Scottish Parliament, 4 September 2025

191 contributions from 56 members. The official report.

General Question Time

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

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

Liam Kerr (Conservative, North East Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Government what alternatives are being piloted to enable older patients to be cared for outside of hospitals. (S6O-04882)

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

Our approach to reform focuses on primary and community care, aiming to shift the balance of care where appropriate for people and their families. Our immediate focus is on enhancing capacity in the community, and work is under way to increase hospital at home provision to 2,000 beds by December 2026, meaning that people can receive hospital-level care in their own homes. To ensure that all of our population can access a hospital at home service that meets their needs, we have commissioned Healthcare Improvement Scotland to support integration authorities to adapt services to meet the needs of rural and island communities.

Liam Kerr (Conservative, North East Scotland)

I thank the cabinet secretary for that answer, but the hospital at home initiative, which he mentioned, is not currently available in Aberdeenshire. Following a pilot in Westhill, the health and social care partnership had to pull out due to a lack of support and resources from the Scottish Government. The service is available just a few miles away in the city, but the shire is left with stacked ambulances, two-tier healthcare, general practitioner practices shutting down and village hospitals shutting. Is there anywhere else in Scotland that will not be running hospital at home? Will the cabinet secretary now provide resources to the shire for it to proceed?

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

I am grateful to Liam Kerr for his questions. As he will know, decisions on how to deliver services for local communities are ultimately for integration authorities to make. In this case, it is the Aberdeenshire integration joint board. However, following NHS Grampian’s escalation, officials have been working with NHS Grampian to confirm the additional funding based on the development of its whole-system plan, taking into account the recommendations that were made in the KPMG report. Through the assurance board process, extensive work is under way with NHS Grampian to develop robust whole-system work so that its share of the £85 million of unscheduled care funding can be allocated. I expect hospital at home to be part of that consideration.

David Torrance (Scottish National Party, Kirkcaldy)

I very much welcome the investment that the Scottish Government is making in the hospital at home initiative, which will make it the biggest hospital in Scotland, with 2,000 beds by the end of next year. Hospital at home is allowing elderly patients in my constituency to benefit from being around their home comforts with family and friends nearby, and I very much welcome that. Beyond that, can the cabinet secretary outline what more is being done to support elderly and vulnerable patients to be treated more effectively in hospitals? For example, how will the new frailty units work?

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

David Torrance is absolutely right that hospital at home can be transformational in terms of the delivery of services. The fact that we are moving to 2,000 beds by the end of next year will make hospital at home the largest hospital in Scotland.

For people who are living with frailty, hospitals can increase the risk of harm if their needs are not identified quickly and if our systems and services are poorly co-ordinated. That is why we have committed to delivering direct access to specialist frailty teams across every emergency department in Scotland. That will mean that frail patients with complex needs will bypass our busy accident and emergency departments to receive the specialist care and support that they need, minimising the risk of prolonged hospital stays. By providing co-ordinated multi-agency care both at the front door of our EDs and in the community, we can provide the right care in the right place, helping people who are experiencing frailty to remain as independent as possible.

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

To ask the Scottish Government for what reason it is reportedly downgrading fire station services across the country, including in Helensburgh. (S6O-04883)

Siobhian Brown (Scottish National Party, Ayr)

It is important to be clear that the Scottish Government is not downgrading fire station services across Scotland.

Decisions on the location of fire stations, along with vehicles, equipment and the people who are needed to deal with responding to emergencies, are a matter for the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service’s chief officer. The emergencies that the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service responds to have changed significantly over the years. For example, dwelling fires have reduced by 20 per cent since 2013. At the same time, we have seen the risks of flooding and wildfires increasing. It is therefore sensible for the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service to carry out a service delivery review to ensure that its resources are in the right place at the right time. It is currently consulting on its review, with a closing date of 16 September. Until the results of the consultation have been properly analysed, no decisions have been taken.

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

I thank the minister for her response, but it is the Scottish Government that has cut the fire service budget by millions of pounds, so, ultimately, it is her responsibility.

The proposal to downgrade Helensburgh fire station is quite simply reckless. The station already has a problem with recruiting sufficient numbers of retained firefighters to cover the existing appliances, never mind the additional overnight cover under those proposals. In the previous year, the availability of appliances was at only 50 per cent at night and a staggeringly low 20 per cent at the weekend. That lack of coverage makes the downgrading short-sighted. Will the minister agree with me and her Scottish National Party colleague Brendan O’Hara that the proposal is reckless and should be scrapped?

Siobhian Brown (Scottish National Party, Ayr)

First, I need to highlight that, since 2017-18, there have been substantial year-on-year increases of funding to support the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service. The current annual budget is more than £97 million more than it was in 2017-18. This year alone, there is an additional £18.8 million in support for front-line services.

We understand that this is not a cost-cutting exercise. The Scottish Fire and Rescue Service is undertaking a service delivery review, and there is a live, full public consultation. I encourage everybody to take part in that consultation.

Pam Gosal (Conservative, West Scotland)

I have been contacted by constituents who have expressed concerns about the change in working patterns at Helensburgh and Milngavie fire stations. Last month, I met Scottish Fire and Rescue Service representatives who cover the west of Scotland and I expressed the concerns of local residents. The representatives to whom I spoke admitted that response times could increase, as on-call firefighters would have to travel from their homes to the station and then to the destination. Does the minister agree that that model risks putting lives in danger?

Siobhian Brown (Scottish National Party, Ayr)

No, I do not agree with the member’s assumption. As I said, this is an operational issue for the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service. No decisions have currently been made, and I encourage the member and her constituents to take part in the consultation.

Martin Whitfield (Labour, South Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Government how it will deliver on its commitments in the Promise, in light of the publication, “Education Outcomes for Looked After Children 2023/24”, showing a decline in most key educational outcomes. (S6O-04884)

Natalie Don (Scottish National Party, Renfrewshire North and West)

I appreciate Mr Whitfield’s concerns. However, it is important not to lose sight of the positive difference in educational outcomes over the long term. The gap in the proportion of children achieving one Scottish credit and qualifications framework level 5 qualification or better reduced by more than 20 percentage points between 2009-10 and 2023-24.

We have introduced a range of targeted support measures, such as the care-experienced students bursary, the Skills Development Scotland mentoring scheme and the provision of more than £70 million to local authorities through the Scottish attainment challenge fund to support the attainment and wellbeing of care-experienced children and young people.

However, I appreciate that the measurements in 2023-24, where progress was static or showing small declines, require increased focus. It is important for us to understand how our investment could be more impactful.

Martin Whitfield (Labour, South Scotland)

I am grateful to the minister for that response. Schools in Scotland must be ambitious for care-experienced children and ensure that they have all that they need to thrive.

The independent care review resulted in the Promise, and yet the latest results show that the percentage of pupils leaving school early is rising and there is a 10-point gap in relation to positive destinations. Those statistics are a damning picture of the SNP Government’s failure to keep the Promise. What is more concerning from the minister’s answer is that the Government does not appear to understand why. Is that the case?

Natalie Don (Scottish National Party, Renfrewshire North and West)

I do not agree with all of that. The statistics show that we need to go further to continue the positive long-term trends that I referred to.

In the statistics, it is good to see an increase in the proportion of looked-after leavers going on to positive destinations nine months after leaving school. That means that we now have more children and young people from the most challenging circumstances getting the chance to succeed at school and in life.

We and key partner agencies, such as local authorities, need to accelerate our efforts to keep the Promise. Earlier this week, the First Minister and the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills met local authority directors of education to reflect on the progress of 10 years of the Scottish attainment challenge and to look ahead at what more we need to do to give more children a chance to get the skills and qualifications that they need to succeed in life.

Willie Rennie (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife)

The minister will know about reports of 15-minute timetables for care-experienced children. That means that they attend school for just 15 minutes in a day, without any other support when they leave the school grounds. In my view, that is exclusion by another name, and it should be stopped, as was stated in the Promise. What investigation has the minister done into the 15-minute timetables?

Natalie Don (Scottish National Party, Renfrewshire North and West)

Mr Rennie refers to exclusion. As I have spoken about previously in the chamber and at committee, our national policy on exclusion has a strong focus on approaches that can be used to prevent the need for exclusion. Exclusion should be the last resort and, when it is used, it should be a proportionate response where there is no appropriate alternative.

Mr Rennie also refers to 15-minute timetables. I will not go into specific cases, but there can be a number of reasons why the school setting might not be the appropriate place for a child at a certain point in their life. The Scottish Government is taking a number of measures, some of which I have already alluded to, and there is the virtual school network, which involves looking at a child’s specific needs, how to build an education around them, and transitioning them back to a school setting.

The Scottish Government is taking a number of measures to tackle the issue and to ensure that care-experienced children and young people get the education that they need.

Davy Russell (Labour, Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse)

To ask the Scottish Government, regarding its definition of what constitutes “substantial” damp and mould in a home, at what threshold such conditions are considered to require remedial action by social landlords. (S6O-04885)

Màiri McAllan (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

All homes in Scotland are required by law to meet the minimum tolerable standard, which requires housing to be

“substantially free from rising or penetrating damp”.

The Scottish Government developed guidance for local authorities on the tolerable standard, which includes guidance on assessing damp. Every case is different, and assessors are expected to use that guidance, as well as their professional judgment, to assess on a case-by-case basis whether a house is substantially free from damp.

I take the issue of damp and mould extremely seriously, which is why I committed to bringing in Awaab’s law across the social and private rented sectors from March 2026.

Davy Russell (Labour, Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse)

The Scottish house condition survey, in its most recently published data, found that 10 per cent—that is, 250,000—of the homes in Scotland have damp and mould. For two decades, the issue has been actively monitored. As woeful as that situation is, it is not spread evenly across the population. Low-income families living in rented accommodation are often left to the whim of rogue landlords and big insurance companies, which all too often do not put the householder first. Their tactic is to ignore and delay and to put numerous hurdles in front of the householder so that, they hope, the householder either gives up or goes away.

The risk to human life that is associated with having damp and mouldy conditions present in a family home is far too great to leave the protection of families to woolly legislation. Does the cabinet secretary seriously believe that it goes far enough?

Màiri McAllan (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

To frame Davy Russell’s question in another way, I note that the 2023 Scottish house condition survey showed that 90 per cent of homes in Scotland were free from damp, condensation and mould. Do I think that that goes far enough? No. That is why, this week, we have confirmed that we will implement Awaab’s law, starting with damp and mould, across the private and social rented sectors from spring next year.

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

To ask the Scottish Government how it supports the food sector to export to international markets. (S6O-04886)

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

Food exports are vital to our national and rural economies. In 2024, food exports were worth £2.1 billion. We have announced an increase in the export support that we provide to Scottish companies through the six-point export plan, which builds on the significant support that we already provide to Scottish exporters, such as the £705,000 that we provided this financial year towards the Scotland food and drink export plan, which helps to exploit the most significant opportunities for Scotland.

The United Kingdom Government must secure a European Union sanitary and phytosanitary agreement to remove the complex and costly barriers to trade with our largest single export market, as we have consistently called for.

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

Scotland’s mackerel industry is a global success story, and Scottish mackerel now accounts for a fifth of the Japanese market. However, processors tell me that they are worried about the possibility of a significant quota cut in 2026, which might put their growth at risk. How will the Scottish Government ensure that processors have access to product, so that Scotland can continue to build on its export success? Will the minister meet me and industry representatives to discuss that challenge?

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

Karen Adam mentioned the success of the mackerel sector, and it is a global success. Scientific advice will be published at the end of this month. However, the bilateral arrangements that we have secured with Norway and the Faroe Islands increase the United Kingdom’s quota in 2025 by more than 26,000 tonnes, the vast majority of which comes to Scotland. We estimate that, following the introduction of amended economic link licence conditions, an additional £52 million worth of mackerel was landed in Scotland in 2023-24.

We met the Scottish Pelagic Processors Association on 22 July in Peterhead. I am happy to consider another meeting to discuss the issue further.

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Government what discussions it has had with local authorities regarding solutions to the housing emergency. (S6O-04887)

Màiri McAllan (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

Since declaring the housing emergency, we have taken an activist and interventionist approach and have worked extensively with local authorities, particularly those that are experiencing the most acute housing pressures. Over the summer, I met extensively with partners across the housing sector, including local authorities and the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, in order to understand their challenges and hear their proposed solutions. Much of that fed into the housing emergency action plan, which I presented to the Parliament this week.

