Scottish Parliament, 9 October 2025

242 contributions from 65 members. The official report.

General Question Time

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

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

Katy (Labour, West Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to the decision by Strathclyde Partnership for Transport to progress with proposals for bus franchising. (S6O-05042)

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

We very much welcome the work that Strathclyde Partnership for Transport has undertaken to update its regional bus strategy, given the importance of the bus sector to its region. It is right that local transport authorities explore how best to use the measures in the Transport (Scotland) Act 2019, as our approach is to enable them to determine what is best to improve their services. Transport Scotland will continue to engage with all stakeholders, including SPT.

Work on the franchising guidance is on-going. We will be sharing it with the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee, along with the affected parties, prior to its finalisation and formal publication.

Katy (Labour, West Scotland)

Since 2006, there has been a 44 per cent decrease in the number of bus routes across Scotland, and 190 routes have been cut in the past year alone. More than 83 per cent of passengers support the idea of Strathclyde Partnership for Transport implementing bus franchising across the region, which would allow for better oversight of fares, routes and timetables. What work is the Scottish Government doing to ensure that SPT has the necessary financial support to enable it to proceed with franchising?

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

The Scottish Government continues to work with SPT, as I said in my original answer. We have to go through a number of phases. Once the guidance is cleared, we will present it to the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee. After that, it will be up to SPT to come back to us to talk about what it needs to do next.

Jamie Hepburn (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld and Kilsyth)

Many constituents are contacting me about the decline in services that are offered by the main commercial bus operators in Cumbernauld and Kilsyth, which can mean that people need to travel for more than two hours to ensure that they are at their work in Glasgow by 9 am. What opportunities are presented by the new powers for local authorities that SPT can utilise to return to a more comprehensive bus network and promote public transport use?

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

The bus powers under the Transport (Scotland) Act 2019 enable local transport authorities to determine the provision of services, the routes and frequency of services and the fare structures for services, as well as the types of vehicles that should be used on local roads. We want all local transport authorities to be able to improve their bus services, but it is for them to decide which powers, if any, are best to use to address the transport challenges in their areas.

Ariane Burgess (Green, Highlands and Islands)

To ask the Scottish Government what scoping work it has undertaken regarding dualling and electrifying the Highland main line. (S6O-05043)

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

Network Rail, instructed by Transport Scotland, has investigated options to electrify the Highland main line. That work contributed to developing our plans to replace ScotRail’s intercity fleet, which I announced to Parliament in December 2024.

As I said in the debate that the member led last week, we are firmly committed to electrifying our railways. Projects that are already delivered or under way, such as those for Edinburgh to Glasgow, Barrhead and East Kilbride, and our recently announced plans for the phased electrification of the Fife and Borders routes, are evidence of that commitment.

A refreshed rail decarbonisation action plan will be published during this parliamentary session, which will specify how we are going to achieve phased decarbonisation of our rail network by 2045.

I appreciate that there are potential improvements to be secured by dualling the Highland main line, but no active projects for that are under way.

Ariane Burgess (Green, Highlands and Islands)

My interest is in the Highland main line in particular. As long as 17 years ago, the Scottish Government promised rail passengers that it would cut journey times between Inverness and Perth by half an hour. In the intervening 17 years, just four minutes have been saved on that route, because the Government has not prioritised rail in its spending. What will the cabinet secretary do to fulfil the promise that has been broken and provide speedy, reliable rail for people in the Highlands?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

I think that the member is incorrect. Rail constitutes the vast bulk of my budget, compared with other modes of transport. Rail is funded with more than £1.5 billion a year, and trunk roads and their issues receive about £1 billion, so it is incorrect to characterise the Scottish Government’s funding in that way. The extensive announcements that I have made on procurement and electrification have been welcomed, particularly in the Borders and Fife, and they are testament to our commitment to rail.

Mark Griffin (Labour, Central Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to the “Housing Statistics for Scotland Quarterly Update: New Housebuilding and Affordable Housing Supply to end June 2025”. (S6O-05044)

Màiri McAllan (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

The Scottish Government recognises the challenges that are set out in the latest housing statistics. That is why we have increased the 2025-26 housing budget to £808 million. We did that in September, when we doubled our funding for acquisitions to £80 million under the housing emergency action plan. That will help family homes to be acquired now to relieve evident pressure. We are also committing up to £4.9 billion over the coming four years, which is a major increase. An uptick in delivery will follow.

Mark Griffin (Labour, Central Scotland)

In 2018, Scotland saw 23,337 housing starts. This year, it is just 15,104, which is a 35 per cent collapse. Social sector starts are at their lowest level since 1997, when we started publishing the statistics. Since 2018, 3,435 more children have ended up in temporary accommodation and, tragically, 1,188 more people have died homeless.

How will the cabinet secretary and the Government reverse that devastating trend? Does the Government have a target date for ending the use of hotels and bed and breakfasts as temporary accommodation for children?

Màiri McAllan (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

The availability of temporary accommodation is a vital safety net under Scotland’s housing and homelessness legislation, but it ought to be just that—it ought to be temporary.

The actions that we have taken to date—not least the delivery of 140,000 affordable homes since we came into government, more than 100,000 of which have been for social rent—have meant that, in Scotland, we have access to 47 per cent more affordable homes per head than in England and 73 per cent more than in Wales. Despite that, Mark Griffin is right that there is considerable strain in the system. I do not want any children to spend longer in temporary accommodation than they need to. That is why, on 2 September, our housing emergency action plan committed to a number of actions to turn around that trend, including setting out multi-annual funding for affordable homes, record investment in affordable homes over the coming years and other changes, including changes to the planning system so that it facilitates the change that we are determined to see.

Rona Mackay (Scottish National Party, Strathkelvin and Bearsden)

Mark Griffin has some nerve to stand in the chamber and criticise the Scottish Government’s action on tackling Scotland’s housing emergency when the Labour Administration of 2003 to 2007 completed only a dismal six council homes and was lacking in crucial innovation and collaboration with local authorities. Will the cabinet secretary advise me how the Scottish Government’s ambitious investment in voids and acquisitions will empower local authorities to replenish existing housing stock to create permanent homes for hundreds of families throughout Scotland?

Màiri McAllan (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

I very much welcome the question and the context. The new affordable homes that we have delivered since coming into government set us apart in the United Kingdom, but it is also important to put the stock that we have to better use.

Rona Mackay asks about voids and acquisitions. Since declaring a national housing emergency, we have brought almost 1,000 homes into affordable use through £40 million of targeted investments in acquisitions and through bringing social voids back into use. On 2 September, in the emergency plan that I mentioned, we doubled the fund for acquisitions to £80 million. We have asked councils to go out now to use that money to acquire homes that are on the market—family homes, which are needed to get children out of temporary accommodation—and relieve the pressure, and we will invest in home building at the same time.

Elizabeth Smith (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

To ask the Scottish Government, in light of it being Scottish women and girls in sport week, what financial progress has been made against its 2021-22 programme for government commitment to double its investment in sport to £100 million by the end of the current parliamentary session. (S6O-05045)

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

The Scottish Government’s women and girls in sport week campaign aims to increase the visibility of women and girls in sport, highlight opportunities to get involved and discuss barriers and drivers to participation. The 2025-26 budget underlines our on-going commitment to sport and active living by protecting that investment, despite a challenging economic background. We recognise the significant impact that spending on sport and physical activity has on delivering health outcomes, and doubling the investment in sport and active living during this parliamentary session remains the Scottish Government’s ambition.

Elizabeth Smith (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

The minister will understand that the Scottish National Party’s 2021 programme for government commitment to double the investment to £100 million substantially raised the hopes of sporting bodies, which have been struggling with resource issues for years. It is little wonder that they are aghast at seeing the figure of around £40 million in the revised autumn budget. Taking away the sportscotland spending of £35 million leaves just under £5 million for the active healthy lives programme. It is worse still when those bodies see that the £40 million figure is lower than the 2021-22 revised autumn budget figure of £44.5 million. Will SNP ministers honour their 2021 programme for government commitment?

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

I assure Liz Smith and the Parliament as a whole that we meet sports governing bodies regularly and we recognise the challenging situation that they are facing, which is, frankly, worsened by some of the decisions that have been made at Westminster, such as those on employer national insurance contributions, which have added strain to a sector that, as Liz Smith acknowledges, was already in difficulty.

It remains our ambition to double that budget. We have one more Scottish Government budget to go before the end of this parliamentary session. I am very hopeful that, unlike last year, the Scottish Conservatives—who did not previously find it possible to vote for the investment in sport of nearly £50 million—will find it in their hearts not just to support the budget and maintain that investment but to negotiate to increase it. That would be great.

Alex Rowley (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

To ask the Scottish Government what rights patients have when their local medical centre has been deemed unfit for purpose by their national health service board. (S6O-05046)

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

NHS boards are responsible for ensuring the provision of primary medical services in their area. My officials are working with all health boards to develop a whole-system NHS infrastructure investment plan. A key part of that plan will be the development of an investment strategy for primary care, which will consider both priorities and delivery models.

Spending on primary medical services by the Scottish Government has increased over the past decade, both in cash and in real terms. In cash terms, spending has gone from £763 million in 2013-14 to almost £1.1 billion in 2023-24.

Alex Rowley (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

According to NHS Fife,

“The Initial Agreement Document (IAD) was approved by Scottish Government in January 2020”.

In 2021, the then health secretary, in answer to a question from Annabelle Ewing about Lochgelly, told the Parliament:

“I give the member an absolute confirmation that, when we have that outline business case, the funding will be found.”—[Official Report, 28 October 2021; c 9.]

In early 2023, NHS Fife stated that the current Lochgelly and Kincardine health centres

“are older facilities which no longer meet the needs of the local populations.”

Does the cabinet secretary understand the level of anger and despair in communities in Lochgelly and Kincardine, which have been promised time and again that they would have replacements for unfit-for-purpose health centres?

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

I thank Alex Rowley for setting that out. Yes, I understand it, because I have met local residents in Lochgelly and Kincardine at the request of Ms Ewing and Ms Somerville, the constituency representatives, and the residents highlighted those concerns. We have a capital funding pause, except in the areas that have been set out in the budget, because of the pressure on our capital budget due to decisions that have been taken that are outwith our control and because of inflation in the construction sector. We are in touch with NHS Fife and all other health boards in order to get their capital priorities. We hope that the United Kingdom budget will provide greater capital investment to allow us to do more in the primary care system.

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

NHS Fife has just said that a new medical centre for Lochgelly will be in its top 3 priority projects for capital funding from the Scottish Government. Does the cabinet secretary agree that it must surely be Lochgelly’s turn now?

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

I very much appreciate the work that Annabelle Ewing has done to advance the case for the Lochgelly medical centre. I hear what she has said about NHS Fife’s prioritisation. She will understand that the capital allocation will be determined based on the allocation that we receive from the UK Government in the budget and the work that is being carried out regarding the spending review and the infrastructure investment plan. My wish is for much greater investment to go into the primary care services capital estate and for Lochgelly, Kincardine and other communities to see development happen.

Jackson Carlaw (Conservative, Eastwood)

To ask the Scottish Government what engagement it has had with Glasgow City Council regarding its proposals for an “at-city-boundary congestion charge” and a toll on the Clyde tunnel. (S6O-05047)

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

The Scottish Government has not held specific discussions with Glasgow City Council regarding any potential at-city-boundary charge or regarding any toll charge to use the Clyde tunnel.

Jackson Carlaw (Conservative, Eastwood)

Perhaps the cabinet secretary might urgently do so, because my Eastwood constituents would be unfairly charged by the Scottish National Party-run council every time they crossed the local authority boundary by car for work, university, college, family or social reasons. For example, every time they went to the Queen Elizabeth university hospital for essential medical care, they would be charged for crossing the city boundary.

Moreover, if every other local authority followed suit, we would have, in effect, a series of custom posts all over Scotland, with people being charged every time they crossed a city or council boundary anywhere in Scotland. That would be a disaster for the economy and a completely unrealistic and unfair burden on motorists.

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

It was my understanding that the Conservatives wanted to have more decentralisation and more powers for councils—[ Interruption .]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Let us hear the cabinet secretary.

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

However, Jackson Carlaw now wants me to step in on an issue that should best be resolved by East Renfrewshire Council and Glasgow City Council. I remind him that there is existing legislation—the Transport (Scotland) Act 2001, which was introduced by the then Labour and Lib Dem Executive—on road user charging powers. It is up to local authorities to make decisions, and they want to manage their own road space, maintenance and congestion. If he does not believe that local authorities should be in charge of their own authorities, perhaps there are even more divisions in the Conservative Party than we realised.

Mark Ruskell (Green, Mid Scotland and Fife)

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on the proposed ferry route between Rosyth and Dunkirk. (S6O-05048)

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

The Scottish Government continues to support the development of our ports and the potential for a new direct freight and passenger ferry service linking Scotland to Europe. Ministers and officials have met the sponsors on a number of occasions regarding their proposal to introduce a new ferry route between Rosyth and Dunkirk, and the Scottish Government continues to engage with the sponsors on a variety of issues.

As Mark Ruskell is aware, one obstacle is the border control post requirements, which were introduced due to the United Kingdom exiting the European Union. Although the Scottish Government welcomes the recent announcement of an outline sanitary and phytosanitary agreement between the UK and the EU, until the agreement is finalised, it is impossible for the Scottish Government to provide certainty about future border control post requirements. Officials continue to discuss those matters and others with the sponsors.

Mark Ruskell (Green, Mid Scotland and Fife)

The minister will be aware that, before the summer recess, the First Minister gave assurances that his Government would “welcome the ferry route” and do

“everything that we can to remove any obstacles that are in the way.”—[Official Report, 5 June 2025; c 20.]

Four months on, the biggest barrier remains the border control post designation. I believe that that is resolvable. The ferry route is a significant opportunity for the local community, the Scottish economy and our connection to Europe. How will the Government support the delivery of the ferry route in the coming months? Time is ticking away; we will lose the ferry route and the direct connection to Europe. We cannot afford to lose this opportunity, and I think that the First Minister knows that, too.

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

Mark Ruskell makes light of the issue of border control posts, but he should not do so, because of the job that they do in preserving Scotland’s public health and animal health. The Scottish Government remains absolutely convinced that Scotland’s future is best served by being in the EU, and we remain committed to seeking to achieve that. Improving our transport and trade links with the European mainland is even more important and has even more resonance after the UK’s damaging exit from the EU.

As I said, although the Scottish Government welcomes the recent announcement about an SPS agreement between the UK and the EU, until an agreement is finalised, it is not possible to confirm what future border control post requirements will be. Scottish Government officials continue to liaise with the sponsors, and I have asked for a meeting directly with the sponsors.

First Minister’s Question Time

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

Yesterday, John Swinney launched yet another taxpayer-funded paper on independence. He has called it a fresh start. [ Interruption .]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Let us hear Mr Findlay.

