Scottish Parliament, 8 October 2025

404 contributions from 66 members. The official report.

Portfolio Question Time

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Good afternoon. The first item of business is portfolio questions.

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

To ask the Scottish Government what assessment it has made of its relations with the British-Irish Parliamentary Assembly. (S6O-05026)

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

The Scottish Government welcomes collaboration between Scottish parliamentarians and members of other Parliaments, including through the British-Irish Parliamentary Assembly—known as BIPA. BIPA provides a useful platform for members of the Scottish Parliament to engage with counterparts across these islands. I thank Ms Ewing and the other Scottish members of BIPA for their contributions to that. I am particularly pleased to welcome the reconvening of the BIPA plenary, which will take place in Weybridge from 12 to 14 October.

The Scottish Government also places great value on our partnership with Ireland, as is seen in the Ireland-Scotland bilateral framework. The framework acknowledges the importance of BIPA in deepening parliamentary connections.

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

As the cabinet secretary rightly acknowledges, the British-Irish Parliamentary Assembly plays an important role in bringing together parliamentarians from across these isles to debate the important issues of the day. Further to recent changes to its committee structure—which I would say is excellent—representatives of the devolved and other jurisdictions can now play a critical role in the work of the committees. Will the cabinet secretary undertake to contact the BIPA secretariat to reconfirm the Scottish Government’s commitment to the assembly and, where appropriate, to offer support?

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

The new Ireland-Scotland bilateral framework 2025 to 2030 reasserts our commitment to BIPA. Specifically, it commits the Scottish Government and the Irish Government to strengthening parliamentary links and recognising the role that the British-Irish Parliamentary Association plays in that regard, with regular contact between the Oireachtas and the Scottish Parliament. Although the framework itself will not be published until 26 November, we can give a supportive reply.

So, the answer is yes, I would be happy to undertake to contact the BIPA secretariat to reaffirm the Scottish Government’s commitment to BIPA and to offer appropriate support.

Kenneth Gibson (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame North)

Regular co-operation with other Governments across the British Isles is vital. At the interparliamentary finance committee forum in March, 13 parliamentarians from 11 parties in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland met to discuss issues of mutual interest. However, the Chief Secretary to the Treasury, Darren Jones MP, offered only to appear virtually—which was eventually downgraded to a 15-minute slot. A freedom of information request showed his diary to be empty other than for work on the spending review that was then some 12 weeks away. Does the cabinet secretary share my concern, and that of other parliamentarians across the devolved Assemblies and Parliaments, that a United Kingdom minister seems to be happy to show devolved Administrations such casual disrespect?

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Please answer with regard to the substantive question.

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

First, I take the opportunity to publicly welcome Mr Jones to his role as Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister and Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, following the UK Government’s latest reshuffle.

It is crucial that UK Government ministers engage meaningfully with devolved Governments and parliamentarians, especially in relation to the budget, given the impact that spending decisions at Westminster have on Scotland. Given that he now has responsibility for intergovernmental relations, I urge Mr Jones to pursue a good level of engagement with me and my ministerial colleagues, as well as with the Parliament and parliamentarians.

More broadly, the Scottish Government welcomed the UK Government’s commitment to reset its relationships with the devolved nations; however, we have become increasingly concerned about the extent to which that relationship has truly been reset. Several high-profile problems in intergovernmental working have occurred over the first year of the UK Government’s term. I hope that Mr Jones takes note of that and works to forge better collaboration, to ultimately benefit the people of Scotland.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Question 2 has been withdrawn.

Fulton MacGregor (Scottish National Party, Coatbridge and Chryston)

To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to support libraries within local communities. (S6O-05028)

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

The Scottish Government’s targeted support for public libraries is made through our annual funding—which totals £935,000—to the Scottish Library and Information Council. It includes the public library improvement fund, which supports creative and innovative public library projects throughout Scotland. The successful PLIF projects for 2025-26 are due to be announced soon.

Through the school library improvement fund, we also provide targeted support—amounting to £150,000—to school libraries, in recognition of their important role in education. More generally, public library policy is devolved to local authorities, which means that our general revenue funding to councils also supports libraries across the country.

Fulton MacGregor (Scottish National Party, Coatbridge and Chryston)

Coatbridge library and Chryston library are among the key community hubs in my constituency, and they now include digital zones, study spaces and community programmes. The third place idea is increasingly recognised by the Scottish Government through strategies on community wellbeing, place-based regeneration and digital inclusion. What steps is the Scottish Government taking to encourage the use of libraries such as the ones in Coatbridge and Chryston as community wellbeing hubs and social spaces for isolated or vulnerable groups?

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

I commend Mr MacGregor for his question. He is absolutely right: the Scottish Government recognises the vital role that libraries play as so-called third places—that is, welcoming, inclusive spaces that support wellbeing, digital inclusion and community connection. That is why we fund SLIC’s public library improvement fund, which supports projects that blend culture, health, social impact and other factors. One such example is the return journeys programme to help underreached groups to reconnect with libraries, which I had the pleasure of seeing at first hand in Falkirk last year. It is a powerful example of how libraries in Scottish communities, such as the ones in Coatbridge and Chryston, are evolving into trusted wellbeing hubs.

Alexander Stewart (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

Libraries have been proven to boost literacy, particularly among children from disadvantaged backgrounds. At least 16 per cent of public libraries in Scotland have closed since 2008, while a quarter of pupils entering secondary school struggle to read, write and count properly. Does the cabinet secretary accept that closing libraries cannot be improving children’s literacy outcomes?

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

For the obvious reason that Mr Stewart set out, I am keen to support any place that helps with literacy and learning, but we must be open-minded with regard to new ways in which libraries can provide services to people young and old. I mentioned the potential role that libraries can play as so-called third places, to which people can go to support wellbeing endeavours and learn about digital inclusion and wider community connection, and I encourage Mr Stewart, his party and others across the Parliament to do what they can to help local authorities—which have the responsibility for the libraries in their areas—to adopt such an approach. I am sure that that will maximise the retention of the library network across Scotland, which is a goal that I support.

Neil Bibby (Labour, West Scotland)

Access to libraries is hugely important for people of all ages, but it is of particular importance for our children and young people. Last week, The Herald reported that around one in 10 of Scotland’s libraries have closed in the past decade on the Scottish National Party Government’s watch. Many school libraries have also been cut as a result of the underfunding of our local councils.

The United Kingdom Labour Government recently pledged to ensure that every primary school in England will have a library. How can we improve literacy in Scotland when our libraries and our school libraries continue to be closed? What assessment has the Government undertaken of access to libraries for our children and young people?

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

I gently say to Mr Bibby that, in my initial answer, I gave quite a lot of detail on the level of support—both direct and indirect—that the Scottish Government provides to libraries. He will, of course, know that library provision is devolved to local government. If he is keen on financial support for libraries, he would have a little bit more credibility on the subject if, rather than abstaining in the budget vote or voting against it, as the Tories did, he had voted for the increases that have been provided to support libraries.

Clare Haughey (Scottish National Party, Rutherglen)

To ask the Scottish Government, regarding the implementation of its international strategy, how and by what mechanisms it is engaging with the Governments of other European nations. (S6O-05029)

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

The Scottish Government engages proactively with European counterparts through bilateral partnerships, multilateral forums and cultural diplomacy, which includes a busy programme of inward and outward visits. Through our network of international offices, which includes key European hubs in Berlin, Paris, Dublin and Copenhagen, along with Scotland houses in Brussels and London, we promote Scottish interests, build partnerships and attract investment. Maintaining close relations with our European neighbours is essential in helping to mitigate the damage of a Brexit for which Scotland never voted.

Clare Haughey (Scottish National Party, Rutherglen)

I thank the cabinet secretary for that answer. Scotland is demonstrating via that strategy that we are a country that is able and prepared to play its part as a member of the international community, and it is clear that countries want to engage with Scotland. Scottish Government offices are an essential component of that. How does the Scottish Government actively assess the reach of those offices and their importance in pursuing the Government’s objectives and commitment to tackling global issues such as the climate emergency?

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

We have nine offices in our international network, most of which are hosted in the British embassy or high commission, alongside United Kingdom, Welsh and Northern Irish teams. We include Scotland House London in that network because it serves to engage the diplomatic community at the Court of St James’s, as well as the global financial markets in the city. In my time as cabinet secretary for external affairs, I have had useful dialogue with the Constitution, Europe and External Affairs and Culture Committee on exactly the question of assessing reach and impact, and I was glad to accept its recommendation that we publish an annual report explaining how the work of those offices contributes to the goals of our international strategy. We will publish the next such annual report in the coming weeks.

Ruth Maguire (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame South)

To ask the Scottish Government what representations non-governmental organisations have made to it regarding its work to support humanitarian assistance in Palestine. (S6O-05030)

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

The Scottish Government receives regular updates from a number of humanitarian organisations regarding the on-going humanitarian crisis in Palestine, including United Nations agencies such as UNICEF, the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East and the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, the Disasters Emergency Committee and our humanitarian emergency panel members, which include the British Red Cross, Christian Aid, Islamic Relief, Mercy Corps, Oxfam, Save the Children, the Scottish Catholic International Aid Fund and Tearfund. We are also collaborating with Kids Operating Room to establish the Gaza HOPES—healthcare for obstetrics, paediatrics, emergency, and surgical care—field readiness hub in Dundee, which will support a rapidly deployable hospital in Gaza to provide essential surgical, maternity and paediatric services and support the longer-term recovery of the healthcare sector in Gaza.

Ruth Maguire (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame South)

The global sumud flotilla is a coalition of everyday people who believe in human dignity and the power of non-violent action. All 42 boats in that historic mission were illegally intercepted while attempting to break Israel’s siege on Gaza. Four hundred and sixty-two people were kidnapped in international waters, including Scottish citizens. Does the cabinet secretary share my dismay at reports of the terrible treatment of those humanitarians, and what representations has the Scottish Government made, either directly to Israel or through the United Kingdom Government, and what response has it received?

