paisley constituency, who otherwise may not have been able to attend university.

George Adam (Scottish National Party, Paisley)

The lengths that this—[Interruption.] Sorry?

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

Your microphone is on, but, a little like mine, it does not seem to be very loud.

George Adam (Scottish National Party, Paisley)

It seems to be on now.

This place will go to some lengths to ensure that the people of Paisley do not have their voice heard in Scotland’s Parliament, but that is what I will ensure happens, after that wee test of the alarm system.

It is not often that I get to talk about much of the good work that happens in Paisley—okay, Presiding Officer, I admit that I do that at any opportunity. That is because, from the very beginning of my time as Paisley’s MSP, I have always wanted to talk about positive Paisley and to talk up all the good things that affect the good buddies of my home town.

We live in extremely challenging times—we hear that all the time in this place—but it has always been thus, and it is how we deal with that adversity and challenge that is the key.

As most members know, I have been a member of our various education committees, in their many guises, for most of my time in the Scottish Parliament. My reason for being on that committee is that I want to make a difference to the lives of young people in my town. Education is a key component in that, and I am lucky to represent a town that has a progressive, forward-thinking educational establishment that is trying to do just that, and to change young people’s lives.

The University of the West of Scotland has influenced the Scottish Parliament, as there are members, past and present, who have been educated in Paisley at the institution in its many guises. Currently, the Education, Children and Young People Committee has among its members Willie Rennie, who is an alumnus of Paisley’s seat of higher education, and, before that, it had Evelyn Tweed, who graduated from there as well—the Parliament’s education committee has had its very own Paisley mafia. If the public had been allowed back into the gallery, I would be able to see my wife Stacey, who also graduated as one of Paisley’s finest. During her time, the institution was known as Paisley tech, then Paisley college, and she finally graduated from the University of Paisley. My close friend and office manager David McCartney also graduated from the UWS.

I mention the fantastic work of the University of the West of Scotland at any opportunity, and today I want to talk about an initiative that is changing lives across the west of Scotland and in Paisley in particular—the UWS foundation academy.

We all know that education is the great enabler. It opens doors, creates opportunities and empowers young people to shape their lives and futures. However, for too many young people from disadvantaged backgrounds, those doors have been closed. That is why programmes such as the UWS foundation academy are vital, because they break down barriers, raise aspirations and deliver on the Scottish Government’s commitment to widening access to higher education.

The impact of the UWS foundation academy is incredible. Already, since launching in 2022, the initiative has supported more than 2,300 students from 34 schools across 10 local authorities, including—right at the centre of the universe, in Paisley—pupils from Castlehead high school and Gleniffer high school, who are also benefiting from the programme.

The programme is free for schools, ensuring that financial constraints are no longer a barrier. It provides a structured pathway into university for pupils in secondary 5 and 6, helping them to gain academic confidence, experience university-level learning and—crucially—earn a Scottish credit and qualifications framework level 7 credit that can be used as an alternative to a higher B grade when applying to the UWS. That is tangible progress in tackling educational inequality, and it demonstrates the UWS delivering the Scottish Government’s widening access strategy.

The Scottish Government has made widening access to higher education a key priority, aiming to ensure that, by 2030, at least 20 per cent of university entrants come from Scotland’s most deprived backgrounds. The UWS foundation academy is directly contributing to that goal. By delivering a flexible and inclusive approach, the UWS is ensuring that young people from all backgrounds, including those who might be the first in their family to consider university, feel supported in making that step. The programme gives them the confidence, experience and qualifications that they need to succeed in life.

This is a positive Paisley story. In our town, the impact of the foundation academy is already being felt. Some 29 pupils from Castlehead high school and 17 from Gleniffer high school are engaged in this year’s cohort. Those young people are gaining invaluable insights into fields such as forensic science, sports science, engineering, nursing and many other disciplines that are crucial to Scotland’s future workforce. [ Interruption .]

I am quite happy to start again for the benefit of the audience that has now come into the public gallery, Presiding Officer.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

I think that you should just save the best bits for last.

George Adam (Scottish National Party, Paisley)

A teacher at Castlehead high school summed it up best:

“For some of our pupils, this programme is the difference between going to university or not going. It breaks down barriers and gives them the belief that higher education is for them.”

That is life changing. That is what widening access is all about. This is a model for Scotland and it is a model that should be used in other areas, too.

The UWS foundation academy is an example of how universities can work hand in hand with schools and communities to deliver meaningful change. It is no surprise that the programme was nominated for the widening participation initiative of the year at the 2024 Times Higher Education awards. It is not just about access; it is about ensuring that young people thrive when they get there. The transition support, the Universities and Colleges Admissions Service application guidance and the continued support even after pupils have left school make the programme a model for how we should deliver education in Scotland.

I am proud to see the UWS, which is a key institution in Paisley, leading the way in widening access to higher education. This is what a fairer Scotland looks like—a place where a young person’s potential matters more than their postcode, where talent is nurtured, not wasted, and where programmes such as the UWS foundation academy help to deliver the Scottish Government’s vision of a truly inclusive education system. I urge colleagues across the chamber to support and champion initiatives such as this, ensuring that every young person, regardless of their background, has the chance to fulfil their potential.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

Thank you very much, Mr Adam. We move to the open debate, and I call Miles Briggs

Miles Briggs (Conservative, Lothian)

I start by thanking George Adam, my Education, Children and Young People Committee colleague and Paisley mafia member, for securing this debate.

I put on record just how impressed I was to hear about the work that is being undertaken by the University of the West of Scotland when I recently met representatives in the Parliament. I look forward to a visit that I have set up to see some of those leading projects. The University of the West of Scotland is one of Scotland’s largest modern universities and a leading provider of undergraduate, postgraduate and research degree education.

As has been mentioned, since the launch of the foundation, in 2022, the programme has grown year on year, with headteachers, pupils, deputy heads and teachers in schools all remarking on the positive benefits that it is bringing to pupils, and I agree. The foundation programme includes a visit to one of the four UWS campuses and a 10-week university-level module that is delivered by UWS lecturers to pupils in their school setting. The modulated timetable, which delivers one period a week for pupils, is really important. The fact that it is free for schools has broken down many barriers, with the UWS also covering the transport costs of the campus visit, which takes place during the school day.

Pupils are invited to be involved during their S5 year, with the aim of completing the programme by December of their S6 year. As has been mentioned, since the pilot in 2022, the UWS has engaged with more than 2,500 senior pupils across more than 30 schools in Ayrshire, Renfrewshire, Lanarkshire, Argyll and Bute, Dumfries and Galloway and Glasgow city. The UWS is continuing to expand the offer to other schools throughout the west of Scotland.

The University of the West Scotland is rightly proud of delivering the foundation academy programme to senior school pupils across the west of Scotland. As George Adam outlined, this unique initiative offers pupils the opportunity to experience studying at university level while developing key academic and personal skills to ensure that they are prepared for the university experience.

The Parliament’s education committee recently met care-experienced young people to discuss the barriers to higher and further education that they are experiencing. One of the key messages that I heard from them and took away was that many felt that they were unprepared for university life. Many of those young people will be the first person in their family who has ever gone to university, so programmes such as this present a real pre-university experience and an opportunity for them to ask the many questions that they had.

The programme has provided numerous benefits to young people, including the opportunity for them to understand what they can expect beyond the boundaries of secondary school education. Ahead of the debate, I was thinking that it does not seem too long ago since I went to university. I remember the shock to my system—I went from rural Perthshire to an Aberdeen student hall flat with a railway right behind it. Luckily for me, I made many great, lifelong friends at university. However, I acknowledge that that does not happen for many young people.

The transition from school to higher or further education is a big step and a big responsibility for many young people who are leaving home or care for the first time, often to travel across the country or even further afield. Initiatives such as the UWS foundation academy can provide our young people with that extra bit of knowledge on how university life will impact them, help them to answer their many questions and address any fears and doubts that they might have.

Other universities have adopted a similar approach. I know that many of our colleges provide early holistic support to young people, but the foundation academy is the first of its kind in Scotland, which has been recognised through many awards, as George Adam said. If more universities and colleges follow the same lines and offer similar courses, that will help to reduce the number of students who drop out of university, which is something that we should all want to see.