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

Scotland’s biggest city is enveloped in a homelessness crisis that is impacting all of Central Scotland. Some 44 per cent of people who present as homeless in Glasgow come from asylum seeker households. Asylum seeker families also make up more than half of all temporary accommodation placements and account for more than 60 per cent of the children who are in such housing. Does the cabinet secretary agree that the Scottish National Party policy of open borders would only make the housing emergency worse?

Màiri McAllan (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

Stephen Kerr, not for the first time in this chamber, should be utterly ashamed of the contribution that he has made. Given his colleague Craig Hoy’s contribution about a change of “character” in the south of Scotland, he, too, should be ashamed. Scotland is an open, welcoming and inclusive country. The homelessness prevention support that we provide is for everybody in this country.

Fergus Ewing (Independent, Inverness and Nairn)

I apologise for being slightly late to this question session.

To ask the Scottish Government, regarding the future award of any grants or loans to arts or public performance venues, whether it or any public authority, including Creative Scotland, will require applicants to observe and respect freedom of expression under the law in order to be eligible for financial support, and that failing to do so will require any funding provided to be repaid. (S6O-04888)

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

Freedom of expression is vital to the culture sector, in which the exploration of new ideas and debate are key to innovation. It is for individual artists and cultural organisations to engage with others in debate and discussion as they see fit. Therefore, Creative Scotland does not include conditions relating to freedom of expression in its funding terms and conditions. Clearly, though, all organisations, whether they are publicly funded or not, must operate within the wider framework of the law.

Fergus Ewing (Independent, Inverness and Nairn)

I commend the cabinet secretary for his masterful ambiguity. However, an arts venue in Edinburgh was awarded £608,000 of taxpayers’ money and then went on to ban, censor and cancel our very own Deputy First Minister, asserting that she was somehow a threat to the safety and wellbeing of its staff.

Will the Scottish Government unequivocally condemn that ludicrous decision? Even more important, will it prevent such a thing from ever happening again by making it clear that any grant of taxpayers’ cash will be clawed back from offenders? Otherwise, the Government is sending out a message that Scotland is where censorship rules okay.

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

The record has been put very straight on the issue that Mr Ewing asked of me, but I am sure that he would acknowledge that there are long-standing examples of freedom of expression in our national and cultural life, as well as issues of controversy—this is not new. I am a strong supporter of freedom of expression but also of recognising the arm’s-length relationship between Creative Scotland and ministers, which is for very good reasons.

Mr Ewing will be aware that a review of Creative Scotland is on-going. I will look closely at any recommendations that it makes in relation to Mr Ewing’s question. Indeed, he will no doubt have made a submission to that review, and I will be happy if he wishes to forward it to me.

First Minister’s Question Time

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

More than four out of five businesses in Scotland fear that they might go bust within 12 months. Around one in six people in Scotland are trapped on national health service waiting lists, with tens of thousands forced to pay for private treatment. Drug death rates are still the worst in Europe, with 4,570 lives lost since the Scottish National Party declared a national mission. All those issues need the Government’s urgent attention now, so why on earth did John Swinney give a speech today all about independence?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Let me reassure Russell Findlay that all those issues command my attention. They are the constant focus of the work of my ministers and my Cabinet and of my personal attention as First Minister, because, as I said this morning, I am absolutely determined to focus on the priorities of the people of Scotland. One of the things that the people of Scotland are concerned about is that their standard of living has been static for most of the past 10 years of austerity, bequeathed to us by the Conservative United Kingdom Government. What independence offers for Scotland is—

Members:

Nothing.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Thank you, members.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

What independence offers for Scotland is a fresh start, and that will be positively welcomed by the people of Scotland.

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

The title of John Swinney’s speech today was “Respecting Scotland’s Right to Decide”. That is right. That from the party that has never, not for a single minute, respected the decision that Scotland made. He said today—let me quote him, because it is absolutely priceless:

“You can’t just support democracy when it suits you.”

First Minister, the fringe festival is over—enough with the terrible jokes. Scotland did decide. Two million people voted to reject division, and they are still demanding that the SNP Government gives it a rest and focuses on what matters. When will he ever learn to take no for an answer?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

One of the points that I made this morning is that, since the 2014 referendum and by 2030, a million individuals in Scotland will not have had the opportunity to decide on our constitutional future. One in four of the population will not have had the opportunity to decide how this country should be governed. I think that, when we have very substantial support in the opinion polls for Scottish independence and a clearly expressed desire of people to decide on their constitutional future, there should be no roadblocks in the way of the people of Scotland exercising their democratic right to decide on their future. That, after all, is democracy, and I am proud to champion it.

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

In John Swinney’s grand declaration of Leith today, he referenced Scotland’s claim of right. Film buffs will know that this nationalist battle cry comes exactly 30 years since the release of “Braveheart”. He has done everything but paint his face blue, while Scots are blue in the face, saying to the SNP, “Enough is enough”.

I really hate to break it to the First Minister, but John Swinney is not William Wallace—nor is he even Mel Gibson. We know his game. He knows exactly what he is up to. He is desperately trying to get the focus off the SNP’s dismal record of failure on the economy, schools, ferries, drugs, crime, health and everything else. Therefore, this week, he cynically focuses on independence and international affairs. Is it not time that he got back to the day job?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Well, I was here on Tuesday, leading a debate on the Government’s priorities for Scotland and, in that debate, I set out—[Interruption.]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Let us hear one another.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

In that debate, I set out the fact that Scotland is now seeing in-patient waiting lists falling, the number of general practitioners increasing, the number of drug deaths—which is still far too high—falling, and young people delivering the best examination results since 2019, before the pandemic.

I notice that there was no round of applause from the Conservatives for the young people of Scotland who delivered an outstanding examination performance, but I am proud of them and all that they have achieved.

What the Scottish Government is doing—[ Interruption .]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Let us hear one another.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

What the Scottish Government is doing is delivering on the priorities of the people of Scotland. That is what my Government is focused on. I want to make sure that Scotland is not inhibited by the failures of Westminster, and that we have the ability to democratically choose the future of independence. I am confident that the people of Scotland will make that choice.

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

Scotland is inhibited by the failures of this rotten Government. When John Swinney became First Minister, he quite understandably tried to present himself as a more decent front, distancing himself from the chaos of Humza Yousaf, but the mask has now well and truly slipped. Despite what he said today, he is not focused on the economy, education or anything else that truly matters to the people of Scotland, who pay our wages, and he is not doing anything to help to improve people’s lives. The same old John Swinney is back: obsessed with independence and distracted from the day job. Does he not realise that the majority of Scots want to tell him, “Move on, John”?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Russell Findlay seemed to miss the fact that, on Monday, the Government set out—no, not set out but delivered—the abolition of peak rail fares in Scotland, which will help—[Interruption.]

While all the shouting is going on, I will set out to Parliament—

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Sorry, First Minister, but I say to members that many people wish to put questions today, so let us continue with our business and let us hear one another.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

On Monday, when the Government delivered on its commitment to abolish peak rail fares, commuters travelling from Glasgow to Edinburgh daily saw their travel costs reduced by 48 per cent. That is an astonishing saving for households in the country and for people commuting, but even that cannot be welcomed by Russell Findlay today.

I do not really think that Russell Findlay is in the strongest position to lecture me—[ Interruption .]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Thank you, members.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

He just needs to look at the words of his former colleague, Jeremy Balfour, to see how moderate Conservatives feel about the outrageous leadership that Russell Findlay is delivering. What we are seeing in Scotland is Russell Findlay—[ Interruption .]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Thank you.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

—in a partnership with Nigel Farage, and Scotland is going to send both of them packing.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

This summer, I travelled to every part of our country and, in every community, the people I met had one clear priority: fixing our national health service. However, this morning, John Swinney showed that fixing the NHS will never be his priority. Instead, he is trying to use independence to hide from his failures and is desperately trying to cling on to power, but it is not going to work.

Over this summer, we have seen NHS waiting lists soar to include almost 900,000 Scots. More than 100,000 Scots have been waiting more than a year to be seen on the NHS, there are record levels of people paying for their own procedures due to this Government’s failures, and Scotland still has the highest rate of drug deaths in Europe. Do Scots not deserve a First Minister whose number 1 priority will be fixing our NHS?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Well, they have that, and they do not need to change the First Minister as long as I am here.

Let me give Anas Sarwar some statistics on what is going on: 97 per cent of people leave Scottish hospitals without their discharge from hospital being delayed; the number of operations that were performed in July was the highest in five years—and an 8.9 per cent increase compared with the number for July last year; our rapid cancer diagnostic services have reduced patients’ waiting time from referral to diagnosis to an average of 14 days; and the number of hip and knee operations reached an all-time high in 2024. That is because the health secretary and I are absolutely focused on improving the performance of the NHS, and that approach is delivering for the people of Scotland.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

It is okay, First Minister—I know that you are tired, but you have only about eight months left, so I would not worry about it.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Always speak through the chair, Mr Sarwar.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

John Swinney is not the only knackered Scottish National Party politician who has given up on fixing our NHS. Yesterday, health secretary Neil Gray abruptly abandoned the SNP’s flagship promise to end waits of more than a year in our NHS. On the same day that the news broke that more than 1,000 Scots lost their lives to drugs in 2024, what did Neil Gray do? He took to social media to ask people whether they had seen the good news about Scotland’s NHS. That was on the same day that more than 1,000 deaths to drugs were revealed.

There are record waiting lists, with no plan to fix them; a record number of Scots are being forced to pay for their healthcare; and we have the highest drug deaths rates in Europe. This Government is so out of touch. Is it any wonder that the Patient Safety Commissioner has said that we have a bed crisis and that waiting lists are imploding under the SNP?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

In-patient waiting lists are falling. That is what is happening under the SNP. In-patient waiting lists are getting smaller as a consequence of the interventions that we made.

I put to the Parliament a range of measures that would expand the number of procedures and appointments that were envisaged in the national health service. We surpassed our original targets with that investment, and we put in place the largest-ever financial settlement to expand the service’s capacity. What is that achieving for us? It is helping us to roll out national treatment centre activity around the country; to deliver an increased number of operations; and to make sure that we have the largest number of hip and knee operations, which are at an all-time high.

Those are all things that the budget deal put in place. The only problem with the budget deal is that Anas Sarwar refused to vote for it. How has he got any credibility on the health service when he cannot even put his finger on the button to support the Government’s budget? It is laughable.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

The First Minister is saying that the Patient Safety Commissioner is wrong, and his response just proves that he is completely and utterly out of touch. It is clear that John Swinney and his knackered Government are totally out of touch with the reality that Scots are facing.

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

You are just making a fool of yourself.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

I hate to say it to the finance secretary, but the only one making a fool of themselves here is the Scottish Government.

Peter Black, a grandfather from Lanarkshire with stage 4 cancer, was forced to wait 15 hours, through the night, to be seen at the accident and emergency department at Wishaw general hospital. Peter was only seen after a relative contacted the chief executive of the health board to complain. Why should it take that? Does every family have to complain to the chief executive? Peter’s daughter, Nicola, told me:

“No family should have to experience what we have, but I know that that is the reality for thousands of people.”

The system is broken, and it feels like the SNP has totally abandoned the NHS. Is it not the case that our NHS will not survive a third decade of this tired, knackered, out-of-touch and incompetent SNP Government?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

In relation to that individual case, I apologise to people who have to wait too long for treatment. The length of wait in the case that Mr Sarwar puts to me is unacceptable. If he will send me the details, I will look at it very specifically and get an answer from the chief executive of NHS Lanarkshire.

In the wider context, the performance of Scotland’s core A and E system has outperformed that of the systems in England and Wales for the past 10 years. I accept that that is no consolation to an individual who has to wait too long or to their family, but the general performance of A and E departments in Scotland’s national health service is stronger than that in the rest of the United Kingdom. As I recounted to the Parliament on Tuesday, the numbers of waits for eight and 12 hours in our accident and emergency departments are falling.

I want to ensure that people get treatment as quickly as they need to. In Scotland, 1 million people go into and out of A and E departments within four hours every year. We have to ensure that that performance is strengthened. The Government is absolutely focused on doing exactly that.

Ross Greer (Green, West Scotland)

Scots are trapped in almost £2 billion of council tax debt. They are locked into poverty and are living in fear of bailiffs at their door. Some of the families that are trapped in that situation spoke to Aberlour. They said:

“I felt like I was stuck in a hole, and I was getting deeper into it, and I wasn’t going to be able to get out of it.”

They also said:

“You worry about being seen as a bad parent. Or you worry and are upset that your kids are missing out on things or treats and stuff like that.”