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

They will not be clapping in a minute.

The same John Swinney has dreamed about breaking up the United Kingdom for almost 50 years. He was at the forefront of the free by 93 campaign. He first became leader of the Scottish National Party at the turn of the millennium. In 2014, he played a crucial role in the—losing—yes campaign. Thank you, John. Last year, he became SNP leader again. He really thinks that it is plausible to describe his latest independence paper as a fresh start. Is John Swinney having a laugh?

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Use full names at all times, please.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Before I respond to Mr Findlay, I want to take a moment to welcome the news that Israel and Hamas have agreed the first phase of a peace plan for Gaza. I call for all sides to abide by the terms of the agreement, for the release of all hostages and for the immediate entry of humanitarian aid into Gaza. I know that, after more than two years of devastating brutality and loss of life, this will be a moment of relief for many here, in Scotland, and around the world. I reiterate my call that Palestinians and Israelis must be able to live safely side by side, based on a two-state solution. I dearly hope that this is the first step towards that outcome, and I express my thanks to all the mediators who have worked so hard to create this moment and this opportunity for peace. [ Applause .]

In relation to Mr Findlay’s substantive question, I am deadly serious about the argument for Scottish independence. As a country, we have exercised self-government since 1999, with the establishment of this Parliament. A number of significant benefits have been achieved for the people of Scotland. Some of those, such as the ban on smoking in public places and the introduction of free personal care, were delivered by the previous Government and some of them were delivered by my Government—including the abolition of tuition fees, minimum unit pricing for alcohol and the introduction of the Scottish child payment.

We are at a moment now, in Scotland, when the rightward drift of the United Kingdom and the stagnation of living standards in our country demonstrate a need to re-examine the argument. That is why independence is the fresh start that Scotland needs.

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

The fact that he says that he is deadly serious is actually even more worrying than if he had just been having a laugh. John Swinney cannot offer a fresh start, because he has been in the SNP Government for almost 20 years. He was Nicola Sturgeon’s and Alex Salmond’s right-hand man. He was up to his neck in every SNP scandal: ferries, gender self-identification, Scottish Qualifications Authority exams, named persons and many more. He ran down Scotland’s economy and then he ran down Scotland’s education system.

A new survey shows that public trust in the Scottish Government is at an all-time low—and it is a Scottish Government survey. Does John Swinney accept that that is a damning judgment of his dismal record?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

What my Government is focused on is improving the lives of people in Scotland. That is why we are keeping prescriptions free in Scotland while they are nearly £10 under Labour in England; it is why we are protecting free tuition in Scotland while fees are rising south of the border; it is why we have expanded free early learning and childcare, extended free school meals, introduced the Scottish child payment and abolished—for good—peak rail fares on our railways. We are interested in providing practical support to improve the lives of people in Scotland, and we will continue to do that.

I notice that, in the survey that Mr Findlay is talking about, there is also a question on independence. It indicates that support for independence is at 47 per cent—up from 27 per cent in 1999. [ Interruption .]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Thank you, members.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I can see the direction of travel in Scotland—it is going towards independence.

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

Nicola Sturgeon’s book should be in the fiction section, but John Swinney’s paper should really be in the fantasy section. It is not just harmless fantasy but dangerous dishonesty. This graph here, from his paper, says that Scotland’s gross domestic product has grown faster than that of the rest of the UK when the opposite is true.

Serious and credible experts have demolished the Government’s 90-page exercise in wishful thinking. Leading economist Professor Ronald MacDonald said that John Swinney’s plans were “totally shambolic” and that they would have “a devastating effect”. He expressed astonishment at the “total ignorance” of the SNP’s currency position. Damningly, he said that all of that would impact on public sector wages, pensions, mortgages and borrowing costs for homes and businesses. [ Interruption .]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Let us hear Mr Findlay.

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

John Swinney’s paper offers no solutions. It does nothing to help people’s lives here and now. It is an outrage that it was produced by Scottish civil servants. Will John Swinney stop wasting taxpayers’ money on such nonsense?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Under the SNP Government, GDP per person has grown by 10.3 per cent in Scotland compared with 6.1 per cent in the UK, while productivity has grown at an average rate of 1.1 per cent per year in Scotland compared with the UK average of 0.4 per cent. That demonstrates that the point that Mr Findlay has put to Parliament is not correct. [ Interruption .]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Let us hear the First Minister.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The issue that Mr Findlay must address is that the arguments that he puts forward for preserving the status quo are now completely and utterly threadbare. Labour and Tory politicians said that staying in the United Kingdom would lower our bills, but the opposite has been the case. They promised financial security but gave us the Liz Truss mini-budget. They assured us that voting no was the surest way for Scotland to remain in the European Union, but Scotland has been taken out of the EU against our will. The arguments against Scottish independence have collapsed since 2014, and Scotland is on a pathway to independence.

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

John Swinney’s graph on GDP is wrong, just as the stats that he gave last week on income tax were wrong. If he ever got his way, it would mean extreme tax rises and severe spending cuts for Scotland. Mortgages would go up, pensions would be put at risk and there would be a hard border with England. Scotland would be divided and would be smaller and weaker.

Despite all of that, John Swinney keeps obsessing about independence, which would make Scots poorer. It is no wonder that public trust in the SNP is at an all-time low. [ Interruption .]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Let us hear one another.

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

John Swinney is not a fresh start. He is a tired nationalist with a dismal record. He is not focused on building a strong economy for the future. He is wasting time and taxpayers’ money on the same old arguments of the past. For the sake of Scotland, is he ever going to give up on his independence obsession and move on?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

It is pretty clear to any member of the public watching this exchange that the more Russell Findlay gets personally insulting to his political rivals—[ Interruption .]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Let us all hear one another.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

—the weaker his arguments become. What I have marshalled and put in front of Parliament today is the evidence. Living standards in Scotland are stagnating, and they have stagnated for 15 years. [ Interruption .]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

It is becoming increasingly difficult to hear one another. I ask members who have not been called to speak to please resist the temptation to do so. I am sure that the people who are gathered in the gallery would wish to hear contributions.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Living standards in Scotland, as part of the United Kingdom, have ground to a halt. Brexit has been a disaster. The implications of the Liz Truss mini-budget have wreaked economic difficulty and havoc on the people of the UK, and Scotland has been saddled with that, despite the promises of lower prices, lower bills and access to the European Union that were made by the no campaign in 2014.

I am very proud to lead a campaign that is about focusing on improving living standards in Scotland and transforming the lives of the people of Scotland, and we will do that through independence.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

I, too, welcome the agreement on a Gaza ceasefire, the end of the bloodshed and the release of hostages. The ceasefire must be real and it needs to last. However, it must also be backed up by an urgent surge in delivery of aid into Gaza and a meaningful pathway towards an end to the illegal occupation and a lasting peace in which every life—whether it be Palestinian or Israeli—is treated as equal.

Today, members will vote on the Right to Addiction Recovery (Scotland) Bill at stage 1. Scottish Labour will support the bill. Six years ago, the Scottish National Party declared a drug deaths emergency. However, six years on, lives are still being lost, families are still grieving and a generation has been failed. In the first six months of this year alone, 607 people died from suspected drug overdoses—that is one life lost every seven hours.

When it comes to recovery, the picture is just as bleak. The SNP has not delivered the promised rehabilitation beds. Even more shamefully, 77 per cent of areas report being unable to access rehab spaces because they do not have the money that they need from the SNP Government. Rehab beds are lying empty in the middle of a drug deaths emergency. Six years into this emergency, why are beds being left empty, and why are Scots not getting the treatment that they need if they are to recover?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I recognise both the importance of drugs support for individuals and the need to deliver on the commitments that we made as part of the programme for government.

On the specific issue that Mr Sarwar raises, we made a commitment to establish 1,000 publicly funded residential rehabilitation placements per year by 2025-26. The most recent Public Health Scotland publication shows that there were 984 confirmed records of individuals having started such placements in 2022-23. We have made £38 million available to eight projects across Scotland to provide additional residential rehabilitation beds. The latest published figures report a rise in capacity of 88 beds, giving a total of 513 in September 2024, and there has been further expansion since then.

I assure Mr Sarwar, first, of the importance of that endeavour and, secondly, of the practical steps that have been taken to implement the commitments that we have given, and that we will continue to implement.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

The promises have not been fulfilled, and the families who have been left behind deserve justice, not excuses. Shamefully, new figures show that, in the past three years, 573 charges of drug dealing had to be dropped because the cases were time barred before reaching court. Hundreds of people who were accused of drug dealing simply walked free. They evaded justice not because they were found innocent but because of the Government’s incompetence. People selling poison to their communities are being given the green light to destroy lives because John Swinney and his tired Government cannot run a court system that sends drug dealers to prison. I reiterate that 573 drug-dealing charges have simply been dropped. Can John Swinney understand why people will be so angry when they learn that, despite one life being lost to drugs every seven hours in Scotland, hundreds of drug dealers are walking free?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The issues with the court service are an effect of the situation that developed during the Covid pandemic, when a backlog of cases had to be addressed. The court service worked—and is still working—incredibly hard to erode the backlog that we have been wrestling with, and significant work has been undertaken.

I will look at other data. As the Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Home Affairs reported to Parliament last Thursday, our prisons are incredibly congested, in many cases with individuals who have been convicted and sentenced for long periods of time as a consequence of their drug-related activities. Our prison system and the Scottish Prison Service are wrestling admirably with the congestion that is caused by the many people involved in the organised crime that underpins the drug issues.

I know that the Crown and the Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service are working incredibly hard, and in an incredibly focused way, to ensure that those who perpetrate illegal drug activity in our society are brought to justice, and that many of them are.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

There is no justification—none—for hundreds of drug dealers walking free because of the incompetence of this Scottish National Party Government. There is no justification at all.

This Government has lost control: 607 lives have been lost in just six months, which is one every seven hours; 573 drug supply charges have gone unpunished; and there is still not enough access to treatment or residential rehab for those who want to recover. The truth is that John Swinney’s approach is failing both victims and communities. Dealers slip through the cracks, people die while they wait for help, and families lose loved ones and are left without hope.

It has been six years since the Government declared an emergency, but Scotland still leads Europe on the figures for drug deaths. John Swinney has abandoned both justice and recovery. Is it not the case that we will never get to grips with Scotland’s drug deaths emergency while he and the SNP stay in charge?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The Government has taken a focused approach, over a number of years, to addressing the issue of drugs in our society, and a number of significant steps have been taken.

I have put on the record the issues concerning the expansion of rehabilitation placements, and the fact that the progress that we committed to is being achieved.

We have supported the delivery of the first safer consumption room. Based on the evidence that is available to us, we know that the Thistle has saved lives as a consequence of that intervention. We have expanded the roll-out of naloxone, which is resulting in a significant reduction of death and injury to individuals who use drugs. I recognise that the level of drug deaths is far, far too high. In the past year, we have seen a 13 per cent decrease in the number of such deaths in Scotland, but we must maintain absolute vigilance and focus to ensure that we continue to make progress.

Finally, on the issue of criminal justice, our prison system is absolutely full of individuals, many of whom have been imprisoned because of their drug-related activity, so it is quite simply wrong for Mr Sarwar to suggest that people are not being brought to justice for their criminal activity. [Interruption.]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Mr Sarwar!

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

That will remain the focused priority of the Scottish Government.

Alex Cole-Hamilton (Liberal Democrat, Edinburgh Western)

I entirely associate myself with the First Minister’s remarks about progress towards peace in the Middle East.

I also take a moment to offer the sincere thanks of the Scottish Liberal Democrats for the life and work of Sir Menzies Campbell, who was lost to us last week. Ming was a titan of British politics who commanded respect in the Parliament in which he served and in homes across this country. He was a mentor and friend to many in my party and we miss him. I offer condolences to his family at this difficult time. [ Applause .]

When companies generate renewable energy, they are expected to give money back to the local community, but the amount of cash that we are talking about is pitiful, because the rules have not changed in more than a decade. All the while, people are still shivering in the shadow of turbines, unable to heat their homes. Will the Scottish Government listen to the Liberal Democrats, to Highland Council and to Shetland Islands Council and will it change those rules to cut energy bills for local people?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

First, I thank Mr Cole-Hamilton for his words, as I thanked Mr Sarwar for his, on the situation in Gaza. I also associate myself with his remarks about Menzies Campbell, Lord Campbell of Pittenweem. I was warmly and fondly welcomed into the House of Commons by Ming Campbell in 1997 and I enjoyed far too many uproariously funny conversations with Ming and his late wife, Elspeth, who were always wonderful company. I convey to the Liberal Democrats, as I have conveyed privately, my appreciation and sympathy as they wrestle with the loss of a giant of the Liberal Democrat movement.

On the substantive question on renewable energy, I have a lot of sympathy with Mr Cole-Hamilton’s point. The issue of community benefits arising out of wind farm developments is regulated by the United Kingdom Government, and we have been pressing for some time to mandate community benefits from mature onshore renewables technologies and to create greater benefit for communities, particularly in relation to the reduction of fuel bills. I am sympathetic to his point, but it is an issue that the Government has pressed the UK Government on, and we will continue to do so.

Alex Cole-Hamilton (Liberal Democrat, Edinburgh Western)

The First Minister cannot dodge this entirely. Some of it lies with his Government, too. Yesterday, I was in north Edinburgh with Ed Davey and Councillor Sanne Dijkstra-Downie and we met Edinburgh College apprentices who are being trained for good green jobs installing home insulation, solar panels and heat pumps. Those technologies are ready to go and they are at the heart of Liberal Democrats’ realistic plan to halve household energy bills by 2035.

John Swinney’s own independent advisers now say that his Government is extremely unlikely to meet its fuel poverty target. They found people catching hypothermia in their own homes, missing meals to top up the meter and burning their own floorboards as fuel. The Scottish Government’s consultation on the amount that energy companies give back closed six months ago, but nothing has changed. Under Liberal Democrat proposals, there are millions of pounds out there that could warm homes across Scotland. When will the First Minister change those rules?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The existing arrangements, which are specified by the United Kingdom Government, are non-mandatory. As a consequence, there is a limit. It is one of the examples of the constitutional point that I make. I am very sympathetic to the member’s point, but I cannot exercise powers that I am not legally entitled to exercise. That is one of the limitations of the constitutional arrangements.

I am absolutely with Mr Cole-Hamilton in wanting to use the energy wealth of Scotland, which is absolutely beyond dispute—we all agree about that—and I am absolutely with him on the desire to eradicate fuel poverty.

In the summer, I spent some time on the island of Yell in Shetland, where I saw an excellent example of a community wind farm that is creating real benefit in the locality and is owned by the community. Such models can be delivered where there is community ownership, and the Scottish Government enabled that development to be undertaken on Yell. I then went to the main island in Shetland and saw a colossal wind farm—the Viking Energy project—that is not delivering the right level of benefit to the community, nor is it eradicating fuel poverty. People in Shetland are living cheek by jowl with one of the largest wind farms in Europe while paying the highest fuel bills and living in fuel poverty.