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

I begin my answer by paying tribute to the Scottish and international members of the humanitarian mission of the sumud flotilla. Scottish Government officials have been in daily contact with the UK Government’s Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, including over the weekend, seeking urgent clarification on repatriation arrangements for the residents of Scotland detained by Israel. The FCDO told us that it had lobbied the Israeli authorities to make clear that it expected the situation to be resolved safely, in line with international law and with due respect for the rights of those on board. All four residents of Scotland have now been deported from Israel, and at least one is back in Scotland, with three deported to Jordan. The FCDO told us earlier today that consular officials are supporting all British citizens who have been deported to Jordan.

Jamie Halcro Johnston (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

In June, I asked the cabinet secretary to assure Parliament that no funding from the Scottish Government to UNRWA had been used or was being used to treat Hamas terrorists. His response suggested that he could not give that assurance, but that he was meeting UNRWA the next day and would raise my concerns with it. Did he raise those concerns with UNRWA, and what assurances did it give him that Scottish taxpayers’ money, as humanitarian aid provided by Scottish National Party ministers, was not used to treat Hamas terrorists?

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

First, I am sorry that the member could not find it in his heart to thank the UN agencies for providing humanitarian support in the genocide that is currently taking place in Gaza. Rather than casting shade—

Jamie Halcro Johnston (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I asked that question in June, and I did not get an answer then. I have made it very clear. I appreciate that the cabinet secretary would like to dance around, but I asked a fairly straightforward follow-up question.

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

The member did not even listen to the answer to the question before he raised a point of order.

I am not aware of any humanitarian aid being used in the way that Mr Halcro Johnston suggests. If I receive any reports of that, I will share them with him. I am sorry that he could not also take the opportunity, in his point of order, to condemn the genocide that is being waged against the people of Gaza, and the humanitarian situation there—[ Interruption .]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Let us ensure that we hear one another.

Meghan Gallacher (Conservative, Central Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Government, regarding its role in proposing the scheduling of parliamentary business, how it can help ensure that parliamentary time is used constructively for the remainder of this parliamentary session. (S6O-05031)

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

The scheduling of parliamentary business is proposed by the Parliamentary Bureau, and it is for Parliament to agree to business motions.

In contributing to scheduling discussions at bureau, ministers take into account committee and plenary capacity, as well as Parliament’s capacity, to support bills’ progression. As with any final year of a session of Parliament, the period leading up to dissolution will be extremely busy, and there is a responsibility on all MSPs in all parties to ensure that we make the most effective use of that time.

For my part, I am happy to commit to working constructively across the chamber to ensure that we can make progress with all legislation that the Parliament has to consider. However, once the Scottish Government or a member introduces a bill, its timetable is for the Parliament to determine.

Meghan Gallacher (Conservative, Central Scotland)

The minister will be aware that it has taken 53 months to get through more than 40 bills, yet Holyrood is now expected to get through more than 20 bills in just six months. If we want good, well-scrutinised legislation through a process that offers Opposition members and back benchers as well as Government members the time to debate it, that needs to be planned well in advance. It cannot come at the expense in particular of MSPs with young families and caring responsibilities, because that goes against the premise that the Parliament was to be family friendly.

Does the minister accept that he will need to relook at the matter and see whether bills will be able to progress all the way to stage 3? Alternatively, is it the case that MSPs will be sitting late into the night, which might not produce legislation that will be beneficial for the people of Scotland?

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

There is a lot in that, so—with your indulgence, Presiding Officer—I will take a bit of time to cover it all, because Meghan Gallacher posed an important question.

Our data suggest that there are no more bills or Scottish statutory instruments before Parliament than is normal at this point in a parliamentary session. We believe that committees are taking a little bit longer to scrutinise bills than in previous sessions, which has seen bill timetables slip across the session. There has also been an increase in the number of amendments being lodged by MSPs, which impacts the time that is required at stages 2 and 3. Lastly, some members’ bills before Parliament are more complex and lengthy than has been the case in previous sessions, and that increases the time that is required for Parliament to scrutinise the detail.

I absolutely understand the frustration of members when business runs late on a regular or semi-regular basis, especially when it occurs at relatively short notice and has an impact on childcare, travel and the need to stay over.

The Parliamentary Bureau is very much alive to that, and I offer Meghan Gallacher the assurance that I and other business managers are doing all that we can to minimise the impacts. It is, however, very difficult to do that at times when there are large bills that attract huge numbers of amendments at stage 3, which—more often than not—are pressed to a vote.

The upcoming stage 3 proceedings on the Land Reform (Scotland) Bill are a case in point, as there are almost 400 amendments to be considered—in that instance, we have been able to give members advance notice. As I said, I offer the member an assurance that, where business managers can mitigate the impacts, they are seeking to do so.

Martin Whitfield (Labour, South Scotland)

The complexity of the timetable is driven by the complexity of legislation. The minister indicated that there is not a substantial difference in comparison with previous sessions. However, if we look at stage 2 proceedings, we see that there is a substantial difference in the time that the process is taking.

Will the minister reconfirm the Government’s commitment to work with all members across the chamber at all stages of a bill to ensure that we can seek agreement early where it is available or identify where the differences actually lie?

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

I absolutely give that commitment. I cannot guarantee that the outcome of such discussions will satisfy the member’s concern, but we have already seen many instances in which agreement on a way forward can be reached. If we are to manage the amending stages better and avoid scenarios such as Meghan Gallacher highlighted, it is absolutely imperative that members and the Government engage as early as possible and, hopefully, reach a satisfactory conclusion.

Edward Mountain (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

To ask the Scottish Government what discussions the veterans minister has had with ministerial colleagues regarding the role of local authorities in maintaining Commonwealth war graves to a national standard. (S6O-05032)

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

During my two spells as Minister for Veterans, I have had no engagement with ministerial colleagues regarding the role of local authorities in maintaining Commonwealth war graves to a national standard as it has not been raised with me, but I look forward to hearing the concerns that I suspect that Mr Mountain intends to bring to my attention.

Edward Mountain (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

There are nearly 1,500 war graves across the Highlands, spread over 192 graveyards, with veterans of the first and second world wars buried in them. Will the minister undertake to speak to his Cabinet colleagues to ensure that proper guidance is issued to local authorities regarding the upkeep of those graves? During my travels in the past 10 years, I have found too many war graves to be in very poor condition. In some cases, the gravestones are collapsing and have not been maintained to a standard that allows people to read the inscriptions on them.

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

I take the opportunity to place on record that I, like Edward Mountain, have enormous respect for the work of the Commonwealth War Graves Commission. In Scotland alone, it maintains in excess of 1,300 sites commemorating more than 21,000 casualties. It is even more to its credit that it prioritises repair over replacement in order to uphold the long-term integrity of those spaces and protect them as dignified places of remembrance.

I am very concerned to hear what the member has said and I am happy to explore it further with him. Beyond that, I am planning to arrange a gathering of local authority armed forces and veterans champions in due course and commit to include the issue on the agenda. I hope that, if we discuss the issue effectively, we can avoid the need to issue the guidance that the member has called for, but I am open to exploring the issue further with him in the aftermath of my meeting.

Gordon MacDonald (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Pentlands)

To ask the Scottish Government how it supports the Royal Edinburgh Military Tattoo in relation to its overseas tours and performances, in light of their reported contribution to the tattoo’s reputation and economic impact in Scotland. (S6O-05033)

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

I congratulate the Royal Edinburgh Military Tattoo on its 75th anniversary, the success of the first show under new creative director Alan Lane, and the £750,000 in charitable giving that was provided during 2025. The Scottish Government-led brand Scotland partnership maximises domestic and international opportunities to promote Scotland. Through its work, we showcase the tattoo annually, amplifying its impact in Edinburgh during August and year round, alongside our other globally recognised festivals. Scottish Government officials will soon meet tattoo counterparts to explore further collaboration on international ambitions, building on previous partnership work such as tartan week and the Washington DC tattoo in the USA.

Gordon MacDonald (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Pentlands)

The Edinburgh military tattoo is a highlight of the Edinburgh festival season, drawing more than 200,000 attendees each year, with a significant proportion of international visitors from more than 100 countries. Does the cabinet secretary agree that, by boosting the global promotion of Scotland, the tattoo not only puts Scotland on the world map, but helps to boost tourism in Scotland?

Angus Robertson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

VisitScotland works closely with the Royal Edinburgh Military Tattoo to promote Scotland internationally, using the event’s global profile to inspire overseas visitors to experience our culture and heritage. The collaboration is particular valuable during the tattoo’s international tours and major showcases, such as tartan week in New York. The tattoo strengthens Scotland’s reputation as a world-class events destination, helping to attract international audiences and drive sustainable tourism. Alongside our diverse portfolio of major arts and cultural events, it plays a vital role in promoting Scotland’s creativity, landscapes and warm welcome to visitors from around the world.

Evelyn Tweed (Scottish National Party, Stirling)

To ask the Scottish Government what steps it is taking to improve access to legal aid for survivors of domestic abuse. (S6O-05034)

Siobhian Brown (Scottish National Party, Ayr)

The Scottish Government continues to work closely with stakeholders to support victims and survivors of domestic abuse to get the support that they need. In addition to the current judicare system, under which all eligible costs are met, we provide grant funding to the Scottish Women’s Rights Centre of £230,000 a year. We also fund public legal services through the Civil Legal Assistance Office and the Public Defence Solicitors Office, which can operate across a wide geographical area.

We are actively reviewing the legal aid framework to ensure that it is fair, accessible and responsive to the needs of vulnerable individuals.

Evelyn Tweed (Scottish National Party, Stirling)

Domestic abuse survivors in my constituency report great difficulty in finding legal aid solicitors. What steps is the Scottish Government taking to address barriers to access outside the central belt and, in particular, in rural areas?

Siobhian Brown (Scottish National Party, Ayr)

The legal aid system is generally effective in delivering help to those who need it. However, we recognise that there are some challenges in relation to certain types of case and certain locations. Although civil solicitors are mainly based in city centres, near to the courts, they have always covered a wide geographical area. I can reassure the member that solicitors in all parts of Scotland are able to access funding for work that is carried out under the legal assistance schemes, and those schemes are flexible enough to allow solicitors to travel to any part of the country to carry out work, should it not be possible to instruct a local agent.

That said, as part of the discussions around the criteria for a new traineeship fund, my officials are currently exploring whether there is a need to be specific in targeting geographical areas or types of case.