I congratulate all those involved in the programme, which has made such a difference to many people already, on the great impact that it is having on many young people’s lives. I also congratulate George Adam on securing the debate.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

I call Stephanie Callaghan. [ Interruption .] We had a problem with Ms Callaghan’s audio, but it has been resolved. Please start again, Ms Callaghan.

Stephanie Callaghan (Scottish National Party, Uddingston and Bellshill)

I thank my colleague George Adam for bringing the debate to the chamber today. There are few things that matter more to me than supporting our young people to achieve their potential, so it is a great pleasure to be part of the celebration of the University of the West of Scotland’s ground-breaking foundation academy. It is a pioneering initiative that is transforming the educational landscape for senior school pupils across the west of Scotland. The initiative offers pupils the unique opportunity to experience university-level study, develop essential academic skills and enhance the quality of their university applications.

Supported by the John Mather Trust, the foundation academy has engaged more than 2,500 pupils from more than 30 schools since its inception in 2022. By providing a blended approach of on-campus and in-school learning, the foundation academy ensures that pupils are well prepared for their future academic journeys.

The success of the programme is evident in the confidence and readiness of its participants, who have gained valuable insights into university life. I listened to Holy Cross high school pupils when they presented to a large group of parents about the merits of taking part. One student said:

“I enjoyed getting to see what it is actually like at university, what the environment is like, and getting to experience different courses. I feel more confident about applying for university.”

Times Higher Education provided a really good description of the foundation academy. It said:

“By building a bridge between high school and university, outreach teams can foster aspiration and provide tangible pathways for students who might not otherwise pursue higher education.”

I am sure that we can all agree that encouraging ambition and offering concrete opportunities are key.

I will reflect a little on the rich history of the UWS in Hamilton and its deep connection to our community. The university’s presence in Hamilton dates back to the merger of the University of Paisley with Bell College in 2007. Bell College educated generations of students since opening in 1972—the year after I was born—and played a crucial role in the educational development of the region. It was a big feature of our local skyline, sitting alongside South Lanarkshire Council headquarters.

The Bell College building was in the Uddingston and Bellshill constituency. It officially closed back in 2018, when students moved to the new, state-of-the-art £110 million Lanarkshire campus, based up the road at Hamilton international technology park.

Just a few months ago, the old Bell College building was taken down, changing the local skyline and the view from my window, because I live a stone’s throw away from there. Local people have expressed nostalgia for and fond memories of the landmark that stood for more than 50 years. Everyone knows someone who studied there. There is also excitement about the future, as we look to secure a transformation that will bring new life to the heart of Hamilton and benefit the local community.

I also want to pay tribute to the late Christina McKelvie, MSP for Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse. She was always a strong advocate for Bell College and its legacy in the community, and for the new campus, too. Throughout her tenure, she consistently highlighted the importance of the college in providing quality education and opportunities, and that resonates with many residents to this day.

Christina was also actively involved in promoting campus safety at the University of the West of Scotland. She supported initiatives such as the standing safe campaign, which aims to end sexual violence on university campuses.

I extend my heartfelt gratitude to everyone who has contributed to the success of the UWS foundation academy and to our Hamilton campus. That dedication and hard work has made a significant difference to the lives of many, and we are proud to celebrate those achievements today. Let us continue to strive for excellence, support our students and uphold the values that make the UWS a beacon of education and innovation.

Carol Mochan (Labour, South Scotland)

I thank George Adam for bringing this celebration of the work of the University of the West of Scotland to the chamber.

We all know the power of education, and we all believe that it can transform lives. The right to education at all levels must be embedded in all that we do as politicians. It is important that we continue to work with universities to encourage programmes such as the foundation academy. The foundation academy has allowed pupils who wish to pursue higher education in a wide range of subject areas to gain access to it. It has provided a pathway without which that education might have been out of reach.

As we have heard, thousands of young people have benefited from the academy since it was launched in 2022 with the aim of bridging the gap between schools and the university, and the numbers continue to increase each year.

One of the biggest challenges that is faced by pupils who would like to go to university, especially those who lack support for and experience of university at home, is change. That can be a very difficult gap to bridge, and we all know that it has led to many people simply giving up. The programme directly addresses that issue, and we should all support it in doing so.

As others have said, the programme includes accredited modules and affords the students a taster of university education.

I was pleased to speak with delegates from the University of the West of Scotland about the foundation academy when they visited Parliament earlier this year. I am proud to say that in my South Scotland region, 245 pupils have participated. Through the programme, they have gained insight and learning experiences to improve their future university applications.

No child or young person should ever feel limited because of their background or circumstances. Everyone should have support to develop the skills and knowledge that they need to access their chosen path. The programme provides opportunity by creating more routes for students to gain access to university. It is vitally important that students from all backgrounds have access to university, should they wish it.

We know the impact of growing up in poverty, which causes unfair barriers to accessing further education. We should be doing everything that we can to provide all children with the tools to choose their own future, which must include access to university, if they choose that option.

As I have a rural constituency, it is very common for constituents to tell me how difficult it is for their young family members to travel to education and training. Recent work that I have participated in around traditional building trades highlighted the issue for me. If a young person living in Dalmellington wants to learn a trade such as roofing, they cannot, through no fault of their own, get public transport that allows them to reach college for the start time. How can we expect them to commit to options that they simply cannot get to?

We in the Parliament have a responsibility to fix those injustices. Part of our responsibility in relation to supporting programmes such as the foundation academy is to look at the wider issues for and needs of our communities.

The programme addresses the challenges that pupils might have. First, it fully funds visits to the university and, secondly, pupils get experience of modules being delivered by lecturers in their own school for a period each week. That provides them with a comprehensive understanding of how university teaching is structured, and gives them accredited skills, knowledge and confidence—and the qualification that other members have mentioned—to take with them in the next steps in their education.

I appreciate all the work that staff and students have done, and I wish them great success for the future. I welcome all the contributions from members today.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

I invite Graeme Dey to respond to the debate—around seven minutes, please.

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

I thank George Adam for bringing the debate to the chamber, and I thank other members for their contributions. I welcome representatives of the University of the West of Scotland to the gallery; unfortunately, they sadly missed the beginning of George Adam’s contribution owing to the fire alarm.

Last year, I had the pleasure of visiting the UWS to speak to—and, more importantly, hear from—staff and students. I heard about the excellent work that the university does to attract and support students from disadvantaged backgrounds. The foundation academy is one of those pieces of work, and it continues to go from strength to strength. It is a fantastic example of partnership working, and that alternative pathway is the type of innovative approach that will help to make access to universities easier. I am pleased that we have had the opportunity to celebrate it today.

As we have heard, the UWS foundation academy supports S5 and S6 pupils who attend schools with lower progression rates. It has partnered with 34 individual schools across 10 local authority areas. The 12-month programme helps pupils to develop academic skills and experience university-level study, and it provides an opportunity for them to visit a campus. That is all helpful in preparing young people for university life, as Miles Briggs noted. The programme is tailored to meet specific regional needs and is delivered at no cost to local authorities or schools.

As we heard earlier, the successful completion of the programme furnishes graduates with credit-bearing modules that can be used as an alternative to a B at higher when applying to UWS. A measure of its credibility is the uptake of the offering. In 2022-23, it engaged with 441 pupils across seven schools; thus far, in 2025-26, engagement sits at 1,207 individuals across 34 schools.

I put on record my thanks to all those at the UWS and their partners for the brilliant work at the foundation academy and for their wider approach to supporting students once they enter the institution. The student success model operating within the institution has real potential, not just for the UWS but for the wider sector. It would be remiss of me, however, not to acknowledge the work that is done by other higher education institutions, such as the University of Glasgow and Queen Margaret University, in reaching into communities to help to ensure that our young people are prepared and supported to be able to pursue university education.

The Government has been clear that we remain resolutely committed to free tuition. The hundreds of students who were able to go to the university because of the foundation academy have been able to do so with no tuition fees to pay. That is the right thing to do, not only for those individuals but for society, and I am proud that Scotland is a nation in which access to university is based on the ability to learn, not on the ability to pay.

