Scottish Parliament, 11 December 2025

317 contributions from 71 members. The official report.

General Question Time

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

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

Alex Rowley (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on what action it has taken to support Forth Valley College’s Alloa campus, in light of the recent reported concerns that it may be closed for financial reasons. (S6O-05275)

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

I last spoke with the principal of Forth Valley College at an event earlier this week and last met him formally on 18 November at the Alloa campus. I remain assured that the college leadership team is committed to doing all that it can to keep the campus open.

The Scottish Government is supporting the Scottish Funding Council’s college infrastructure investment plan. Through that plan, the SFC has supported the college to undertake an urgent feasibility study to identify and explore all possible options. A contract for that work was signed on 2 December and the work will inform the college board’s deliberations in the new year.

Alex Rowley (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

The college projects that it will be millions of pounds in the red. A feasibility study will, in itself, still need resources.

In its recent publication on the draft budget, Colleges Scotland highlighted that, under the current model, the college sector is unsustainable without significant change. The publication calls for “above inflation investment” and a commitment to sustainable funding to reverse years of underinvestment in the sector. Does the minister accept that, if we are to reverse the dire state of further education finances, the Scottish Government must commit to above-inflation investment and sustainable funding models moving forward?

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

With regard to Forth Valley College and the Alloa campus, as I have said, the contract for the work on the feasibility study was signed on 2 December and that work will inform the college board’s deliberations in the new year. As well as that, in the new year, I will be working with the principal to assist the college with organising a round table that will bring together all interested parties in the locality to consider the future of the Alloa campus, with a shared intention for it to continue to be used for the common good of the local area and of all the stakeholders who benefit from it now and could benefit from it in future.

On the budget considerations for the college sector more widely, including Forth Valley College, ministers are constructively engaged with Colleges Scotland as the representative body for the sector. We are having good discussions; indeed, ministers will be having discussions with Colleges Scotland today. However, as Alex Rowley would expect me to say, decisions on next year’s budget are still being considered and will be relayed to Parliament on 13 January.

Michelle Thomson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk East)

Funding is at the heart of this issue, but Colleges Scotland has also made clear the unaffordability of the employer national insurance contributions. Has the minister been able to have any further discussions with the United Kingdom Government, which levied that charge? It is having a disproportionate impact on many businesses but, arguably, nowhere more so than on colleges.

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

The member has raised important points. Although Scottish Government ministers, including me, have recognised the financial pressures on our college sector, whether through the Audit Scotland report or the work of the Scottish Funding Council, we have to recognise collectively that the scenario includes external pressures that are outwith the Scottish Government’s control. It was deeply disappointing for a range of reasons, including for our college sector, that the position on employer national insurance contributions was maintained in the UK budget. It is putting unhelpful and undesirable pressure on our colleges, as it is on many other organisations across the public sector.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Question 2 has been withdrawn.

Maggie Chapman (Green, North East Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Government what measures it is taking to address the reported legal aid crisis, to ensure that people in the North East Scotland region are able to access support. (S6O-05277)

Siobhian Brown (Scottish National Party, Ayr)

The Scottish Government recognises the concerns raised by Maggie Chapman, including the importance of ensuring access to justice for people in North East Scotland. The Scottish Government values the legal profession and continues to fully fund legal aid while advancing reforms to improve access and sustainability across Scotland and not just in the north-east.

We will soon lay regulations to remove unnecessary financial tests for children’s hearings. We will widen the eligibility for summary criminal cases, incentivise early resolution for solemn criminal cases and ensure fair remuneration for solicitors across Scotland. Additionally, the Scottish Government provides funding to citizens advice bureaux across the country and in North East Scotland, and we support the Civil Legal Assistance Office, which operates locally to offer advice and representation on civil legal issues.

Maggie Chapman (Green, North East Scotland)

I know that I am not alone in having increasing numbers of constituents come to me about legal aid issues. Each one says a similar thing: they spend weeks, sometimes months, trying to find a legal aid solicitor, only to be told no, either due to the complexity of their case or sheer lack of capacity. Most are in marginalised groups, and they include single migrant parents, disabled people and a single mum who is a survivor of domestic violence that involved financial abuse and coercion. People can sometimes end up self-representing, but they have spent so long looking for legal aid that they do not have time to learn how best to advocate for themselves. How can the Scottish Government ensure that my constituents are able to realise their right to access to justice?

Siobhian Brown (Scottish National Party, Ayr)

I thank Ms Chapman for highlighting these complex challenges on behalf of her constituents. The Scottish Government is committed to ensuring that everyone, particularly people from marginalised groups, gets the access to justice that they need.

However, the current legislative framework does not guarantee access to legal advice and representation. Solicitors decide whether to undertake legal aid cases and, if they do, which clients or cases to accept. It is important to note that the Scottish Government cannot compel solicitors to take on a case. As I have already noted, the on-going reforms aim to improve the situation, and solicitor availability will be considered as part of any future changes to the system.