Pam Gosal (Conservative, West Scotland)

Evidence heard by the Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee has painted a shocking picture of the inability of survivors of domestic abuse to access legal aid. We have heard of survivors being denied legal aid because they were unable to provide figures for their household income, but how would someone know their household income when their abusive partner has complete control over their finances? What action is being taken to ensure that survivors have access to legal aid when they have no access to their own finances?

Siobhian Brown (Scottish National Party, Ayr)

As the member is probably aware, domestic abuse organisations are not allowed by law or regulation to hire lawyers to support women and children. However, the Regulation of Legal Services (Scotland) Act 2025, which was passed in May and which the member and the Conservatives did not support, will remove restrictions preventing charities, law centres and citizens advice bodies from directly employing solicitors to provide certain types of legal aid to some of the country’s most vulnerable citizens.

In addition, the legislation will ensure that third sector organisations can directly employ legal professionals to undertake reserved legal services, such as those in cases involving domestic abuse.

Pauline McNeill (Labour, Glasgow)

Lawyers have said for some time that they are leaving the legal aid sector in significant numbers due to inadequate remuneration and an unsustainable working environment. In fact, many lawyers have said that the pendulum has swung so far that the lack of legal aid defence lawyers is creating a backlog that is impacting victims of sexual crime. As the minister will know, that is partly because those who are accused of sexual crimes must employ a lawyer.

I welcome the announcement of the training fund, but what other action is being taken and what progress is the Government making to stop lawyers leaving the sector that we so desperately need them to stay in?

Siobhian Brown (Scottish National Party, Ayr)

A lot of work is going on in that area. The member will know about our work on legal aid reform. We will not be able to pass legislation on that during this parliamentary session, but work is under way on it at the moment.

The Scottish Government is investing record levels of funding to support victims through a wide range of front-line services, including specialist legal advice. This year’s budget was at a record high, with total legal aid fund investment of £165 million. The fund is demand led, so all eligible costs will be met, regardless of the cost.

Legal aid is available to victims of domestic and gender-based violence who are seeking protection through civil actions where they meet the statutory eligibility criteria. I appreciate that there are some challenges, and that is why I am working with the legal profession to move forward in conquering those challenges.

Michael Marra (Labour, North East Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Government, in light of reports of rising levels of knife crime in Dundee over the summer, how it is supporting Police Scotland and local partners to prevent and reduce incidents of violent crime. (S6O-05035)

Angela Constance (Scottish National Party, Almond Valley)

Although it is of little comfort to victims, recorded crime in Dundee city has continued its downward trend, reducing by 3 per cent since 2021. That includes reductions in non-sexual crimes of violence and crimes of common assault.

We remain vigilant to the need to tackle any crimes of violence, which can cause devastation for families and communities. We are providing Police Scotland with increased funding of £1.64 billion this year, and we have invested £6 million in the implementation of the violence prevention framework over the past three years. This year, that includes up to £1.2 million for the Scottish Violence Reduction Unit and nearly £300,000 for the delivery of YouthLink Scotland’s No Knives, Better Lives programme.

Michael Marra (Labour, North East Scotland)

The cabinet secretary is correct that that will be of little comfort to the people of Dundee. There has been a series of stabbings, murders and attempted murders in the city over recent months, which have hit the headlines and are creating a climate of fear for many residents.

Despite the cabinet secretary’s claims, we know that the Scottish National Party is not supporting our police officers. On the SNP’s watch, police officer numbers continue to fall—they are down 1,000 in the past decade. There are therefore 1,000 fewer officers on our streets to confiscate those offensive weapons, investigate crimes and keep us all safe.

Just yesterday, the general secretary of the Scottish Police Federation warned that Police Scotland is “at a crossroads”, citing falling officer numbers and rising demands. David Kennedy said that the situation was simply “unsustainable”. He is right, is he not?

Angela Constance (Scottish National Party, Almond Valley)

Let me, as always, put on record my appreciation of Scotland’s police officers and police staff for the crucial job that they do in keeping our communities safe. I also say to Mr Marra that I am very aware of the incidents that have taken place across Dundee in recent times.

On police numbers, although the deployment of police officers is a matter for the chief constable, our record funding has ensured that, since the start of 2024, Police Scotland has welcomed 1,500 new police officers to the rank and file. That is the biggest recruitment programme that Police Scotland has had since its establishment in 2013.

On resource in next year’s budget, I will, of course, scrutinise that with the Scottish Police Authority, along with Police Scotland. My engagement on that matter has started. Public finances remain stretched, and the chancellor’s recent spending review has taken us back to austerity. However, as always, we will do our very best for front-line services.

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

I have three requests for supplementary questions. I intend to get in all three, but they will need to be brief.

Kenneth Gibson (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame North)

Will there be any increase in Scottish Government support for the successful Medics Against Violence programme?

Angela Constance (Scottish National Party, Almond Valley)

We have committed more than £6 million to support a range of prevention and early intervention activities. That includes funding for Medics Against Violence, which has been awarded nearly £350,000 in this financial year, which is an increase on the previous year. That funding supports the delivery of work in our schools, including, for example, the provision of violence prevention messages to almost 5,000 pupils last year. It also supports the delivery of Medics Against Violence’s very successful navigator programme across eight emergency departments, as well as the youth navigator service.

Liam Kerr (Conservative, North East Scotland)

Between April 2024 and March 2025, crimes involving knives and weapons in Aberdeen schools increased by 150 per cent. Since the beginning of 2024, more than 40 weapons have been seized in Aberdeen schools, including knives, blades and BB guns.

What action is the Government taking to prevent weapons from entering schools? Will the cabinet secretary encourage the roll-out of regular anti-weapons lessons?

Angela Constance (Scottish National Party, Almond Valley)

Mr Kerr is correct about the work that takes place in our schools to support good behaviour and to ensure that our children have the skills and resilience that they need to lead successful lives—successful, law-abiding lives. I will not repeat the information that the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills has frequently updated the Parliament on.

Katy (Labour, West Scotland)

As the cabinet secretary said, the No Knives, Better Lives programme has been successful. It has been credited with helping to reduce the number of young people who have been convicted of handling knives by 85 per cent since 2008. However, despite a recent increase in knife crimes, there has been a 12 per cent real-terms reduction in the funding of No Knives, Better Lives since 2022. In the forthcoming budget, will the cabinet secretary look at the issue again, reinstate the funding and consider what further the programme can do?

Angela Constance (Scottish National Party, Almond Valley)

In relation to funding, we will of course look at all matters that support community safety. It is imperative to say that there is never any justification for any form of violence, and that includes the carrying of knives. Work with young people to emphasise that it is never safe to carry a knife and that there is absolutely no prestige in doing so is crucial.

Other work that is being funded by the Scottish Government via the Scottish Violence Reduction Unit includes the delivery of preventative education inputs in areas where violence is higher. That is a very targeted approach. The Scottish Violence Reduction Unit is, in partnership, developing a deterrence support package for the young people who are at the highest risk of such offending.

Daniel Johnson (Labour, Edinburgh Southern)

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on legal enforcement measures being taken with regard to retailers committing age-of-sale offences when selling age-restricted items, such as vapes and cigarettes. (S6O-05036)

Siobhian Brown (Scottish National Party, Ayr)

A range of age-restricted products exists in Scotland, with legislation specific to each of them.

In relation to tobacco and vapes, local authorities have powers to issue fixed-penalty notices to retailers and individuals who commit offences relating to the age of sale. Where premises are subject to more than three enforcement actions in a two-year period, the local authority may apply to court for an order banning the sale of tobacco and vaping products from those premises for up to 24 months.

Last year, trading standards officers with young volunteers attempted 662 test purchases of vapes and 251 test purchases of tobacco at premises across the whole of Scotland. In the 2024-25 financial year, 56 fixed-penalty notices issues were issued for tobacco products and 217 for nicotine vapour products.

Daniel Johnson (Labour, Edinburgh Southern)

I remind members of my entry in the register of members’ interests.

The reality is that those powers are simply not being used to the degree that we would expect. In 2023-24, there were just 128 vapour product age-of-sale contraventions. That is an average of just 2.6 per local authority, and in the past two years there have been only seven applications for the court orders that the minister described.

Any member who looks at their mailbag will know that such sales are a scourge in our communities that needs to be clamped down on. I recently spoke to a constituent who had bank receipts and statements showing that her children had been buying vapes from a local shop. What we need is action. What will the Government do to shut down shops and use those powers to stop such sales? When will we see, instead of prevarication, evidence such as bank statements being used to take immediate action?

Siobhian Brown (Scottish National Party, Ayr)

I have had huge concerns about youth vaping and nicotine products over many years. Local authorities are responsible for enforcing the ban on single-use vapes. Trading standards officers have power to issue fixed-penalty notices of up to £800 for non-compliance. The Scottish Government provided £300,000 in additional funding to support local authorities in tackling that specific issue after the implementation of the ban on single-use vapes. In line with the principles of the Verity house agreement, that funding is not ring fenced. However, it is up to local authorities to determine how best to prioritise that work in line with local needs.

The member might be aware of the United Kingdom-wide Tobacco and Vapes Bill that is currently progressing through the parliamentary process. If passed, the legislation will introduce a range of restrictions—on age of sale, advertising, free distribution and retail register—that will also apply to such products.

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

We are seeing a worrying increase in the uptake of vaping among young people. Will the minister give an update on the current UK Government plans for the Tobacco and Vapes Bill and the consequential legislative consent memorandum, which fell before last year’s election but if revived would see some control being introduced to the advertising and promotion of vaping products?

Siobhian Brown (Scottish National Party, Ayr)

The Scottish Parliament gave unanimous consent to the UK-wide Tobacco and Vapes Bill in May, and I am pleased that the bill is expected to complete its passage within the current UK parliamentary session.

New powers in the bill will empower the secretary of state to regulate product features, packaging ingredients and flavourings of vapes in Scotland with the consent of the Scottish ministers. It will also introduce new restrictions on the advertising, sponsorship, free distribution and nominal pricing of vapes across the UK’s four nations. I hope that that will help to prevent underage consumers from being targeted.

Sharon Dowey (Conservative, South Scotland)

Retailers tell us that asking for proof of age can often be a trigger point for violence or abuse if the sale is refused, and that response times from Police Scotland are poor, if officers even turn up at all.