Last month’s Higher Education Statistics Agency statistics showed a welcome upward trend in the proportion of students from deprived areas entering university. I know that those figures reflect a huge amount of effort from all staff who are working to support those learners, whether in our schools, our colleges, our universities or elsewhere, and I pay tribute to them for that. However, we know that, collectively, we still have work to do if we want to support more learners from all backgrounds to access higher education.

We are in a different place in comparison with 2016 and, in many ways, it is a much more challenging place. However, I know from speaking to our universities, and to the commissioner for fair access, that the momentum behind this agenda is stronger than ever. As we continue to focus on making progress towards widening access to higher education, it is important to remember why we are doing that. It is to allow everyone to reach their potential, and I am confident that, with programmes such as the foundation academy, we are helping people to do just that.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

That concludes the debate.

Portfolio Question Time

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

The next item of business is portfolio question time. Question 1 has not been lodged.

Foysol Choudhury (Labour, Lothian)

To ask the Scottish Government how it is working to promote the benefits of volunteering, in light of the recent research from Volunteer Scotland indicating that regular participation in volunteering can have wellbeing benefits worth approximately £1,000 per person per year. (S6O-04537)

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

I welcome the publication of the research and recognise the positive impact that volunteering has on people’s wellbeing. That is why Scotland’s volunteering action plan aims to create a Scotland where everyone can volunteer more often and throughout their lives. The 10-year plan, which has been co-produced with the third sector, seeks to increase volunteering participation. To support the plan, the Scottish Government provides direct funding to national and local intermediaries, including Volunteer Scotland. I am also pleased to announce that this year we will invest £1.1 million in the volunteering support fund to support people who experience barriers to their volunteering.

Foysol Choudhury (Labour, Lothian)

Given the concerning fall in volunteering participation, we must ensure that volunteers are treated well and that standards are upheld. Will the cabinet secretary advise how the Scottish Government is ensuring that funding for third sector organisations supports volunteers’ involvement that is aligned with the principles of the volunteer charter? Will she join me and representatives from volunteer organisations at the next meeting of the Parliament’s cross-party group on volunteering to discuss the issues that the sector faces?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

The Scottish Government encourages the use of the volunteer charter, which was developed by Volunteer Scotland and the Scottish Trades Union Congress and sets out the 10 principles for the foundation of a good volunteer experience, exactly as the member mentioned. Foysol Choudhury is quite right to point out the value of volunteering to the individual, the third sector and our communities, but it is right that it is done in a way that respects, encourages and supports volunteers. I would be happy to meet the member, in whichever fashion he would like, to discuss those matters further.

David Torrance (Scottish National Party, Kirkcaldy)

To ask the Scottish Government what impact it believes the United Kingdom Government’s spring statement will have on the provision of social security in Scotland. (S6O-04538)

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

The United Kingdom Government’s planned welfare reforms prioritise spending cuts over the welfare of sick and disabled people. I am disappointed that it chose not to engage with the Scottish Government before announcing those reforms. Initial indications are that the changes will reduce the block grant funding that we can expect to receive for social security benefits in 2029-30 by £408 million. Given the scope and scale of those changes, I am urgently seeking clarification from the UK Government on its proposals and how they will interact with the devolved benefits.

David Torrance (Scottish National Party, Kirkcaldy)

New analysis from the London School of Economics has found that the UK Government could lift 700,000 children out of poverty overnight if it were to match Scotland’s investment in social security. Poverty campaigners are crying out for the backward Labour UK Government to get its priorities right and look to Scotland instead of slashing benefits and putting renewed financial pressure on devolved budgets. Will the cabinet secretary provide an update on any communication with her UK counterparts to ensure that our work to eradicate child poverty in Scotland is not undermined further by Westminster austerity?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

David Torrance is quite right to point out the impact on the Scottish Government budget and, most importantly, on individuals, by whom I mean disabled people and their carers. That is why the Scottish Government’s first priority is to call on the UK Labour Government to scrap the proposed changes. Imposing austerity on the backs of disabled people and their carers is disappointing at any time, but it is particularly disappointing when it comes from a UK Government.

I am deeply concerned about the direction of travel of the UK Government’s child poverty task force, whose credibility has been drastically undermined by the changes that have been announced.

I will continue to press for meetings with the UK Government at ministerial and official levels so that we can discuss those issues and work with disabled people and their carers to ensure that there are no changes such as the ones that have been planned by the UK Government.

Jeremy Balfour (Conservative, Lothian)

I understand that a review of the adult disability payment in Scotland is on-going and that it will issue its report this autumn. Does the cabinet secretary think that that is an opportunity for us to have a whole look at the ADP, its criteria and how it could work better for disabled people in Scotland?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

As Jeremy Balfour has alluded to, the ADP review is on-going and is independent of Government; it is led by Edel Harris. The whole point of that is to ensure that ADP is examined and to see how it can be improved. However, that is even more difficult when we are facing cuts to personal independence payment from the UK Government, which will impact on the Scottish Government’s budget. We have approached the question of how to deliver the adult disability payment in the best possible fashion by working with disabled people under that independent review. That is exactly what the independent review is undertaking at the moment, and I look forward to its final report from Edel Harris in due course.

Sue Webber (Conservative, Lothian)

To ask the Scottish Government how it monitors the effectiveness of Social Security Scotland. (S6O-04539)

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

As an executive agency, Social Security Scotland is part of the Scottish Government. Oversight arrangements are in place in the form of a portfolio accountable officer, who scrutinises performance and progress against aims and objectives. Social Security Scotland provides regular statistics and publishes an annual report on accounts, alongside a report from Audit Scotland. The charter measurement framework provides evidence on delivery of the commitments in our charter. I receive updates on performance from the chief executive, and the agency’s effectiveness is clear. Its latest client survey shows that 90 per cent of people rated their experience as “good” or “very good”.

Sue Webber (Conservative, Lothian)

The Scottish Fiscal Commission’s budgetary forecasts highlight an ever-growing gap between the amount of money that the Scottish National Party Government receives to finance devolved benefits and the amount of money that it spends. In 2023-24, the Scottish Government spent £198 million more on devolved benefits than it received from the UK Government. In just three years, the gap is expected to triple to £619 million. In terms of performance and progress, does the cabinet secretary believe that that is sustainable?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

Sue Webber raises an important point about the sustainability of expenditure on social security. She talked about the numbers in relation to our investment in social security—and it is an investment—so let us be clear that that goes to those on low incomes, disabled people, carers and those who receive support through winter fuel benefits.

Sue Webber criticises the Government for spending on people on low incomes, disabled people and carers. I wonder where exactly she would like to see that money being taken from. What group of people would the Scottish Conservatives like to take from? We spend more money because of the Scottish child payment. Is that what she would like to see cut? We spend more money because we have additional payments that go to carers. Is that what she would like to see cut?

Of course we will work on the fiscal sustainability of the Scottish Government overall, including on social security, but, as well as talking about big numbers, the Conservatives need to talk about people and be up front with people when they are talking about cuts. They are talking about cuts for some of the most vulnerable in our society.

Collette Stevenson (Scottish National Party, East Kilbride)

The Social Security (Amendment) (Scotland) Act 2025, which was passed by the Parliament last year, is proof of the commitment to continually improve the Scottish social security system in action. Reserved UK benefits are about to be gutted by a fresh round of Westminster austerity, so does the cabinet secretary agree that the Labour UK Government would do well to study Scotland’s social security principles before it pushes any further with its damaging programme of welfare reforms?

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Questions must be on matters for which the cabinet secretary has responsibility.

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

Thank you, Presiding Officer. As I have mentioned in previous answers, we are exceptionally concerned about the decisions of the UK Government, because they will have a direct impact on our budget and will have implications even for some reserved changes, such as to the work capability assessment. We simply do not know at the moment what the implications will be for devolved benefits.

It goes back to first principles. We see investment in supporting people, particularly some of the most vulnerable people in our society, as a genuine investment. It is disappointing that the UK Government seems to be viewing social security as the way to make savings to balance its self-imposed fiscal rules.