Thousands of families across Scotland are trapped in that situation. The rules for council tax debt in Scotland are four times as harsh as they are in England, which is trapping families, in some cases, with unpayable debts for decades. The Scottish Greens have a plan to end that scandal and bring our debt collection rules into line with the rest of the United Kingdom by changing the Housing (Scotland) Bill. Will the First Minister support our plan to end that cruel regime and break the cycle of poverty that so many families are stuck in?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Before I answer Mr Greer’s question, I express my congratulations to Ross Greer and Gillian Mackay on their election as co-leaders of the Scottish Green Party. I extend my admiration to Patrick Harvie and Lorna Slater for their service and I look forward, as I do with all party leaders, to co-operating on the issues that require our co-operation in a Parliament in which no one party has a majority at present.

On the substance of Mr Greer’s point, I acknowledge that financial distress can be a significant source of difficulty for families and that it can increase the challenges that they face. That is why the Government’s agenda is absolutely focused on eradicating child poverty. That is my key priority and it is at the heart of the Government’s agenda. The support that we put in place is designed to do that, with measures such as the Scottish child payment. That does not exist in England and Wales and it is a significant measure that supports families who are in difficulty. On other occasions, we have taken steps to remove council tax debt. Ms McAllan, the Cabinet Secretary for Housing, and I are very happy to engage in discussions with Mr Greer about the proposals that he wishes to bring forward for the Housing (Scotland) Bill, which is coming to the Parliament for consideration.

Ross Greer (Green, West Scotland)

I thank the First Minister for his kind words.

Energy bills are sky high, the weekly shop costs double what it used to, a meal deal can be a fiver now and a jar of coffee can cost £7.50. One in five households are living from payslip to payslip, and they are terrified of how they will pay their bills if something goes wrong.

Yet not everyone is having a hard time. The richest 2 per cent of people now have more wealth than half the population combined. Billionaires should never be getting tax breaks, but they are. Some of Scotland’s richest people pay no business rates for their shooting estates. We are missing out on millions of pounds for our schools, libraries and health centres. It is indefensible that some of the richest people on the planet get a 100 per cent tax break from the Scottish Government. The Scottish Greens have a plan to end that injustice. Does the First Minister really think that billionaire-owned shooting estates need a tax break? Should aristocrats get blank cheques, while the poorest have bailiffs at their door?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The issues that Mr Greer raises relate to the budget process, which the Government needs to go through. We will happily engage with the member on those issues, as we will with all parties. On his point about family and household costs, I totally agree with him about the burden of energy costs. I do not think that the situation has been helped by the failure of the Labour Government at Westminster to deliver on the promises that were made to people. People were promised that there would be a reduction in their energy bills of £300, yet energy bills are higher now than when the Labour Government came to power. My simple response to Mr Greer, the Parliament and the people of Scotland is this: if you want to work out what a Labour Government would look like, look at the shambles that is at Westminster today.

Evelyn Tweed (Scottish National Party, Stirling)

To ask the First Minister what action the Scottish Government is taking to reduce the number of road traffic incidents on the trunk road network, in light of reports of a number of serious accidents over the summer. (S6F-04246)

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I express my sympathies to anyone who is affected by the loss of a loved one or who has been injured on our roads. The Scottish Government is investing a record £48 million in road safety in this financial year, including just over £12 million on trunk road safety engineering. Transport Scotland regularly liaises with Police Scotland on road safety issues and undertakes an annual assessment of the safety performance of the trunk road network. Mitigation measures are then prioritised for delivery. That robust approach ensures that the funding targets specific locations with a direct focus to improve safety and to save lives.

Evelyn Tweed (Scottish National Party, Stirling)

Recently, there have been five serious road traffic accidents on the A84 at Blair Drummond, in my constituency. What action is being taken following the 2019 Transport Scotland review of the area? Will the Cabinet Secretary for Transport meet me and concerned community members to discuss it?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I understand the concerns that have been raised by Evelyn Tweed about that junction. I understand that there is an on-going police investigation into recent claims in the area; that will be subject to review by Transport Scotland.

I would be happy for ministers to meet Evelyn Tweed and her constituents to discuss the issue. It is important that we are responsive to the challenges that are faced on the road network. Transport Scotland and the Cabinet Secretary for Transport look carefully at all these incidents to identify where we can take action to improve road safety. I am happy for those arrangements to be put in place.

Craig Hoy (Conservative, South Scotland)

Too many people are dying in accidents on the A75. Will the First minister therefore add his voice in support to the campaign launched by Finlay Carson and me to save lives by expediting the dualling of the A75?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The Government has taken a number of measures to improve road safety on the A75 and to improve the road. There are on-going discussions in relation to the upgrade of the road, and the Government will play its full part in all those discussions.

Tess White (Conservative, North East Scotland)

To ask the First Minister whether he will provide an update on the steps that the Scottish Government is taking as a result of the Supreme Court judgment in For Women Scotland Ltd v the Scottish ministers. (S6F-04252)

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The Government has made clear since the Supreme Court ruling that we accept the judgment and that we are taking forward detailed work that is necessary as a consequence. A working group convened by the permanent secretary is actively considering the implications of the judgment across every key area of Government.

As a result of that work, action has already been taken, including updated guidance for the Gender Representation on Public Boards (Scotland) Act 2018 and amendments to the public appointments recruitment process for regulated public bodies, through which the act is applied. Through joint working with Police Scotland, we will publicly consult on the stop-and-search code of practice before the end of this year. Actions have been taken. We also continue to engage with the Equality and Human Rights Commission while we await its updated code of practice, which I understand is yet to be submitted to the United Kingdom Government.

Tess White (Conservative, North East Scotland)

What the First Minister has said is a huge insult to women and to the women who are protesting outside today. First Minister, we are not buttoned up at the back. It has been months since the Supreme Court judgment and the Court of Session decision on single-sex toilets in schools. Children have gone back to school now and teachers, some of whom are in the gallery today, are still being told to follow the Scottish National Party Government’s unlawful supporting transgender pupils in schools guidance. They are fearful for their jobs if they do not do so. The City of Edinburgh Council has acted now because delaying would be illegal. This SNP Government is showing wilful ignorance. Why is the First Minister deliberately ignoring the rule of law?

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

On a point of order, Presiding Officer—

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

I will address any points of order after we have finished First Minister’s question time, Ms Grahame.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The Government is undertaking the work that I set out in my earlier answer to Tess White. On the issue of schools guidance, we are committed to ensuring that the supporting transgender young people in schools guidance is fit for purpose. As with any significant legal or policy developments, we are considering what developments are required in the guidance to ensure that all aspects of that analysis are taken forward. There is complex work under way in that respect and the Government is doing that work.

Ash Denham (Alba, Edinburgh Eastern)

The Supreme Court has been absolutely clear: sex, in law, means biological sex, and single-sex provisions must be respected.

The Equality and Human Rights Commission told the Government not to wait before acting, yet we still see confusion across all our public bodies, from schools to prisons to the national health service and local authorities. If Government lawyers are not there to advise ministers to follow the law, will the First Minister explain what, exactly, they are there for? Will he now commit to ensuring that all publicly funded bodies comply with the judgment in full and without delay?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

As I have explained in my answers and as has been explained by other ministers, the Government is undertaking the careful, detailed legal work that is required to put in place the provisions that are required following the Supreme Court case. We have taken some of the actions that we have been able to take to date, and we will continue to pursue the other issues as we take forward that work.

Government lawyers support the Government in its work to ensure that, at all times, the Government is acting within the law.

Alex Rowley (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

To ask the First Minister, in light of the Scottish Environment Protection Agency’s warnings of water scarcity over the summer and the introduction of restrictions on water abstraction last week in some areas, including north Fife, what action the Scottish Government is taking to secure water supply in Scotland in the face of changing climate conditions. (S6F-04244)

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

It is clear that climate change is driving more extreme weather, and, this summer, very dry conditions have been seen across Scotland, particularly in the east. Today, the Scottish Environment Protection Agency has confirmed that the number of areas that have significant water scarcity has increased to 10.

With SEPA and Scottish Water, we are implementing Scotland’s national water scarcity plan, to support those who are affected. I recognise the seriousness of the situation, particularly for producers. SEPA is working closely with affected water abstractors—principally, NFU Scotland and the Scotch Whisky Association, and others—to minimise the impact where possible.

Our investment in resilience measures over many years means that Scottish Water is able to maintain supplies to all parts of Scotland during prolonged dry periods. However, supplies are clearly not infinite, so I encourage everyone to use water responsibly.

Alex Rowley (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

In the past week, I and other MSPs who represent the east of Scotland, including the First Minister, had an online meeting with Scottish Water, at which we heard about the work that it is doing. That includes its efforts to get people to reduce water usage, which I support. I have also been in touch with SEPA over the past few months, and I thank the staff at Scottish Water and SEPA for the work that they have done to manage the situation.

However, looking forward to the medium and longer term, does the First Minister recognise that there is a need to review water infrastructure and water resilience? For farmers, this has been a difficult year, and it is predicted that food production will be well down as a result of the dry spells. NFU Scotland has said:

“Building resilience must be a shared priority between growers, regulators and policymakers.”

Will the First Minister agree to look at what we need to do in the medium term to put in more water storage to support farmers and others who draw water, and at the issue of reservoirs and whether we need to increase capacity across Scotland in the medium and longer term?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Not for the first time, Mr Rowley has raised significant issues and provided an indication of where the solutions lie. I very much welcome the content of his question and express the willingness of ministers to engage with him on those points.

The situation has been acute. This year, I started to receive a weekly water scarcity warning from SEPA in April. Normally, I would probably begin to receive such warnings in August. That gives a practical indication of the effects of climate change.

Mr Rowley will be familiar with the Government’s priority of tackling climate change, which is part of the solution. Another part of the solution is the constant improvements that are being made to water infrastructure around the country. A significant upgrade has just been completed in my constituency, in the city of Perth, to deal with the issues that Mr Rowley has raised. Such developments, which are going on around the country, often cause some disruption to members of the public, and we have to wrestle with that, too.

Mr Rowley’s final point was about the importance of water resilience and what more must be done to secure that. That obviously has an effect on capital priorities, but the Government will be happy to engage with Mr Rowley and other interested members on those questions, which are very much on the agenda of the Cabinet Secretary for Climate Action and Energy.

Rachael Hamilton (Conservative, Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire)

Last week, 6,000 people in Berwickshire, including vulnerable people and farmers with livestock, were left without water. I welcome Scottish Water’s commitment to a full investigation of that issue, but will the First Minister confirm whether Scottish Water will provide full compensation to all the affected customers and will he outline what action is being taken to ensure that Borders residents are not left without access to water again?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I understand the inconvenience for members of the public when there are occasional interruptions to water supply. That happens very infrequently, when issues affect individual water systems around the country. I know that Scottish Water worked quickly to restore supplies and provided water to the affected households to ensure that they received an adequate supply during that period. I understand the inconvenience, but I recognise that Scottish Water worked hard to ensure that it offered resilience where there was an interruption to supplies.

Bill Kidd (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Anniesland)

Even in a country synonymous with rain, the effects of climate change will make it necessary to be prudent about how much water we use and when and why we use it. Therefore, what can the Scottish Government and its agencies do to publicise and promote everyday tips so that all of us can conserve water and ensure that we are using Scotland’s water sensibly?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The work that Mr Kidd talks about is important and those steps are all part of the water is always worth saving campaign by Scottish Water and SEPA. Although we have a history of abundant water supply, this summer has demonstrated that that can be challenged by climate change.

I experienced one example of extremely good work in the village of Dunkeld and Birnam, in my constituency, where, in collaboration with Scottish Water, the village was able to reduce water use by 1 million litres in one year. By community engagement and awareness and by doing simple things around the use of water, that small village in Perthshire was able to reduce water consumption. That is part of the mix of interventions required to address the point that Mr Rowley put to me, which Mr Kidd has reinforced.

I encourage more awareness of such campaigns and I will reflect with ministers on what more needs to be done to increase that awareness.

Willie Rennie (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife)

I have spoken before about water in the River Eden catchment and about the dramatic impact of flooding on the people of Cupar. There is now an impact on farmers, with broccoli, potatoes and even cereal crops being dramatically affected. I have argued before for a river catchment plan for the Eden, because we must get everyone together to deal with the extremes of climate change. Will the First Minister agree to such a catchment plan?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

That is required not only for the River Eden; the current environment tells us that we need such river management plans in place across the board, and Mr Rennie is absolutely right to say that that can happen only if everybody is round the table to make it happen. I have seen such developments being successful in my constituency, but it required every party to be round the table to make that possible.