What communication has the minister had with Police Scotland on that? How many prosecutions have there been under the Protection of Workers (Retail and Age-restricted Goods and Services) (Scotland) Act 2021?

Siobhian Brown (Scottish National Party, Ayr)

I do not have details for how many prosecutions there have been—perhaps I could write to the member on that.

I engage quite frequently with retailers, who raised the issue with me prior to the introduction of the ban on single-use vapes in June. The Scottish Government is committed, through the new deal for business, to meet regularly the regulatory review group on the Tobacco and Vapes Bill. We will ensure that any impact of the proposals on business is fully understood and that policy implementation is effective and proportionate while delivering the beneficial outcomes for population health that are sought.

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

To ask the Scottish Government what action it can take to address the misuse of e-bikes and off-road vehicles, in light of reported concerns that it is a growing community safety issue. (S6O-05037)

Siobhian Brown (Scottish National Party, Ayr)

We remain committed to working collaboratively with local authorities and Police Scotland through the road safety framework strategic partnership board. Earlier this year, I met several members of the Scottish Parliament to discuss concerns, which led to a summer safety awareness campaign.

Enforcement is a matter for Police Scotland, whose local teams are best placed to identify misuse and prevent future incidents. It is undertaking initiatives, including work with delivery companies.

Police funding has increased to a record £1.62 billion this year. We will continue to engage with the United Kingdom Government, which holds reserved powers over off-road vehicles, including licensing and regulation.

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

I thank the minister for acknowledging meeting me and other colleagues on two occasions to explore the matter further. As the minister noted, the one tangible outcome was the summer safety awareness campaign that I had called for. However, many concerns remain, including my own that, when Police Scotland confiscates off-road vehicles and e-bikes for misuse—which often causes danger and damage and contributes to antisocial behaviour—vehicles are often returned with little consequence. That must change.

Will the Scottish Government review provisions in that area? Will the minister again meet me and colleagues to continue to progress the matter and a range of other matters, and so keep that partnership working alive?

Siobhian Brown (Scottish National Party, Ayr)

I will be happy—I am sure that Jim Fairlie will be, too—to meet members to keep the conversation alive.

We support Police Scotland and its partners in dealing with the misuse of vehicles. Across Scotland, police have seized 816 e-bikes and scooters in the past year, mainly on account of the rider having no licence or insurance. As I said, enforcement is a matter for Police Scotland, and local policing teams are best placed to identify misuse and work to prevent future incidents.

The road policing function of Police Scotland is leading on the development of new guidance on the organisation’s approach to the returning of confiscated vehicles. I am keen to work with all interested MSPs to determine potential opportunities for further Government action, including approaches to the UK Government.

Sue Webber (Conservative, Lothian)

In response to my recent parliamentary question, in which I highlighted the criminality associated with e-bike use, the minister stated:

“Police Scotland is keeping its approach to the illegal use of e-bikes and e-scooters under review.”—[Official Report, 17 September 2025; c 18.]

That does not help the victims of crime; it brings no confidence to communities that are plagued by these thieves; and neither does it say that we are serious about cracking down on the criminals or the antisocial behaviour associated with the use of e-bikes. I am respectful of the answer that the minister has just provided to Mr Doris, but will the Scottish Government finally provide the resources, guidance and training that Police Scotland needs to allow it to crack down on this sort of crime?

Siobhian Brown (Scottish National Party, Ayr)

I hope that the member appreciates that ministers have met members several times this year to tackle the issue. The issue is not being ignored. Police Scotland has a record £1.64 billion in its budget this year. As I said to Mr Doris, Police Scotland is doing on-going work on the confiscation of vehicles, and I hope that we will be able to update you at the next meeting.

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

Always speak through the chair.

The member who was due to ask question 5 is not present.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

To ask the Scottish Government what assessment it has made of any impact of sustained overcrowding in prisons on suicide and self-harm prevention. (S6O-05039)

Angela Constance (Scottish National Party, Almond Valley)

I recognise the profound impact that overcrowding is having on those living and working in our prisons. That is why I set out last week the immediate action on early release that we intend to take in response. The Scottish Prison Service and the national health service continue to prioritise prisoners experiencing heightened distress levels or thoughts of self-harm or suicide, and the SPS remains committed to meeting the mental health and wellbeing needs of those in its care.

The SPS is also working at pace on the overhaul of the “Talk to Me: Prevention of Suicide in Prison Strategy”. By understanding the high risk and complex environment of a prison, that improved strategy will enhance holistic support and, ultimately, save lives.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

Since 2021, more than 4,000 incidents of self-harm have been reported in Scottish prisons, with more than 1,000 in the past year alone. At the same time, our prisons are operating at unsustainable levels of overcrowding, with reconviction rates remaining above pre-pandemic levels and remand numbers stubbornly high. If we are serious about reducing incarceration sustainably and avoiding the sort of emergency releases that we have had in recent months, we must ensure that prisoners have access to proper mental health support, which is vital to achieving rehabilitation and securing public safety.

Will the cabinet secretary give an update on the timeframe for replacing the suicide strategy, which was supposed to be replaced back in 2023? What progress has been made on boosting the mental health experts who are present in our prisons around Scotland?

Angela Constance (Scottish National Party, Almond Valley)

Mr McArthur is correct to highlight and underscore that our rising prison population is the most critical operational and strategic challenge that is currently faced by our Prison Service. As recently highlighted by the Prison Governors Association, there is also a human cost to overcrowding. The member will recall the commitments that I made in response to the fatal accident inquiry recommendations and the statement that I made in Parliament in response to the deaths of Katie Allan and William Lindsay.

On the overhaul of “Talk to Me”, the final report from an independent specialist, Professor Towl, will be published in October. By the end of this calendar year, the Scottish Prison Service will publish its suicide prevention pathway.

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

Question 7 has been withdrawn. I can squeeze in question 8 if I have brief questions and succinct replies.

Kevin Stewart (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Central)

To ask the Scottish Government what actions Police Scotland is taking to deal with problem street drinkers. (S6O-05041)

Angela Constance (Scottish National Party, Almond Valley)

The Scottish Government is committed to tackling all forms of antisocial behaviour and recognises that community safety is a shared endeavour. Local authorities and Police Scotland have statutory duties to develop and share antisocial behaviour strategies and local policing plans that target and address local needs. Police Scotland is receiving record funding of £1.64 billion this year. Each local authority has its own set of byelaws determining where people can drink in public places.

Kevin Stewart (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Central)

The issue of drinkers congregating and carrying out antisocial behaviour in city centre sites, including in Aberdeen, is becoming an ever-increasing problem. I recognise that it is an operational matter, but will the cabinet secretary consider asking Police Scotland to take a zero-tolerance stance in dealing with folk who are involved in street drinking and antisocial behaviour?

Angela Constance (Scottish National Party, Almond Valley)

I will certainly discuss with justice partners the best approach to take in those circumstances. I will be interested to hear more about where good practice exists and what the evidence tells us.

The member will of course be aware that local authorities and Police Scotland are under a legal duty to maintain a strategy to tackle antisocial behaviour in their area. I will keep the member informed.

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

That concludes portfolio questions on justice and home affairs. There will be a short pause before we move to the next item of business.

Decision Time

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

There are nine questions to be put as a result of today’s business. I remind members that if the amendment in the name of Màiri McAllan is agreed to, the amendment in the name of Mark Griffin will fall.

The first question is, that amendment S6M-19252.5, in the name of Màiri McAllan, which seeks to amend motion S6M-19252, in the name of Russell Findlay, on stopping illegal immigration and recognising its impact on housing, be agreed to. Are we agreed?

Members:

No.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

There be a division. There will be a short suspension to allow members to access the digital voting system.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

I remind members that if the amendment in the name of Màiri McAllan is agreed to, the amendment in the name of Mark Griffin will fall. Members should cast their votes now.

The vote is closed.

Michael Marra (Labour, North East Scotland)

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. My proxy vote for Paul O’Kane failed to register. I would have voted no.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Thank you, Mr Marra. We will ensure that that vote is recorded.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

The result of the division on amendment S6M-19252.5, in the name of Màiri McAllan, is: For 61, Against 51, Abstentions 0.

Amendment agreed to.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

The next question is that amendment S6M-19252.4—[ Interruption .] My apologies—since amendment S6M-19252.5 was agreed to, amendment S6M-19252.4 has fallen.

The next question is, that motion S6M-19252, in the name of Russell Findlay, on stopping illegal immigration and recognising its impact on housing, as amended, be agreed to. Are we agreed?

Members:

No.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

There will be a division.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

The result of the division on motion S6M-19252, in the name of Russell Findlay, as amended, is: For 61, Against 51, Abstentions 0.

Motion, as amended, agreed to,

That the Parliament notes that the suspension of local connection referrals in 2022 did not change the rights of newly recognised refugees to choose where they settle in Scotland, nor did it prevent Scottish local authorities from referring households presenting as homeless to an English or Welsh local authority with which they have a local connection; reaffirms that Scotland is a welcoming nation to people fleeing persecution, seeking safety and who have been granted refugee status, ensuring that they can rebuild their lives in the country through the New Scots Refugee Integration Strategy; highlights action in Scotland to tackle homelessness and destitution, including new prevention measures in the Housing (Scotland) Bill, increased investment in affordable homes and the £4 million investment in homelessness prevention pilots, alongside the extension of rapid rehousing transition plan funding of £8 million into 2026-27, and calls again on the UK Government to urgently uphold the European Convention on Human Rights, 1951 Refugee Convention and 1967 Protocol.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

The next question is, that amendment S6M-19253.3, in the name of Richard Lochhead, which seeks to amend motion S6M-19253, in the name of Murdo Fraser, on backing Scotland’s colleges and apprenticeships, be agreed to. Are we agreed?

Members:

No.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

There will be a division.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

The result of the division on amendment S6M-19253.3, in the name of Richard Lochhead, is: For 61, Against 51, Abstentions 0.

Amendment agreed to.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

The next question is, that amendment S6M-19253.2, in the name of Lorna Slater, which seeks to amend motion S6M-19253, in the name of Murdo Fraser, on backing Scotland’s colleges and apprenticeships, be agreed to. Are we agreed?