The powers to arrest that do not rest in this Parliament. They rest with the UK Government. I am determined—and I am very keen to work with Mr Cole-Hamilton—to get those powers here so that we can do something about it for the people of Shetland and the people of west Edinburgh.

Clare Adamson (Scottish National Party, Motherwell and Wishaw)

To ask the First Minister what assessment the Scottish Government has made of any implications for its work to mitigate the two-child benefit cap of the United Kingdom Government’s reported proposals to replace the cap with a tapered system. (S6F-04378)

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I have seen the press speculation to which Ms Adamson refers. It is important that the UK Government lets us know as soon as possible about any plans that it might have because, as Ms Adamson will know, the Scottish Government is pressing ahead with our measures to abolish the two-child limit, which should have been undertaken as one of the first acts of the Labour Government. The Scottish Fiscal Commission estimates that 43,000 children in Scotland will benefit from the Scottish Government’s two-child limit payment, and Scottish Government modelling shows that 20,000 children will be kept out of relative poverty as a result.

Clare Adamson (Scottish National Party, Motherwell and Wishaw)

In hearing the murmurings, I was not surprised to find out that Labour is now back-pedalling on its plans. With a record 4.5 million children living in poverty under the Labour Government, plans to introduce a tapered system are nowhere near good enough. Will the First Minister join me in calling for the UK Government to reconsider that short-sighted proposal and instead follow the Scottish Government’s lead, dump the cap and dump the so-called rape clause?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I very much associate myself with the comments that Clare Adamson made. The Scottish Government is taking measures that are resulting in a reduction in child poverty in Scotland, but all the estimates show that, as a consequence of the actions of the Labour Government, particularly in welfare reform, there is likely to be a rise in child poverty across the rest of the UK, and, of course, across the rest of the UK, the level of child poverty is already rising.

I make the plea today—and I have made it on many other occasions—for the Labour Government to recognise the absolute imperative of eradicating child poverty, take the measures to lift the two-child cap and enable the Scottish Government to use the resources that we are using on that to mitigate another Westminster decision that is bad for Scotland.

Brian Whittle (Conservative, South Scotland)

To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government’s response is to reports that the mental health budget has been reduced in the 2025-26 autumn budget revision. (S6F-04374)

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The budget remains as originally published at £270.5 million.

Brian Whittle (Conservative, South Scotland)

I thank the First Minister for that answer, but the situation speaks to a wider problem across health and social care, namely that it is verging on impossible to follow the path from a Scottish Government spending commitment to the front-line support that it is intended to provide. Audit Scotland and the Fraser of Allander Institute have repeatedly warned that the complex and convoluted methods that are used by the Scottish Government are barriers to effective public scrutiny, and now organisations that are directly impacted by that funding are seemingly unable to determine how or even if the money that was promised will reach them.

As Scotland’s Mental Health Partnership has said, transparency is essential. The First Minister might be able to explain where those tens of millions of pounds of public money are when he has a briefing note in front of him, but how does he expect the public, the organisations that rely on it and those who scrutinise the Government to do the same?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I think that transparency and clarity were in my original answer; the budget remains as originally published at £270.5 million. I understand the importance of the issue and the significance that Mr Whittle attaches to all of that, but I simply make the observation that it is interesting that Mr Whittle is interested in the budget of £270.5 million for mental health support, but he was not interested enough to vote for the budget when it came to Parliament. It is all very well to come here and complain about budgets, but people have got to vote for them for them to be spent in the community in the first place.

Paul Sweeney (Labour, Glasgow)

Dr Pavan Srireddy, the vice-chairman of the Royal College of Psychiatrists, has described the autism and ADHD waiting time scandal as “a public health emergency”. Will the Scottish Government fulfil its commitment to spend 10 per cent of the national health service budget on mental health by the end of this parliamentary session, so that those who are trapped on waiting lists will have some reassurance that they will get the support that they need?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The Government is on track to fulfil that commitment.

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

To ask the First Minister, following Scotland’s global investment summit 2025, whether he will provide an update on the Scottish Government’s work to attract international investment into Scotland’s economy. (S6F-04377)

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Scotland is a nation that is extremely attractive to investors due to our skilled workforce, world-leading universities, a strong presence in the skilled workforce in sectors such as energy and a supportive business environment. That is why we have been ranked as the top destination for foreign direct investment outside of London and the south-east for the past 10 consecutive years. That work is led by the Deputy First Minister, who was actively engaged—as I have been—in the global investment summit that took place in Edinburgh this week.

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

Scotland’s record in attracting direct foreign investment has been consistently good. Last year alone, Scotland attracted 135 projects and it is ranked the sixth most attractive location in the top 10 locations in Europe for foreign direct investment.

However, the First Minister will recognise that making sure that we attract energy manufacturing capacity to Scotland to support us in the building out of our renewables is critical to delivering a just transition. What specific action is being taken to ensure that we attract that type of investment to create the jobs that we are looking for in the Scottish economy?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

A number of steps have been taken, particularly in relation to strengthening the scoping and consenting arrangements for offshore renewables projects. The Government is focused on taking those decisions. We work closely with the United Kingdom Government and press the argument, particularly with GB Energy and those responsible for the national grid, that there should be connectivity for those projects, so that the supply chain can have confidence in its investment decisions.

A number of developments that have taken their course—at Ardersier, and Sumitomo at Nigg—are strong indications of good foundations for the supply chain. However, we need every step of the journey to be undertaken to give us confidence in attracting investment. The Scottish Government is focused on making sure that that is the case.

Craig Hoy (Conservative, South Scotland)

In a week when John Swinney released yet another taxpayer-funded fantasy pamphlet on independence, the City of London Corporation stood shoulder to shoulder with Scotland to unlock new opportunities for growth. However, two areas where the SNP Government has effectively scuppered future inward investment are nuclear energy and oil and gas exploration, both of which are vital to our energy security and economic security. Now that John Swinney has been freed from the shackles of the extremist Greens, why does he not do the right thing by the Scottish economy and commit fully to drilling the North Sea and ending his Government’s student union politics on nuclear energy in Scotland?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

We all make our policy choices. On nuclear, I have made the policy choice to ensure that we develop Scotland’s natural and sustainable sources of energy, because that is better for our people and our planet. I am proud to defend that in Parliament today.

Secondly, it is the shiniest of brass necks imaginable for Craig Hoy to indicate that there is an issue with oil and gas activity, because the Conservative Government that he supported presided over the punitive tax regime of the energy profits levy, which is recognised by every commentator to be the biggest impediment to the security of the North Sea oil and gas sector. Mr Hoy should face up to the realities of the dreadful decisions made by the last Conservative Government.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

We move to constituency and general supplementary questions.

Emma Harper (Scottish National Party, South Scotland)

The general secretary of the Royal College of Nursing has said:

“Health and care services would cease to function without migrant nursing staff.”

Does the First Minister agree with that statement, and will he outline what assessment his Government has made of the impact of the Labour Government’s new immigration rules on vital essential workers in Scotland’s national health service?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The general secretary of the Royal College of Nursing has given a siren warning to all of us about the welcome that has to be extended to staff from other countries to come and work in our national health service.

In the year ending June 2025, the number of health and care worker visas issued to nursing professionals fell by 80 per cent. That will have a damaging effect on the operation of our national health service. We all know that there are challenges in relation to the size of our working-age population and a need for an appropriate skilled worker visa route that works in the interests of the national health service. That is one of the reasons why, if we have control of those issues in Scotland, it will be better for the people of Scotland.

Alexander Stewart (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

A recent report has uncovered that NHS patients in my region and across Scotland were forced to receive electric shock treatment against their will almost 1,100 times last year. In around 2,000 cases out of 4,000, that outdated procedure was performed on people who, because of their mental state, were deemed incapable of giving consent. How will the Scottish Government act to ensure that vulnerable patients are protected from receiving that ethically unacceptable procedure?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

If Mr Stewart writes to me, I will explore that in more detail. The issue merits a deeper answer than I can offer him at this stage. My first reaction would be that such judgments have to be made on the basis of clinical opinion, but Mr Stewart raises a wider and more significant issue, which I would rather have the opportunity to explore. If he would care to write to me, I will give him a substantive response.

Martin Whitfield (Labour, South Scotland)

The report “Improving care experience: Delivering The Promise”, by the Accounts Commission and the Auditor General, which was published yesterday, concluded that, from the outset, there was no assessment of what resources and skills were needed to deliver the Promise by 2030, or of how success would be defined or measured. Who should take responsibility for that failure?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

As Mr Whitfield knows, I take responsibility for everything here. I am the First Minister of Scotland—I do not dodge that for a moment. We gave a commitment as a Government to honour the Promise. As for the definition of success, I am a wee bit mystified by that point in the Audit Scotland report. It is pretty clear what the Promise has to achieve by 2030, and we are making progress in that respect.

I understand Mr Whitfield’s interest in the question, but substantive progress has been made. For example, we have taken action to ensure that no young people under 18 are admitted to young offenders institutes, and we have fewer children in Scotland growing up in care since 2020—a reduction of 18.1 per cent. Incidents of physical restraint and seclusion are declining in children’s residential accommodation, and more people with care experience are going on to positive destinations nine months after leaving school.

I acknowledge that there is more work to be done. The work has been taken forward very effectively by the minister responsible, Natalie Don-Innes, who has my full support. We have legislation on the issue, which Parliament can scrutinise, and that will be dealt with by Parliament before the close of the parliamentary session.

Michelle Thomson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk East)

The latest Scottish Chambers of Commerce quarterly economic indicator survey, which was published this morning, shows that seven out of 10 Scottish firms continue to struggle with higher employment costs and have concerns about further potential adverse policies from the United Kingdom Labour Government. Has the Scottish Government had the chance to assess the impact of the increase in employer national insurance contributions on employers in Scotland—a tax on Scottish businesses—and if so, what are its findings?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

That is a serious issue, because the increase in employer national insurance contributions has reduced competitiveness and opportunities for growth in the Scottish economy. The Government’s analysis shows that the changes could cost employers in Scotland more than £1.7 billion, and the cost to public services is of the order of more than £500 million. That indicates that a significant burden is being carried by business in Scotland, which, as a consequence, is an inhibitor of growth. It is beyond me why a Government that apparently supports economic growth is taking such a measure. It is another example of why we should take decisions here in Scotland on our behalf that are in the interests of the Scottish people and the Scottish economy.

Tess White (Conservative, North East Scotland)

NHS Grampian has plunged into further financial crisis, with the board’s financial director saying that it is struggling to “keep afloat”. This morning, a diagnostic report from KPMG said that expenditure has risen by £153 million—a 33 per cent increase. NHS Grampian already has the lowest bed base in Scotland. The Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care has failed to get a grip. The strain is intolerable for staff and patients. Will the First Minister please meet the board, which this morning put out a Facebook post saying that it has a “path to improvement”? I do not think that it does. Will he meet the board urgently to discuss its financial crisis in advance of winter?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The Government has taken measures in relation to NHS Grampian, and the board is under a significant level of additional scrutiny as a consequence of the issues that Tess White puts to me. I know that the cabinet secretary is meeting the board on Monday. I will wait to get a read-out of the report that Tess White mentioned. I am very happy to engage. I discuss the performance of the national health service with my officials on a weekly basis, and I will reflect on the points that she puts to me.

I assure Tess White that the issues that are important for the delivery of healthcare to the communities in the north-east of Scotland are being properly and effectively scrutinised and delivered, and I will ask the cabinet secretary to write to her with an update on those issues.

Rhoda Grant (Labour, Highlands and Islands)

The First Minister will be aware that the only islander on the board of Caledonian Maritime Assets Ltd has not had his membership renewed. That is a snub to our island communities, which are left yet again with no islander on the board. What will the First Minister do to increase the number of islanders on the board and ensure that islanders are represented on boards that are crucial to island communities’ survival?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

As Rhoda Grant will appreciate, the process of appointing members to boards is overseen by ethical standards advisers and it must take its course. However, she makes a substantial point about the necessity for island opinion and experience to inform the decisions of bodies that are acting on issues that significantly impact island communities. Regardless of board appointments, I would expect CMAL, Caledonian MacBrayne, Highlands and Islands Enterprise, the Crown Estate, NatureScot and all the other bodies that have a locus in relation to the issues and experience of islanders to go to absolute lengths to ensure that they can hear islanders’ opinions, listen to them and address the issues that they raise. Those issues are legitimate and boards must take them seriously. Although board membership cannot reflect Rhoda Grant’s legitimate aspiration in all circumstances, boards must listen to islanders and act on their behalf. I will ensure that that is the case.

John Mason (Independent, Glasgow Shettleston)

We all support the right to protest, assemble, march, and so on, yet the Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Act 2021 makes it an offence to stir up hatred. Does the First Minister think that we have, or can achieve, the right balance? Some groups, such as Catholic and Irish people, feel threatened by the repeated Orange marches in Glasgow, and Jewish people feel threatened by the repeated pro-Palestinian protests.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

That is a sensitive issue and I have to be careful, because we are in territory in which Police Scotland has to make careful judgments about a variety of long-standing circumstances in Scottish society. Some of the issues are easier to handle than others.

Fundamentally, I believe that we have to recognise the right to peaceful, respectful public assembly and freedom of expression. We all enjoy that right and are committed to upholding it. However, the right to peaceful assembly and freedom of expression should never be used to carry out or justify any form of hateful, violent, intimidating or otherwise criminal behaviour. Any form of hate crime is completely and utterly unacceptable. The 2021 act includes rigorous safeguards on free speech, which we respect everybody’s right to.

Lorna Slater (Green, Lothian)

Just two weeks ago, our capital city and my home town, Edinburgh, backed Scottish Green councillors’ calls to ensure that no public money is being used to bankroll Israel’s genocide. That comes more than a month after our Parliament voted to back our calls for boycott, divestment and sanctions against the genocidal Israeli regime.

What additional legislative changes will the Scottish Government pursue to enable local authorities such as the City of Edinburgh Council to legally adopt the BDS policies that the Parliament has agreed to support?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

In my statement on 3 September, I set out to the Parliament the actions that are within the Parliament’s competence and responsibility to take forward. The Government will pursue that agenda to ensure that we fulfil the commitments that I gave to the Parliament.

Keith Brown (Scottish National Party, Clackmannanshire and Dunblane)

As we have heard, this week, the Scottish Government published “A Fresh Start with Independence”. At a time when many of my constituents are struggling to heat their homes and pay for their food shopping due to Westminster inaction—and bearing in mind that the promise to reduce energy bills by £300 has turned into an increase of £200—will the First Minister outline his Government’s findings on the impact that independence would have on living standards and energy bills?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The Government’s paper that was published yesterday makes clear that there are opportunities to improve the living standards of people in Scotland by exercising the powers that would come with independence. In 2014, we were promised lower bills, financial security and European Union membership, but all those promises have turned to dust. This is the time for Scotland to have a fresh start with independence.