Paul O'Kane (Labour, West Scotland)

An important part of the effectiveness of Social Security Scotland is the uptake of Scottish benefits. As the cabinet secretary knows, around 84,000 young Scots—around 15 per cent of them—are not in work, education or training, and we know that that can have lifelong effects on people. The Scottish Government’s job start payment is designed to support people between the ages of 16 and 24 who are out of work and receiving low-income benefit for six months prior to finding employment. It has an uptake rate of just 21 per cent, according to the latest statistics. How confident is the cabinet secretary that that payment, which Social Security Scotland is operating, is being targeted to support people into employment and is as effective as we need it to be?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

Paul O’Kane is right to point to job start payment. It is an important part of our social security work to support young people into employment. The uptake issue is a challenging one.

I am sure that Paul O’Kane will be aware that the statutory underpinning of job start payment means that it is very different from the rest of our social security payments. We had to undertake specific work with the Department for Work and Pensions to allow us to have the job start payment at all. The situation is exceptionally difficult, because if we want to make changes to the eligibility criteria, they must be allowed by the UK Government. That makes it challenging to increase uptake by, for example, making it simpler to apply for the benefit or making the eligibility criteria simpler so that the benefit can be accessed by more people.

We are keen to continue to work with the Department for Work and Pensions and, in particular, with job centres to ensure that young people who might be eligible for job start payment are made aware of it and of the timeframe. Members have a responsibility and the opportunity to raise awareness of that important benefit.

Murdo Fraser (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

I apologise for being a few minutes late for the start of the session, Presiding Officer.

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on what action it is taking to increase house building. (S6O-04540)

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

We are progressing a series of strategic and targeted actions to support the delivery of more homes at pace, with a particular focus on unlocking stalled sites and providing brokerage. Good progress is being made across the 23 actions in the Government’s “Planning and the Housing Emergency—Delivery Plan”, and we are working in close collaboration with industry and other stakeholders.

The 2025-26 budget includes £768 million for the affordable housing supply programme, helping to tackle the housing emergency and contributing towards our target of 110,000 affordable homes by 2032. Since 2007, we have supported the delivery of more than 136,000 affordable homes.

Murdo Fraser (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

The statistics do not paint an impressive picture. Starts and completions are down for the third successive year, private sector starts are at their lowest level since 2013 and we have a cumulative shortfall of more than 100,000 homes since 2008. The industry body Homes for Scotland says that “urgent action” is required on planning and regulatory reform to try to progress matters. It has raised the issue that, four months on from the Scottish Government announcing a housing planning hub, there have been no tangible outcomes to date. When will progress be made?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

A matter of weeks ago, I had the pleasure of participating in the housing to 2040 strategic board meeting, where I had the opportunity to discuss the planning hub with Homes for Scotland and other members of the board. At that time, we talked about the work that has been done under the leadership of the chief planner, particularly on stalled sites and brokerage, which is already paying dividends. As the member will be aware, the planning hub also has a responsibility for and focus on offshore wind. However, we are moving forward with work on stalled sites and brokerage.

We are working with Homes for Scotland on individual sites to ensure that, where something can be done, it is being done. I point the member to the number of planning applications that have been passed but for which the sites are not being built on. We are working with Homes for Scotland to understand that because, when a planning application has been passed, it is preferable if it is built out, for the private development and for the affordable homes that will be attached to it.

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

I am pleased that, under the Scottish National Party Government, almost 137,000 social and affordable homes have been completed across Scotland, leading the way in the United Kingdom on the provision of warm, safe homes. Can the minister confirm how many such homes have been completed in Midlothian?

Craig Hoy (Conservative, South Scotland)

Has someone written his question for him?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

I am sure that Craig Hoy will be delighted by the answer, if he is interested in it—because he did not appear to be interested in the question.

From 2007 to the end of December 2024, the affordable housing supply programme helped to support the delivery of 3,532 completions across Midlothian, of which 70 per cent were for social rent.

I recently had the pleasure of visiting Colin Beattie’s constituency to meet tenants and to meet Wheatley Homes East to discuss the new development at Rosewell. It is a fantastic example of the investment that the Government has put through charitable bonds, and further developments are taking place there. The development is a high-quality scheme that was provided by that registered social landlord. I was pleased to meet the tenants, who are enjoying their new homes in the member’s constituency.

Willie Rennie (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife)

The big decline in new starts and completions is a clear indication that the previous leadership and policy on housing was part of the problem.

I have lodged some constructive amendments to the Housing (Scotland) Bill to encourage investment in housing. They are designed to accelerate house building during the housing emergency. Is the cabinet secretary open to supporting those amendments?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

The member knows that I am always happy to meet him to discuss his amendments and the other proposals that he has made on housing. I thank him for the constructive way in which we have had those discussions to date.

I assure him that the Minister for Housing and I are taking a very close interest in the amendments that have been lodged. I would be happy to meet the member to continue those discussions, ahead of the votes in the committee on the bill. I would be very happy if, not only on those amendments but in the wider context of the housing emergency, we could share the endeavour across the chamber to find solutions.

Craig Hoy (Conservative, South Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Government how much it projects to spend on social security by 2029-30, including how much of this it estimates will arise from Barnett consequential funding. (S6O-04541)

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

Based on the Scottish Fiscal Commission’s latest forecast, the Scottish Government anticipates spending £8.9 billion on social security in 2029-30.

Following the United Kingdom Government’s spring statement, updated block grant adjustments have been calculated by HM Treasury. They show that the Scottish Government will now receive £408 million less funding through the BGA in 2029-30 as a result of the UK Government’s announcements on welfare reform. The updated BGA forecasts show that £6.9 billion of the expenditure in 2029-30 will be covered by social security block grant adjustments; the remainder will be found from the Scottish Government budget.

Craig Hoy (Conservative, South Scotland)

In a bid to plug what is set to become a £2 billion benefits-induced budget black hole, the Scottish Government says that it will reform public services. This year, the Scottish National Party has set aside £30 million for an invest-to-save scheme. Can the minister say in what areas the Government will be looking to make savings in the social security portfolio? How much is she estimating to save as part of that process?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

Social Security Scotland and all parts of the Government are looking seriously at the proposals that we can take forward for the invest-to-save fund, which is an exceptionally important piece of work.

To reassure the member, I point to the fact that, when we compare the administration costs of Social Security Scotland with those of the Department for Work and Pensions, once pensions costs have been taken away—in other words, if we look at the benefits situation—we see that Social Security Scotland comes out of that comparison very well. That demonstrates that it is possible to have a system that is both robust and humane.

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

Investing in our people and communities through social security will be vital if we are to achieve the First Minister’s central mission of eradicating child poverty in Scotland. This week, the London School of Economics and Political Science found that the UK Government could cut child poverty by a sixth if it chose to match Scottish Government policies. Will the cabinet secretary lay out how much Social Security Scotland payments could be worth to a low-income family as they raise a child and how life-changing that investment could be?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

I thank Karen Adam for that question, because it gets to the heart of how our investment in social security supports people in Scotland. The Scottish Government’s five family payments, which include the Scottish child payment, best start foods and best start grants, could be worth more than £10,000 by the time an eligible child turns six, and around £25,000 by the time an eligible child turns 16. That compares with a figure of less than £2,000 for families in England and Wales, where support ends when an eligible child turns four.

That support is in addition to the wider support that we provide for families, which includes the child winter heating payment, the carers allowance supplements and the on-going mitigation of the UK Government’s benefit cap, all of which is provided to put money in the pockets of the families who need it most.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Question 7 has not been lodged.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

To ask the Scottish Government how it plans to provide continuity of funding through the rural and islands housing fund. (S6O-04543)

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

The demand-led £30 million rural and islands housing fund continues to play an important role in providing support to community organisations, private landowners and others to deliver affordable homes where there is identified need, and it complements the significant delivery in rural and island areas by councils and registered social landlords through our mainstream affordable housing supply programme.