Members:

No.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

There will be a division.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

The result of the division on amendment S6M-19253.2, in the name of Lorna Slater, is: For 60, Against 51, Abstentions 0.

Amendment agreed to.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

The next question is, that motion S6M-19253, in the name of Murdo Fraser, on backing Scotland’s colleges and apprenticeships, as amended, be agreed to. Are we agreed?

Members:

No.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

There will be a division.

The vote is closed.

Richard Lochhead (Scottish National Party, Moray)

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. My app froze. I would have voted yes.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

We will make sure that that is recorded.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

The result of the division is: For 61, Against 51, Abstentions 0.

Motion, as amended, agreed to,

That the Parliament recognises that future economic growth is reliant on providing the right opportunities to create good jobs that allow businesses to expand; notes the Audit Scotland report entitled, Scotland’s colleges 2025, and the importance of continued investment in Scotland’s colleges and skills system to support inclusive economic success, prosperity and job creation, including provision of around three quarters of a billion pounds in Scotland’s colleges in 2025-26, and an additional £3.5 million for skills, through the Scottish Budget; acknowledges that this is particularly important in the thriving sectors, like those critical to realising the transition to net zero, and the shared opportunities of this; recognises the key role that colleges, employers and training providers have played in ensuring that 93% of school leavers have a positive destination, and providing apprenticeships and training to a record 39,000 individuals, and notes, however, concern about the impact of Brexit and the UK Government's migration system, which is contributing to key skills gaps and labour market shortages.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

The next question is, that motion S6M-19268, in the name of Graeme Dey, on behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau, on suspension of standing orders, be agreed to. Are we agreed?

Members:

No.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

There will be a division.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

The result of the division is: For 85, Against 0, Abstentions 26.

Motion agreed to,

That the Parliament agrees, for the purposes of consideration of the supplementary legislative consent memorandum on the Public Authorities (Fraud, Error and Recovery) Bill, Rules 9B.3.5 and 9B.3.6 of Standing Orders are suspended.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

The next question is, that motion S6M-19269, in the name of Graeme Dey, on behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau, on approval of a Scottish statutory instrument be agreed to. Are we agreed?

Members:

No.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

There will be a division.

The vote is closed.

Jackie Dunbar (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Donside)

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. My app did not work. I would have voted yes.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

We will ensure that that is recorded.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

The result of the division is: For 51, Against 25, Abstentions 33.

Motion agreed to,

That the Parliament agrees that the Climate Change (Scotland) Act 2009 (Scottish Carbon Budgets) Amendment Regulations 2025 [draft] be approved.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

I propose to ask a single question on four Parliamentary Bureau motions. As no member has objected, the question is, that motions S6M-19270 and S6M-19271, on approval of SSIs, and motions S6M-19272 and S6M-19273, on designation of lead committees, in the name of Graeme Dey, on behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau, be agreed to.

Motions agreed to,

That the Parliament agrees that the Social Security (Cross-border Provision, Case Transfer and Miscellaneous Amendments) (Scotland) Regulations 2025 [draft] be approved.

That the Parliament agrees that the Winter Heating Assistance (Pension Age) (Scotland) Amendment Regulations 2025 [draft] be approved.

That the Parliament agrees that the Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee be designated as the lead committee in consideration of the Contract (Formation and Remedies) (Scotland) Bill at stage 1.

That the Parliament agrees that the Economy and Fair Work Committee be designated as the lead committee in consideration of the Digital Assets (Scotland) Bill at stage 1.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

That concludes decision time.

Members business will be published tomorrow, Thursday 9 October, as soon as the text is available.

Business Motion

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

The next item of business is consideration of business motion S6M-19267, in the name of Graeme Dey, on behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau, setting out a business programme.

Motion moved,

That the Parliament agrees—

(a) the following programme of business—

Tuesday 28 October 2025

2.00 pm Time for Reflection

followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions

followed by Topical Questions (if selected)

followed by Stage 3 Proceedings: Land Reform (Scotland) Bill

followed by Committee Announcements

followed by Business Motions

followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions

10.00 pm Decision Time

Wednesday 29 October 2025

2.00 pm Parliamentary Bureau Motions

2.00 pm Portfolio Questions: Deputy First Minister Responsibilities, Economy and Gaelic; Finance and Local Government

followed by Stage 3 Proceedings: Land Reform (Scotland) Bill

followed by Business Motions

followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions

followed by Approval of SSIs (if required)

10.00 pm Decision Time

Thursday 30 October 2025

11.40 am Parliamentary Bureau Motions

11.40 am General Questions

12.00 pm First Minister’s Questions

followed by Members’ Business

2.30 pm Parliamentary Bureau Motions

2.30 pm Portfolio Questions: Climate Action and Energy, and Transport

followed by Stage 1 Debate: Natural Environment (Scotland) Bill

followed by Financial Resolution: Natural Environment (Scotland) Bill

followed by Business Motions

followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions

5.00 pm Decision Time

followed by Members’ Business

Tuesday 4 November 2025

2.00 pm Time for Reflection

followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions

followed by Topical Questions (if selected)

followed by Social Justice and Social Security Committee Debate: Financial Considerations When Leaving an Abusive Relationship

followed by Stage 3 Proceedings: Land Reform (Scotland) Bill

followed by Committee Announcements

followed by Business Motions

followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions

5.00 pm Decision Time

followed by Members’ Business

Wednesday 5 November 2025

2.00 pm Parliamentary Bureau Motions

2.00 pm Portfolio Questions: Rural Affairs, Land Reform and Islands; Health and Social Care

followed by Scottish Labour Party Business

followed by Business Motions

followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions

followed by Approval of SSIs (if required)

5.10 pm Decision Time

followed by Members’ Business

Thursday 6 November 2025

11.40 am Parliamentary Bureau Motions

11.40 am General Questions

12.00 pm First Minister’s Questions

followed by Members’ Business

2.30 pm Parliamentary Bureau Motions

2.30 pm Portfolio Questions: Social Justice and Housing

followed by Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee Debate: Strengthening Committees’ Effectiveness

followed by Business Motions

followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions

5.00 pm Decision Time

(b) that, for the purposes of Portfolio Questions in the week beginning 27 October 2025, in rule 13.7.3, after the word “except” the words “to the extent to which the Presiding Officer considers that the questions are on the same or similar subject matter or” are inserted.—[Graeme Dey]

Motion agreed to.

Secure Accommodation

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

The next item of business is a statement by Natalie Don-Innes on the capacity and future of secure accommodation. The minister will take questions at the end of her statement, so there should be no interventions or interruptions.

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

Over the past year, I have updated Parliament several times on recent challenges in the provision of secure care in Scotland and on the actions that this Government has taken to address them.

I also committed to inform Parliament of work being undertaken to build on the strengths, address weaknesses, and deliver a sustainable, future-proofed system that is aligned with the Promise. In June, I published the Government’s response to the report “Reimagining secure care: a vision for the future”, which focuses on the actions that are necessary to achieve that.

I want to ensure that Scotland’s secure care system treats children as children, with their rights and wellbeing at the heart of all decisions that are made with, for and about them.

That system must, by necessity, provide an intensive trauma-informed environment for the very small number of children whose needs in relation to safety, support and stability are acute. However, it must also aim to reduce the need for secure care through earlier, more effective intervention.

Our immediate priority is, of course, to stabilise and strengthen secure accommodation capacity. As of today, 11 secure care places are available. That relatively positive position is one that we have seen for the past four months. It comes as a result of close monitoring and collaboration to restore capacity and to build resilience in the system.

Recent actions that have been delivered include a commitment of up to £8.4 million in funding to cover the placement of sentenced and remanded children, and up to 16 beds across the secure estate to maintain capacity in 2025-26 and 2026-27. There has also been a commitment of up to £2 million in funding to support contingency actions in 2025-26, updated practice guidance on alternatives to secure care, which was published in March 2025, and a new four-bed national contingency resource, which opened in April at Rossie.

Significant work is under way to strengthen the provision of secure care, and access to it. Our goal remains to uphold an effective and equitable system for children who might require secure care, recognising that placement decisions rest with independent courts, children’s hearings, chief social work officers and secure accommodation providers.

Progress at St Mary’s Kenmure is a key part of our recovery efforts, with staffing increases enabling a safe and sustainable extension of capacity. Government officials continue to provide support to help restore capacity and to meet Care Inspectorate requirements to enhance the quality of the service. We expect St Mary’s to return to offering 14 places by the end of this month, and 16 by the end of 2025.

In July, the Good Shepherd Centre’s board decided to temporarily restrict capacity from 18 to 12 beds to allow the centre to undertake physical remediation work and recruit to key roles. That temporary restriction has not adversely affected overall capacity across the secure estate, and Good Shepherd continues to accept referrals. When I visited the Good Shepherd Centre last week, I was advised that the board is meeting next week to consider restoration plans. I was encouraged to hear that it continues to make progress in Promise-keeping practice development, in particular in areas around reducing restraint, advancing violence reduction and restorative approaches. Government officials have been actively engaging with St Mary’s and Good Shepherd to offer support to ensure the restoration of full capacity as soon as that is safely possible.

I am also determined to deliver greater resilience and longer-term sustainability in the sector. I therefore announce today that, subject to the necessary approval and registration, a further new four-bed national contingency resource at Rossie should be operational in early December. Those additional spaces provide the further contingency that our system may require in the longer term, not least to provide safe and appropriate care options for young people who will no longer be placed in young offender institutions, but whose offences still necessitate a deprivation of liberty.

However, the Promise Scotland has rightly highlighted the need to strike a careful balance between ensuring sufficient capacity to meet current demand without overprovision that could signal overreliance on deprivation of liberty and undermine longer-term sustainability. Planning in a systemic way for change is important. I therefore advise Parliament that we are working with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities to develop a joint action plan, bringing together local and national Government to co-ordinate efforts, clarify responsibilities and drive progress in a coherent and collaborative way.

As announced in January, we have agreed to fund a dedicated professional lead within Social Work Scotland for a 12-month period, to strengthen support for placing authorities, and I am pleased to say that the successful postholder started work at the end of August. The aim is to enhance confidence and awareness among key professionals who work in that challenging environment and, through working closely with Government officials, placing authorities and providers, to support effective decision making and practice.