Meghan Gallacher (Conservative, Central Scotland)

Families of residents at a sheltered housing complex in Falkirk are deeply concerned about plans to outsource care services to an external provider. The proposals, which would remove the round-the-clock care service at Tygetshaugh Court, form part of an effort to address the £21 million budget shortfall. Families were not properly consulted, and local councillors have expressed frustration about their lack of influence over decisions that are made by the integration joint board. Should decisions that directly impact local communities be made by councillors or by an IJB in which the majority are unelected?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The arrangements for IJBs were put in place by statute that was considered by Parliament. It is the responsibility of the IJBs to take those decisions, and there will be members of any relevant local authorities on those boards. However, there should also be appropriate and adequate consultation with people who are affected by service changes. That is an implicit part of all the approaches that are taken to any service changes that take place, and I encourage that to be the case in this circumstance.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

That concludes First Minister’s question time.

The next item of business is a members’ business debate in the name of Clare Adamson, and there will now be a short suspension to allow those leaving the chamber and the public gallery to do so.

Breast Cancer Now Awareness Day 2025 and Wear It Pink Initiative

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

The next item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S6M-18752, in the name of Clare Adamson, on Breast Cancer Now awareness day 2025 and wear it pink. The debate will be concluded without any question being put. I invite members who wish to speak in the debate to please press their request-to-speak buttons.

Motion debated,

That the Parliament recognises Breast Cancer Now Awareness Day 2025, which takes place on 24 October, and commends what it sees as the vital work of Breast Cancer Now, which, it understands, is the UK’s leading breast cancer research and support charity; acknowledges what it considers the importance of the annual Wear It Pink initiative, which raises millions of pounds for lifesaving breast cancer research and care, and notes the calls for individuals, workplaces, schools and communities across Scotland to take part and show their support by wearing pink and fundraising on the day; pays special tribute to the late Christina McKelvie MSP, a dear friend and colleague, whose unwavering support for breast cancer awareness, equality and compassion continues to inspire; understands that around 4,700 people in Scotland are diagnosed with breast cancer each year, and that early detection, timely treatment and ongoing support are crucial to improving outcomes; notes the view that there is a need for continued investment in research, improved access to care and increasing awareness of secondary breast cancer, for which, it understands, there is currently no cure, and further notes the view that, by working together, raising awareness and supporting vital initiatives like Wear It Pink, people can make a real difference in the lives of those affected by breast cancer, now and in the future.

Clare Adamson (Scottish National Party, Motherwell and Wishaw)

I am delighted to speak in support of the motion recognising Breast Cancer Now awareness day 2025, which takes place on 24 October, and I thank all those members of the Parliament who supported the motion and allowed it to come to the chamber today. I am also delighted to welcome Kira McDiarmid and Jen Hardy from Breast Cancer Now, who are with us in the gallery today. It is wonderful to have them here to mark this important occasion and to enable us to recognise the vital work that they and their colleagues do every day, including in this Parliament. [ Applause .]

This day is not just a date in the calendar; it is a day of solidarity, hope and determination in the face of one of the most common and devastating diseases that affect people across Scotland, the United Kingdom and the world.

We commend the vital and tireless work of Breast Cancer Now, the UK’s leading breast cancer research and support charity. Its vision is bold but essential. It is that, by 2050, everyone who is diagnosed with breast cancer will live and be supported to live well. That is not just a mission statement; it is a call to action for all of us—policy makers, researchers, healthcare workers and communities alike. That work matters because breast cancer affects one in seven women in the UK during their lifetime. My sister started her journey in January this year. The issue also matters to men, who often have less awareness of the condition and receive less support after diagnosis, and it matters to the families and friends who work alongside people through diagnosis, treatment, recovery and loss.

One of the most important and powerful initiatives on breast cancer is the wear it pink campaign. Since 2002, it has raised more than £39 million for breast cancer research and care. Each October, people across Scotland and the UK, in schools, workplaces and homes, wear it pink to fundraise and show their support. Many of my colleagues did that last week—I ask that they bring the feather boas back.

In Scotland alone, the wear it pink campaign has raised more than £2.5 million in the past five years. That is an extraordinary contribution, and it shows what can be achieved when people come together with hope and determination. Wear it pink is a simple act, but it sends the powerful message that we are united in this fight. I encourage everyone in the chamber and beyond to get involved. Whether people hold a bake sale or a dress-up day or simply make a donation, every action counts. It is one day, one colour and one powerful message.

Breast cancer affects people in Scotland and across the UK, and it is also a reality that millions more face around the world. Around 4,700 people in Scotland are diagnosed with breast cancer every year, which is more than 12 people every day. Around 25 of those diagnosed each year are men. Globally, breast cancer is the most common cancer, with more than 2.3 million people diagnosed each year, and it leads to more than 685,000 reported deaths worldwide according to the World Health Organization.

Those figures represent far more than numbers; they reflect the lives of families, friends, colleagues and communities who are impacted by breast cancer every single day. They remind us why our gathering to wear it pink in the Parliament is so important. We came together in the garden lobby and the Burns room of the Parliament last week to wear it pink and show solidarity with Breast Cancer Now. It was wonderful to speak to survivors about their journey. The sense of unity among members, advocates, patients and families standing side by side demonstrates the strength of the campaign and the determination behind it.

We have made progress. Thanks to investment in research and early detection, the five-year survival rate is now over 85 per cent.

We can be proud of that, but it is not the full picture. For those living with secondary breast cancer, where the cancer has spread and is no longer curable, the outlook is still deeply concerning. It is estimated that more than 1,000 people in Scotland die of breast cancer each year—many of them from secondary cancer. Those patients often do not have the benefit of the same level of visibility, data collection or specialised care as those with primary breast cancer, and that is something that we can change. We must shine a stronger light on secondary breast cancer. That means better data collection, quicker and more accurate diagnosis, increased opportunities for clinical trials and wider access to specialist support. Although a cure may not yet be within reach, people living with incurable cancer deserve time, dignity and the best possible quality of life.

This year’s awareness day also gives us a moment to remember someone whom many of us knew, loved and respected—Christina McKelvie MSP. Christina was more than a colleague; she was a friend to all and a passionate advocate for equality, dignity and justice. She was someone who consistently fought for those who needed a voice and for those who found themselves marginalised, disadvantaged and often overlooked. Her voice in this chamber was powerful, and her absence is deeply felt. We honour her legacy by continuing the work that she believed in so strongly.

Breast cancer affects every part of our society, across every postcode and background. It impacts women and men and families. It does not discriminate, and neither should our efforts to fight it. Let us use Breast Cancer Now awareness day not only to raise funds and wear it pink, but to push forward with purpose. Let us continue to invest in research, ensure equal access to care and raise awareness for those who are still fighting and those who are living with secondary cancer. [ Applause .]

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

Thank you, Ms Adamson. We move to the open debate.

Marie McNair (Scottish National Party, Clydebank and Milngavie)

I congratulate Clare Adamson MSP on securing this important debate and on all the work that she has done in Parliament to raise awareness of breast cancer and the wear it pink campaign.

I am pleased to speak in the debate and pay tribute to my dear friend and beloved colleague Christina McKelvie. Christina’s warmth, kindness and passion for equality drive us all. In her memory, we must push harder to raise awareness and call for more research, to ensure that no one loses their life to breast cancer.

A few months ago, I went for my first breast screening. I am not afraid to admit that I was a bit nervous and apprehensive about it. However, I did not need to be, as the wonderful Gillian at the Golden Jubilee hospital in my home town of Clydebank put me at ease from the word go and carried out the mammogram with minimal discomfort.

The procedure took less than 10 minutes, so I urge anyone who is called for the screening to go, as it can save your life. It is essential, as one woman in nine in Scotland will develop breast cancer. Screening can find breast cancer before you notice any symptoms, and you are more likely to survive if it is found early. Even if you are fit and healthy, it is important that you attend and check yourself regularly.

Breast cancer is the most common cancer in women in the UK. A woman is diagnosed every nine minutes and a man every day. Thanks to advances in research and treatment, almost nine women in 10 survive breast cancer for five years or more. Breast cancer survival rates have doubled in the past 50 years, and it is estimated that routine screening prevents around 1,300 deaths from breast cancer each year in the UK. According to Breast Cancer Now, in the 1990s, more than one person in seven died from breast cancer, whereas today it is one in 20. That is a positive improvement, but more needs to be done. That is why the Breast Cancer Now wear it pink initiative is important. It raises millions of pounds for life-saving breast cancer research and care.

More needs to be done to increase awareness of secondary breast cancer, for which there is currently no cure. Currently, around 1,000 women in the UK die each month as a result of secondary breast cancer. I agree with Breast Cancer Now that it is a matter of urgency that we should dramatically improve outcomes for people whose cancer has spread.

Unfortunately, there are also inequalities in relation to cancer. There are inequalities in the risk factors for breast cancer, the uptake of breast cancer screening and survival rates. Lifestyle factors increase the risk of breast cancer. Public Health Scotland is clear that each of those factors is socially patterned, with people who live in deprived areas being more at risk. Women on low incomes are less likely to go for breast cancer screening, and breast cancer survival rates are worse in women from more deprived areas, partly due to the lower uptake of breast cancer screening. Public Health Scotland advises that, for the three-year period from 2020 to 2023, women from more deprived areas were less likely to attend breast screening: 64.2 per cent from the most deprived areas compared to 82.8 per cent in the least deprived areas. I want more action on that, to ensure that everyone can receive a timely diagnosis and treatment to beat breast cancer.

My sincere thanks go to Breast Cancer Now for all its amazing work and to its local co-ordinator, Kirsteen McDonald, for taking the time to meet me. In Christina McKelvie’s memory, let us continue to work together to ensure that breast cancer no longer takes the lives of those we love.

Stephen Kerr (Conservative, Central Scotland)

I associate myself with everything that Clare Adamson says in her motion and said in her excellent speech. I recognise Breast Cancer Now awareness day 2025 and commend the vital work of Breast Cancer Now, which is the UK’s leading breast cancer research and support charity.

I recognise, as Clare Adamson said, that the wear it pink campaign is an effective way of raising awareness. I am a week late—I see that the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care is also wearing pink—but I recognise the importance of the campaign, of showing solidarity and of communities demonstrating that they stand with people who are affected by breast cancer. It is a simple act, but it carries a powerful message of compassion and hope.

I thank God for the professionalism and compassion of the people who treated my wife, Yvonne, when she was diagnosed with breast cancer. No one forgets the moment when the words, “You have cancer” are spoken. The room falls silent, the world narrows and your heart sinks with fear for the one you love. In that moment, everything depends on the people around you. For Yvonne and me, it was the breast screening services team in Glasgow—it was they who first told Yvonne. I will never forget the quiet calm with which they broke the news. There was no panic, no bluntness and no false reassurance—just steady, compassionate professionalism. They explained what the diagnosis meant and what the pathway ahead would look like, treating Yvonne not as a statistic but as a woman with fears, hopes and a family who loved her.

The consultant surgeon who cared for Yvonne was equally remarkable. With clarity and sensitivity, she guided us through what surgery would involve. Her calm authority, patience and absolute dedication gave us reassurance at a time of great fear and uncertainty.

After surgery, Yvonne’s treatment moved to the Beatson West of Scotland Cancer Centre in Glasgow. I pay the highest tribute to the staff there. They were at the cutting edge of cancer treatment. However, what struck me most was their humanity. They did not simply deliver treatment—they cared. They knew Yvonne’s name, they asked after her wellbeing, and they invested themselves in her recovery as though she were one of their own. I saw that same care extended to every patient who walked through those doors. I cannot speak highly enough of them. To this day, my gratitude is without limit, because they gave me my wife, and they gave us both the chance of time together—something never again to be taken for granted.

That experience taught me that breast cancer is not borne by the patient alone; it is shared by husbands, wives, children, families and friends. I want to pay special tribute to Jo Churchill, the former member of Parliament for Bury St Edmunds and a two-time cancer survivor. During Yvonne’s treatment, Jo’s empathy and wisdom were a lifeline to me. Her support reminded me that compassion and solidarity matter almost as much as treatment.

The statistics remain sobering. Around 5,500 people are diagnosed with breast cancer in Scotland each year, and 1,000 die. Too many still wait too long for a diagnosis. Too many lack access to genomic testing. Secondary breast cancer—for which there is no cure, as was mentioned earlier—still blights lives.

We must be ambitious. That means resourcing our screening programme in order to achieve the 80 per cent target, collecting proper data on secondary breast cancer and ensuring access to new treatments and genomic testing on the national health service, not just private access.

In support of the motion and of Clare Adamson’s speech, I say let us wear pink with pride. Let us raise funds. Let us commit to ensuring that Scotland leads in research, treatment and care. In doing so, we give hope to those who live with breast cancer today and to those who will face it tomorrow. [ Applause .]

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

I congratulate Clare Adamson on securing this important debate and commend her for her thoughtful contribution. Like other colleagues, I associate myself with her remarks.

Like many other members, I come to the debate thinking of Christina McKelvie. I first met Christina when she was a young learning and development officer in social work services, working to improve the lives of families in Glasgow. It was absolutely characteristic of Christina that, even before she was diagnosed with breast cancer in 2020, she already supported Breast Cancer Now’s wear it pink campaign. She responded to her diagnosis by campaigning even harder to encourage women to regularly check their breasts and attend screening appointments.

Sadly, however, breast cancer remains one of the main causes of death in Scotland, and the vast majority of those who are affected are women. As Marie McNair rightly said, one in nine women in Scotland will develop breast cancer, but they are five times more likely to survive it if it is caught early.

Yesterday, I had the privilege of chairing a meeting with Atos Scotland and Breast Cancer Now to discuss what more progress can be made in screening. Uptake in Scotland right now is just over 75 per cent, which is good, but that still means that one in four eligible women are missing that vital opportunity. Although around 80 per cent of women from the least deprived fifth of the population take up screening, the rate among the most deprived fifth is 65 per cent. Last week, I urged the Scottish Government to publish the cancer deprivation figures, and I repeat that call now, because it is only with accurate data that we can target those who need it most effectively.

Raising awareness of screening is only part of the picture. For screening to work, not only do we need women to come in the door; we need radiographers to take scans and radiologists to make diagnoses based on the results. It is the whole journey that matters. I heard earlier this year from the Society of Radiographers, which warned that many of its members are at the point of burnout. Demand for diagnostic radiography has increased by 11 per cent year on year, and there is no equivalent increase in radiographer numbers or their equipment. Meanwhile, the latest census from the Royal College of Radiologists found that there was a 25 per cent shortfall of radiologists in Scotland, which is expected to rise to 35 per cent by 2029. In addition, of all the UK nations, Scotland has the worst shortage of clinical oncologists who treat cancer. Further, Scottish Labour research that was published earlier this year found that Scottish hospitals are relying on scanners that, in many cases, are decades old. We can do so much better.