My officials continue to actively support a significant pipeline of projects in the rural and islands housing fund system in order to maximise the number of projects that gain tender approval for delivery of affordable rural and island homes through the fund.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

The cabinet secretary will be aware that community development projects are key to tackling the housing crisis in rural and island areas. Those projects rely heavily on the rural and islands housing fund but, although councils and housing associations benefit from resource planning assumptions that provide at least some security across elections, no such guarantees apply to community development projects, which may face a potential cliff edge next year. If such projects are forced to cease work during an election year, they lose valuable time, expertise and resources.

Given the urgency of the housing crisis in communities such as Orkney, community development projects cannot afford to see progress jeopardised next year, so will the cabinet secretary take steps to ensure the continuity of the rural and islands housing fund through 2026 and into 2027?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

Liam McArthur raises a very important point, and I want to reassure him that no decision has been taken to close or end that fund. As I mentioned in my original answer, a healthy number of pipeline projects have already gone through the initial expressions of interest stage and have been invited to progress.

I recognise the point that Liam McArthur makes and the importance of the types of projects that he mentioned, not only for his constituency but for other parts of the country. I will be happy to update him further in writing. Should he wish to have a meeting to discuss what more can be done not only for community development projects but for other areas in which island communities might want further changes to be made, I would be more than happy to discuss any funding flexibilities that we can provide or improvements that we can make in the scheme that he mentioned and in other areas.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

That concludes portfolio question time.

Project Willow

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

The next item of business is a statement by Kate Forbes on project willow—unlocking Grangemouth’s potential. The Deputy First Minister will take questions at the end of her statement, so there should be no interventions or interruptions.

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

Members will be aware that, despite the Government’s best efforts, Petroineos took the decision to close the Grangemouth refinery this year. We remain disappointed by that decision, which will result in the loss of hundreds of highly skilled jobs at Grangemouth, and our thoughts remain with the workers, their families and the community at this difficult time.

Last month marked an important milestone in Grangemouth’s future, with the publication of the project willow report, which sets out how the skills, expertise and facilities at Grangemouth can be used to achieve a just transition for the site. That study was jointly funded by the Scottish and United Kingdom Governments, and the public information document sets out the study’s findings and recommendations. It demonstrates that a transformative future for the existing site is achievable if the public and private sectors work together in the coming months and years. The study has identified nine projects that are viable alternatives to existing fossil-based operations. If brought to fruition, those projects could support 800 direct jobs at Grangemouth, along with others across the supply chain.

To achieve that transformation for the site, significant investment will be needed to bring those projects to life. Project willow reports that up to £4.25 billion in capital investment will be required in a “base case” scenario. We acknowledge that the public sector has a role to play in leveraging private sector investment in those projects, which is why the Scottish Government will establish a £25 million just transition fund for Grangemouth. The fund will seek to catalyse near-term opportunities arising from project willow and will send a clear signal that we will work with businesses to ensure that low-carbon projects at Grangemouth are market investable.

I welcome the UK Government’s confirmation that £200 million has been ring fenced within the national wealth fund to support the deployment of projects at Grangemouth. However, many of the proposals outlined in project willow are not yet market investable, which may preclude access to national wealth fund support. I therefore call on UK ministers to provide urgent clarity and confirm that those moneys will be available for Grangemouth as soon as businesses need them.

Project willow cannot and will not become a report that merely sits on a shelf. It is a call to action for the public and private sectors to work together to harness the potential at Grangemouth, and I assure members that project willow is being progressed. The Cabinet Secretary for Energy and Net Zero and the UK Government Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero have instructed Scottish Enterprise and the UK Office for Investment to jointly establish an investment task force that will identify and attract investors to support the development of the proposals set out in project willow. The task force will report jointly to both Scottish and UK ministers on a six-weekly basis to ensure that progress is being made to support business, the workforce and the community. I can confirm that initial interest has already been strong, with both Scottish Enterprise and Petroineos confirming that they have received numerous expressions of interest.

Although project willow considered the future of the existing refinery site, we are ambitious about the wider cluster’s low-carbon and renewables prospects. Therefore, the task force will also seek to attract investment in proposals not identified under project willow, ensuring that prosperity is felt in all corners of the industrial cluster.

It is clear from my discussions with businesses that there is a need for a radical shift in the policy and regulatory landscape if new projects are to be deployed at Grangemouth. That is reinforced by project willow, which makes a series of policy recommendations to Government, with the majority being directed at UK ministers due to the reserved nature of these matters.

Officials will work collaboratively with the UK Cabinet Office to ensure that each and every recommended policy change that is required at a UK level is given due consideration. We need UK ministers to take seriously the significant shift in existing policy that will be required to deploy longer-term technologies such as biofuels refining in Scotland. I therefore call on the UK Government to take urgent action to ensure that there is a viable route forward for the production of transition fuels, such as sustainable aviation fuel, at Grangemouth. That includes legislating before the summer to allow revenue mechanisms to be established.

Furthermore, the much-delayed and long-awaited decision by the UK Government on the Acorn project is essential for the future of the Grangemouth industrial cluster. The lack of clarity and commitment from the UK Government is inhibiting, and will continue to inhibit, investment. I therefore call on the UK Government to show that it is serious about supporting Grangemouth’s transition and confirm Acorn now.

As I have set out, we have already heard from businesses and potential investors with an interest in supporting new activities at Grangemouth. Now that project willow has been established, our commitment is to engage and work with investors and a broad range of stakeholders to fully understand the changes that they need to enable the deployment of low-carbon projects. To put it plainly, we want to understand any and all barriers to investment and the steps that the Scottish Government can take to remove them.

Our efforts to secure a sustainable, prosperous and fair future for Grangemouth do not end with project willow. It is vital that the benefits of transitioning Grangemouth are felt across the totality of industry there, as well as by the workforce and, indeed, the wider community, which has an intrinsic relationship with industry. Our Grangemouth just transition plan, which has been developed in partnership with all those stakeholders, will be published next month, and that first-of-its-kind plan will outline both the strategic framework and the vision for the future of the industrial cluster. It will inform the next steps of project willow as well as wider activity that is focused on developing and growing the highly skilled workforce and support for the Grangemouth community. I am grateful to all those who took the time to respond to our recent public consultation, ensuring that the final plan will best represent a broad range of views and ambitions.

The First Minister recently made reference to the “economic crisis” facing the cluster, and we are taking decisive action. We are providing support to the workforce, who are facing redundancy as a result of the refinery’s closure. We are providing a comprehensive retraining offer, which is delivered by Forth Valley College and is equipping workers right now with the skills to transition into in-demand industries. We are grateful to both Forth Valley College and Unite the Union for their dedication in ensuring that we leave nobody behind.

Further to that, we have been clear that the valuable input of trade unions must be central to any efforts to progress the vision that is set out in project willow. I am committed to ensuring that unions and the voice of the workforce continue to have strong representation as we take the next steps. Their skills and experience are critical to securing the future of Grangemouth.

Grangemouth can and will remain at the forefront of industrial manufacturing in Scotland for years to come, provided that it is supported throughout the next phase of its journey. The businesses and the workforce at Grangemouth represent decades of energy-intensive expertise that is ready to be harnessed as new technologies become more viable. Together, project willow and the Grangemouth just transition plan are a blueprint for what is possible at Grangemouth. We now have to get on with the work to deliver it.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

The Deputy First Minister will now take questions on the issues that were raised in her statement. I intend to allow around 20 minutes for questions, after which we will move on to the next item of business. I would be grateful if members who wish to ask a question would press their request-to-speak buttons now.

Douglas Lumsden (Conservative, North East Scotland)

I thank the Deputy First Minister for advance sight of the statement.

Petroineos has confirmed that 405 workers have already been made redundant, with a further 105 to go in the next 18 months. My thoughts go out to those workers and their families. Project willow will not save those jobs. It may create 800 jobs over a 15-year period, but only if £4.25 billion is invested. Those 405 workers cannot wait 15 years.

What we are seeing at Grangemouth is what happens when an industry is demonised and a hostile environment is created. The SNP’s presumption against new oil and gas is driving investment away, and the lack of an energy strategy is, frankly, an embarrassment. The workers of Grangemouth have been failed by this SNP Government, which failed to plan ahead for this eventuality and sprang into action only when it was too late.