As members will be aware, the needs of children and young people are changing and, often, becoming much more complex. As acknowledged in our response to “Reimagining secure care”, we need our future provision to evolve to meet emerging and developing needs.

Last month, I had the opportunity to visit Kibble and learn more about the support that it offers to children. For more than 160 years, Kibble has provided support and services to children and young people in Scotland, including the provision of secure care for young people up to the age of 18.

Kibble already provides care in three small group houses, which each accommodate up to six young people in a safe and nurturing environment with a consistent staff team that provides round-the-clock care and support. I announce today that the Scottish Government is working with Kibble to construct up to three future-proofed four-bed houses that are designed to create a trauma-informed environment and provide adaptable environments that respond to the evolving and complex needs of the children who are cared for. Those additional houses will not only add useful capacity to the secure care system and estate; they will help to signal our intent, which is shared with secure care providers and partner agencies, to develop what and how we provide in the future.

As we start to reimagine secure care for the future, it is important to gather views, knowledge and experience to inform the development of options. As part of the Government’s response to the report “Reimagining secure care”, I have committed to consulting on those options before the end of the parliamentary session. That includes the consideration of the future purpose of secure care, the routes into and transitions from it and the more practical aspects of how it will be provided in the future—including commissioning and contract management, and how best to co-ordinate a national response to the acute needs and interests of a very small number of children and young people from across the country, who have a wide range of backgrounds and circumstances.

Placing children and young people with complex and acute needs in secure accommodation—sometimes far from family, often outwith their local community and sometimes for considerable periods of time—is one of the most serious things that we as a society do. We should not take that lightly. We should always be cognisant of our responsibilities to not just the children involved but the children’s panel members, the judiciary and the chief social work officers who have to make those decisions, the professionals who support that decision making and the people who provide care. A caring, professional, supported and supportive workforce is vital. The children and young people who are placed into secure care, either in short or longer-term situations, deserve nothing less.

I want everyone who works in and around those most difficult and complex circumstances to know that they are valued and appreciated and that we are committed to enhancing their capacity and confidence. Members in the chamber will want to echo that, and I welcome the close attention that many have paid in recent months to what is a most important issue in my portfolio.

My statement seeks to reassure members that, over the summer, our focus has very much been on addressing the immediate capacity issues. The interventions and the work that I have set out mean that we are achieving that. I am assured that the steps that we have taken and are taking will minimise the risk that the challenges that were experienced earlier this year will arise again. We are pressing forward with further positive capacity investment and interventions; we continue to work in close partnership with secure care providers, placing authorities and third sector organisations; and we are drawing on their expertise and commitment to ensure that every child receives the care and protection that they need, in safe and trauma-informed environments. In short, we are laying the foundations for a more sustainable and resilient system for the future.

I am happy to take questions.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

The minister will now take questions on the issues that were raised in her statement. I intend to allow about 20 minutes for questions, after which we will move on to the next item of business. I encourage members who wish to ask a question but have not yet pressed their request-to-speak buttons to do so.

Miles Briggs (Conservative, Lothian)

I thank the minister for advance sight of her statement.

The Scottish Conservatives have consistently warned ministers that the situation on the ground in our secure accommodation sector was not sustainable. The minister’s statement demonstrates that the Scottish Government has failed to competently implement its policy to date, despite those warnings.

At the weekend, a story was reported in the Sunday Post regarding a vulnerable Aberdeenshire teenager, Callie Thomson, who has been inappropriately placed in all four of Scotland’s secure units since the age of 14. Callie, who has just turned 17, has now been discharged from the Rossie secure unit without a care package in place. She has been directed to homelessness services—a 17-year-old is being placed in homeless accommodation with people who have recently been released from prison and people with substance abuse issues. Callie said:

“I feel like I have been utterly abandoned, and nobody seems to care if I live or die.”

The destination on discharge from secure placements was not mentioned in today’s statement, but I am deeply concerned at the picture that is emerging. I believe that this will be the next big scandal to face the Scottish Government and shows its failure to meet the needs of some of the most vulnerable children and young people in our society. In 2024, 19 per cent of children were discharged with “other” recorded as their destination.

What is clear from today’s statement is that secure accommodation capacity across our country remains completely unstable. I ask the minister two questions. First, will she personally intervene and investigate the failings in Callie Thomson’s case? Secondly, given the continuing pressure facing wider children and young people’s services, will the minister undertake a review of the inappropriate placement of young people in adult homelessness services and adult mental health services?

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

I cannot comment on individual cases, but I was very sorry to hear about that story. All children who are placed in care settings, including in secure accommodation, should expect to receive the highest standards of care. That includes when they leave secure accommodation, because we have pathways for that. Any decision to place a child in secure accommodation is taken by the relevant decision makers, including the independent courts, children’s hearings, chief social work officers and secure accommodation providers.

Mr Briggs asked me two questions. I am more than happy to look into the direct details of the case, because I am very concerned about what I am hearing. On the wider issue of housing services, I would be more than happy to discuss those issues directly with Mr Briggs after my statement.

Martin Whitfield (Labour, South Scotland)

I, too, thank the minister for advance sight of her statement.

In relation to the case that Miles Briggs has just raised, I think it is right to say that the Scottish Government would remain the corporate parent for that individual up until the age of 18 at the very least, so it does have a direct responsibility.

I have two questions. The evidence shows that we currently have 65 beds—I welcome the fact that provision will be expanded—and that, currently, 54 beds are occupied. Can the minister confirm, first, how many of those beds are occupied under cross-border placements and, secondly, how many are occupied by young people who are on remand from the court system? As the minister pointed out, there are a number of ways in which young people can end up in secure accommodation.

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

I understand Mr Whitfield’s point about the case that Mr Briggs referred to, and I have committed to looking directly into it.

In relation to the secure care numbers, I can confirm that six children from England and Wales are currently placed in Scotland on cross-border placements. I will have to get back to Mr Whitfield on the number of beds that are occupied children who are on remand—I will do so following my statement.

Rona Mackay (Scottish National Party, Strathkelvin and Bearsden)

I welcome the publication of the Government’s response to the “Reimagining Secure Care” report. St Mary’s Kenmure, in my constituency, is an excellent facility, and I was pleased to hear the minister’s announcement on capacity there.

What steps does the minister intend to take to develop secure care provision in the longer term? How can stakeholders engage with that work? What are the strengths of the current system? Where does the Scottish Government envisage changes potentially being required in the future?

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

The Scottish Government is committed to building on the strengths of the system while embracing a future vision for change in line with the priorities that are laid out in “The Promise”. That may involve radical change when and where improvements to children’s experiences and outcomes demand it.

Our response to the “Reimagining Secure Care” report will be delivered over two phases: first, as I set out in my statement, on capacity restoration and reinforcement; and, secondly, on road-testing elements of reimagined secure care. The next steps include exploring the report’s recommendations with partners in more detail, and establishing good practice examples and testing out some of those approaches. As I confirmed in my statement, we are working with COSLA and Social Work Scotland on the development of a joint action plan, which will allow us to progress that work. I have also confirmed our commitment to consult on the future of secure care by the end of this parliamentary session, to ensure that we get the views of those who matter.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

In her statement, the minister has hailed the establishment of another working group to deliver another action plan. Does she not accept that the Government should surely just get on with delivering the consistent capacity in secure accommodation that is so clearly needed?

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

That is exactly what I have done today. I have informed Parliament of the actions that have already been taken—the introduction of a new four-bed house and a contingency plan. I also introduced two new capacity restoration actions today in relation to Kibble and Rossie. I agree with Mr Ross that we need to get on with ensuring capacity—that is exactly what we are doing. I am also focused on how we ensure that the system is fit for the future, and that is exactly what I read out in my statement.

Jackie Dunbar (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Donside)

It is vital that secure care is more than a holding centre—that it keeps communities safe and keeps young people safe from harming themselves. Children and young people need help to break the potential progression into poorer life chances in adulthood, and secure care can do that by giving them access to the same standard of education as their peers. They must also have their underlying health and wellbeing needs addressed. The system must be one where children are still treated as children, with their rights and wellbeing at the heart of all decisions.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

Ask a question, please.

Jackie Dunbar (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Donside)

How can we ensure that that happens?

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

I fully agree with the sentiments that Ms Dunbar has expressed. We know that children or young people who do not get those chances will have poorer outcomes. Secure accommodation is a specialised form of residential care and is designed to restrict the liberty of children who represent a significant risk to themselves or others. The primary aims of secure care are to keep children safe; to provide intensive support, therapeutic care and education; to help children—importantly—to re-engage with their communities; and to ensure that any deprivation of liberty is absolutely necessary, rights respecting and time limited.

Secure care providers work intensively to provide support that focuses on equal access to education, addresses health and wellbeing needs and creates a safe and nurturing environment. However, I fully recognise the extremely complex and demanding nature of the work of secure care providers and local authority teams. They play a challenging but vital role in supporting children with significant and often multifaceted needs. I am sure that all members agree with me and deeply value that dedication.

Pam Duncan-Glancy (Labour, Glasgow)

I thank the minister for advance sight of her statement.

Social Work Scotland told the Education, Children and Young People Committee that the system is already depleted and struggling, with the social work workforce effectively static over the past decade, while the volume of duties keeps rising. The minister says that the workforce is vital, and I whole-heartedly agree. During the passage of the Children (Care and Justice) (Scotland) Bill we warned the Government about the need to build the workforce first.

What specific actions are being taken to ensure that the workforce is supported and that the capacity is there to deliver the desired outcomes?

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

We have taken a number of actions to improve retention and to improve support for the workforce. The Scottish Government fully recognises the pressure that the social work workforce is under. With sector partners, it is delivering on specific priorities to ensure that children and young people receive the level of care that they deserve. That is absolutely vital, as I have said in the chamber many times. We will only bring about systemic change to operational social work services by investing in those who provide those services—our workforce.

I have spoken before about the national social work agency that we will establish by April 2026 to support registered social work students, social workers and social work assistants across the public, third and independent sectors. National and local government also recognise the need to work differently and more closely together. Therefore, a national social work agency, COSLA and Social Work Scotland will work together as the Scottish social work partnership. As partners, they will share responsibility for a joint strategic plan to address the on-going issues across the social work workforce in Scotland. I assure the member that I hear what she is saying. There are active, on-going discussions about what we can do to bolster the workforce.