Mr Rennie highlights, as did Mr Rowley, the significant impact on this year’s agricultural harvest. Malting barley is not at the strength that we would want to see and some vegetable crops have not flourished to the extent that we would want them to, because of the absence of both rainfall and the ability to abstract water.

I will take away from today’s First Minister’s questions the importance of river management catchment areas and will ask ministers to engage with Mr Rennie and other interested members on how that can be taken forward at local level.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

We move to general and constituency supplementaries.

Marie McNair (Scottish National Party, Clydebank and Milngavie)

A constituent of mine sadly lost her niece to methanol poisoning a few years ago. Since then, the family has campaigned to get the dangers of methanol included as a mandatory part of personal, social, health and economic education in England. Will the First Minister join me in reiterating the dangers of methanol poisoning and confirm whether the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills will meet me to discuss what more can be done to raise awareness in Scottish schools?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

First, I express my sympathy to Marie McNair’s constituent’s family. I am very concerned and sorry to hear of the example that has been set out about the impact of methanol poisoning. It is important that we have a comprehensive set of interventions to address all such issues of potential harm. I am happy to agree that the education secretary will meet Marie McNair to discuss our approach to education in respect of alcohol, medicines, drugs, tobacco and solvents as part of the wider curricular approach that we take in Scottish schools.

Liam Kerr (Conservative, North East Scotland)

Around 150 home owners in Aberdeen’s Balnagask area could lose tens of thousands of pounds because of the presence of reinforced autoclaved aerated concrete, plunging them into debt and mental health crises. I notified the Government that I had found £20 million to fix that last spring, but the Cabinet Secretary for Housing still has not decided whether to release the funds. Will the First Minister instruct his cabinet secretary to urgently repurpose the £20 million and, if she will not, to use a fraction of the billions that were promised for housing this week to give a fair settlement to the Torry home owners who are affected by RAAC?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I recognise the importance of the issue that Liam Kerr raises and the worry that it will be causing his constituents. The cabinet secretary is actively engaged in considering the proposals that have been put to her and will come to conclusions very shortly. Mr Kerr and his constituents will be advised when that conclusion has been reached.

Pam Duncan-Glancy (Labour, Glasgow)

Legal advice published this week concluded that the Assisted Dying for Terminally Ill Adults (Scotland) Bill would not be compatible with the European convention on human rights because,

“without justification, it contains no adequate safeguard protecting the position of those with disabilities where suicidal ideation is more likely, and who are, because of that feature of their disability, more likely to express a wish to die.”

In particular, the advice indicates that the bill would breach article 14 of the ECHR, which prohibits discrimination. Does the First Minister agree that that presents an insurmountable risk to disabled people’s equality and human rights in Scotland, should the Assisted Dying for Terminally Ill Adults (Scotland) Bill be passed?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

First of all, the Government takes a neutral stance on the bill, which is before Parliament just now. It is a member’s bill, not a Government bill, and the Government takes a neutral stance on it, so I can express only a personal opinion to Pam Duncan-Glancy.

As Ms Duncan-Glancy will know, I do not support the bill, and I do not support it for many of the reasons that she has just put on the record. I have enormous personal sympathy with the point that she raises. Parliament will have to wrestle with those issues as it considers the legislation, but I can only express to her my agreement with the point that she has made.

Kenneth Gibson (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame North)

Will the First Minister set out the implications for the Scottish budget of the UK budget being delayed until 26 November?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

This is a very unfortunate situation, to put it mildly. The lateness of the presentation of the UK budget will mean that the budget process of the Scottish Government will be under enormous pressure. Given that the Parliament will rise for the election around the middle of March, the window for scrutiny and delivery of the budget priorities, and particularly for the Government to fulfil its legal obligations in relation to the scrutiny by the Scottish Fiscal Commission, for example, will be very constrained.

We have to leave enough time for both parliamentary scrutiny of the budget and scrutiny of the Government’s choices by the Scottish Fiscal Commission, but the lateness of the presentation of the UK budget means that a very short number of weeks will be available in which that can be done before the start of the financial year in April 2026. It is a completely undesirable situation.

The Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government has, I think, written to the Finance and Public Administration Committee, and she will discuss the issues with the Scottish Fiscal Commission. The Scottish Parliament and the Scottish Government have been left in an entirely undesirable situation as a consequence of the delay to the timetable for the United Kingdom budget.

Sandesh Gulhane (Conservative, Glasgow)

The Scottish National Party’s open-door policy to asylum is a sham. Even Susan Aitken, the SNP leader of Glasgow City Council, says that the number of asylum seekers is “unsustainable.” Peter Smith’s ITV report highlighted the farce of illegal migrants being prioritised for housing over legal migrants and Scots. Is it time that the First Minister was honest with the people and admitted that illegal immigration is crippling services in Glasgow?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I have set out my concern about where the debate on migration is going. I honestly do not think that Sandesh Gulhane’s contribution helps us one bit in trying to ensure that our country remains cohesive and united, as it has always been on those questions.

The issues that the city of Glasgow faces are fundamentally because of the inadequacy of the approach of the United Kingdom Home Office—Councillor Aitken made that point clearly. That is where there needs to be a realisation of the implications of those issues, and I encourage the Home Office to engage with Glasgow City Council on those particular questions.

I make it absolutely clear to anyone who is listening that I think that Scotland is a welcoming country. Under my leadership, it will remain a welcoming country, and that is something that we as a country should be proud of.

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

Hundreds of Scottish saltires have been put up in my constituency—predominantly, but not exclusively, in the Maryhill area. The saltire is an inclusive and welcoming symbol, representing tolerance. However, serious concerns have been raised by many of my constituents that there might be an attempt by the far right to hijack our country’s flag. Racist graffiti is starting to appear in my local areas, including the phrase “Sink the Boats.” The other day, one of my constituents was told to “Get back on their boat.”

Many people in Maryhill, from all backgrounds, have reached out to me with huge concern, and offering their love, support and solidarity for all of the people, including immigrants and asylum seekers, who have made their life in Maryhill. Will the First Minister show his solidarity with the people of Maryhill, the vast majority of whom are welcoming, tolerant and inclusive? What practical support can the Scottish Government offer our communities?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I could not have expressed that point better than Mr Doris has. I agree with him that the national flag of Scotland has always been represented as an inclusive flag that is there to draw all of us together in Scotland as an essential part of our national identity, and I want to ensure that is always the case.

I had the pleasure of being in Mr Doris’s constituency last Thursday at the launch of a magnificent partnership between Home-Start, Greater Glasgow and Clyde NHS Board and Glasgow City Council. The partnership supports many vulnerable families in the Maryhill area, and I was glad that Mr Doris made it possible for me to be there at its launch. At the heart of that event was the spirit of inclusion; the welcome to people from other places who had made Glasgow and Maryhill their home and who were proud of that fact.

The Government will give leadership and practical support for community cohesion, because we believe—as Mr Doris does—that Scotland is best served by being an inclusive and welcoming country; it has been in the past and it must be in the future.

Pauline McNeill (Labour, Glasgow)

The Homeless Project Scotland in Glasgow has done an incredible job of feeding people, giving them a bed for the night and saving their lives—in fact, 27,000 people have gone through its doors. However, the charity might be homeless if the planning committee at Glasgow City Council does not consent to allowing it to remain on Glassford Street. If it were to close, it would be devastating for many homeless people. Does the First Minister agree that Glasgow City Council must work with the Homeless Project to find an alternative home should planning consent not be granted? Would the First Minister consider—time permitting—visiting the project, which he has known about for some time? He would be very welcome if he did.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

If Pauline McNeill will forgive me, I will not intrude on the planning application process—it is generally pretty tricky when ministers do that. However, I will say that the Homeless Project Scotland carries out an important role in supporting vulnerable individuals in our country. Therefore, regardless of the planning application, we must find ways of supporting such individuals. The Cabinet Secretary for Housing is planning to engage on the issue and perhaps visit the project. I will give consideration to that, because I want to ensure that we have in place practical support for people who are homeless.

I hope that the housing secretary’s statement to Parliament on Tuesday indicated the priority that we attach to improving housing supply. A lot of improvements to housing supply have been achieved in the past 12 months, and I am determined to build on that in the period ahead.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

That concludes First Minister’s questions.

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

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. The Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body issued guidance that those attending in the public gallery should desist from wearing visible slogans. Does that direction apply to MSPs in the chamber? No matter what a slogan says, the issue is especially significant as we enter election periods.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

That matter is not covered in our standing orders and there is nothing in the guidance in the code. However, as ever, I ask all members, as they do, to present themselves in the chamber dressed in a respectful manner, as a consequence of the role that we hold.

There will be a short suspension to allow those leaving the chamber and the gallery to do so.

Rail Fares

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

The next item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S6M-18570, in the name of Bob Doris, on the abolition of peak rail fares. The debate will be concluded without any question being put.

Motion debated,

That the Parliament notes the Scottish Government’s reported decision to abolish peak rail fares in Scotland; acknowledges what it sees as the ambition to make public transport more affordable and help people with the rising cost of living; considers that initiatives such as the abolition of peak rail fares can encourage more people to switch from cars and opt to use the train; believes that this can help tackle inequalities by making commuting, day trips and access to leisure activities more affordable, and notes the view that passengers in the Maryhill and Springburn constituency should be encouraged to use this opportunity, not only for the daily commute but to see all that Scotland has to offer.

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

I thank all those who have supported my motion on the Scottish Government’s abolition of peak rail fares, which has allowed it to be debated today.

As a non-driver and regular rail and bus user in my constituency of Maryhill and Springburn, I am well aware that many of my constituents require an accessible, reliable and affordable rail service. The abolition of peak rail fares by our Scottish National Party Government sits at the heart of that ambition. It is not the only aspect, though—I will return to that later.

My local train station is Summerston, which sits on the Maryhill line. I used the train service to get to Edinburgh this week, changing at Queen Street station. Many of my constituents will have made a similar journey this week. Maryhill, Kelvindale, Gilshochill and other stations on the line all serve commuters heading into Glasgow city centre and onward destinations elsewhere. Before the abolition of peak rail fares, an anytime return journey from Maryhill to Edinburgh would have cost £35.50. Today, it costs £19.90, which is a 44 per cent reduction.

For those who travel to work in Glasgow city centre, an anytime return to Glasgow Queen Street cost £5.40 last week. It now costs £3.10, which represents a 43 per cent reduction. Of course, not all my constituents travel into Glasgow city centre. Some areas do not have access to a large supermarket and do not have alternative public transport that allows people to get to one. They will make savings at former peak times when they travel to, perhaps, Summerston or Anniesland to use or work in one of the large supermarkets there. All those savings will make a real-life difference to my constituents.

The cost of living crisis that has swept across the UK has not gone away.

Paul Sweeney (Labour, Glasgow)

Mr Doris has extolled the benefits of the Maryhill line, which is a fantastic piece of infrastructure that was, of course, extended under the previous Labour Government. However, does he agree that it is badly in need of further upgrading, including electrification and an increase in frequency, so that we have turn-up-and-go frequencies and do not need to rely on timetables?

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

I confirm that I am continuing to press to make sure that the Maryhill line is either electrified or is made carbon neutral in some other way, in order to meet our net zero aspirations and build resilience into the line. Of course, there should be a half-hourly service on that line. I will return to that later in my speech.

The measures that our Scottish Government has taken have made, and continue to make, a real difference for many in the face of the cost of living crisis. I will not reel off all the other policy initiatives, but, needless to say, the abolition of peak rail fares by the Scottish Government is a key contribution to helping rail users during the cost of living crisis. I very much hope that it will assist my constituents who have felt priced out of using Scotland’s rail network at peak times.

The abolition of peak fares also has the potential to play a crucial role in Scotland’s contribution to tackling our climate emergency and achieving our net zero ambitions, which I have just referred to. I say that it has a “potential” role because, unless we significantly drive up the number of commuters who would otherwise take a car for their journeys but who take the train instead, the contribution that our rail network can make to our climate aspirations will not be maximised. Decarbonising our railway is vital, and the Scottish Government is currently investing heavily in it.

I am keen to hear from the minister how he will monitor the impact of the permanent abolition of peak rail fares. Such monitoring and analysis must be done over the longer term, with no rush to judge the impact over the short term. This is a long-term, strategic approach.