There is a new drug to treat secondary breast cancer, which the Scottish Medicines Consortium considered recently—this week, I believe—and an announcement is expected next week. However, we lack the capacity for the type of genetic testing that is required along with the drug, which is routinely available to women in NHS England. I plead with the Minister for Public Health and Women’s Health and the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care to act quickly to ensure that the drug can be used in Scotland, if passed by the SMC.

For 2025-26, the UK Labour Government delivered a record budget settlement for Scotland, including around £2 billion extra for Scotland’s NHS. It is up to the Scottish Government to ensure that that money is invested appropriately. I ask the Scottish Government to commit to investing in scanners and developing a proper workforce plan so that women who turn up for screening know that, if anything is found, they will have the fastest possible route to treatment.

Jenni Minto (Scottish National Party, Argyll and Bute)

I, too, express my sincere thanks to Clare Adamson for bringing this important motion to the chamber for debate and to my fellow MSPs, who have all provided meaningful and thought-provoking contributions to our discussion.

I associate myself with the motion’s commendation of the work of the charity Breast Cancer Now. It is an active member of the Scottish Cancer Coalition, and I greatly appreciate its contribution to the national conversation on issues in relation to breast cancer and its vital work in supporting women living with breast cancer in Scotland. Clare Adamson and other members are right to recognise the support that men living with breast cancer get, too.

I have met the charity on a number of occasions since I became Minister for Public Health and Women’s Health, and I look forward to continuing that important collaboration into the future. The charity published its five-year strategy at the end of September, and I was pleased to note that our priorities continue to be aligned in the coming years and that its three key themes—earlier diagnosis, care and support, and new treatment—echo the ambitions of our 10-year cancer strategy for Scotland, which we published in 2023.

Everyone in the chamber has been completely correct about wear it pink. Stephen Kerr talked about what an effective way it is of raising awareness but also about the messages of care and hope that it brings.

The motion has awarded us the opportunity to mark the important contribution of Christina McKelvie.

Keith Brown (Scottish National Party, Clackmannanshire and Dunblane)

I apologise if I am pre-empting the minister’s next remark. I commend the Scottish Government for approving the drug Enhertu, which is not approved elsewhere in the UK. There are campaigns to make it available elsewhere.

The minister mentioned the wear it pink campaign, and Stephen Kerr did as well. I let the select band of members in the chamber know that next year, on 4 April, there will be a wear it pink event for Christina McKelvie, which will continue from the 10 to 15 years for which Christina hosted the wear it pink campaign in the Parliament. It will not be a Scottish National Party event; it will be open to everyone, if you can get a ticket. The money raised from that will go, in part, to Breast Cancer Now. I bring that to the attention of the minister and members.

Jenni Minto (Scottish National Party, Argyll and Bute)

I thank Keith Brown for that intervention and I hope that I will be able to get a ticket to that event.

As I was saying, the motion has given us the opportunity to mark the important contribution of our dear friend and colleague Christina McKelvie to amplifying the voices of women with breast cancer in Scotland.

Earlier this year, we had a very powerful motion of condolence for Christina. For me, Christina represented the heart and soul of our party. Her determination to make Scotland a better place to live in for the generations to come and her passion to see Scotland thrive as an independent nation meant that she dedicated her life to encouraging others to speak up and speak out for what is right. She championed so many important causes and was the epitome of what progressive politics should look like.

The first time that I saw Christina McKelvie speak, I remember thinking, “Who is this amazing woman?” She was full of energy. She spoke with such passion. She owned the room and, simply, she held everyone in the palm of her hand. Her demeanour was infectious and her presence will be forever missed in this chamber.

Christina’s focus on supporting minorities and women should be applauded and her particular focus on women’s health meant that she was a passionate advocate for all the issues in relation to breast cancer. As others have said, she had been so before her personal diagnosis. She was committed to ensuring that women regularly checked their breasts and were aware of signs and symptoms of breast cancer, as well as to encouraging all eligible women to attend their appointments at her national breast screening programme. I thank Marie McNair for emphasising the importance of that in her contribution.

I am pleased to be here to outline some of the actions that the Scottish Government is working on to continue Christina’s important legacy on this issue.

Clare Adamson (Scottish National Party, Motherwell and Wishaw)

I appreciate that the minister is about to move on to say what is happening. I want to remember on record that one of the first things that Christina did after her diagnosis was to have the age protocols for screening changed. I was a couple of months older than Christina—she never let me forget it—but, because of the cycle of when people were called to be tested, I had my first breast cancer screening test three years before she did. She changed that system to ensure that every woman would have that screening in her 50th year.

Jenni Minto (Scottish National Party, Argyll and Bute)

Clare Adamson raises an incredibly important point about Christina McKelvie’s focus on doing the right thing. I thank her for mentioning it.

We know that one in nine women living in Scotland will develop breast cancer at some stage in their life. Breast cancer is the second most common cancer in Scotland and the most common cancer to be detected in females. Importantly, due to improved detection and treatment options, survival rates have significantly increased over the past 30 years. Women are five times more likely to survive breast cancer if it is caught early. However, that does not mean that we should stop looking at new ways to work on it, such as the one that Clare Adamson just highlighted.

We know that earlier diagnosis is vital. That is why we continue to invest in our detect cancer earlier programme, which encompasses primary care, diagnostics, public education, data, innovation and screening. The programme works closely with the Scottish Cancer Coalition, including Breast Cancer Now, to support awareness-raising efforts, and uses social media channels to promote joint content and messaging where possible. Our “Be the Early Bird” campaign, which was launched in March 2023, aims to reduce the fear of cancer and to empower those with possible symptoms to act early. The campaign has been rerun several times over the past three years, specifically to target women aged 40-plus from areas of deprivation.

We are also committed to ensuring that those women who are diagnosed with breast cancer receive the best possible treatment and support. Our strategy has a range of measures that aim to benefit all those who are living with cancer, including implementation of a single point of contact to support patients throughout their journey and after discharge. It was heartening to hear about Stephen Kerr’s wife’s experience at the Beatson and throughout her treatment.

In Scotland, we are proud of our national breast cancer screening programme. All women aged 50 to 70 are invited for breast screening every three years, and women over 71 can request an appointment if it has been more than three years since their last appointment. My officials are also working with Screening Oversight and Assurance Scotland to implement the recommendations from its breast screening modernisation report, which was submitted earlier this year. The final report will be published in the coming weeks.

Christina McKelvie also championed the importance of improving data collection for metastatic breast cancer in Scotland. She shone that light, as Clare Adamson mentioned. I appreciate that that is an important issue for Breast Cancer Now and for patients including Jen and Alison, who I was so pleased to meet last Thursday on wear it pink day.

In our cancer action plan, we committed to improving data collection for metastatic cancers, and we are starting that process with breast cancer. My officials, along with colleagues in Public Health Scotland, are currently undertaking a thorough review of our options in relation to collecting data on secondary breast cancer in Scotland. As part of that work, they are considering the clinical time required and how such data can be used to improve services. My officials expect to receive advice from Public Health Scotland imminently. Following receipt of that advice, our aim is to agree the best method of data collection by 2026, which is the completion date for our cancer action plan. I note the points that Jackie Baillie made about the SMC’s deliberations, and I will take that issue away.

I reiterate my thanks to Clare Adamson and all my colleagues for their contributions today. I also thank Breast Cancer Now and all the other organisations that provide vital support to women and men living with breast cancer in Scotland. Together, we must build on the legacy of Christina McKelvie and the many other women who have lived with breast cancer.

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

That concludes the debate.

Portfolio Question Time

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

Good afternoon. The next item of business is portfolio question time, and the portfolio on this occasion is education and skills. There is quite a bit of interest in asking supplementary questions, so I make the usual appeal for brevity in questions and responses.

Tess White (Conservative, North East Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Government, in light of the publication of its revised guidance on supporting transgender pupils in schools, whether it can guarantee that, effective immediately, single-sex spaces, including toilets and changing rooms, have been made available to all girls during school hours. (S6O-05050)

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

Under the Education (Scotland) Act 1980, education authorities have the statutory responsibility for the delivery of education. The Scottish Government therefore does not carry the legal responsibility for the management of schools, or of their facilities, including the provision of toilets and changing rooms, which is a matter for education authorities.

The Scottish Government’s role is to provide education authorities and schools with non-statutory guidance to inform their work in relation to the legal requirements and associated national policies. The guidance that was published last week fulfils that role. For the avoidance of doubt, that updated guidance reflects the Supreme Court judgment and states that

“separate toilet facilities for boys and girls must be provided in schools”

and that

“the facilities require to be made available on the basis of biological sex”.

Tess White (Conservative, North East Scotland)

Parents have informed me that girls’ toilets in secondary schools in Angus are being locked during the school day, which is denying girls their legal right to single-sex spaces. That, as the cabinet secretary has just outlined, is illegal. What immediate steps is the Scottish Government taking to ensure that every girl in every school has unrestricted access to single-sex toilets, as required by the law?

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

I thank Tess White for raising that point. I am not sighted on the specifics relating to Angus Council, but I will go back to my officials in relation to toilets being locked during the school day. More broadly, she will be aware of the guidance that we published last week following the Supreme Court ruling. That guidance is intended to bring clarity to the teaching profession and to young people in our schools and was our response to the Supreme Court ruling. I am more than happy to take away the specific issue that she has raised.

Rona Mackay (Scottish National Party, Strathkelvin and Bearsden)

I welcome the engagement that the Scottish Government has undertaken with parents and carers, education representatives, LGBT organisations and women’s organisations to develop the recent guidance. Will the cabinet secretary provide more detail about how that will ensure that support for trans children continues in schools?

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

The purpose of the guidance is to support our councils and schools in their support for transgender pupils. We know that those matters are really complex and that education authorities will continue to consider the wellbeing of all their pupils, including transgender pupils, as they navigate the support that is required in schools.

The guidance offers advice on legal, policy and practical matters and draws together the signposting of support for parents and carers and for young people. It recognises that those highly personal decisions can be challenging for young people and their families, and for councils and schools, to navigate. The guidance seeks to provide support to those working in our schools as they navigate that complex issue for all.

Richard Leonard (Labour, Central Scotland)

I welcome the minister to his new position.

To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to address the reported jobs and cuts crisis in further and higher education. (S6O-05051)

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

I thank Richard Leonard for the warm welcome and express to him that the Scottish Government values and works to support all those who work in further and higher education in our country. I have valued the opportunities to express that since coming into post less than a month ago.

Our most recent budget allowed the Scottish Funding Council to increase revenue funding to colleges by 2.6 per cent and funding to universities by 3.3 per cent. However, we recognise the pressures that both sectors face, which have been set out clearly by Audit Scotland and the Scottish Funding Council. My ministerial colleagues and I will continue to work collaboratively on those challenges with both sectors and with the Parliament.

Richard Leonard (Labour, Central Scotland)

The Alloa campus of Forth Valley College remains under threat. The principal told me this week that

“Without intervention the college is forecast to run out of cash by December 2026 and would become insolvent”.

In a written answer last week, the minister told me that the closure of the Alloa campus was “ultimately ... an operational matter” for the college. If it is not the job of the Minister for Higher and Further Education to defend access to further education in one of our most deprived communities, I do not know what his job is, so will he give an assurance to Parliament and to the people of Clackmannanshire, this afternoon, that the Alloa campus will not be downgraded and will not be closed?

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

I thank Richard Leonard for his engagement on the matter. In relation to the Alloa campus, I have valued questions from members across the chamber, including from Keith Brown last week, who have advocated on behalf of the campus.

We recognise that, as has been set out, including in the Audit Scotland report this week, colleges are anchor bodies in communities. The Alloa campus plays an important role in helping young people and others in Clackmannanshire to fulfil their potential, build their skills and contribute fully.

The Scottish Government is engaged on the issue, as members would expect. Ministers are regularly being updated on the matter and, crucially, the Scottish Funding Council is engaged with Forth Valley College on the Alloa campus. We will continue to update the Parliament as appropriate, and we will continue our proactive engagement with the Scottish Funding Council.

Miles Briggs (Conservative, Lothian)

The Audit Scotland report is not only a wake-up call for ministers; it should act as an alarm bell for them. Scotland’s colleges face a dire financial future under this Government. After a decade of dire public warnings from colleges and others about their future, what future funding models and new funding models will the Scottish Government bring forward to save our colleges?

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

Following the Audit Scotland report last week, and prior to that with regard to the Scottish Funding Council reports, we have collectively discussed in the Parliament, and at length, the importance of colleges as anchor institutions, which I mentioned earlier, and the roles that they play in enhancing skills, creating a fairer society and providing locally accessible learning facilities.

As well as appreciating my engagement with the Parliament so far, I welcome the positive engagement that I have had with Colleges Scotland, as the body that represents colleges. I had a really good visit to Kelvin College in Glasgow earlier this week. We need to have engagement with the college sector on sustainable funding, and we look forward to having that further engagement in the weeks and months ahead. I look forward to my next meeting with Colleges Scotland and discussing how we can collectively bring everyone with an interest round the table to ensure that we support our colleges and provide sustainable funding into the future.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

Thank you, minister. We are going to need a little more brevity in responses.

Jackie Dunbar (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Donside)

To ask the Scottish Government what discussions the education secretary has had with ministerial colleagues regarding how to support people in Aberdeen to gain the skills and qualifications needed for the energy transition, to ensure that north-east Scotland has a world-leading workforce. (S6O-05052)

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

The cabinet secretary maintains regular communication with Cabinet colleagues on matters of importance to the Government, including supporting people in Aberdeen and elsewhere to gain the skills for the energy transition in the north-east, which is a key priority. We will continue to work with regional partners to help to ensure that the workforce is equipped for the opportunities ahead. Targeted funding is already in place to support skills for the energy transition, in recognition of high demand, and colleagues and I will continue to engage with all partners, including Jackie Dunbar, in this shared endeavour.

Jackie Dunbar (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Donside)

It is hugely important that we harness the potential of our young people and workers who are needed for the energy transition and that we assist in facilitating pathways to success. Does the minister share my view that cross-sector joint working is crucial to achieving that objective?

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

We are committed to boosting skills among Scotland’s young people, especially in vital sectors such as those relating to the energy transition. Although we pursue long-term reform of post-school education and skills, we recognise that there is an urgent need to meet current demands. That is why we are providing targeted funding to colleges in 2025-26 for an offshore wind skills programme. That will create training hubs to build the skilled workforce that is needed for our offshore wind ambitions and will support the upskilling and reskilling that will aid energy transition. The funding enables new courses to be provided, strengthens college staff capacity and invests in facilities across strategically important regions for the offshore wind industry.