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

Some people have suggested that, now that a larger group of older young people with more serious offending will be able to be detained in secure care, we will need to differentiate the approach in secure care on age grounds and we will need to separate those who are there on welfare grounds from those who are there on justice grounds. I am concerned by that. Does the minister agree that doing that would be unhelpful and that the founding principle of our care for children—that it is based on needs as well as deeds—still holds true?

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

I agree that that would be very unhelpful. Not only is there no evidence to support the separation of children in that way, but it would be unworkable in practice and run completely counter to the aspirations of the Promise.

Although, for a small number of placements, the reason for a child to be accommodated in a particular setting will be that they have committed an offence, often things are not as clear cut as that. The reason for a placement is usually wrapped up in a number of wider considerations and broader welfare issues. Many of the children who have committed an offence are victims themselves. A rigorous matching process is in place, which safeguards children in those circumstances. When considering the referral of a child for admission to a secure care placement, the provider must carry out its own assessment of whether it can meet the needs of the child while also protecting the safety and welfare of other children in that setting.

Maggie Chapman (Green, North East Scotland)

The minister outlined investment to expand secure capacity. Will she detail parallel investment in community-based and preventative services that are designed to reduce the need for secure placements in the first place? Will she say more about how the joint action plan with COSLA will ensure that local authorities are resourced to intervene earlier so that secure accommodation is genuinely a last resort?

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

Absolutely—the budget for 2025-26 includes an additional £11 million of support for community justice services and on-going work to further enable a shift away from the use of custody, which brings the total investment in community justice to £159 million, with a total increase in investment of £25 million over two years. That supports a range of community justice services, including diversion from prosecution, alternatives to remand, and community sentencing. That will help us to ensure that justice social work can continue to provide alternatives to custody in the community, when it is deemed appropriate.

Willie Rennie (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife)

I acknowledge the minister’s efforts in the past year to resolve this problem. However, this playing catch-up is typical of the Government’s approach to keeping the Promise. First, we read in the damning Audit Scotland report about the lack of planning by the Government over many years to deliver the Promise, which means that we are now behind schedule. Secondly, in the Education, Children and Young People Committee this morning, witnesses told us about the lack of engagement—and, again, planning—on the new Promise bill. Is the minister going to change the Government’s approach to keeping the Promise?

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

I welcome the Audit Scotland report and I will take time to consider its recommendations in full. I do not agree that it was damning; there were some real positives in there, and it was clear that we are still on track to deliver the Promise by 2030.

In relation to tracking progress, we have the Promise progress framework and “Plan 24-30”—there are several ways in which we are looking to track progress on the Promise. However, we need to be clear that it is not all about measurable data. There are real people and real lives. We know that the Promise is for transformational change—that is systemic change, and it is not going to happen overnight. Although there are aspects that are measurable, which we will track, there are also real lives at stake. The change that is happening on the ground, which is not always measurable, is very important, too.

Jamie Hepburn (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld and Kilsyth)

Decisions on placing a child in secure care are currently taken locally, and the process involves those who work closely with and support the child and their family. In relation to the “Reimagining Secure Care” report, the minister spoke about the co-ordination of a national response to support the interests and needs of what is a small number of children and young people. Will she expand on that and set out what it might mean in practice?

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

Looking ahead, the Government remains absolutely committed to developing a more resilient and responsive system of secure care provision, with a strong emphasis on capacity preservation and placement management.

Scotland’s secure care system does not currently have a placement commissioning mechanism or national oversight of placement decisions. We are exploring a future national approach to the placement of children in secure care that would involve that function being held by the national social work agency. The creation of a mechanism whereby a centralised approach was taken to the placement of children in secure care would assist placing authorities in securing a placement and would support better data collection.

Consideration would still have to be given to the issues of resource, remit, functions and costs, but central co-ordination would certainly help to ensure that placement decisions were based on need, rather than geography or availability, which would promote fairness and reduce regional disparities in access to secure care.

Sue Webber (Conservative, Lothian)

The minister said that

“we are laying the foundations for a more sustainable and resilient system for the future”,

following the challenges that were experienced earlier this year. I welcome some of the announcements that she has made today. However, when I was convener of the Education, Children and Young People Committee, I warned the minister of the very issues that we are discussing today 30 months ago, back in June 2023. In its stage 1 report on the Children (Care and Justice) (Scotland) Bill, the committee made it clear that capacity was a significant concern. Why did the minister not heed those warnings 30 months ago and act then?

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

As I set out in my statement and as The Promise Scotland has made clear, we do not want to have overcapacity. Obviously, the situation that we were in last December, which went on for some months after that, was extremely difficult, but we have taken the necessary steps and action. We are now in a much better place—today, 11 secure places are available, and a range around that number has been available for the past couple of months. I have set out how we plan to re-envision that provision for the future in order to future proof it. I take heed of Ms Webber’s comments and thank her for bringing those matters to my attention.

Fulton MacGregor (Scottish National Party, Coatbridge and Chryston)

Does the minister think that it is right, going forward, for secure care to be provided by a series of independent organisations that all do things differently and which are accountable to their boards, rather than to the Scottish ministers?

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

As I noted in my statement, although the immediate focus has been on stabilisation, capacity restoration and encouraging the safe use of alternatives, we must always look forward in an effort to future proof the system.

We are considering future funding and commissioning models as part of our plans for reimagining secure care. We will work in partnership with Scotland Excel, secure providers and commissioning authorities to consult on and co-design a new national commissioning model that reflects our shared aspirations for the future of secure care. That process will consider potential changes in funding and commissioning arrangements to better serve the needs of Scotland’s children.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

That concludes the item of business. Before we move to the next item, there will be a brief pause to allow front-bench teams to change over.

Illegal Immigration

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

The next item of business is a debate on motion S6M-19252, in the name of Russell Findlay, on stopping illegal immigration and recognising its impact on housing. I invite members who wish to speak in the debate to press their request-to-speak buttons now or as soon as possible.

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

I am proud of Britain’s long history of immigration. I am proud of the strength and richness of our diversity. I am proud of our culture—decent, welcoming, tolerant and respectful.

I am just back from our party conference in the great city of Manchester, where the writer Matthew Syed said of his father, an immigrant from Pakistan:

“He knew that this is perhaps the most meritocratic and least sectarian nation on earth.”

I value colleagues from a broad range of ethnic and religious backgrounds, including Kemi Badenoch, the first black leader of any major United Kingdom party, and Rishi Sunak, the first ever non-white Prime Minister.

Neither today, tomorrow or, indeed, ever will I accept lectures from Scottish National Party or other left-wing politicians who falsely accuse our party of xenophobia.

Daniel Johnson (Labour, Edinburgh Southern)

Will the member take an intervention?

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

I would be delighted to do so if there is any guarantee of getting the time back.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

We are tight for time. You will get some of it back, but not necessarily all of it.

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

Okay. I will take the intervention.

Daniel Johnson (Labour, Edinburgh Southern)

I welcome Russell Findlay’s comments about having a welcoming approach to people who come from other countries. However, would he endorse the statement that Robert Jenrick made at the weekend about walking in certain communities and seeing the complexions of people there? Would he support that comment?

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

What Mr Jenrick meant was that we want communities that are assimilated. We do not want people to be isolated or ghettoised. That is an entirely reasonable position to take.

For the sake of everybody understanding the position, I say loudly and clearly that talking about immigration is not racist. We welcome people, such as Mr Syed senior, who arrive legally and who respect our freedoms of both speech and religion—those who want to work hard to build a better future for their families, and who cherish democracy, equality and the rule of law.

It is not racist to recognise that our country has failed in its fundamental duty to control its borders. Too many have come here illegally or have overstayed their welcomes. Too many are here not to give, but to take. Too many do not share, or even actively oppose, our country’s values.

It is not racist to say that we should remove foreign killers, paedophiles and rapists from our country. It should not have to be said, but it is also not racist to say that countless women have been trafficked and enslaved into prostitution by evil criminal gangs.

Kevin Stewart (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Central)

Will the member give way?

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

It is not racist to want to stop the boats: a treacherous trade that claims lives and enriches gangsters.

I will take one more intervention, from Mr Stewart.

Kevin Stewart (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Central)

Language in rhetoric is very important in this debate. What we heard from Robert Jenrick is not good, as far as I am concerned. Trying—

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

Please be brief, Mr Stewart.

Kevin Stewart (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Central)

Trying to brand all immigrants as criminals is wrong, too. Does the member accept that?

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

I will not even waste my time in attempting to address that point. Kevin Stewart needs to open his ears and listen up to what is actually being said.

Concerns are increasing in many Scottish communities. People can see that uncontrolled immigration is unsustainable. People know that foreign criminals should be sent packing. Those are not extreme positions, but the views of ordinary, mainstream Scotland—of sensible Scots who increasingly struggle to understand an out-of-touch, left-wing political class. People can see that unfettered immigration places increasing pressure on public services. Taxpayers who work hard but struggle to pay the bills while local services decline understand that. When SNP politicians accused Scots who are concerned about immigration of politicising the saltire, that was surely the day when irony died. To attack this debate—as I suspect many will do—will serve only to confirm how out of touch they really are.

I will say it again, loud and clear. The people in Scotland who have concerns about immigration are not racist. It is not racist to reject alien attitudes towards women or gay people. It is not racist to oppose cultural practices such as child marriage. It is not racist to expect or want immigrants to assimilate.

It is foolish and naive to nurture the idealistic notion that all immigration is good and welcome, yet in Scotland today, that is where many left-wing politicians appear to stand. Some of them want open borders. Some are blind to the misery of trafficked people. Some think that it is fine for migrants to leave a place of safety, such as France, to reach our shores.

We, the Scottish Conservatives, think differently. We believe that illegal migration is causing strain in our local communities and our nation’s finances. That is why I endorse Kemi Badenoch’s plan to withdraw from the European convention on human rights and deport those who come here illegally. That is the only credible way in which we can again take control of our borders. Those views are basic common sense. Such conversations are held around dinner tables, at football grounds, in community centres and in pubs.