I welcome the strong cross-party support for the abolition of peak fares, as well as the strong support from trade unions such as the National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers and the Transport Salaried Staffs Association, and from business, including from the Scottish Retail Consortium.

At the start of my speech, I said that my constituents require an accessible, reliable and affordable rail service and that the abolition of peak fares sits at the heart of that. ScotRail timetables must also meet the needs of commuters. When I was first elected, securing a rail service on the Maryhill line seven days a week was a major campaign effort of mine. There used to be a Sunday service only on the four Sundays before Christmas. Following my campaign, an all-year-round service on Sundays was secured for the benefit of my constituents, and it has made a real difference.

However, I note that the frequency of services on the Maryhill line during the week, outwith the rush hours, is still to return to pre-Covid levels. The services are hourly during the day. If there is a single cancellation for whatever reason—it is not always ScotRail’s fault; often, it is due to Network Rail—it is often not practical, and it is certainly not desirable, for people to wait another hour for the next train. The frequency of the service used to be every 30 minutes. ScotRail tells me that, as passenger numbers continue to recover, it will continue to look at running a 30-minute service on the line once again. Can we have that as soon as possible, please? The abolition of peak rail fares can make an important contribution to the efforts to secure a greater frequency of services in my local communities.

Making rail fares more affordable across the board, be it through peak fare abolition or through other ScotRail initiatives such as kids for a quid or club 50, builds commuter confidence and loyalty in our publicly owned rail network. I hope that we will see more journeys being taken more often. That will build on the strong progress of ScotRail. In 2023-24, there were 81.2 million passenger journeys on ScotRail services, which represents an increase of 27 per cent on the previous year. However, the potential is clear, with numbers still being 16 per cent lower than in 2019-20. As passenger numbers continue to grow across the network, it must be a socially responsive railway, and it must invest in and enhance services for communities such as those that I represent, which use the Maryhill line. I am confident that it will do so.

Fulton MacGregor (Scottish National Party, Coatbridge and Chryston)

Presiding Officer, I apologise to you and to Bob Doris, because I will not be able to stay for the whole debate. You should have received an email about that, Presiding Officer. With the Deputy First Minister, I have a prior engagement with my cross-party group.

I thank Bob Doris for bringing this important debate to the chamber. One of the reasons that I was keen to speak in the debate, despite the fact that I have a prior appointment, is that it is a policy that impacts greatly on my constituency, which has no fewer than nine very active train stations. That is probably one of the highest numbers in the central area of Scotland, and both of the main Glasgow to Edinburgh lines are included in that coverage.

Those stations are used regularly by my constituents, and, as members can imagine, the issue of rail fare costs has come up regularly. Over the years, a lot of people have said that the cost of the trains puts them off using them, so they stick with taking the car, which is something that we all want to move away from. Therefore, this policy is a very welcome step, and my communications on it in various channels over the past couple of days have been very well received and have led to an influx of emails to my office.

I will give an example of some of the local routes that people take regularly for work and leisure and the difference in price because of the change in policy. A return from Coatbridge to Glasgow Queen Street was £8.20 and is now £5.30; a return from Coatbridge to Edinburgh was £27.80, which was really high, and is now £16.40; a return from Kirkwood in Coatbridge to Glasgow Central was £8.70 and is now £5.40; a return from Gartcosh to Queen Street was £7.80 and is now £5.00; and a return from Whifflet to Motherwell was £5.90 and is now £3.30. Those are significant savings for people.

As a result of the comms that I have put out on the issue, a lot of people have got back in touch with me, because they are concerned about the fact that concession fares went up prior to the announcement. In particular, older constituents have got in touch to say that, although it is great that peak fares have been scrapped, concession fares have gone up quite significantly.

Because today’s debate is a members’ business debate, it is maybe not the right time to go into too much detail on that issue, but, given the correspondence that I have had on it, I am keen to write to the minister on the matter. Could he look at that today and perhaps go back to ScotRail to look at where the concession fares are? I do not think that anybody—whether from a Government or an Opposition point of view—would want such a fabulous and great policy to be undermined because vulnerable groups feel that they are almost paying the cost of funding it. I am sure that that is not the intention of either the Government or ScotRail; I simply ask the minister, when he is summing up, to have a wee look at that.

I can see that I have already used most of my four minutes, Presiding Officer, so I will bring my remarks to a close. Again, I thank Bob Doris for bringing this debate to the chamber and I welcome the policy that the Scottish Government has brought forward. It will have a real impact on my constituents, and we are all here to make sure that that happens.

Sue Webber (Conservative, Lothian)

I thank Mr Doris for bringing the debate to the chamber. It is great to be back after our summer recess and to talk about something that people care about so much.

Nicola Sturgeon promised passengers that Scotland’s rail service would improve under Government ownership, yet things are manifestly worse than they were under Abellio. Public transport has become unreliable and far too expensive. Taxpayer subsidies, ticket prices and the number of complaints have all soared, but the number of services and the number of passengers using them have plummeted.

It was the Scottish National Party’s decision to reintroduce peak fares on ScotRail trains last year. That was a disastrous decision, because it punished hard-working Scots, who paid hundreds or thousands of pounds more simply to commute to their work.

Our party, the Scottish Conservatives, campaigned against that. Despite being defeated in the Parliament last September on a Scottish Conservative vote on the issue, the SNP at that time refused to budge, claiming that abolishing peak fares permanently was unaffordable. We have always campaigned to permanently scrap peak fares, because we want to ease the burden on hard-working Scots.

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

I was disappointed when the pilot ended. At the time, the Scottish Government said that it had to put its policy on a firm financial footing and that, if the Government found the funds, it would return to the matter. It found those funds and put them in the budget this year, and peak rail fares have now been scrapped. Did the member support that budget?

Sue Webber (Conservative, Lothian)

I did not, because the budget is not about one specific thing; it is about a collection of things. There were many things in the Government’s budget that we would never prioritise ahead of other things.

I am pleased that the SNP has U-turned on peak rail fares. We have seen all the SNP’s tweets and other social media posts congratulating itself on reversing its own decision. I am glad about the decision. However, sadly, some passengers will still miss out, despite the sudden SNP U-turn, as is always the way when we scratch underneath for the detail.

Those with a club 50—or over-50s—rail card cannot get a discount with that card until after the old peak time. We have had lots of numbers today, so I will give just one example. On a 9.15 am service from Waverley to Queen Street, they will pay £16.80, but, at 9.30 am, it will be £13.40. People with other rail cards can get that discount, so why is it not the same for everyone?

I want to make sure that the detail is provided and that everyone can benefit from there being no peak rail fares. We have also heard that consumers paying the anytime fare, no matter what time of the day they travel—I am getting a bit mixed up with my notes here. I apologise, Presiding Officer.

Mr Doris said that it is not just about affordability but about services being accessible and reliable. We know that cheaper rail fares in Scotland will contribute to our net zero goals and better connectivity, so we need to encourage people to leave their cars at home. We want them to choose rail travel, because we know that it reduces congestion, lowers emissions and will support our climate targets.

Although encouraging a shift from the car to the train is a worthwhile goal, it does nothing to address the underlying issues that Scotland’s rail system faces overall—the unreliable services, the frequent cancellations and the underinvestment in key routes. We heard some of the specifics from Mr Doris, including the need for Sunday services at Maryhill. We need greater frequency rather than one train an hour.

Consumer Scotland research shows that 11 per cent of consumers feel that lack of safety is a barrier to adopting more sustainable travel methods. It is not just about fares but about accessibility, reliability and passenger safety.

Richard Leonard (Labour, Central Scotland)

I begin by declaring my interest as the convener of the RMT Scottish parliamentary group. I thank Bob Doris for lodging the motion. I know that, like me, he is a regular passenger on the Glasgow to Edinburgh train, so maybe he should declare his interest, too.

I also thank the Scottish Government, because Abellio is gone, Serco is gone, ScotRail is in public ownership and the Caledonian Sleeper is in public ownership. I am not sure that the Government is building socialism, but it is taking steps in the right direction.

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

I thank Mr Leonard for his kind words. I did not declare my interest as a regular Glasgow to Edinburgh rail user because I am privileged that the taxpayer steps in and funds my rail travel. It is my constituents who do not have that privilege who will benefit, rather than me.

Richard Leonard (Labour, Central Scotland)

Yes, I take the point.

Let me return to what I was saying. I have said before in this Parliament and in these debates that ownership is power. The Scottish Government is now the sole shareholder in Scottish Rail Holdings Ltd, so it must use that ownership and power for the common good.

Let me be clear: I, for one, welcome the Government’s conversion to the scrapping of peak fares once and for all. In my view, it is a victory for the RMT and the other rail unions, which have campaigned for it with tenacity and with banners bright. In the face of that, the Scottish Government has maintained for the past year that it was only existing, undeserving and—worse yet—middle-class ScotRail passengers on above-average earnings who gained from the scrapping of peak fares, when in fact it was a benefit to all workers travelling to and from their work, which, by my definition, is the working class.

We know that this is about leading a long-term change in behaviour. As the Auditor General told Parliament earlier this year,

“it can take time to sustain positive behavioural changes, such as encouraging modal shift from car to rail use”.

He also concluded that, when it came to getting people out of cars and on to public transport, the Scottish Government had carried out no consultation, had no clear costed plan, had no measurable milestones and had done no equality impact assessments, and he said that monitoring and scrutinising arrangements were insufficient. I hope that ministers will heed this warning and learn this lesson.

I hope that the Scottish Government will also dispel the dark cloud of funding cuts that is hanging over the alliance between Network Rail, Babcock Rail and Arcadia—the rail systems alliance Scotland—which has forced redundancies and is compromising safety-critical work.

I hope as well that the minister today will address the question of supporting the trade union campaign against cuts to British Transport Police in Scotland, and that he will make a statement against the outsourcing of ScotRail customer experience services to the anti-trade-union company Teleperformance.

Of course, I also hope that the Government will address and reverse the big cuts in ticket office opening hours in railway stations right across Scotland, which have been forced through as a political choice. They are not operational decisions; they have been signed off by the Scottish Government.

Let me conclude by saying this: the removal of staff from railway station ticket offices will not only deter passengers; it will deny many passengers access to public transport altogether.

I welcome this week’s move, and I welcome public ownership, but we must have public ownership that is equal and inclusive, is transparent and accountable and is comprehensive and democratic—public ownership of our railways that is of the people, by the people, for the people.

Mark Ruskell (Green, Mid Scotland and Fife)

I join members in thanking Bob Doris for securing this very timely debate. It echoes the debate that I led on the same topic in February, but I think that we are now in much happier times on the issue. Alongside my Scottish Green colleagues, rail unions and commuters, I am delighted that peak rail fares are now gone for good.

It has been quite a journey to get here. A six-month pilot that introduced off-peak all-day tickets was secured by the Greens, working with the Government, in 2023. It was extended to nine months before ending a year ago. Now, the scheme is back, and commuters are enjoying those savings once again.

Scrapping peak rail fares is all about making travel cheaper and simpler at a time when many households are still struggling to make ends meet. Peak fares have always been a tax on workers who have no say in what time they travel to work. As pre-Covid work patterns started to return in 2022, the absurdity of spending £30 a day to travel from Edinburgh to Glasgow hit home for many workers. Workers having to spend most of their morning’s wages just to pay for their commute was never right. It was simply not credible to run a nationalised rail service with fares set at extortionate levels. That marginalised rail as an option that was available only for the well paid or for those who, like us in this chamber, are on expenses.

The nine-month pilot got results. It resulted in a nearly 7 per cent increase in passenger numbers and an extra 4 million journeys by rail, half of which would have been otherwise taken by car. With transport accounting for a third of Scottish carbon emissions, it was a win for the climate, too. However, the policy clearly needed time to bed in to convince more people to make the switch.

The magic of the railways is that they shrink Scotland. They make job options viable that would otherwise require people to move house or to sit in spirit-crushing traffic jams for hours on end every day. As a result, they help to keep children in schools in the communities where they are settled. They allow people to choose between having one or two cars—or even no car at all.

However, the power of the railways to shrink Scotland works only if rail is affordable. It takes time for everyone to take stock of a big change such as the scrapping of peak fares and to make choices about where to live and what job to take in the future. It will take time to bed in, but now that certainty has been given that peak rail fares are gone for good, it will enable more people to choose rail as a more attractive option for travel.

It is important that the simple daily savings are understood better so that people can make such choices. Perth to Glasgow is a popular fast commute by train, and it is now £20 cheaper than the old peak price. Stirling to Edinburgh is another really busy commute—it is the one that I take—and the cost of it is down from nearly £20 to about £12 a day.