Liam Kerr (Conservative, North East Scotland)

In order to address the issues that we have heard about, as well as the legislative framework, the Scottish Government’s 2021 programme for government promised a legal aid reform bill during this parliamentary session. Given that there is only three months to dissolution, has the Government broken another promise?

Siobhian Brown (Scottish National Party, Ayr)

No, and we are all aware of the timetable for this parliamentary session. There have been many members’ bills as well as Government ones. I have been engaging with the legal profession for nearly three years now, and I have ensured that we will take forward legal aid reform in the next parliamentary session. In the meantime, there is a lot of secondary legislation going ahead now that will be delivered in this parliamentary session.

James Dornan (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Cathcart)

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide further details of the December carers allowance supplement payment, including its anticipated impact on carers and how it will ensure that all eligible carers receive their payment promptly. (S6O-05278)

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

Social Security Scotland will pay an extra £293.50 to more than 96,000 unpaid carers from 4 December. Since its introduction in 2018, the carers allowance supplement has provided more than 1 million payments, delivering hundreds of millions of pounds to help to ease financial pressures and improve wellbeing. The vast majority of carers receive the payment automatically, but anyone who has not received it by 15 December should contact Social Security Scotland. This year, eligible carers in Scotland will be £587 better off than those elsewhere in the UK, recognising the essential contribution that they make to communities right across the country.

James Dornan (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Cathcart)

Given that more than 96,000 carers were due that payment from 4 December, and recognising the significant contribution that unpaid carers make to our communities, will the cabinet secretary outline what further steps the Government is taking to widen support, particularly in light of the recent expansion of eligibility for the young carer grant? What advice is available to any carer who has not received their letter or payment by 15 December?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

As I said in my original answer, those who have not received their payment by 15 December should contact the agency for further details. Mr Dornan is quite right to point to the extended eligibility for the young carers grant, which, of course, is available only in Scotland and eligibility for which has been extended to the age of 19.

Yesterday, I was delighted to talk to carers in Hamilton about the improvements in support from March 2026, as part of which those with multiple caring roles who receive carer support payment can be paid an extra £520 per year for every additional cared-for person through the carers additional person payment. Again, that is available only in Scotland, and it will provide extra support to around 18,000 carers in the next financial year.

Moreover, from March 2026, carers will receive four more weeks of support when a caring role ends due to a bereavement, which will provide more stability at what is a very difficult time.

Meghan Gallacher (Conservative, Central Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Government what progress it has made on increasing the number of overnight beds for parents in neonatal wards. (S6O-05279)

Jenni Minto (Scottish National Party, Argyll and Bute)

“The Best Start: a Five-Year Forward Plan for Maternity and Neonatal Care in Scotland”, which was published in 2017, recommended that all neonatal facilities should provide emergency overnight accommodation on the unit for parents, and that accommodation should be available nearby for parents of less critically ill babies. Boards are expected to include provision for that in their planning.

Every neonatal unit in Scotland has provision for families to stay overnight, where required. All neonatal intensive care units, and the majority of local neonatal units and special care baby units, have rooms on or near the unit, with other accommodation available nearby to allow parents to be with their babies. The majority of boards also provide support to allow siblings to stay, to ensure that families are supported to remain together.

The Scottish Government also provides support to all families with babies in neonatal care to cover the costs of food, travel and accommodation as part of our young patients family fund. If hospital accommodation is not available, the health board will usually be able to book and pay for nearby accommodation for families in advance.

Meghan Gallacher (Conservative, Central Scotland)

I thank the minister for her answer and for taking the time to meet me yesterday to discuss concerns relating to neonatal care.

Bliss Scotland has been championing the need to increase bed numbers, which is an issue that must be taken seriously. At present, for every 10 babies who need neonatal care, only one bed is available for parents to stay overnight. I could not imagine being a parent of a newborn baby who was sick and vulnerable and being told that I could not stay with my child in the same location.

It is understood and accepted that the Scottish Government must do everything that it can to increase the number of beds. Would the minister be willing to keep me and other members who are interested in the issue up to date on the progress that the Scottish Government makes and on any discussions that it has with local NHS boards on the issue?

Jenni Minto (Scottish National Party, Argyll and Bute)

I appreciated being able to have a conversation with Meghan Gallacher outwith the chamber to ensure that we both understood the importance of having the right accommodation available nearby or in neonatal units to support families at what can be a very traumatic time.

The Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care has just written to Ms Gallacher to lay out the Government’s plans, which will involve officials engaging with health boards that do not have adequate accommodation to ensure that that is provided.