What work is the Scottish Government doing with other heavy industrial sites across Scotland to ensure that they do not find themselves in the same situation but have transition plans ready before closures happen? Since the publication of the report, what discussions have taken place with the site owner, Petroineos, to ascertain whether it has an appetite to invest in the projects listed in willow or whether it is willing to sell the site to someone else who will?

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

I appreciate that it is great rhetoric for Douglas Lumsden to spin the line that a very recent policy on oil and gas is somehow to blame, but that belies his ignorance of what has actually led to this position. The gravity of the situation at Grangemouth befits greater understanding of the factors that have led to it.

On the last question, about engagement with the site owner and the appetite to invest, there has been extensive engagement with the owner about that, and with others who have indicated an interest in investing. The point of project willow is to set out the viable projects that could be progressed with. As I said in my statement, significant interest has come to Petroineos and Scottish Enterprise.

Some near-term projects, such recycling of plastics, acetone-butanol-ethanol biorefining, anaerobic digestion and fuel switching could be delivered more quickly. The overall figure that Douglas Lumsden gave, which is over a longer timeframe, does not indicate that some of these are short, medium and long-term projects.

Sarah Boyack (Labour, Lothian)

I thank the Deputy First Minister for advance sight of her statement.

It was great that we had the joint briefing from the Acting Cabinet Secretary for Net Zero and Energy and the UK Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero when the project willow report was published last month, because the workers and the communities at Grangemouth urgently need investment. Does the Deputy First Minister agree that that joint work and co-operation between our Governments needs to continue?

It is great that the Deputy First Minister is promoting training at Falkirk College, but where are the jobs for the people doing that training? Given the scale of green jobs that have been promised over the past 17 years, we urgently need to know where those green jobs are.

Given the urgency of the situation at Grangemouth, where is the Scottish Government’s just transition plan? It was promised years ago. When will the new investment task force report? Does the Deputy First Minister agree that the focus needs to be on the jobs and industrial investment that will be delivered, so that Grangemouth continues to deliver energy security through jobs now and in the future, rather than being an import terminal?

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

There were a lot of questions there. As was the case with Douglas Lumsden, I probably did not cover in full a lot of those questions in my statement, so I am happy to follow up with both members to make sure that I answer them all.

The joint working must continue, because, although there has been a lot of focus on the available investment—£25 million from the Scottish Government and £200 million of ring-fenced funding from the UK Government—our understanding is that considerable policy changes need to be made. I have raised with the UK Government the nature of those policy changes.

For example, project willow’s findings chime with Unite’s view that a biorefinery that is capable of producing sustainable aviation fuel is feasible at Grangemouth, but work and investment are required first, before deployment can take place. The policy landscape needs to be altered to ensure that sustainable aviation fuel production in Scotland is possible. Therefore, collaborative work with the UK Government is not just something that is nice to have; it is critical if we want to make progress on those points.

I am happy to share a little more detail when the investment task force reports. At the moment, we are looking at the short to medium term. We will collate the expressions of interest and look for ways to progress those. Some of that work might evolve as we see the level of interest, and some of it might be confirmed later down the line.

Sarah Boyack asked other questions, but I am afraid that I could not scribble them all down quickly enough, so I will come back to her.

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

I welcome the Deputy First Minister’s statement. As she rightly recognised, many of the potential projects that project willow has identified would take significant time to be developed. Some of them would not be developed until into the 2030s and would require a significant deployment of capital investment in order for their potential to be realised.

Therefore, I will make two points to the Deputy First Minister. First, what further immediate action can be taken to support not only the Grangemouth economy but the wider Falkirk economy, which has been hit by the loss of jobs at the refinery and, in recent months, at Alexander Dennis? Could some of the £25 million that the Scottish Government has provided for immediate action be deployed more widely in the Falkirk Council area in order to support employment opportunities?

Secondly, the task force is to be welcomed and I acknowledge its work to date. However, in the medium to longer term, we require a governance process for driving investment in Grangemouth that will ensure that the type of capital funding that is needed is deployed strategically and aligns with the long-term vision for the area, and I do not think that the task force will be able to achieve that. Is the Government open to looking at the long-term governance arrangements for investment in the area in the medium to long term?

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

I counted two questions, so it was easier to note them down—I thank Michael Matheson for that.

His question about the long-term governance arrangements is absolutely legitimate. I will take that away and speak to him in detail about what he thinks would be most appropriate. He mentioned Alexander Dennis, and I had the pleasure of meeting members of that company about a week ago in recognition of the important role that it plays.

On the point about immediate action, it is well understood that, although project willow outlines plans for the short to medium term, depending on the project, there is need right now. Michael Matheson will know about the work that we have done on targeted skills support. That work is under way—more than 90 per cent of those who have come forward for a training needs assessment have had it completed. An enhanced package of support is available as part of the Falkirk and Grangemouth growth deal, and we are open to suggestions, most of which come through Falkirk Council, to ensure that the resources are targeted most effectively. The Grangemouth just transition fund is focused on supporting businesses, the workforce and the community in the immediate term.

There is a sequence: some funding is able to be deployed immediately to provide support, and some funding is being used for the longer-term vision for the site.

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

I thought that the Deputy First Minister was uncharacteristically vague in her answer to Douglas Lumsden’s questions, so I will ask her to clarify an important issue. As we know, the project willow report was paid for with taxpayers’ money, but Petroineos commissioned EY to do the work and to report to it, so Petroineos has known all along about the nine potential projects—I might say that it has known about them for even longer than Colin Mackay of STV.

I ask the Deputy First Minister to be not vague but very clear. First, has Petroineos made it clear that it is committed to the development of its existing site? Without the site, none of those projects will happen. Douglas Lumsden asked that very important question, and I am asking it again. Secondly, has Petroineos made it clear that it is willing to invest in any of the nine potential projects, other than to create an import terminal?

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

I might have given an uncharacteristic answer because, uncharacteristically, I am speaking on behalf of a third party, so there is an element of challenge in answering those questions directly.

Stephen Kerr is absolutely right to say that the UK Government and the Scottish Government provided grant funding to Petroineos to commission the work. Petroineos acted as the lead partner to reflect its role as the owner and operator of the Grangemouth refinery. An advisory board met regularly throughout the reporting period and up to the project’s conclusion. It received drafts of the project’s findings throughout that period and collectively agreed the final outputs.

On the specific questions, despite raising the issue, Petroineos has not made any firm commitment to invest in the technologies that project willow identified. We have worked with the business previously on progressing a proposal for a biorefinery at Grangemouth, but the shareholders have not taken the decision to continue with that project. In lieu of a commitment from the business, we are engaging with all parties that are interested in progressing low-carbon projects at Grangemouth.

There is no doubt that Petroineos continues to have a critical role in securing a future for the site. Whatever role Petroineos plays in the future, it has confirmed to us that it will act in good faith when engaging with businesses that are interested in deploying new projects on the existing site, which I welcome.

I hope that that answer is more characteristically clear, despite the fact that I am, uncharacteristically, answering on behalf of somebody else, hence the way in which I have answered the questions.

Kevin Stewart (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Central)

During the election campaign, Labour pledged to save Grangemouth. It did not. The Labour Government also continues to deny resourcing for Acorn, Scotland’s carbon capture and storage project; it has failed to take the strides that are required to ramp up sustainable aviation fuel production; and no action has been taken to change hydrogen storage and transportation regulations. All of that could have benefited Grangemouth. What are Scottish ministers doing to get their Labour UK Government counterparts to get the finger oot on those issues in order to save and create jobs?

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

We urgently need the UK Government to give a positive decision on the Acorn project. We have said that for a number of years, but the urgency is now heightened in light of the publication of project willow’s report, which makes it crystal clear that a decision on the Acorn project by the UK Government is required as part of determining Grangemouth’s long-term viability. It is not fair on those behind the Acorn project to make them wait indefinitely for clarity.

I have raised the issue with the UK Government. Again, I call on it to prioritise the Acorn carbon capture and storage project, and I call on members of the Parliament to join forces with me in making that call.

Kevin Stewart also asked about sustainable aviation fuel, which can be a critical component of the transition, but legislation is required in order for the regulatory changes to be made and the necessary mechanism for revenue certainty to be established.