In addition, alongside the United Kingdom Government, we are providing up to £2 million of funding to Forth Valley College to support workers at Grangemouth to transition into those key sectors.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

To ask the Scottish Government for what reason it considers the percentage of students earning an A, B or C in higher history fluctuated by 27.6 per cent between 2023 and 2025. (S6O-05053)

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

There are always year-on-year fluctuations in pass rates in both directions for individual courses. The Scottish Qualifications Authority has worked in partnership with history teachers to develop and deliver an enhanced and well-received understanding standards programme. Following the 13 per cent dip last year, I was pleased to see that the pass rate improved by 14.6 per cent this year.

The SQA quality-assured awarding process, which includes grade boundary checks, confirmed that the assessments worked as intended and that the national standard was consistently applied. Candidates can be confident that their results in both years reflect the hard work and achievement.

Douglas Ross (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

I am sorry, but I do not think that candidates can be confident. The SQA’s internal review of the 2024 higher history exam blamed the students, yet we now see the exam results back up to pre-2024 levels. Does the cabinet secretary not accept that that means that the SQA’s review—a review that she whole-heartedly supported—was wrong? Does she understand that students who got lower-than-expected grades in 2024 feel a sense of injustice and that their marks were not sound?

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

I thank Mr Ross for his interest in this matter. We have discussed it at length in front of his committee, but I want to put on the record and reassure him that I pressed the issue with previous management at the SQA on no less than three occasions. Of course, there has also been an independent report into the processes that were applied.

It is worth recounting, however, that pass rates vary year on year. I can cite other examples, such as that the national 5 graphic communications pass rate fell from 74.2 per cent in 2023 to 64.8 per cent in 2024, and then it increased again to 76.7 per cent in 2025. There will always be variations.

There were issues in relation to higher history last year—I accept that—and the SQA took a number of different actions in that regard, not least in relation to the support to the profession, but also through additional support for teachers of higher history and markers being put in place. The markers’ report was also reviewed and updated. The markers’ report is important, because it looks at the national standard and identifies strengths and weaknesses in performance. Markers were given the form earlier this year so that it could be used by all markers who are undertaking coursework and question paper marking in 2025. It is also a matter of public record that the SQA carried out an independent review that looked into the matters in detail at that time.

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

Although the Opposition looks to discredit the dedication of Scotland’s students through persistent negativity about Scotland’s schools, this year’s SQA results showed record levels of achievement. Can the cabinet secretary speak further on the overall performance of Scotland’s schools, notably in relation to the narrowing of the poverty-related attainment gap? [ Interruption .]

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

I can hear someone to my left muttering the word “shameful”, but I thank Paul McLennan for highlighting the achievements of our young people in Scotland this year, which have been remarkable. A record number of vocational and technical qualifications were achieved, and pass rates for nat 4, nat 5, higher and advanced higher were up compared to last year. The poverty-related attainment gap has also narrowed for nat 5, higher and advanced higher when compared to last year. We also had 95.7 per cent of school leavers in initial positive destinations in 2024, which is our second-highest level ever. Of course, there is more work to do, particularly in relation to the attainment gap, but I certainly welcome the progress that we have seen this year in relation to our exam results.

Jamie Halcro Johnston (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

To ask the Scottish Government what challenges are faced by those delivering education across the Highlands and Islands. (S6O-05054)

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

The statutory responsibility for delivering education lies with local authorities, and we recognise the unique challenges that are faced by those in the Highlands and Islands. We are actively engaged with councils and stakeholders in the region. I have met Highlands and Islands Enterprise to discuss rural childcare accessibility. The cabinet secretary and ministerial colleagues have also visited to hear directly from communities.

The forthcoming national islands plan and rural delivery plan will include education as a strategic priority. Those plans aim to ensure that communities have a genuine voice in decisions that affect local education provision and ultimately improve outcomes for learners.

Jamie Halcro Johnston (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

In January last year, my Conservative colleague Councillor Helen Crawford presented a motion to the Highland Council calling on it to declare a school estate emergency, based on the fact that it has the poorest school estate in Scotland. The council’s Scottish National Party-led administration refused to do so.

More than one third of Highland schools are now classed as being in a state of disrepair, with 53 primaries and 11 secondaries falling below acceptable standards. Given that clear neglect of rural education, can the minister explain why—after 18 years of Government—the SNP is still failing to deliver safe and efficient learning environments for Highland pupils?

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

First, it is the statutory responsibility of local authorities to manage their school estate. We are aware that some schools in the Highland Council and Moray Council areas are in an unsatisfactory condition. Two of the deconditioned schools in the region—Forres and Nairn academies—are being replaced through the learning estate investment programme. There are plans from each council for the other two de-conditioned schools—Charleston and Alves. We will continue to work with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, local authorities and the Scottish Futures Trust to explore how we can deliver further improvements.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

With a reminder that the substantive question is around education access in the Highlands and Islands, I call Jamie Hepburn.

Jamie Hepburn (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld and Kilsyth)

Will the minister set out how Scottish Government schemes, such as the preference waiver payment, assist in overcoming any challenges in education associated with geographical location?

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

The Scottish Government recognises the challenges that are posed by geographical location in delivering education, particularly in remote and rural areas. The preference waiver payment is an incentive to attract newly qualified teachers to more remote and rural local authorities that experience difficulties in securing probationers.

Currently, the PWP is £6,000 per annum for primary teachers and £8,000 per annum for secondary teachers, and it is paid in addition to the probationer’s salary. It is complemented by the remote schools allowance and targeted funding to protect teacher numbers. Those measures all form part of a broader strategy, including the forthcoming national islands plan and rural delivery plan, which I have already mentioned. Together, those initiatives support equitable access to high-quality education across all parts of Scotland.

Douglas Lumsden (Conservative, North East Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to recent reports of a rise in recorded bullying incidents in schools. (S6O-05055)

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

I have made it clear that I expect all incidents of bullying to be recorded and that, with more rigorous recording, the number of recorded incidents will likely increase. That reflects a crucial part of our on-going commitment to transparency, ensuring that every allegation is taken seriously and that all children and young people are properly supported.

To support schools, we published updated national anti-bullying guidance in November of last year, which includes guidance on recording and monitoring. We also continue to fully fund respectme, Scotland’s anti-bullying service, to build confidence and capacity to address bullying effectively.

Douglas Lumsden (Conservative, North East Scotland)

With more than 64,000 bullying incidents logged in just five years and growing reports of violence against teachers, it is clear that violence and intimidation are becoming routine in Scotland’s schools. Does the cabinet secretary agree with the First Minister’s claim yesterday that the Scottish National Party Government has not failed in education, when it is evident that it is failing to protect pupils and staff from harm?

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

Douglas Lumsden might be interested in a report by His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Education that was published in early 2023, which looked at the quantum of bullying incidents that have been recorded and noted that only two thirds of our schools recorded bullying incidents effectively. We therefore know that a number of schools currently do not recording bullying incidents.

In my time as education secretary, I have been clear that we want all schools to record all incidents and allegations. We need to have a clear national picture. In doing that, I accept and recognise that it might lead to an increase in the number of incidents that are recorded, but it is important to have that information to inform our support to our schools. That has been done primarily from an education perspective, driven through the national action plan on behaviour and relationships, which has been co-produced with local authorities and our teaching trade unions. It has been hugely important to have co-operative partnership working on this really important issue in our schools.

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

Bullying is categorically unacceptable in Scotland’s schools and in our society. Will the cabinet secretary provide details of engagement with teachers and parents, who interact with our young people day in, day out, in shaping guidance on responding to challenging behaviour?

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

I engage with parents and teachers on a regular basis. This morning, I met the headteacher panel and, earlier this week, I was in Orkney meeting parents and carers and listening to some of their concerns at the current time.

We published the guidance, “Fostering a positive, inclusive and safe school environment”, to support our school staff in relation to challenging behaviour. As I have set out previously, the Scottish advisory group on relationships and behaviour in schools includes representatives from our teaching unions and Connect, our parent organisation, which has been hugely important in providing the oversight and necessary experience in the development of the guidance.

James Dornan (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Cathcart)

To ask the Scottish Government what progress it has made in further widening access to university education for people in the most disadvantaged communities. (S6O-05056)

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

The number of Scots from the most deprived areas who enter university has increased by 37 per cent since the Scottish Government established the commission on widening access, and the latest Universities and Colleges Admissions Service statistics show that record numbers of young Scots from deprived areas were accepted to study at university in 2025.

However, we know that there is more to do. We will continue to work with the sector, and with the commissioner for fair access, to make further progress on fair access to higher education. That includes our on-going exploration of data-sharing options to better support disadvantaged individuals and communities.

James Dornan (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Cathcart)

Will the minister set out how the support that is available for mature and care-experienced students to access and succeed in university compares with that in other United Kingdom nations? What assessment has the Scottish Government made of the effectiveness of those measures in reducing inequalities in higher education?

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

I thank the member for raising those important matters. The Scottish Government continues to provide unparalleled support to care-experienced students in the form of a non-means-tested bursary of £9,000—the first of its kind in the UK. All of Scotland’s universities are committed to guaranteeing a university place to care-experienced applicants who meet minimum entry requirements. I am proud that there has been an increase in care-experienced students attending university every year since 2016. Support for mature learners is also a priority, and we continue to fund the Scottish wider access programme, which supports thousands of learners to return to higher education each year.

Pam Duncan-Glancy (Labour, Glasgow)

Although entry numbers have increased, course completion is still a problem. The most recent figures show a retention rate of 86.1 per cent for students from the most deprived communities versus 92.1 per cent for those from the least deprived. There is now a gap of six percentage points, which is up from a gap of 4.5 percentage points 10 years ago. Does the minister agree that getting into university or college is not enough? We must support students to complete their courses. If he agrees, how does he think that cuts to discretionary funds and to student mental health support will impact widening access?

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

The member is right that we need to support people through their journey. That is why provision through the Scottish loan system and Student Awards Agency Scotland support is significant and makes an important difference for people throughout their journey.

As I said in my first answer, I appreciate that there is more work to do. We have made a lot of progress since 2016, and I would be pleased to engage with Pam Duncan-Glancy on those points as we collectively try not just to enhance the opportunities of people going to university but to help them to complete their journey and succeed thereafter.

Jamie Halcro Johnston (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

The latest figures show that University of Highlands and Islands student numbers have fallen by 6,000. UHI has faced a number of challenges, including mergers, staff cuts and, of course, the funding issues that have plagued the sector in the past 18 years. What impact does the minister think that that will have on the disadvantaged and often remote communities across my Highlands and Islands region?

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

I have welcomed engagement on UHI since coming into post, including from Jamie Halcro Johnston and the members who are sitting behind him. The provision across the Highlands and Islands, which is, of course, a wide geographical area, is extremely important for those communities and for the country more widely.

It is important to recognise that, when students go to a university in Scotland, their fees are paid for by the Government—by the taxpayer. That helps people to access those opportunities. There is a situation, as set out by the Scottish Funding Council, with regard to the sustainable funding of the sector, and I spoke earlier about how we are engaged in that and how we engage with Universities Scotland.

Martin Whitfield (Labour, South Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Government what assessment it has made of the impact on youth work provision of its budget decisions, in light of the most recent YouthLink Scotland survey indicating that the majority of young people accessing youth work do so through the voluntary sector. (S6O-05057)

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

As Parliament knows from contributions that I have made previously, I highly value youth work, and I am looking at ways to provide further support. At present, the Scottish Government funds youth work provision in a variety of ways, most prominently through local authority block grants, which give councils significant autonomy to provide youth work in their area.

Martin Whitfield (Labour, South Scotland)

I am aware that the minister genuinely values youth work. When I launched my proposed youth work (Scotland) bill at the Citadel Youth Centre in Leith, I saw first hand how transformative voluntary provision can be and, indeed, how the minister takes interest in that place. However, YouthLink’s latest survey shows that the majority of young people who access youth work do so through voluntary organisations, and that many such organisations are struggling to meet rising demands. What are the minister’s specific plans to strengthen voluntary and statutory provision so that no young person misses out?

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

I am looking forward to engaging with the youth work sector in my role and will be doing so in the weeks ahead. The member speaks about youth work in terms of preventative spending and its power to help young people to realise their potential, which allows them to contribute more to society and the economy. I believe in that deeply, and I see it in my local constituency through organisations such as the Citadel Youth Centre. I have forgiven the member for not inviting me to the launch of his bill in my constituency in Leith.

Although I not dismissing the considerations around the need for primary legislation, most important, we must consider the current needs in communities, which I am engaged with. We have provided a lot of additional resource—more than £1.1 billion in 2025-26, which is a real-terms increase of 5.5 per cent—to local authorities. Without disrespecting the Verity house agreement, we need to consider whether local authorities are investing enough in youth work and what other ways we can provide additional youth work support where there is need and demand, given the current circumstances.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

I can squeeze in a very brief supplementary question.

Bill Kidd (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Anniesland)

Is there anything else that the minister can say about the role of local authorities in allocating resources for youth work?

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

I recognise that local authorities have significant resource and a responsibility to invest in youth work. We are investing through other avenues where we can, including through Youth Scotland and YouthLink Scotland. We have invested £2 million since 2023 through community-based national youth work organisations. I will continue to consider how central Government, working with local government, while respecting the Verity house agreement, can support the important contribution that youth work makes to our communities.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

That concludes portfolio questions. There will be a brief pause before we move to the next item of business to allow front bench teams to change position.

Cambuslang Jobcentre (Proposed Closure)

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

The final item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S6M-18364, in the name of Clare Haughey, on opposition to the proposed closure of Cambuslang jobcentre. The debate will be concluded without any question being put. I invite members who wish to participate in the debate to press their request-to-speak buttons.

Motion debated,

That the Parliament condemns the proposed closure of jobcentres across the UK, including Cambuslang Jobcentre in the Rutherglen constituency, by the UK Government.

Clare Haughey (Scottish National Party, Rutherglen)

In January 2017, I stood up in the chamber to speak in my colleague Bob Doris’s debate on proposed jobcentre closures in the Glasgow region, including Cambuslang jobcentre in my constituency. After a huge effort from the local community, local organisations, trade unions, activists and elected members, Cambuslang jobcentre was saved. Eight years later, communities in my constituency find themselves in exactly the same situation, albeit under a Labour Government rather than a Tory Government at Westminster.

The Department for Work and Pensions has announced that Cambuslang jobcentre is to close, with all services being relocated to Rutherglen. In 2017, my colleague Jamie Hepburn made the point that the decision to close particular jobcentres seemed to be driven by the fact that lease arrangements for buildings were coming to an end. Strangely enough, the DWP’s lease in Cambuslang is due to end in early 2026.

The DWP has claimed that the jobcentre’s proposed closure is part of its plans to leave “older, poorer-quality buildings”. That supposed justification would be risible if it was not so insulting. Cambuslang jobcentre is situated in a bright, accessible, modern building in a central location in the town. It is co-located with other vital services including the award-winning employment champion Routes to Work South, which has just celebrated its 20th year of operation. In fact, the jobcentre is in such a great location that the DWP invested more than £200,000 of public money in new doors and closed-circuit television just a couple of years ago. The DWP rationale simply does not wash with the residents of Cambuslang and it does not wash with me.