I see the impact of mass migration on my home city of Glasgow, which now houses more asylum seekers than any other local authority area in the United Kingdom. Once an asylum seeker is granted leave to remain, they gain refugee status. At that point, they are the responsibility of the local council, which is required to house them, albeit only if they are categorised as priority need. However, the SNP abolished the priority need criteria in 2012. That means that every homeless refugee is entitled to a home in Scotland. In addition, 10 years later, in 2022, the SNP abolished what is known as the local connection rule. That means that those with refugee status do not need to have any local connection whatsoever to seek housing. Both of those SNP decisions have resulted in Scotland generally, and Glasgow specifically, becoming a prime destination.

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

Will the member take an intervention?

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

I am sorry, but I have no time remaining.

Glasgow declared a housing emergency two years ago and it has a mountain of debt, which stands at £1.6 billion and is rising. It is little wonder that Glasgow City Council leader Susan Aitken has suggested a pause on asylum seeker dispersals to Glasgow, while her SNP colleague concedes that the existing system risks damaging social cohesion.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

You need to wind up.

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

I end by saying it loud and clear: the public purse cannot afford this. It is unsustainable. That is not racist. It is not far right. It is simply right.

I move,

That the Parliament believes that illegal immigration must be stopped because of the damaging impact on public finances and local communities; recognises that the Scottish Government’s decision to suspend local connection rules in relation to homelessness provision back in 2022 has contributed towards attracting asylum seekers to Scotland at an unsustainable level, and calls on the Scottish Government to immediately reverse this decision.

Màiri McAllan (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

I cannot say that I am pleased to open in this debate for the Government. The Conservatives brought a similar motion only four weeks ago, and on that day a number of contributions crossed the line. Today, they have taken the biscuit, frankly.

I start by appealing for care in the language that we use this afternoon. Whatever certain politicians do to characterise the situation, we are talking about people—people with hopes, people with aspirations, people who have suffered and human beings who should be treated with dignity and respect.

I will promptly address what are, flatly, errors in the Conservative motion. First, the Conservatives wilfully misuse the terms “illegal immigration” and “asylum seekers”, conflating two fundamentally different issues. The term “illegal migrant” is not only divisive and dehumanising; it is also inaccurate. People are not illegal. Seeking asylum is a right. In fact, it is the lack of safe routes to the UK that makes migration take irregular presentations.

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

Will the cabinet secretary take an intervention?

Màiri McAllan (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

I am not giving you one more second of our time.

Members:

Oh!

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

Speak through the chair, cabinet secretary.

Màiri McAllan (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

Secondly, the Conservatives misunderstand the rules on local connection. Let me explain those rules to them. The changes that were made in November 2022 only prevent a Scottish local authority from referring a homeless household to another Scottish local authority in which that household has a local connection. That was praised as giving homeless households the choice that anybody else would expect. The change did not alter local connection rules for refugee households. As things stand, nothing prevents a Scottish local authority from referring a homeless refugee household back to parts of England and Wales in which that household has a local connection.

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

Will the cabinet secretary take an intervention on that point?

Màiri McAllan (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

I have already made it clear that I will not give the Conservatives a platform for one more moment—not on my watch. The Conservatives are wrong, they know that they are wrong, and they ought to stop spreading the mistruths.

There are pressures on our housing system, which are driven not least by the pressures on households and our economy after the years of Conservative chaos in Whitehall.

Craig Hoy (Conservative, South Scotland)

What about the SNP Government?

Màiri McAllan (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

The truth is that Mr Findlay’s party allowed enormous asylum backlogs to build up while creating a hotels policy that allows people to languish. Now, a Labour Government is continuing to move through those applications far too quickly and without proper provision for settlement. In particular, I appeal to the UK Labour Government to implement proper move-on periods that do not create homeless refugees and for the process to be properly funded.

Scotland has some of the most protective anti-homelessness laws of any country. We have significantly added to them with the “ask and act” duties, which the Parliament has just voted for in passing the Housing (Scotland) Bill. We have also delivered more than 140,000 affordable homes in our time in Government. Although there is housing strain, I can say with absolute certainty that, in the face of a housing emergency, this Government will not be rolling back on the homelessness rights of a single person in Scotland.

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

Will the cabinet secretary take an intervention on that point?

Craig Hoy (Conservative, South Scotland)

Will the cabinet secretary take an intervention?

Màiri McAllan (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

In closing, while continuing to ignore the Conservatives’ attempts for a greater platform, I want us to reflect on what has led us here—to the point where this right-wing nonsense has found itself in our national Parliament for the second time in a month, where mistruths on social media are read by thousands before we have the chance to correct them, and where politicians, journalists and institutions are repeating and thereby normalising unfounded suspicion, fear and hatred, which should never be normalised.

Sue Webber (Conservative, Lothian)

Will the cabinet secretary take an intervention?

Craig Hoy (Conservative, South Scotland)

Will the cabinet secretary stop grandstanding and take an intervention?

Màiri McAllan (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

All of that is happening to the extent that what we once knew as bigotry is being defended as free speech. The SNP knows what it is, we recognise what it is, and we will call it what it is. It is prejudice. It is intolerance. It is racism. [ Interruption .]

Rachael Hamilton (Conservative, Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire)

You cannot say that.

Sue Webber (Conservative, Lothian)

Will the cabinet secretary take a factual intervention? We are trying to have a debate.

Màiri McAllan (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

It is all those things, because it has no basis whatsoever in fact. Conflating crime with migration, as the Conservatives do in this chamber, is simply not factual. Holding whole populations to account for the criminal actions of one individual is patently absurd. Suggesting that the far right are somehow defenders of the rights of women and children is utter nonsense.

We now—predictably—have Russell Findlay following Kemi Badenoch in backing leaving the ECHR, which would make the UK join Russia and Belarus as the only non-signatory countries. The ECHR promotes the rule of law and the protection of individuals. It represents the difference between barbarity and civilisation. It says that people have rights by virtue of being human alone, and we should be suspicious of anyone who tries to drag us from it.

I move amendment S6M-19252.5, to leave out from “believes” to end and insert:

“notes that the suspension of local connection referrals in 2022 did not change the rights of newly recognised refugees to choose where they settle in Scotland, nor did it prevent Scottish local authorities from referring households presenting as homeless to an English or Welsh local authority with which they have a local connection; reaffirms that Scotland is a welcoming nation to people fleeing persecution, seeking safety and who have been granted refugee status, ensuring that they can rebuild their lives in the country through the New Scots Refugee Integration Strategy; highlights action in Scotland to tackle homelessness and destitution, including new prevention measures in the Housing (Scotland) Bill, increased investment in affordable homes and the £4 million investment in homelessness prevention pilots, alongside the extension of rapid rehousing transition plan funding of £8 million into 2026-27, and calls again on the UK Government to urgently uphold the European Convention on Human Rights, 1951 Refugee Convention and 1967 Protocol.”

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

I remind members, although I do not think that it should be necessary, that it is up to the person who has the floor to decide whether they will take an intervention. It is up to members whether they request interventions, but if I determine that those requests are simply an attempt to barrack, I will step in.

Mark Griffin (Labour, Central Scotland)

Once again, the Conservatives have brought this issue before the Parliament not to offer solutions, but simply to replay what they think are their greatest hits. In reality, this Tory debate is political hypocrisy of the worst kind. The Conservatives are trying to seize political capital from the wreckage of a chaotic immigration system that they designed, presided over and, ultimately, broke. Moreover, they are not doing it make improvements to a single person’s or community’s life; the only reason for it is that they are terrified of political extinction at the hands of Reform next May.

Under the previous Tory Government at Westminster, net migration quadrupled in four years to nearly 1 million, despite repeated promises to reduce it to under 100,000. The Tories gave us record net migration, record small boat arrivals and thousands of people stuck in more than 400 asylum hotels across the UK, waiting endlessly for their claims to be processed with no hope of resolution.

Craig Hoy (Conservative, South Scotland)

If the Labour Government is taking the issue seriously, why has the number of small boats arriving on UK shores doubled since you came to office?

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

Through the chair, please.

Mark Griffin (Labour, Central Scotland)

The member should pay attention to the latest figures, which came out in September. I cannot believe that Mr Hoy would again come to the chamber and talk about immigration, given the absolutely woeful performance by the Tories: 1 million despite a promise of 100,000. The Tories’ record is appalling, and their aim is purely to escape the annihilation that they are expected to receive at the hands of Reform next May. Gimmick responses were all that they offered at a UK level, and it is the exact same with their response here.

In Scotland, the housing emergency is deepening on the SNP Government’s watch. Let me be absolutely clear, however, that refugees entering the homelessness system are not the cause of the housing crisis; the system is broken because the SNP Government has not built enough homes. In the year to September 2025, the number of housing completions fell, as did the number of housing starts. Private sector completions have been at their lowest level since 2018. In the social sector, the number of completions dropped to its lowest level since 2017 from an already low base last year.

Kevin Stewart (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Central)

Will Mr Griffin give way?

Mark Griffin (Labour, Central Scotland)

I am sorry, but I only have four minutes in which to make these points.

This year, social housing starts in Scotland were at their lowest level since we started collecting the data, in 1997. Those figures are from September this year.

Meanwhile, around 220,000 people are waiting for a social home. There are more children in temporary accommodation in Glasgow than there are in the whole of Wales, yet the SNP Scottish Government still had to be dragged into accepting that we are in the middle of a housing emergency.

Make no mistake: the SNP Government uses immigration as a political tool just as much as the far right does. The only difference is in who it decides to blame.

Looking at the evidence, it is painfully clear that none of the other parties is interested in offering solutions for those who are trapped in housing need. One party virtue signals and one dog whistles, and now they both point fingers and stir division in service of their own political goals. They stay very quiet about the fact that their Governments created this mess. While the Tories have chosen political amnesia and rank hypocrisy, the SNP waves flags when it should be building homes.

We cannot vote for either the motion or the Government’s amendment. We cannot vote for Tory hypocrisy or SNP complacency. Since the present UK Government was elected, the number of asylum decisions has doubled and the backlog has fallen by a quarter. Labour is fixing the broken system, driving down the numbers and restoring fairness, and we will build homes at a record level. A Scottish Labour Government would deliver a new direction. We would prioritise building homes, properly funding local authorities and addressing this crisis.