Carol Mochan (Labour, South Scotland)

In parts of my South Scotland region, a lack of overnight beds in neonatal wards could result in parents facing a 100-mile round trip to see their baby. I understand that the recently announced maternity and neonatal task force will review rural service provision. Will the minister ensure that consideration will be given to supporting families in rural areas who have babies in neonatal wards?

Jenni Minto (Scottish National Party, Argyll and Bute)

Given that I, too, represent a rural and island constituency, the issue of such travel is high on my agenda, and it will be considered.

Ruth Maguire (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame South)

To ask the Scottish Government what consideration it gives to the gendered impact of debt in its child poverty and social security policies. (S6O-05280)

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

The Scottish Government recognises the impact of debt on families, particularly women, and it encourages all public bodies to share good practice on debt collection. Our approach includes having a social security system that is underpinned by the values of dignity, fairness and respect.

We have committed to exploring further pilot activity on gender budget tagging for the 2026-27 budget, building on the work that was done last year with the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. We are consulting a range of stakeholders on the development of our final tackling child poverty delivery plan, including the National Advisory Council on Women and Girls, to ensure that the plan tackles gender inequalities.

Ruth Maguire (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame South)

It is well understood that domestic abuse can entail financial abuse, including coerced debt, and that single parents are around three times more likely to have experienced domestic abuse. Unfortunately, public debt processes too often do not reflect that knowledge and understanding, and they can perpetuate the impact of financial abuse and coerced debt.

The excellent report by Professor Morag Treanor for Aberlour Children’s Charity, One Parent Families Scotland and the Trussell Trust recognises that the issue requires action from all spheres of government. Will the Scottish Government consider reforming council tax joint liability rules, for example, so that women who are fleeing abuse are not automatically made responsible for debts that have been accrued by their abusers, to protect victims/survivors from debts that result from financial abuse and coercion?

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

I recognise the challenge that many women face when they are faced with domestic and coercive abuse of that kind. The Aberlour report shines a light on that important issue, and the Government is taking action, but we are always keen to see what more we can do through the child poverty delivery plan.

I hope that I can reassure Ruth Maguire, at least in part, by pointing to the Scottish Government’s funding for Citizens Advice Scotland’s council tax debt project, which extends right across Scotland, to improve access to services for people who are struggling with council tax debt, provide wider, more holistic support and ensure best practice by councils.

There is also the financially included project, which responds to economic abuse and includes a national helpline that my colleague Màiri McAllan launched officially yesterday.

The Housing (Scotland) Act 2025 also places a duty on Scottish ministers to undertake within one year a review of the impact of joint and several liability for council tax arrears—

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Briefly, cabinet secretary.

Shirley-Anne Somerville (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline)

—for those who have experienced or are experiencing domestic abuse, who are primarily women, as suggested by Ruth Maguire.

Paul Sweeney (Labour, Glasgow)

To ask the Scottish Government what support it is providing to NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, in light of reports that the national health service board is dealing with a much higher rate of flu patients compared with previous years. (S6O-05281)

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

We are working closely with NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde to support it this winter, as we are seeing levels of flu that are higher than usual for this stage of the winter season. We have provided funding to support initiatives such as virtual hospitals and flow navigation models, which help patients to get the care that they need while reducing unnecessary accident and emergency visits.

Our vaccination programme is also vital in supporting health boards to respond to flu this season. We work closely with boards to make vaccination accessible, supporting them with national resources and funded initiatives such as mobile vaccination units.

Paul Sweeney (Labour, Glasgow)

Staff in Glasgow hospitals say that beds are filling up at an alarming rate due to what has today been called a super-flu. In other health boards, hospital visitor restrictions are in place. Scotland appears to be facing a worst-case scenario this winter, but the situation could have been managed more effectively if the suggestions that we made to ministers months ago had been heeded.

Flu vaccination rates are unacceptably low. It is shocking that more than 300,000 fewer adults have been vaccinated this season compared with two years ago. That is completely unacceptable. What additional measures will the Government introduce to rebuild Scotland’s vaccination rate before our healthcare system is completely overwhelmed?

Neil Gray (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

In his narration, Mr Sweeney has compared apples with oranges in relation to eligibility for flu vaccinations a year ago in comparison with this year. Eligibility is decided on the basis of Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation advice on vaccinations. If we compare like with like, particularly among adults, we are substantially ahead on vaccinations issued compared with where we were last year. Our flu vaccination programme started in September and we have vaccinated more than 1.5 million people.

Of course there is more to do, and it is never too late to pick up a vaccine, which is why the Government and I encourage everybody who is eligible for vaccination, whether they are a member of the public or a member of staff in health and social care, to make sure that they take it up.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

I call Davy Russell for a brief question 8.