Hundreds of local residents have now signed my petition against the closure, and many of them have shared their stories with me. Those people would be seriously impacted by any closure, and I am thankful for their candidness. Time and again, I have heard fears around accessibility, travel time and the threat of punitive sanctions for being late or missing an appointment.

Cambuslang community council is a well-kent and well-respected organisation that is rooted in the communities that its members serve and it knows them inside out. It has been unequivocal in its opposition to any closure, citing the disproportionate impact that it would have on vulnerable people and those who live in areas of deprivation, and I agree with it entirely. The community council is fiercely protective of local services—it successfully launched a banking hub in the face of the withdrawal of high street banks, for example—and I commend its continued commitment to Cambuslang.

I also put on the record my thanks to the many local businesses and shops that have displayed the poster about my campaign and petition.

In 2017, the previous UK Government said that, if it would take 20 minutes for people to reach a named alternative by public transport, there should be a public consultation on any proposed jobcentre closure. My constituents in Halfway, Drumsagard or Lightburn would face around a 90-minute walk, or a journey of at least 30 minutes on public transport, to Rutherglen jobcentre. My constituents in Greenlees would face up to a 45-minute journey using public transport.

Frankly, it feels like the latest decision has been made by someone who could not point to Cambuslang on a map, let alone be bothered to look at the building on Google maps, download a bus timetable or google local representatives’ names. There has been absolutely no consultation whatsoever with local communities, service users, elected members, trade unions or Department for Work and Pensions employees.

At a meeting of South Lanarkshire Council on 1 October, the SNP group lodged a motion that called on the council to unite in condemning the proposed closure. I am delighted to say that the motion was passed unanimously, with councillors of all political parties and none coming together to stand up for the community.

In 2017, Labour members lined up to condemn the prospect of jobcentre closures, including in Cambuslang. Where are Anas Sarwar and Pauline McNeill today? Where are they when a jobcentre in their region is again under threat?

Back then, our Conservative colleague Annie Wells spoke very honestly about her concerns about the proposed consultation process, or lack thereof. I appreciate that that must have been a politically uncomfortable position for her to take, given that there was a Tory United Kingdom Government at the time. It is for that reason that I commend one local Labour councillor for speaking up for her constituents in the council chamber and for publicly stating:

“The evidence that the DWP has given for the relocation definitely does not stack up. There is nothing that stacks up that justifies closing the jobcentre.”

I am deeply concerned that not one of our Labour colleagues has signed my motion or stayed to listen to the debate. That speaks volumes to my constituents about how much their regional Labour representatives care. It is disgraceful that there has not been a cheep from the Labour MP on the matter, either.

It has been 11 weeks since I wrote to the UK Government to request an urgent meeting and to relate my constituents’ concerns. I have yet to receive a substantive reply, let alone a date for a meeting. I ask the minister to write to the DWP to chivvy it along and make it aware that my constituents are so concerned about the closure of Cambuslang jobcentre.

I am not alone. Local Liberal Democrat and Labour councillors have shared that they have not received replies, either. Perhaps Andrew Western, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State at the Department for Work and Pensions, who made the announcement in July, has had other important DWP-related matters on his mind. After all, on 15 September, he provided an MP with an answer as to on how many days the union flag had been flown over DWP buildings.

Altogether, the UK Government’s behaviour has been nothing short of disgraceful. It has provided a flimsy rationale that does not stand up to any sensible scrutiny. It has not even matched the previous Government’s extremely low threshold to trigger consultation. It has flat-out ignored elected members’ requests for meetings and further information. In the face of increasing pressure from all sides, it has repeated the same worn-out lines in the local and national press.

I was proud to stand up for Cambuslang jobcentre in 2017, and I am proud to do so today. I am proud of the resolve of the local residents, communities, activists and organisations in my constituency, which I stood alongside in 2017 and which I am standing alongside today.

The motion is about protecting local services and about dignity and respect in relation to how we treat vulnerable groups in our communities. It is about giving my Cambuslang constituents access to a vital service and helping them to access benefits, work and training opportunities. I will continue to campaign for the DWP and the UK Labour Government to lift the threat of closure of Cambuslang jobcentre and to secure its future.

Annie Wells (Conservative, Glasgow)

I thank Clare Haughey for once again bringing this matter to the chamber. She should not have had to do so; it should have been dealt with back in 2017, as she said. I express my concern at the decision to close Cambuslang jobcentre in January 2026, which is a decision made by the DWP under the Labour Government at Westminster.

The closure is more than just an administrative change; it will have real consequences for people in Cambuslang—people who are trying to find work, support their families and rebuild their lives. For many in the community, the jobcentre is not simply a building; it is a vital point of access for advice, training, opportunities and human connection at what can often be one of the most difficult points in someone’s life.

By closing this jobcentre, we are asking vulnerable people—people with disabilities, mobility issues or limited means—to travel significantly further, often for more than an hour, as we have heard from Ms Haughey, to reach the next nearest centre in Rutherglen. That is not accessibility; it is exclusion.

As we have heard, the decision was taken without any meaningful consultation with local residents, councillors or community groups, and that lack of transparency is unacceptable. Local voices matter. The people of Cambuslang deserve better than to have decisions made about them, without them.

We have heard all too often that such closures are about efficiency, but there is nothing efficient about forcing people to spend more time and money to access basic support, particularly in the midst of a cost of living crisis. It is also deeply ironic that a Government that claims to promote fairness and opportunity is instead pulling up the ladder for those who need the help most.

Although I acknowledge the need for modernisation, digital tools and online services can never fully replace the face-to-face support that many people need and want. Not everyone has reliable internet access, and not everyone has the competence to navigate the system alone.

Cambuslang has already lost too many local services in recent years. We cannot continue to strip away the very foundations of community support, and then act surprised when people feel abandoned.

I would like to make clear that this is not about party politics. It is, as I said in the debate earlier today, about people. It is about ensuring that those looking for work are supported locally and are not left behind.

I also call on the UK Government to pause this closure, to properly consult local representatives, service users and employers and to commit to a full equality and accessibility impact assessment before any final decision is made.

Let us listen to the people of Cambuslang, and let us make decisions with communities, not for them. Government at every level should be about helping people move forward and not about putting more barriers in their way.

Once again, I thank my colleague Clare Haughey for bringing this debate to the chamber.

Rona Mackay (Scottish National Party, Strathkelvin and Bearsden)

I thank my friend and colleague Clare Haughey for bringing this important debate to the chamber. It is good to see her standing up for her constituents.

The importance of the debate is clear. Cambuslang jobcentre is the first customer-facing jobcentre to face closure in Scotland. Sadly, if the closure goes ahead, I fear that it might not be the last.

Previously, the Tories threatened closure of several jobcentres in Glasgow. There was no surprise there, to be honest, but I congratulate Annie Wells on standing up against the tide. At that time, MSPs and MPs managed to overturn the decision in cognisance of how damaging it would be at every level. However, I have to admit that I am shocked that it is a Labour Government that proposes this closure. No Labour MSPs signed Clare Haughey’s motion, there have been no protests from their MP colleagues and there are no Labour MSPs in the chamber. As Clare Haughey said, that really says it all.

The jobcentres were saved at that time, yet here we are again, now with a Labour Government threatening the closure of a jobcentre. It beggars belief. Labour supported the campaign to save the jobcentres in 2017, but it has been silent now. The level of hypocrisy here is breathtaking.

Only two front-facing jobcentres are under threat of closure at the moment: those in Bristol and Cambuslang. Why is Cambuslang under threat? The DWP says that it is rationalising old estate, but that really does not wash. As we have heard Clare Haughey articulate, Cambuslang jobcentre is in a modern building and is co-located with a general practitioner surgery. It is also a stone’s throw from the local citizens advice bureau, and it has the award-winning Routes to Work South, a training provider with more than 20 years of operation under its belt, on its doorstep, so it could not be more ideally located or fit for purpose, which makes a nonsense of the reasons that have been given by the DWP for its closure.

When the UK Government is looking to move more people off disability benefits into employment, and at a time of record-high unemployment, withdrawing the local support services that could help people into work is ludicrous. Where is the sense in that? However, numerous non-public-facing DWP offices across the UK have closed, which could be the start of a callous cost-cutting measure that will affect people seeking help with accessing benefits, training and, ultimately, employment. When banks are closing on our high streets and post offices are closing, this move seems incredibly callous. I know that it would be a huge blow if the jobcentre in Kirkintilloch in my constituency were to close but, frankly, I now can take nothing for granted.

The UK Government must stop penalising the disadvantaged—people who need support to live a dignified life. It must stop taking services away from them and making their lives even harder.

Richard Lochhead (Scottish National Party, Moray)

I thank Clare Haughey for bringing forward this debate on what is clearly a very important issue, as has been expressed by those members who stayed behind to take part in it.

Many of our ministers in the Scottish Government, including me, share the concerns that Clare Haughey and other members have expressed about the closure of Cambuslang jobcentre, particularly given the lack of consultation with those impacted that has been reported, not least the people who currently access support through the jobcentre.

As members have already said, this is not the first time that the Cambuslang jobcentre has been earmarked for closure, and community campaigns have previously been successful in ensuring that it remains open. I note Clare Haughey’s comments about the cross-party support locally in her constituency for retaining the jobcentre, albeit that the Labour Party has not turned up or participated in the debate, which is unfortunate. I suspect that, as others have said, had it been a different Government that was closing the jobcentre, Labour members would have been queueing up to protest and speak in the debate.

The decision certainly risks making it more difficult for people to access the support that the DWP provides and could increase the instances of sanctions as a result of additional travel time to attend jobcentre appointments. That in turn is likely to cause a disproportionate impact on people who already experience structural barriers to entering and sustaining employment. Travelling further and longer will undoubtedly present more of a challenge to some population groups, not least parents and disabled people. As Annie Wells, Clare Haughey and others have said, the face-to-face contact that some people require more than others is very important and has to be taken into account.

Due to the nature of the devolution settlement, the delivery of employability and social security support straddles both the Scottish and UK Governments. The closure may have an indirect impact on people’s access to devolved employability services in South Lanarkshire, and we are therefore disappointed that we were not consulted on the decision. In contrast to the closure, the Scottish Government’s approach to devolved employability services recognises the importance of place-based delivery. Through our no one left behind approach, which is delivered in partnership with local government, partners at a local level have flexibility to tailor provision to the needs of service users and local labour markets.

Building meaningful relationships between key workers and people accessing support is seen by the Government as a critical aspect of service delivery. Our approach ensures that in-person provision can be effectively targeted by local partners to areas of need, utilising a range of expertise across the public, third and private sectors.

The Scottish Government has deliberately taken a different approach to devolved services with our policies built around the values of dignity, respect, fairness, equality and continuous improvement. We want those services to be seen as an opportunity, which is why participation remains voluntary.

We have invested £90 million in devolved employability services in 2025-26. The funding ensures that every local authority area in Scotland has an all-age employability offer in place. Our employability investment seeks to balance local flexibility with the assurance that services support the delivery of the Government’s missions to support the economy and eradicate child poverty. That is why our budget continues to include specific funding to support parents, for instance, to enter employment and increase their earnings. From 2025-26, there will be specific funding to ensure that every area has an offer of specialist employability support for disabled people.

The commitment to implement specialist employability support is a good example of the Scottish Government working closely with local government to target our activity for significant labour market challenges. Delivery of the specialist employability support has been live in all local authority areas since 1 July this year. Ministers have seen first hand how Scottish Government funding is being used by the local employability partnership in South Lanarkshire to support the people of Cambuslang into work. My predecessor launched the employability strategic plan in September 2024 and visited the Routes to Work South project, which has supported people into employment in a local cafe. That is one example of the good work that is happening locally. The project also considered how its role in the local community could be leveraged to support those who are furthest from employment and encourages people to engage with the service through a community pantry.

I thank colleagues for bringing the issue to the attention of the Government and highlighting many of the concerns that are being expressed locally. I will take up Clare Haughey’s offer to write to UK ministers to indicate the strength of feeling among some parties in the chamber and will note her particular interest in the matter as a local MSP. We will seek a response to her and others’ concerns and will probe for more information about the UK Government’s intended timescales. We will also ask why there was no consultation, among other issues.

I congratulate Clare Haughey on securing the motion for debate in the chamber and I commend her on her local campaign and support of the local community.

Youth Mental Health Support

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

The next item of business is a statement by Tom Arthur on youth mental health support. The minister will take questions at the end of his statement, so there should be no interventions or interruptions.

Tom Arthur (Scottish National Party, Renfrewshire South)

My statement concerns the lasting legacy of the youth commission on mental health services, which reported in 2019. I begin by thanking Young Scot, Scottish Action for Mental Health and the Children and Young People’s Commissioner Scotland for their recent report detailing the progress against the commission’s recommendations. The opportunity to give my statement today is therefore very timely.

The youth commission’s work remains at the heart of the Government’s approach to children and young people’s mental health and wellbeing. The commission was part of a sea change in how we think about support for children and young people’s mental health. The commission’s primary theme was that support should be available across the whole system at all levels of need, which is a principle that is at the core of our current mental health and wellbeing strategy. The strategy sets out our shared vision of a Scotland that is free from stigma and inequality, where everyone, including children and young people, fulfils their right to achieve the best mental health and wellbeing possible. I believe that that reflects the youth commission’s ambition for children and young people’s mental health.

That includes the strategies that focus on the three Ps—promote, prevent and provide. It is clear that the commission was a catalyst for so much of the change that we have seen across the system in the intervening years. I will give some examples shortly. The commission was a great example of young people directly driving meaningful improvements on the issues that matter to them. On that note, I give my heartfelt thanks to the many young people who shared their personal experiences. They demonstrated tenacity, candour and passion to improve the services that they access. Their work, and that of the many young people who followed them in sharing their views and experiences, continues to influence policy six years after the report was published. Therefore, I hope that the members of the commission are very proud of what they achieved.

We accepted the vast majority of the 103 recommendations that were made by the commission. However, as the new progress report acknowledges, the landscape has changed significantly over the past six years. The time between then and now spans two parliamentary terms. In that time, we have had a global pandemic; national health service spend on mental health has increased dramatically; and we have published two national strategic mental health documents—I could go on.

The latest report highlights the difficulty of reporting progress against previous recommendations that have themselves resulted in huge change. That is why I want to focus my statement on the commission’s lasting legacy. It is only right that we reflect on its achievements, and I would like to do so with reference to each of the commission’s five key themes.

The first theme focused on services. The recommendations directly influenced the development of the service specification for national child and adolescent mental health services, which was published in 2020 and outlined the standard of support that young people and their families are entitled to expect from the national health service. Key principles of the specification include equity of access and a needs-led and rights-based approach that is aligned with the getting it right for every child policy.