The introduction last year of better deals on passes was also welcome for those who were prepared to make a commitment to regular travel by rail, but the passes were never a substitute for a cheaper flat fare that meets the demands of a post-Covid world.

I will always remember the queue of people at Queen Street station—I was in that queue—on the day that peak fares were brought back in by the Government. It was chaos. People were confused and angry about having to upgrade tickets because they had missed the off-peak fare by just a few minutes. That is gone now—peak fares are gone. I am pleased that the Government has listened to those passengers, to the rail unions, which have been persistent in their campaigning on the issue, and to the Scottish Greens. We have now ended peak fares for good.

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

I, too, congratulate Bob Doris on securing the debate. I am delighted to speak, not only because I am a custodian—I jest—of the Borders railway but because I just love trains. That is particularly useful, as I am terrified of flying, but I digress.

The removal of peak-time rail fares is brilliant. It makes rail so much the better choice for commuters who travel to work or college, for example, and for commuting not just out of the Borders but into the Borders, where the cost of housing is much more reasonable than in the city and where there are excellent schools.

The story of the Borders railway, which on 9 September celebrates its 10th birthday, is one of unmitigated success. The passenger numbers that I am about to give represent thousands of journeys off the Borders roads, reducing congestion into the city of Edinburgh. Here are just a few stats. Borders railway footfall was nearly 2 million in 2019-20, which significantly exceeds the initial projected 600,000 annual passengers. That demonstrates a successful reintroduction of all rail services to the area after decades of local campaigning—and failure of the union.

More recently published figures show that, at some stations, the number of travellers increased by more than 30 per cent during 2023-24. The highest percentage increases were at Tweedbank station, which saw a 32.4 per cent increase, and at Gorebridge station, which had a 32.9 per cent increase. Although, nationally, Scotland enjoyed a 16 per cent uplift in the number of passenger journeys, local figures for stations in that section of the Borders line exceeded that impressive rise by a considerable margin.

The reduction in the daily return fare from Edinburgh to Tweedbank, for example, which was £22.50 before the abolition of peak fares and is now £15.10, will only serve to increase usage and reduce congestion and emissions. Keeping with the day return—you can, of course, buy weekly, monthly, seasonal and other tickets, with even more cost savings—I note that its reduction in price of more than £7 a day equates to a saving of £35 for the week and, for a working month, say, £140. Take another step up and it could be £1,500 a year. That is a huge economic bonus in this time of raging food inflation and energy costs. Other concessions and discounts still apply, including the kids-for-a-quid £1 ticket, which has already been referenced.

The Associated Society of Locomotive Engineers and Firemen supports the removal of peak-time rail fares. For me, that approach underlines the value of our railway system—although not the network—being in public ownership; we can avoid the costs and complexities that are so obvious in England, with its range of private companies and bewildering plethora of prices—all of which Sue Webber managed to dodge. On top of that, it adds to the argument for extending the line to Carlisle; there is a £10 million feasibility study to see whether an extension of the railway through the Borders to Carlisle would be financially viable—that case, I think, is proven. What has happened with the railway in the past 10 years shows that the extension is important. That is all a good thing and is assisted by the abolition of peak fares.

By the way—I am sorry that Sue Webber is the only Conservative here to hear this—the Conservatives initially opposed the return of the Borders railway. I have been here so long that I remember that.

Claire Baker (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

I thank Bob Doris for securing the debate. The removal of peak fares from Scotland’s railways on 1 September is very much welcomed. In the rail debate next week, there will be an opportunity to discuss that policy, along with others, in our consideration of the future of Scotland’s railways. I welcome the fact that Bob Doris took time this afternoon to highlight some of those other issues.

At the 26th United Nations climate change conference of the parties—COP26—in Glasgow, the rail trade unions launched a vision for Scotland’s railways, recognising the significance of COP taking place in Scotland. That was a welcome document that firmly placed the future of Scotland’s railways as part of the way in which we can tackle climate change and meet our ambitious environment targets. It included the removal of peak fares, which it argued were a tax on workers and a disincentive to using the train.

This week, ASLEF welcomed the decision on peak fares, saying:

“So while today is a victory and good news for passengers, more could and should be done to cut fares further and ensure Scotland’s rail services are as affordable and accessible as possible. We urge the Scottish government to keep on working to this end.”

Although today is an opportunity to highlight the change in fares, next week’s debate may be the time to consider what more could and should be done to make rail more affordable and inclusive. Scotland and the UK have some of the highest fares in Europe, and reductions such as reducing a peak-time return from Kirkcaldy to Edinburgh from £19.60 to £12.60—a saving of £7 per journey—are to be welcomed. There is also an additional benefit for Fife travellers, as the peak fares applied over a longer period and did not just cover the morning rush hour but restricted travel in the evenings for almost two hours, which made a cheap day return less attractive.

The minister will have also heard me say that, in terms of price per mile, Fifers pay some of the highest fares, and that discrepancy will still remain. I appreciate that that is not always the best way to measure costs, but the fair fares review was designed to address some of those anomalies, and we need to see more progress on that.

It is fair to say that some of us might have been surprised when the Government announced the scrapping of peak fares. The pilot, which ran from October 2023 to September 2024, was deemed by Transport Scotland to not have been successful, and the Cabinet Secretary for Transport has previously defended in the chamber the decision to scrap the pilot. She recently said:

“Was modal shift part of the original intention of the pilot? Yes. Did the pilot achieve the shift that we wanted or desired? Unfortunately, and regrettably, no.”—[Official Report, Public Audit Committee, 23 April 2025; c 10.]

The cabinet secretary also said:

“the pilot did not achieve its original aim of encouraging more people to travel by train. The analysis shows that there was only a limited increase in passenger numbers—6.8 per cent—during the pilot. Consequently, insufficient levels of income were generated to justify continuing the pilot, which mostly benefited existing passengers who have above-average incomes.”—[Official Report, 26 February 2025; c 51.]

Some of us will be familiar with the argument that the pilot was flawed. It was not initially advertised or promoted, and it took place during industrial action, at a time when there was a reduced timetable and we were still in a post-pandemic period, when patronage of public transport was going through a transition.

The cabinet secretary also argued, just at the end of February, that

“the trial had limited success, and Parliament simply cannot and should not overturn a carefully crafted and agreed budget for transport this coming year, the day after agreeing to it.”—[Official Report, 26 February 2025; c 69.]

The plans were, therefore, not in the budget that Parliament passed in February. However, within a matter of months—coincidentally, before a crucial Scottish Parliament by-election—the First Minister announced a change of heart.

Next week will provide more time to consider the detail of the policy, but I will finish with one more quote from the cabinet secretary. She said:

“The Scottish Government would be open to consider future subsidy to remove peak fares should UK budget allocations to the Scottish Government improve in future years.”

Therefore, maybe it is the UK Government that we have to thank for the First Minister’s change of track.

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

I thank Bob Doris for bringing the debate to the chamber today. East Lothian has seven rail stations: Dunbar, East Linton, Drem, Longniddry, Prestonpans, Wallyford and Musselburgh. I work closely with the Rail Action Group East of Scotland—RAGES—which was established in Dunbar in January 1999 and now has about 170 members. RAGES aims to improve rail transport in East Scotland in order to reduce social isolation, promote rail transport as an essential element in an integrated transport system that serves all sections of the community—I will touch on that later—and promote rail as an environmentally friendly, sustainable and affordable mode of transport. Those aims were set out in 1999, and things have not changed.

In 2007, when I was elected as a councillor for the first time, one of my main objectives was to secure a rail station for the village of East Linton in my ward. With that in mind, I set up a steering group with councillors, MSPs, council officers, South East of Scotland Transport Partnership, ScotRail, Transport Scotland and Network Rail. We met four transport ministers in the campaign as we pushed for a rail station.

East Linton railway station opened on?Wednesday, 13 December 2023, for the first time in almost 60 years. I had the privilege of travelling on the first train from Edinburgh Waverley to East Linton alongside Fiona Hyslop, the Cabinet Secretary for Transport, and Alex Hynes, the then chief executive of ScotRail. My enduring memory of that day was seeing the entirety of the East Linton primary school children meet the train and wave as we arrived, along with many local residents—it was a fantastic sight.

I continue to work with RAGES as we push for a new rail link from Haddington and Blindwells in East Lothian. We will meet the council next week to discuss the campaign. I also work with RAGES to push for more services and train stations in the rest of East Lothian.

East Lothian, along with Midlothian, has the fastest-growing population in Scotland. I mentioned Blindwells, which has the potential to be a new town in East Lothian, increasing the population by between 25 and 33 per cent. East Lothian has traditionally been a commuter belt for Edinburgh but Covid changed travel patterns, and those are continuing to change—many people now work from home in East Lothian and occasionally travel in to Edinburgh.

East Lothian has an amazing tourism offering, which is also important in relation to the abolition of peak rail fares. According to figures from the Scottish tourism economic activity monitor, the tourism industry in East Lothian generated £379 million for the local economy in 2024. It also noted that there were 1.56 million visitors to the county last year, a 9.5 per cent increase from 2023 and 14 per cent higher than pre-pandemic levels.

Overnight stays saw a significant rise, with visitor numbers increasing by 20 per cent. Overnight tourists contributed more than two million stays, adding £311 million to the local economy. Day visitors also played a crucial role, accounting for 63 per cent of all visits and generating £68 million. We are fortunate to have the Scottish open at the Renaissance club near North Berwick and the fringe by the sea in North Berwick, which have also boosted tourism. Many travel by rail.

The abolition of peak rail fares from 1 September saw an anytime day return from North Berwick drop from £15.60 to £9.10 and an anytime day return from East Linton to Edinburgh drop from £16.70 to £10.80. The decision to scrap peak rail fares will put more money in people’s pockets in East Lothian. It will also drive forward tourism and support jobs in that sector. It will make travel by train more affordable and encourage more people to use sustainable public transport.

Once again, it is a better deal for people because they live in Scotland, thanks to the Scottish Government.

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

I thank my colleague Bob Doris for bringing forward this debate on the abolition of peak fares from ScotRail services. He has done something that we in the Government are sometimes not good at doing, which is celebrating success and making sure that we let people know that we are taking steps that will help make the lives of the people of Scotland better under this SNP Government.

Bob Doris asked about the monitoring of the programme. We will monitor it over a three-year period, but I point out that we have abolished peak rail fares for good. We will see what will happen over the three-year period, but those peak rail fares are gone.

I also want to congratulate Bob Doris, because he has an exemplary record of standing up for his constituents in the chamber on a regular basis, and I commend him for that.

Fulton MacGregor raised the issue of concessions. Despite the fact that he is not here, I encourage him to write to us. A lot of the fares that he was talking about are local authority and transport authority concessionary travel fares, but I am happy to have a further discussion with him on those.

Sue Webber was, unfortunately, disappointing but not surprising in making her miserabilist speech. I will correct her on one thing, which is that ScotRail is one of the top-performing train operators in the United Kingdom; it performed better than most operators in Great Britain. In 2024-25, ScotRail cancelled just 2.2 per cent of its trains, which is around half as many cancellations as the GB average of 4.1 per cent. I could read the entire list of other performance measures in which ScotRail is doing so well under public ownership, but I will spare Ms Webber’s blushes.

I am delighted to welcome Richard Leonard’s warm response and vociferous support. We may not agree on some things, but we absolutely agree on this.

Mark Ruskell made a point about the Greens’ involvement, which I absolutely accept, but he should remember that it was the cabinet secretary who extended the pilot scheme in order to see how it would work. He also talked about season tickets and the variety of ways—again, I have a full list—in which people can save money by using ScotRail. Christine Grahame pointed out the same thing.

Claire Baker made points about remarks that were made by the cabinet secretary, on which I will come back to my notes. Her last point was that perhaps we should be thanking the UK Government for the extra money. I go back to the point that the First Minister made during First Minister’s question time, which was that the people of Scotland should have the right to choose; we should not have to wait for Westminster to do things in order to allow us to deliver for the people of Scotland.

I thank all the staff who are involved in Scotland’s Railway for helping us to deliver our landmark policy commitment. It is a collective effort of the staff in ScotRail and Network Rail Scotland, and has resulted in ScotRail performing better than most GB operators.

Public ownership has created the opportunity to deliver a railway that is run for the benefit of the nation. ScotRail passenger numbers have increased by 75 per cent from 46 million in 2021-22 to around 82 million in 2023-24. That makes ScotRail one of the fastest-growing operators, with one of the best passenger satisfaction rates. We are building even further on that success by removing ScotRail peak fares for good.