There is also an opportunity for hydrogen to play a critical part in Grangemouth’s transition—I know that Kevin Stewart has a long-standing interest in hydrogen. We can lead the way in hydrogen production, and our hydrogen action plan clearly sets our strategic ambitions. I note that the Scottish Government is investing £5 million in Ineos Olefins & Polymers Europe’s select phase fuel-switching programme as it seeks to transition to hydrogen.

Richard Leonard (Labour, Central Scotland)

I remind members of my voluntary register of trade union interests.

Yesterday afternoon, people from Unite the union were in Parliament. They warned that, if the Grangemouth refinery is not repurposed and if it closes this year, the infrastructure will run down or disappear altogether, the workers will go and project willow, in their words, will be nothing more than a paper exercise.

What action is the Deputy First Minister taking, even at this late stage, to prevent the refinery from closing down? Will she push Petroineos to co-operate with an urgent review of the assets at the refinery to see whether they can be converted to produce sustainable aviation fuel and, if so, at what cost? Finally, how many interested parties—I am not asking who they are—have now approached Scottish Enterprise about investing in the future of the Grangemouth site?

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

I thank the member for another series of questions, some of which I may not have scribbled down.

On the first point, about the infrastructure, I think that Unite makes an excellent point, which is that we have seen previously that, when there is too long a gap in a site transitioning from one purpose to another, there are additional costs. That is why getting the project willow report published now, to give us an indication of where we might go, is important. It is an issue that we take seriously.

The member knows that we have ensured that Unite the Union has been well integrated into project willow via regular standing committee meetings and so on. We are happy to continue to engage with the union.

The member made a point about how we avoid a situation happening. We do that by identifying the investable propositions as quickly as possible, securing any regulatory changes that are required, putting the money in and enabling new work to begin at the site as quickly as possible. That is possible, but it requires very clear prioritisation and focus.

The member asked how many parties are interested in the site. I am afraid that I do not have the figures in front of me, but a report from SE and Petroineos indicates that the number of interested parties is above expectations, so there is more interest than they anticipated. I have also been engaging with a number of investors who have expressed interest. The issue is then turning the interest into specific proposals.

I wrote down that the member asked another question about sustainable aviation fuel, but I do not recall what it was, so I will come to find him after this.

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

As was touched on in previous questions and responses, one of the key pathways that the report highlighted was the transformation of Grangemouth into a producer of sustainable aviation fuel, which is an option that the Scottish Government has long called on the UK Government to appropriately regulate for. Does the cabinet secretary share my concern that the UK Labour Government has so far concentrated on aviation fuel developments south of the border, when Grangemouth is poised to lead that industry? Bearing in mind the cabinet secretary’s important point about the need for a radical shift in policy and the regulatory landscape, what engagement has the Scottish Government had with the UK Government on the urgent need for regulatory changes to enable that?

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

The UK Government has made £50 million available to Teesside to develop various SAF projects. We need at least similar support for Grangemouth, and we need the UK Government to swiftly introduce its planned sustainable aviation fuel revenue support mechanism bill. The £200 million that has been ring fenced in the National Wealth Fund is really welcome, but it operates in a different way from funding that can be provided up front. I take the member’s point about the opportunity. We know the steps that need to be taken, and we are willing all parties to take them.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

In the remaining one and a half minutes, there are five members who wish to ask questions. I would be grateful if we could all bear that in mind when it comes to asking multiple questions. If we could all be concise, that would be helpful.

Gillian Mackay (Green, Central Scotland)

Sizeable changes could be made to Grangemouth in the next few years. The community has lived beside an oil refinery for the past 100 years, and its sights, sounds and—often—smells are very well known. The options in project willow and the decommissioning of the refinery leave the community with uncertainty about what living in Grangemouth and the surrounding area will be like in the years to come. How will the Scottish Government ensure that the community is well engaged on and informed about the changes that are likely? What will the Government do to ensure that there is not a detrimental impact on the lives of people in the community?

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

The member is right to highlight the impact on the community. It is always worth saying that a number of really exciting businesses with high-growth potential are already active in Grangemouth. Celtic Renewables is one of the most exciting businesses there. Taking the community with us, informing people as much as possible and keeping in touch with local representatives is the way to do it.

Willie Rennie (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife)

It is positive that Petroineos has said that it will act in good faith. However, what does the company require from the UK and Scottish Governments to give a greater commitment to the site, so that we can seek the opportunities, which obviously exist, for a well-serviced, well-located site?

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

Now that the biggest opportunities have been highlighted, the process is about converting the level of interest that has been expressed to SE into genuine propositions that can be co-invested in. Project willow suggests that £4.25 billion will be required. Clearly, some of that will have to come from the private sector, so it will be a co-investment approach. We are keen to do that and our funding is available—we anticipate that the sum of £200 million will be available—and it is as simple as responding to the interest with investable propositions that all parties can back and take forward and getting those established as quickly as possible.

Emma Roddick (Scottish National Party, Highlands and Islands)

It is essential that the workforce and the local community have a voice in the process and a say in the support that is made available to them. We cannot stand by and lose another pillar of Scottish industry thanks to a lack of action from Westminster, and urgent action is needed to retain the skills of Grangemouth’s highly skilled workforce. Can the Deputy First Minister say any more about the Scottish Government’s latest engagement with workers and trade unions at Grangemouth?

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

We engage regularly with trade unions. In fact, the First Minister met them on the day that project willow was launched. We recognise the critical role that they play, and we continue to engage regularly with workforce representatives. We are hugely grateful for their candour as we navigate this period of change.

Graham Simpson (Conservative, Central Scotland)

I have long been an advocate for Grangemouth’s potential to produce sustainable aviation fuel, which has been mentioned already. The Deputy First Minister spoke about legislation being introduced potentially before the summer. Is that just her wish, or has she been told that there will be such legislation?

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

I am afraid that I am not able to confirm what legislation the UK Government will definitely introduce, but that is what we believe the timetable needs to be in order to achieve our wider ambitions.

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

Rightly, there has been much focus today on the importance of the local economy and Grangemouth’s significance to the national economy. If the recommendations are progressed, what will the positive benefits be for the regional economy of the Firth of Forth, which includes the port of Leith?

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

There could be significant opportunities. On a day such as today, we are all very conscious of the geopolitical international risks that we face. Therefore, backing our industries and creating jobs in Scotland become even more important.

Businesses that are based at Grangemouth contribute significantly to Scotland’s economy and to the wider region, so I see huge opportunities for the whole of Scotland, including the port of Leith.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

That concludes the ministerial statement on project willow. I will allow a moment or two for those on the front benches to get organised.

Heat in Buildings Bill

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

The next item of business is a statement by Alasdair Allan on the heat in buildings bill. The minister will take questions after the statement, so there should be no interventions or interruptions.

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

I am pleased to update Parliament on the next steps that the Scottish Government will be taking regarding a heat in buildings bill.

In 2019, the Parliament agreed that Scotland will end its contribution to global emissions as soon as possible and by no later than 2045. Our commitment to that ambition is unwavering.

As outlined to Parliament on Tuesday, the Government is also committed to reducing fuel poverty through the limited devolved powers that we hold. It is vital that we find the right balance to both reach net zero by 2045 and reduce fuel poverty.

We have already achieved a great deal when it comes to our transition to net zero. In 2023, 91.2 per cent of electricity generated in Scotland was from zero or low-carbon sources. Specifically, 70.3 per cent of electricity generated was from renewable sources. Our target for 6,000 public charge points was met two years ahead of schedule, and more than 2 million children, young people, disabled people and older people are now benefiting from free bus travel, making sustainable travel more accessible for everyone in Scotland. We have created almost 75 per cent of the United Kingdom’s new woodland since 2019, and an estimated 56 per cent of homes are now rated energy performance certificate band C or better, which is an increase of 11 percentage points since 2019.

Those are just a few of the many examples of tangible progress and Scottish Government actions that have taken us halfway to net zero. However, we all need to do more. We need to see climate action in all areas, by individuals, households and businesses, and by all parts of Government.