In recent years, we have invested significantly in CAMHS improvements and continue to work with health boards to closely monitor implementation of the specification. In line with the commission’s recommendations, the service specification states that CAMHS must work in partnership with children, young people and their families in all aspects of service design and delivery, including transition planning.

We have also seen considerable improvements in CAMHS waiting times. The 18-week standard has now been met for the third quarter in a row, with 91.8 per cent of children and young people starting treatment within 18 weeks of referral. Local CAMHS teams continue to respond well to demand, with one in two children and young people who are referred to CAMHS starting treatment within five weeks, compared with 12 weeks in the period before the pandemic. That is the result of sustained investment by the Scottish Government and, even more importantly, the continued hard work of our amazing CAMHS workforce.

CAMHS staffing levels have increased by 54.3 per cent in the past decade under this Government. We have also exceeded our commitment to provide funding for 320 additional staff in CAMHS by 2026, increasing case capacity by more than 10,000.

The commission’s second theme—education—called for a whole-school approach. We have ensured access to counselling services in secondary schools across the country, and continue to support local authorities with £16 million every year. We have also published a whole-school approach framework to assist in supporting children and young people’s mental health in schools.

The third theme called for more community-based approaches to support mental health. We know that not all children and young people who need support will require a specialist service such as CAMHS. That is why, since 2020, we have provided local authorities with more than £80 million to fund community-based mental health support for children and young people, including £15 million a year in baseline funding from 2025-26. Community-based supports are now available in every local authority area, and councils report that such support was accessed by nearly 80,000 people in 2024-25.

Young people aged 16 and over can also access projects that are supported by our communities mental health and wellbeing fund for adults. We have invested £81 million in that fund since 2021, with a further £15 million committed for 2026-27 through our third sector fairer funding pilot.

Our substantial investment in community-based support brings me to the commission’s next theme: finance, policy and rights. As I mentioned earlier, NHS mental health expenditure has risen substantially in recent years, from £1.3 billion in 2022-23 to £1.49 billion in 2023-24. Despite facing the most challenging financial situation since devolution, we have doubled the direct programme budget for mental health since 2020-21, allowing us to build on the improvements that we have made in early intervention and prevention, as well as clinical support.

Again, let me be unequivocally clear: the mental health budget for 2025-26 remains at £270.5 million. Between the Scottish Government and NHS boards, we expect spending on mental health to be around £1.5 billion in 2025-26.

The commission’s report emphasised the importance of young people being at the centre of decision making and being supported to understand their rights. That principle of meaningful participation is central to the adoption of a children’s rights-based approach and is a guiding general principle of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child.

Scotland is the first country in the United Kingdom, and the first nation in the world, to incorporate the UNCRC into domestic law, within the limits of devolved competence, providing legal protection for children’s rights. Further building on the legacy of the commission, we continue to ensure that the voices of children, young people and those with lived experience are central to policy development, for example through our child and family mental health joint strategic board and a youth reference group that supports our work on suicide prevention.

In its final theme, the commission rightly acknowledged the need to train the workforce to better meet the needs of children and young people. Our mental health and wellbeing workforce action plan sets out a range of actions to address key workforce issues, including training. In 2025-26, we provided NHS Education for Scotland with over £30 million to continue multidisciplinary education, training and support of workforce expansion, including for CAMHS.

Despite the substantial progress that I have set out, we are not complacent. I acknowledge that we have much more to do. That is why we are working with partners to refresh our mental health and wellbeing delivery plan. The next delivery plan is scheduled for 2026 and will contain a focused selection of strategic actions that will enable us to make significant progress towards our overall vision for health and social care reform. I want the delivery plan to show a clear and tangible contribution not only to the mental health and wellbeing strategy, but to the service renewal framework, the population health framework and the NHS Scotland operational improvement plan.

I also recognise the importance of ensuring that the Government learns from our incredibly valuable partners who are working on the ground and in communities. For example, I know that SAMH is shortly to open its nook network hub in Glasgow, which will be an integrated, community-based site that brings together stakeholders from across the city and will be open to people aged 10 and up. I very much look forward to visiting the nook hub and learning from the innovative approach that SAMH is taking.

Finally, I will touch briefly on neurodevelopmental support, following on from my statement to Parliament in June. Although I recognise that neurodivergence is not a mental health condition, I want to reaffirm that we are continuing to take action to support people with neurodevelopmental needs. Improving support for children and young people is a long-term commitment. Although we are still at the early stages of that work, we are providing funding of £500,000 this year to improve ND assessment and support for children and young people. In conjunction with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, we have undertaken a review of the implementation of a national neurodevelopmental specification. That will inform improvements to ensure that health boards and local authorities are delivering the specification in full. We have also established a new cross-sector neurodevelopmental task force, which met for the first time on 2 October. It will be key to taking forward the actions that are identified in the review.

I end by reminding colleagues that tomorrow is world mental health day, which makes this an ideal time to reflect on the progress that we have made and the work that we still have to do. I again give my thanks to the youth commission members and to SAMH and Young Scot. The lasting legacy that they have created continues to drive our approach to children and young people’s mental health and wellbeing.

I look forward to members’ questions.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

The minister will take questions on the issues raised in his statement. I intend to allow around 20 minutes for questions, after which we will need move to the next item of business. I encourage members who wish to ask a question to press their request-to-speak buttons.

Brian Whittle (Conservative, South Scotland)

I thank the minister for early sight of his statement.

The rise in poor mental health among children is one of the most concerning health issues that we face in Scotland, even in an environment in which poor health outcomes are too common. Scotland has had a significant spike in the need for CAMHS services, along with a massive jump in attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, autism and neurodivergence referrals. We even have situations in which health boards cannot disaggregate CAMHS numbers from neurodivergence numbers. That cannot be allowed to continue. How can we solve an issue if we do not understand the problem?

We also have a third sector, which we rely on heavily, that is on its knees. Many essential mental health services that it provides are in danger of disappearing, further exacerbating the pressure on our statutory services.

Last week, I was at the launch event for Voluntary Health Scotland’s manifesto, the key theme of which is prevention. We need significantly better interaction between the third sector and statutory services, with an emphasis on prevention.

It is great that councils have more money, but what assessment has the Scottish Government made of what is happening on the ground? Many leisure centres, pools and community halls have shut because of a lack of local government funding. Those spaces provide front-line support services for our kids by offering, first, inclusion and, secondly, an outlet.

The commission on mental health services made its recommendations in 2019 but, last month, the children’s commissioner said:

“evidence of progress by the Scottish Government in many areas is seriously lacking.”

What guarantee do we have that the Government will finally deliver after six years?

The children’s commissioner also highlighted that the Scottish Government had made a key commitment that at least 1 per cent of NHS funding should go towards young people’s mental health services, which has not been fulfilled. Will the minister commit to delivering that promise by the end of the parliamentary session?

Tom Arthur (Scottish National Party, Renfrewshire South)

I will take each of Brian Whittle’s questions in turn. He referred to the impact on the ground. As I touched on, since 2020, £860 million has been invested in community mental health services from two funding streams: one for children and young people and another for adults. As I said in my statement, the funding for children and young people has been baselined into local government funding.

Around the inception of that funding, a framework was published that set out the types of interventions that it would help to support and the vision for community mental health support. The evidence that we have seen to date—the number of organisations that have been able to secure funding and deliver projects on the ground locally, and the point that I made about around 80,000 people receiving support in the last year for which we have data—demonstrates the significant impact of that funding. Of course, we continue to engage with partners and local government to understand what further action can be taken.

On the point about progress on the commission’s recommendations, as the commission’s report acknowledged, and as I touched on in my statement, there has been a sea change over recent years—not least because of the impact of the Covid pandemic—and a second mental health and wellbeing strategy has been introduced. The actions that I have set out demonstrate that the commission’s core recommendations, which the Government accepted either outright or in principle, have strongly informed our strategic position and the actions that are being taken forward via the delivery plan.

With regard to the point on CAMHS spending, we recognise the commitments that Mr Whittle mentions and are resolved to work constructively with our partners to ensure that we can deliver on the commitment for 1 per cent of NHS funding to go to CAMHS and, indeed, on the commitment for spending on mental health services to increase to 10 per cent of the total NHS front-line budget.

Paul Sweeney (Labour, Glasgow)

I thank the minister for advance sight of his statement.

We all agree that the current system for young people who seek mental health support is broken and must be transformed. I came to the Parliament from the Bipolar Scotland conference held in Edinburgh this morning, where there was broad agreement that prevention is often ill recognised and poorly resourced, particularly because of irrational and incoherent decisions made by integration joint boards in allocating budgets.

At First Minister’s question time, the First Minister told me that the Government was on track to meet its commitment to spend 10 per cent of the national health service budget on mental health services by the end of this parliamentary session. Does the minister agree with the First Minister that that will be achieved, and is he willing to be held to account for that commitment?

Tom Arthur (Scottish National Party, Renfrewshire South)

The First Minister set out clearly what action the Government is pursuing and that we are on track to achieve the goal that he mentions. As I stated when responding to questions on my statement in June, I made a commitment that we would work constructively with health boards to support that delivery because, as Paul Sweeney will be aware, there is variation across health boards in the total percentage of resource that is allocated for mental health services. I again commit to working constructively with health boards to achieve it.

Mr Sweeney made a point about prevention. That is absolutely important. It is the heart of the population health framework and, indeed, a core component of our mental health and wellbeing strategy, which seeks not only to promote positive mental wellbeing but to prevent crisis and need and, where they develop, to be able to provide the required support.

Jackie Dunbar (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Donside)

Will the minister say a bit more about the steps that the Scottish Government is taking to deliver improvements across waiting lists for youth mental health services?

Tom Arthur (Scottish National Party, Renfrewshire South)

We are taking a number of actions. As I touched on in my statement, there has been significant investment in resource over the past decade. There has been a rise in CAMHS staffing in excess of 54 per cent as well as significant increases in our mental health budgets. That is reflected in the CAMHS performance statistics, with the national target being exceeded for the third consecutive quarter and the median wait for people to begin treatment after referral being five weeks.

Annie Wells (Conservative, Glasgow)

Glasgow families have been left deeply concerned by the closure of the Notre Dame children’s centre earlier this year. That service supported some of the city’s most vulnerable young people. How can the minister claim real progress when trusted community-based services such as that centre are closing their doors due to funding pressures? It leaves children without the help that they desperately need.

Tom Arthur (Scottish National Party, Renfrewshire South)

I recognise the importance of the issue that Annie Wells has raised. Other members will have concerns with regard to locally made decisions that are taken under the existing statutory frameworks. The Government is committed to ensuring that we engage constructively with partners. This year, we have allocated record funding for our health boards and local government. As I touched on earlier, over the past five years, we have provided £160 million for community-based mental health services.

Evelyn Tweed (Scottish National Party, Stirling)

The transition from child to adult mental health services can be a worrying time for both young people and their parents or carers. What assessment has been made of the support that is required for those who are transitioning from youth mental health services to adult mental health services?

Tom Arthur (Scottish National Party, Renfrewshire South)

The question of transitions is extremely important. Providing transitionary support was one of the recommendations in the commission’s original report. That report followed the 2018 publication of the transition care plan guidance that informs our CAMHS approach. There is flexibility, in that when a young person reaches 18 years of age it does not necessarily mean that they move immediately to adult mental health services. The point for such a move can vary between the ages of 18 and 25 in response to the specific needs of the individual or young person. That flexibility is included within the national standard. It is for local partners to ensure that that is being delivered.

Pam Duncan-Glancy (Labour, Glasgow)

I thank the minister for advance sight of his statement. It will be disappointing to young people with ADHD across Glasgow and their parents that he mentioned issues that relate to ADHD only at the end of his statement and, even then, in very broad terms.

A constituent in Glasgow has struggled to be assessed for ADHD for almost two decades. Her assessment was first requested in 2008, when she was a young child, and she has spent the intervening years being passed from pillar to post. She is not alone. Current waiting times mean that people who are assessed this week are likely to have waited more than three years to be assessed, leading to a lifetime of uncertainty with untold consequences. What is the minister going to do to urgently ensure that there is a timely pathway for support and diagnosis for young people with ADHD?

Tom Arthur (Scottish National Party, Renfrewshire South)

I recognise the primacy and importance of that issue. That is why I set out the actions that the Government is undertaking in a substantive statement to the Parliament prior to summer recess, in which the substance of my remarks focused on responding to the youth commission report. However, I felt that it was important to provide a further update to the Parliament on the work that we are doing on support, assistance and assessment for neurodevelopmental conditions.

We recognise that, to use the words of the Royal College of Psychiatrists in Scotland, we are contending with an

“unprecedented increase in the number of people”

who are coming forward, which was “unforeseen”. Scotland is not alone or unique in facing this challenge; it is shared by our colleagues elsewhere in the UK and in many other countries.

To reiterate my points, we have a national specification that sets out the standards and expectations for partnership working at the local level, and we recognise that there have been implementation challenges—hence the review of implementation and the establishment of a cross-sector task force. I would be more than happy to keep Pam Duncan-Glancy up to date on that work. We have a forthcoming cross-party summit to discuss those matters further.

Clare Haughey (Scottish National Party, Rutherglen)

I remind the Parliament that I am employed as a bank nurse by NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde.

Having adequate staffing levels is key to ensuring the provision of high-quality services. Will the minister provide an update on current CAMHS staffing levels and on the Scottish Government’s work to invest in our mental health workforce?

Tom Arthur (Scottish National Party, Renfrewshire South)

As I touched on earlier, there has been significant investment. Staffing has increased by more than 54.3 per cent to 1,510.9 whole-time-equivalent posts. We have exceeded our commitment to provide funding for 320 additional staff in CAMHS by 2026, which has increased capacity for cases by more than 10,000. We have also provided NHS Education for Scotland with more than £30 million in 2025-26 to continue multidisciplinary education and training and to support workforce expansion.

Ariane Burgess (Green, Highlands and Islands)

Will the minister clarify how children and young people from marginalised or rural backgrounds are being included in the youth reference groups and strategic boards that are shaping mental health policy?

Tom Arthur (Scottish National Party, Renfrewshire South)

My clear expectation and intent is that our work in policy development should reflect the whole range of Scotland’s population, including those in different geographies, and should include consideration of issues that pertain to rurality. I am happy to follow that up in writing to provide Ariane Burgess with more specific detail.

Jamie Greene (Liberal Democrat, West Scotland)

If neurodevelopmental assessment waiting times were absorbed into CAMHS waiting times, the Government would miss every single one of its targets. The Scottish Parliament information centre tells us that more than 42,000 children are waiting for an assessment. The average waiting time is 76 weeks, which is a year and a half. Some people are waiting four, five or even six years for an assessment. That is outrageous, atrocious and, frankly, shameful. When will we achieve parity and consistency of access across all local authorities and all health boards, so that every child in Scotland, no matter where they live, has access to diagnosis and the treatment and support that they rightly deserve?