We have always been clear that further initiatives on peak fares would be considered if money was available. Balancing our budget for the benefit of the people of Scotland is, and will always remain, a priority for the SNP Government. Removing the peak fares is a bold and pioneering initiative that has not been done elsewhere in the UK, and it was possible only due to the Government’s bringing ScotRail into public sector control.

I applaud the unions for their role in helping the Scottish Government to deliver what is a pioneering policy and for their collaboration, which demonstrates that working together allows us to achieve more. That is a further commitment of our desire to be able to do more and to create a railway that is run in the interests of the nation and for the benefit of passengers rather than shareholders. An ambitious move such as scrapping peak fares from ScotRail services shows exactly what we can achieve with a modern, efficient and sustainable publicly owned railway, and I again commend everyone who has partnered us in delivering it.

Getting more people to travel by public transport is crucial in tackling our climate emergency. To do that, we need to make public transport more appealing. Removing peak fares will do exactly that. The pilot demonstrated that more people chose to travel by train when fares were removed. By taking this step and providing certainty that peak fares are gone for good, we are confident that more people will take the opportunity to make sustainable long-term choices, choosing public transport, which will make public transport more sustainable as a result. That is a win-win for us all, but not only that; the decision to remove peak fares was taken against a backdrop of continuing global uncertainty—arguably, a period of even greater economic uncertainty than when the pilot was initially operated. That has had an impact on the day-to-day lives of the people of Scotland. That is why it is vital that we as a Government take direct action to reduce uncertainty and improve the lives of those who live in Scotland. Permanently removing those peak fares will help many passengers to cut down on their travel costs. That is the SNP Government working hard for the people of Scotland.

I understand that folk thought that we had not done enough to promote the pilot removal of peak fares, so I will be clear: we want as many folk as possible to take advantage of the excellent value that our railway offers. That is why significant promotional activity is under way right now so that we can maximise the uptake of the great value that the train offers. I am sure that many of you will have encountered advertising on television, radio or social media, spreading the message that peak fares are gone for good.

Indeed, I and almost every other SNP MSP were all over social media at the start of the week, highlighting the scrapping of peak rail fares with videos and memes, and even handing out tickets at stations, letting commuters know that the SNP Government had scrapped peak rail fares for good. Ironically—

Mark Ruskell (Green, Mid Scotland and Fife)

Will the minister give way?

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

Yes, I will.

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

Briefly, please, because the minister is concluding.

Mark Ruskell (Green, Mid Scotland and Fife)

This time last year, the Cabinet Secretary for Transport talked about how flexi and season passes were going to be the way forward and the way to reduce costs. Was there any analysis of how successful that approach was, and did that lead the Government to changing its view and reintroducing off-peak fares all day? I just thought that that was the main answer that the Cabinet Secretary for Transport gave this time last year.

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

If you could bring your remarks to a close, please, minister.

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

In the interests of brevity, I will continue what I was saying. The fact is that we have taken the decision to scrap peak rail fares, which will get more people on to public transport.

As I have said, I and every other SNP MSP were all over social media last week about this. In the interests of time, I will just say that I very much look forward to seeing every other member across the chamber celebrating this successful SNP policy and the fact that fares have been driven down for the people of Scotland.

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

That concludes the debate.

Portfolio Question Time

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

The next item of business is portfolio questions, and the portfolio is climate action and energy, and transport. I invite members who wish to ask a supplementary question to press their request-to-speak buttons during the relevant question.

Question 1 has not been lodged.

Stuart McMillan (Scottish National Party, Greenock and Inverclyde)

To ask the Scottish Government what discussions the energy secretary has had with the United Kingdom Government regarding how Scotland’s energy policy and natural resources could support the establishment of new data centres in the country. (S6O-04891)

Gillian Martin (Scottish National Party, Aberdeenshire East)

Ministers and Scottish Government officials regularly engage with their counterparts in the UK Government’s Department for Energy Security and Net Zero and the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology. I continue to ask the UK Government to address the high cost of electricity, as that will be a key driver in attracting data centres to Scotland.

Data centres are also identified in the Scottish Government’s green industrial strategy. We are working with our economic agencies to identify data centre sites that utilise our renewable energy sources, while exploring opportunities to recycle waste heat from those facilities into the wider community. That is also in line with our vision and action plan for green data centres and digital connectivity, which seeks to position Scotland as a leading zero-carbon, cost-competitive green data-hosting location.

Stuart McMillan (Scottish National Party, Greenock and Inverclyde)

Artificial intelligence is continually developing and an increasing number of data centres will be required. Clearly, energy and water are needed to operate them. As we have seen, Thames Water and Anglian Water have already highlighted their concerns about the Prime Minister’s announcement of an additional 100 data centres. Does the cabinet secretary agree that Scotland would be an ideal location to host AI data centres that are powered by renewable energy, and is she confident that we have enough renewable capacity to operate such facilities?

Gillian Martin (Scottish National Party, Aberdeenshire East)

Given our dynamic innovation and tech ecosystems and abundant renewable energy capacity, which, at the moment, includes a lot of constrained wind energy—at various times, we have to shut off wind generation—that could be used to power new AI data centres, Scotland is certainly a natural home for them.

In May 2025, the Deputy First Minister wrote to the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology regarding the AI growth zone opportunity. She provided an open letter of support to all bidders in Scotland to accompany their final submissions, which evidenced the dedicated support that the Scottish Government and its economic agencies will provide to any selected AI growth zone in Scotland. I am keen that we promote all suitable areas of Scotland, particularly former industrial sites, as potential hosts for that key critical infrastructure. Mr McMillan’s constituency would be an excellent location for such projects.

Douglas Lumsden (Conservative, North East Scotland)

This week, offshore Europe is taking place in Aberdeen, where the best of our energy sector are showcasing to the world the value and skills that an oil and gas sector provides. While I was there, it was put to me that the sector has been waiting more than 31 months for Scotland’s energy strategy. That is 31 months of people having no idea whether the devolved Government still has a presumption against new oil and gas. There is even a petition calling on the Scottish Government to provide the strategy. Can the cabinet secretary commit to releasing the strategy before the end of the year or even before the next election? Can she provide some clarity on this important strategy?

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

That is not directly related to the substantive question. Cabinet secretary, do you have anything to add?

Gillian Martin (Scottish National Party, Aberdeenshire East)

I thank the Presiding Officer for making that point. It is not directly related to Stuart McMillan’s important question about the importance of renewable energy generation to power Scotland’s economy in the future.

Mercedes Villalba (Labour, North East Scotland)

New infrastructure such as data centres requires land, but land ownership in Scotland continues to be concentrated in the hands of anonymous corporate investors such as Gresham House, which, according to research by Andy Wightman, is now the second-largest private landowner in the country. It is clear that, without a presumed limit on land ownership, remote corporate entities such as Gresham House will continue to monopolise Scotland’s natural resources, including energy. Does the cabinet secretary agree that Scotland’s natural resources—which are, after all, public goods—must, at the very least, be used in the public interest?

Gillian Martin (Scottish National Party, Aberdeenshire East)

Again, that is quite a tangential subject to the talk of data centres. Actually, the types of land that are probably more suitable for data centres are in urban environments, particularly industrial land that perhaps is not in use at all at the moment.

I agree that Scotland’s decisions on energy should be in Scotland’s hands, and that they should include Scotland’s people.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

I remind members that supplementary questions need to relate to the original substantive question.

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

To ask the Scottish Government what plans it has to tackle the frequently reported overcrowding on Fife commuter trains. (S6O-04892)

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

I recognise that the fleet serving Fife routes is aged, which affects its reliability and has a negative impact on commuters. We are committed to replacing the fleet and to decarbonising the routes. Work on that continues to advance.

In the meantime, ScotRail continues to take steps to improve fleet reliability in Fife as part of its broader strategic approach. That includes close collaboration between ScotRail and the train leasing company to implement a comprehensive fleet improvement plan, with a particular focus on enhancing the performance of diesel fleet operating in that region.

There were more than 800 additional train services in Fife in the most recent reporting period, compared with the same period last year, and further additional services were introduced on the Leven route, which increased capacity. My officials will continue to monitor Fife services closely to ensure that further improvements are made where possible.

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

The cabinet secretary will be aware of my long-standing calls, going back many years, for the serious overcrowding on Fife commuter trains to be sorted once and for all. Although the scrapping of peak fares by the Scottish Government will be very popular with my constituents, what would be equally popular would be a clear plan, with a clear timetable, to ensure that my constituents are not packed in like sardines when they are travelling to and from their work. Can the cabinet secretary therefore offer my constituents an assurance that this constant problem of overcrowding will finally be tackled?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

With the Scottish National Party Government’s removal for good of peak fares, commuters in my colleague’s constituency are making considerable savings. Those travelling between Cowdenbeath and Edinburgh Waverley are saving £7 on their return daily ticket and even more with a flexipass.

I appreciate Annabelle Ewing’s—dare I say—dogged commitment to improving rail services for her constituents. She is right to do so. The Government shares her commitment to that goal of improvement and, as I have mentioned, plans to replace the ageing fleet and decarbonise the Fife rail routes are well under way. I will update the Parliament with further details very soon, and I hope that Annabelle Ewing will then be able to share them with her constituents.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

Again, there are a couple of—I hope—highly relevant supplementaries.

Roz McCall (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

Statistics from last year reveal that there were more than 500 full train cancellations at Inverkeithing station alone, with a further thousand train services due to travel via Inverkeithing being more than nine minutes late, of which 615 were 10 to 14 minutes late. I am sure that the cabinet secretary will not be troubled by that in her upcoming visit, but passengers and commuters in Fife have a problem and they have been suffering for too long. I know that the transport secretary believes that the current situation in Fife is unacceptable, but it is also unreliable. Can we have some timeframes from the Government for how quickly we will be able to get this sorted for the people of Fife?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

As I referred to in my initial answer, ScotRail has been working on timetable, train crew and fleet resilience. I remind the member that ScotRail performs better than most Great Britain operators: in 2024-25, ScotRail cancelled only 2.2 per cent of all trains—around half as many cancellations as the average of 4.1 per cent on the GB rail service, as run by her party at the United Kingdom level. There is a particular issue—

Douglas Lumsden (Conservative, North East Scotland)

No, it was not.

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

All right—as run by private operators following the Conservative Government’s privatisation of the rail service. I am pleased to see that the new Labour Government is looking to copy Scotland and to take the rail service into public ownership.

We can try to make improvements on both track and train. If we are to improve them on the Fife line in particular, we need to make sure that we are progressing on the electrification. The work between Edinburgh and Dalmeny is already under way, so those improvements are being made. We will also see improvements to the service that, as I indicated to Annabelle Ewing, we will set out in the plans shortly.

Claire Baker (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

Short-forming is often the cause of the overcrowding. As the cabinet secretary has recognised, there is a need to increase capacity in Fife. Given that short-forming is not measured in the public performance measure, would she support the PPM being changed to recognise the issue? Although peak fares have been removed, which is to be welcomed, overcrowding could work against that policy and make it less attractive to travel by train.

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

I have been very concerned about those areas where there is short-forming and what impact reduced rail fares could have on that. Short-forming could happen when units are affected by issues such as door cracks or wheel flats. That is why replacement is really important.

Claire Baker makes a reasonable point about what impacts are measured. I know that, before the Glasgow to Edinburgh line was electrified, short-forming was an issue, so it is not unreasonable to ask for the impact of short-forming to be measured. I will speak to ScotRail about whether it could consider that.

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

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on the progress being made in relation to its hydrogen action plan. (S6O-04893)

Gillian Martin (Scottish National Party, Aberdeenshire East)

Significant progress has been made in delivering the actions and commitments in the hydrogen action plan. The building blocks of a hydrogen economy in Scotland are being laid, technology is advancing and projects are entering construction. More than £35 million has been awarded to support hydrogen development. We have published our hydrogen sector export plan and have launched a national hydrogen planning hub, and we will shortly publish planning and consenting guidance.

We are also working with the United Kingdom Government on the role of hydrogen in the energy mix and on the development of the policy that is required to address deployment challenges, including in areas such as regulatory frameworks, market mechanisms and infrastructure.