The way that we heat our buildings accounts for around 19 per cent of our country’s total emissions. Scotland depends greatly on gas and other fossil fuels for heat. Nearly 90 per cent of our homes use those fuels. In Europe, only the Netherlands has a similarly high dependence on gas as we do. Meanwhile, for communities that are off the gas grid, fuel poverty is even more prevalent—a subject that I will come to in a moment.

I raise all that to underline just how significant an impact decarbonising our buildings will have. That is why the heat in buildings bill is so important. As members know, we consulted on a range of proposals, and that consultation closed last year. It received more than 1,600 responses, and I thank everyone who engaged in that process. We received a diverse range of views. Many people supported the need for legislation requiring energy efficiency standards and prohibiting certain types of heating in buildings; others questioned that need.

Having carefully considered those views and having listened to a range of stakeholders since the consultation concluded, I am today charting a new course that is, I believe, consistent with our goal of removing emissions from buildings by 2045. Our plan to deliver a revised bill responds to the legitimate reservations and concerns that have been raised since our consultation was completed, including the risks of exacerbating fuel poverty and of burdening every individual householder with an overly onerous responsibility as we decarbonise.

Parliament is more than aware that many households, families and businesses across the United Kingdom are facing difficult circumstances. Despite promises from the new UK Government that energy bills would be lowered by £300 a year, since October last year they have risen by almost £300. A unit of electricity presently costs around four times more than a unit of gas, and up-front costs for installing clean heating systems remain higher than those for fossil fuel systems.

A combination of all those factors, combined with a severe cost of living crisis, makes it simply unaffordable for many building owners to make great changes in the near future. I believe that those challenges could be particularly pronounced for those in rural and island locations, whose needs and circumstances we must continue to consider carefully.

All those factors merit important changes in our approach—changes that demonstrate that we are listening and responding to the important concerns that people have raised. Our approach moves away from penalising individuals, and instead commits to collective action. Instead of placing prohibitions on every homeowner, we will establish targets for Government to reach. Rather than looking at action through the lens of decarbonising alone, we will also commit to doing everything within our power to reduce costs for people.

I am confirming today that we will introduce a heat in buildings bill, in this parliamentary session, that will create a target for decarbonising heating systems by 2045. It will send a strong signal to homeowners, landlords and other building owners about the need to prepare for change, while outlining collective actions to help do that, and that will give the supply chain confidence to invest. The bill will underpin our existing work to progress to net zero through the range of support measures and interventions that are already available to households seeking to transition their homes to non-polluting heating systems.

The most obvious way that the bill will do that is by boosting heat network development, by creating particular requirements for large, non-domestic premises and including powers to require public sector buildings to connect to district heating when it is available. We will, of course, work with those building owners to ensure that appropriate safeguards are developed. Those powers will help to make more heat network projects investible, which will lead to greater choice for households and businesses in how they reach net zero.

My intention is that our bill will enable and support flexibility. It will be technology neutral. Different properties and people will require different solutions; for example, the clean heating solutions in some remote and rural areas may vary from those in urban areas. Reaching our target is likely to need a range of technologies, including bioenergy.

Our bill will also include powers to set minimum energy efficiency standards for owner-occupier and non-domestic properties, as part of a plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions that are caused by heating systems.

In the meantime, to improve the standard of rental properties and to help to reduce fuel poverty, we will make regulations under existing powers to introduce a minimum energy-efficiency standard in the private rented sector. Those regulations would mean all privately rented properties, as far as possible, reaching the equivalent of EPC rating C. That would improve those homes, reduce energy costs for tenants and support the transition to clean heating.

My officials are working to prepare the bill for introduction in year 5 of this session of the Parliament. It will accompany our related work on a social housing net zero standard and EPC reform under existing powers. The bill will affect everyone, but it will differ markedly from earlier iterations in that it will not be a prohibition but a target and rather than placing all the onus on individual action it will emphasise a collective response. The opportunities that it will present for Scotland are significant.

The proposed legislation will build on the Climate Change (Emissions Reduction Targets) (Scotland) Act 2019 that the Parliament came together to pass, so I am confident that we share its overall intent. Following its introduction, I will work with members from all parties on the points of detail that underpin it to ensure that it works for consumers, home owners, businesses and rural and island communities.

Progress towards decarbonisation in housing depends on action in reserved areas from the UK Government, too. The UK Government could take several vital actions that would accelerate buildings decarbonisation and support the legislation that I propose. That is why I hope that members will join me in calling for the UK Government urgently to clarify its intentions on phasing out gas boilers in existing homes and the future role of the gas grid in heating our buildings, on rebalancing policy costs from electricity to gas bills to incentivise the installation of clean heating in a way that alleviates fuel poverty and on reform of the Great Britain energy markets to support a reduction in the cost of electricity more generally. Without those and other changes, we are severely hampered as we attempt to deliver this societal and economic transformation.

I began by reflecting on the scale of the challenge that faces us. The framework of targets and regulation that I have described can provide certainty to building owners and confidence for investors and supply chains. We will, of course, continue to provide advice and financial support to those who need it most. We are investing a further £300 million in our heat in buildings programmes this year, including support to more than 20,000 Scottish households to save up to £500 a year on their energy bills. Therefore, I ask members to work with me when we introduce our heat in buildings bill to Parliament and to support our calls for the UK Government to take similar action. The actions that I have described can cut carbon and help to reduce fuel poverty at source. They are essential to achieving the goal of net zero, for which the Parliament voted.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

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

Meghan Gallacher (Conservative, Central Scotland)

I thank the minister for advance sight of his statement. We warned the Scottish Government and the Scottish Greens time and again that the proposed heat in buildings bill was an absolute farce, but they refused to listen. Patrick Harvie was adamant that his heat pump proposals were the right call, despite warnings from stakeholders, investors and other parties. Expecting people to pay more than £14,000 for a heat pump that might not be suitable for their home shows how out of touch the Scottish Greens are with ordinary hard-working Scots.

The Scottish National Party has announced a rehashed heat in buildings bill with no further details about how much it will cost the public. More net zero targets have been missed and more net zero targets have been announced. When will the Government realise that Scotland deserves an affordable, just transition—one that works with industry, protects jobs and is affordable for people to make changes to their homes and lifestyles?

The SNP has announced that the new heat in buildings bill will be introduced next year, in the same year as the next Scottish Parliament election. Will the minister be up front with the public and tell them, right now, how much the new bill’s provisions will cost them? Will he confirm that, when the bill is introduced, he will announce to Parliament the timescales that the SNP will work towards?

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

The bill will be introduced to Parliament this year. The timescales that we are working towards aim for it to receive royal assent by the time of dissolution, so it will be introduced in the present session of Parliament.

I am disappointed that Meghan Gallacher regards the proposed bill as simply a rehashed version of the previous proposal. I had expected her to point to the areas that are different from those covered by the consultation on the original bill, some of which I mentioned earlier. The fact that we are talking about targets rather than prohibition is a fairly significant change. It will not be one that everyone will agree with, but it reflects the fact that the Scottish Government has listened to the people who came to us during the consultation rather than merely going through the motions. I hope that she will come to want to work with the Scottish Government, because we should seek to work together towards an aim for which the whole Parliament voted.

Sarah Boyack (Labour, Lothian)

I thank the minister for advance sight of his statement. I draw members’ attention to my entry in the register of members’ interests.

I welcome the commitment to finally introduce a heat in buildings bill in this parliamentary session, because we urgently need people to have warmer and more affordable homes. We are still way behind our European neighbours on the provision of energy-efficient homes and we need effective solutions. Reform of our electricity markets is under way. Instead of hiding behind the fact that it does not control energy prices, the Scottish Government should exercise its devolved powers to support the provision of better insulation and renewable heat solutions in Scotland now.

I have three questions for the minister. He mentioned the growth in Scotland’s renewables. There are existing projects across our urban and rural communities that could see us having community heat networks, if we learn lessons from our Nordic neighbours about supporting and empowering local authorities to deliver their ambitions. Will the Scottish Government announce what it is doing to support local authorities to deliver projects through the local heat and energy efficiency strategy plans, which were submitted in January 2024? Does the minister agree that our constituents need more support to make their homes affordable to heat—