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

As the cabinet secretary knows, the north-east of Scotland’s TH 2 ISTLE hydrogen valley project bid for European Union funding of €9 million, which will bring together a consortium of 29 partners led by Aberdeen City Council, aims to stimulate demand for hydrogen, thereby helping sectors including transport, agriculture, construction, new green industries and industrial test facilities to decarbonise. Given the significant opportunity that that bid creates for the north-east, what assurance can the cabinet secretary provide that the hydrogen action plan includes tangible support mechanisms to help projects such as TH 2 ISTLE, which is critical to the emergence of the hydrogen economy in the region?

Gillian Martin (Scottish National Party, Aberdeenshire East)

As Audrey Nicoll might know, the former Acting Minister for Climate Action, Dr Alasdair Allan, was very pleased to offer a letter of support to the TH 2 ISTLE hydrogen valley project’s bid for EU funding. It is good to note the positive progress that Audrey Nicoll informs us has been made on the initiative. I look forward to receiving more updates as the project moves forward.

That project is a good example of energy transition harnessing north-east Scotland’s long-standing history of developing expertise in the oil and gas sector to take advantage of the new green hydrogen opportunities and, in doing so, helping to stimulate economic growth and job creation and to support the hydrogen supply chain to develop.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

A number of members wish to ask supplementaries. I will try to get them all in, but they will need to be brief, as will the responses.

Brian Whittle (Conservative, South Scotland)

The 2020 Scottish hydrogen assessment suggested that Scotland could deliver up to 126TW of hydrogen energy per year by 2045, with up to 96TW of hydrogen being available for export to Europe and the rest of the UK in the most ambitious scenario. However, the most recent Climate Change Committee carbon budget reduced that forecast to 60TW in 2040. Does the minister think that that reduction in budget is a result of not being able to properly connect suppliers and offtakers?

Gillian Martin (Scottish National Party, Aberdeenshire East)

I am trying to piece together the parts of that question. Brian Whittle mentioned the Climate Change Committee’s estimate. The Climate Change Committee does not fund any hydrogen projects—it is up to Governments to do that. We are working with the UK Government on what it is doing in relation to the hydrogen allocation round support that it provides, which is absolutely vital. We are concentrating on the innovation side of things, which involves supporting companies.

As far as I am concerned, we need to aim as high as we can on the production of hydrogen. There is a great market for it in Germany, in particular, but there is also a great need for it in decarbonising Scotland’s industrial complexes. Many jobs will come with that if we aim high.

Sarah Boyack (Labour, Lothian)

I ask the cabinet secretary to focus on the issue of creating green jobs in the area of green hydrogen, in which there is huge economic interest. Green hydrogen could be used in supply chains, in heavy goods vehicles, on our railways and in industry, and it could also be used to produce sustainable aviation fuel for future use by aeroplanes.

Gillian Martin (Scottish National Party, Aberdeenshire East)

I assure Sarah Boyack that I am concentrating our efforts on green hydrogen, because that is very much where the market is. There may be some instances of developers initially choosing to produce blue hydrogen but moving on to green hydrogen over time. We know that, if we are to export our hydrogen, any European countries that might buy from Scotland are interested only in green hydrogen, so it is fair to say that that is where our efforts lie.

Willie Rennie (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife)

I recently visited the Binn ecopark at Glenfarg, which neighbours my constituency and has a really interesting hydrogen project coming on stream. Green Cat Hydrogen is particularly anxious about incentives for the demand side. Although those are in the action plan, the company is nervous that the emphasis on that is not sufficient. What can the minister say to reassure Green Cat Hydrogen and other companies that are interested in becoming involved in the sector?

Gillian Martin (Scottish National Party, Aberdeenshire East)

I would say that there is a really large potential market for green hydrogen in Scotland, on top of the export plans that I mentioned.

We must first decarbonise our own industry, and there are many opportunities for companies with high energy use to diversify into using hydrogen. We should shout from the rooftops about companies such as the one that Willie Rennie mentioned in order to send a signal to those with high energy use that are looking to change their fuel. For example, the whisky industry is one of the first movers in that area. We should signal that there is an opportunity to buy hydrogen from developers such as the one that Willie Rennie mentioned and from many more across Scotland and that they can only grow.

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

To ask the Scottish Government, in light of the 10th anniversary of the Borders railway, whether it will provide an update on the progress of the feasibility study to extend the line beyond Tweedbank to Carlisle, via Hawick. (S6O-04894)

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

I pay tribute to Christine Grahame for her early, continuous, and passionate support for rail in the Borders over many years, and I look forward to joining her and others over the coming week as we celebrate the 10th anniversary of the Borders railway.

The Scottish Government recognises that extending the Borders railway is a regional priority. We have already seen the positive social and economic impacts that reopening the railway to Tweedbank has had on the region in the past 10 years. I am pleased that Scottish Borders Council, which is leading the business case work on the proposed extension, has now appointed a project manager from Turner & Townsend.

Officials from both the United Kingdom and Scottish Governments recently met with the project manager to agree next steps and will continue to engage and support the work as it develops.

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

I thank the cabinet secretary for her kind words. Earlier today, I emphasised the success of the Borders railway. It was once opposed by the Conservatives, but we all love sinners who repent.

The extraordinary level of passenger usage, which goes way beyond what was predicted in the early days, has now had added to it to the huge benefit of the discarding of peak fares. Does that not add to the case for extension?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

More than 13 million passengers have used the Borders railway since it opened. It is a major success, reflecting experiences in other areas, including with the Bathgate to Edinburgh line and the Bathgate to Airdrie extension, which have also encouraged more passengers than were originally forecast. Investment in rail is important.

The case has been made for the work that is required, which is why the project manager is now producing the business case. When that is delivered, we expect it to reinforce what Christine Grahame and others want to see. Any decisions about how an extension might be taken forward will be made in the future, but the delivery of the business case is the key next step.

Rachael Hamilton (Conservative, Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire)

Will the cabinet secretary address concerns that the Scottish Government feasibility study will concentrate predominantly on multimodal options, rather than looking at what the people of the Borders want, which is a transformational connection by rail, via Hawick, to Carlisle?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

It is the project manager who will take forward that work, on behalf of Scottish Borders Council. If the member has any concerns about what Scottish Borders Council is looking at, it would be best for her to take those up with the council.

When we are developing transport enhancements, as we did with East Kilbride, multimodal use and encouraging passengers to use buses or cars to reach railway stations is part and parcel of the plans that we expect nowadays, so I will not traduce the use of multimodal transport in combination with rail. It will be best if the member addresses her question to Scottish Borders Council.

Gordon MacDonald (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Pentlands)

To ask the Scottish Government, regarding any impact on its energy policy and strategy, what its response is to Ofgem’s announcement on 27 August regarding the energy price cap. (S6O-04895)

Gillian Martin (Scottish National Party, Aberdeenshire East)

The Labour Party’s election manifesto pledged to cut bills by £300, but bills are higher than there were this time last year and they have just risen again. We need urgent action from the United Kingdom Government to set out how it will cut bills and keep its promise. We believe that the UK Government must immediately deliver a social tariff in the form of a targeted unit rate discount, while progressing much-needed wider reform. We urge it to deliver a package of measures that addresses fuel poverty while securing investor confidence and a level playing field for renewable generators in Scotland.

Gordon MacDonald (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Pentlands)

Scotland produces far more electricity than it consumes, but nearly half a million Scots are living in extreme fuel poverty. What financial support will be available from the Scottish Government this winter for people who are struggling to pay ever-increasing energy bills? I thank the cabinet secretary for welcoming Advice Direct Scotland’s call for a social energy tariff.

Gillian Martin (Scottish National Party, Aberdeenshire East)

This coming winter, the Scottish Government will provide an estimated £28.3 million through our winter heating payment and £11.4 million through our child winter heating payment, and there will be £187 million priority payment recovery from pensioners who have a taxable income of more than £35,000 through our pension-age winter heating payment. That is in addition to the Scottish Government’s significant capital investment of more than £150 million in the current financial year in our energy efficiency programmes—the warmer homes Scotland and area-based schemes, which are targeted at people in fuel poverty, making homes easier and cheaper to heat.

I commend the work of Advice Direct Scotland, which is a member of our consumers working group. ADS has consistently, over many years, called for a social tariff for those whom it represents.

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

To ask the Scottish Government what impact the abolition of peak rail fares is likely to have on people living in, working in or visiting the Maryhill and Springburn constituency. (S6O-04896)

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

The Scottish National Party Government’s initiative to remove for good peak-time fares from ScotRail services will have a strong positive impact on passengers not only in Bob Doris’s constituency of Maryhill and Springburn but across the country. For example, passengers travelling during peak times between Springburn and Glasgow will save around 27 per cent on their daily return ticket, and those travelling from Maryhill will save 42 per cent on the same journey, and there will be more savings on flexipass fares.

With this initiative, we are helping household incomes as people face increases in food and energy bills. We are providing more choices for where people might want to work, and we are encouraging more people to travel into our cities and spend money on retail and hospitality. We are also, of course, tackling the climate emergency by encouraging new potential passengers on to the train and to leave the car at home.

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

I welcome the significant cost savings that abolishing peak-time rail fares will provide to my constituents. As the cabinet secretary has highlighted, the saving is more than 40 per cent for many of those using the railway in my constituency. Does the cabinet secretary agree that this is a real opportunity to drive up commuter numbers across the rail network more generally? As railway patronage grows, I highlight the importance of restoring a 30-minute service during the day on the Maryhill line Monday to Friday, which is still to return to its pre-Covid frequency.

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

We monitor the growth in passenger numbers and will continue to do so. We recognise the importance of the role that rail travel plays. Bob Doris might appreciate that passenger travel patterns have changed since the Covid pandemic, but they are recovering, and we expect further growth. We will identify what might be needed in the future, but as the service is meeting the current passenger demand, there are no immediate plans to deliver any significant changes to the timetable on the Maryhill line. However, as I have said, ScotRail will continue to review the timetable and, at some point in the future, it might adjust it.

Claire Baker (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on work to improve safety on public transport. (S6O-04897)

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

Everyone has the right to be and feel safe when using or working on our public transport network. Transport Scotland is working to make travel safer for all. ScotRail is delivering an on-going programme of conflict management training for all front-line staff and has recently expanded its travel safe team. To support that, a Scottish Government working group has been established to review how police enforcement powers are applied on the railway and where they can be strengthened.

The First Minister has set out a programme for government commitment to remove free bus travel from any person of any age who does not act responsibly. Work is on-going to develop a behaviour code for scheme users, with legislation planned to suspend access to free bus travel. Alongside that, work is on-going with bus operators to explore the use of travel safety officers on the bus network, along with enhancing education materials for bus passengers on safety.

Claire Baker (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

I think that we all agree that there is no place for antisocial or abusive behaviour on public transport and that no one should feel unsafe or threatened in their place of work or when travelling.

The cabinet secretary recognised the concerns that were raised by bus drivers last year, and the Parliament agreed that the potential to remove concessionary bus passes from individuals who engage in antisocial behaviour should be progressed. I welcome her indicating that that work is on-going. Can she indicate when that work will be completed? Can we expect it to be completed by the end of this session of Parliament?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

The answer to that is yes, that is our intention. However, I am in the hands of Parliament, its clerks and the committee on that, so I cannot give you certainty about that now.

Sue Webber (Conservative, Lothian)

Police Scotland figures, which were obtained by the Scottish Conservatives during the summer, have revealed that assaults and threats at bus stations have soared by 65 per cent in one year. The number of police call-outs to assaults at Glasgow’s Buchanan bus station rose by 85 per cent, while the number of call-outs to Dunfermline bus station increased by 133 per cent. Does the cabinet secretary believe that that is acceptable? What action is being undertaken to ensure that hard-working commuters feel safe?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

Clearly, criminal behaviour needs to be dealt with by Police Scotland. Individuals are responsible for their own behaviour. It is more telling that people carry out such behaviour in environments in which there is a single bus driver, for example, and they are not in the company of others. Obviously, bus stations are owned by different operators.

In my initial answer, I mentioned that we are considering putting in place travel safety officers. Obviously, the issues that the member raises are for Police Scotland, but in general—this is a plea to the United Kingdom Government—the cuts to British Transport Police are not helpful, particularly to rail. However, I understand that the member asked about buses; I am sure that Police Scotland will give its attention to that area.

Paul Sweeney (Labour, Glasgow)

Will the cabinet secretary update the Parliament on progress on extending concessionary travel to people seeking asylum?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

Work and funding are progressing on that, and my colleague Jim Fairlie—who will be taking the lead because of his responsibility for bus services—will inform Parliament at the appropriate time.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

That concludes portfolio questions on climate action and energy, and transport. There will be a short pause before we move to the next item of business.