Davy Russell (Labour, Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse)

To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to Shelter Scotland statistics stating that there are 109,000 families on waiting lists for social housing. (S6O-05282)

Màiri McAllan (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

We have the most confidence in those estimates, which are based on the Scottish household survey. They contain no double counting of households across multiple housing lists and are not dependent on keeping the administrative housing lists up to date. They will, however, contain some households who are already living in social rented housing and looking to transfer to another location.

Estimates from the 2024 Scottish household survey are scheduled for publication in January next year. Of course, the Government is entirely focused on work to ensure that supply can meet increasing demand.

Davy Russell (Labour, Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse)

There are 5,000 families on the waiting list in my constituency alone. What action have you taken to improve the new-build situation, as the statistics say that there has been a significant drop in new builds over the past three years?

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Always through the chair, please.

Màiri McAllan (Scottish National Party, Clydesdale)

The Government is taking action across the board to increase the supply of social and affordable homes, building on a record that shows that we have built more than 140,000 affordable homes since we came into government, more than 100,000 of which have been for social rent.

There is £808 million available in this year’s affordable homes budget, which we are putting towards the construction of new homes. We are now also asking councils to acquire family homes in particular off the market, to ensure that children spend less time in temporary accommodation.

Of course, that comes in advance of the £4.9 billion-worth of funding that will, as we have set out, be invested in the coming four years.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

That concludes general question time.

First Minister’s Question Time

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

Our party—through my colleague Liam Kerr—lodged an amendment to the Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill to secure a grooming gangs inquiry in Scotland. The Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Home Affairs, Angela Constance, rejected it and said that further inquiries were not necessary. She told the Parliament that a leading expert, Professor Alexis Jay, “shares my view”—that is a direct quote.

However, Professor Jay does not share Angela Constance’s view. In an email to the justice secretary, which we forced the Government to release, Professor Jay says that her views

“had nothing to do with Mr Kerr’s amendment, or the position in Scotland”.

Professor Jay asked for her position to be “clarified”. Can John Swinney explain why, therefore, his justice secretary did not correct the parliamentary record?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The comments that the justice secretary made in the stage 3 proceedings on the Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill were, as I said to Mr Findlay last week, a reflection of the general comments that were being made about the issues at that time.

The issues that Professor Jay raised were corrected in the minutes of the national child sexual abuse and exploitation strategic group, which were published as a consequence of that meeting, and the release to the public of that information clarified the point that Professor Jay was concerned about.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

I call Russell Findlay. [ Interruption .] Let us hear Mr Findlay.

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

That answer might have held water last week, but it does not any more.

The justice secretary brazenly misrepresented a leading child abuse expert in order to block a grooming gangs inquiry in Scotland. The Scottish ministerial code requires Government ministers to correct

“any ... error at the earliest opportunity.”

It also states:

“Ministers who knowingly mislead the Parliament will be expected to offer their resignation to the First Minister”.

The justice secretary misrepresented an expert and then denied doing so when asked by journalists. She failed to correct the record and she has not even apologised. Why is it not obvious to John Swinney that she has broken the ministerial code?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

For the reason that I set out in my earlier answer today and in my answers last week—that the justice secretary was making a general comment on the Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill. The issue about which Professor Jay was concerned—[ Interruption .]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Let us hear the First Minister.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

—has been addressed in the minutes of the national child sexual abuse and exploitation strategic group.

What the Government is doing, which is what the justice secretary was setting out to Parliament at that time and which has been set out to Parliament on numerous occasions, is taking forward the essential work that is necessary to make a judgment about whether a separate grooming gangs inquiry is required, because the view that has been expressed to us—[ Interruption .]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Let us hear one another.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

—is that the evidence base is not sufficient for us to take such a decision at this time.

As I pointed out to Mr Findlay previously, even if the amendment had been agreed to by Parliament on that occasion, there would have been no ability to take forward a grooming gangs inquiry, because it relied on the appointment of—[ Interruption .]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Sorry, First Minister. I say to members that this session is for scrutiny, and it is difficult to have that when we cannot hear one another.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

That amendment relied on the appointment of a victims commissioner, who has not yet been established in office and cannot take the action that was proposed.

The Government is addressing the substance of the issue to ensure that we come to the correct conclusion on the steps that we have to take.

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

I know that Angela Constance was not making a general point. Everyone in the chamber knows that Angela Constance was not making a general point. John Swinney knows that Angela Constance was not making a general point. She twisted a statement about England to deny victims an inquiry in Scotland. Professor Jay asked her to correct this falsehood on 26 September, but she did not do so, and she has still not done so. Then, on 25 November, Angela Constance doubled down. She told the media that she had not misrepresented Alexis Jay. We only know about that now, in December, because we have dragged the information out of this secretive Government.

Grooming gang victims were failed by the authorities, and they are now being failed again by the Scottish National Party Government. How can they trust John Swinney and his justice secretary to deliver the honest answers that they deserve?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

One of the points that I have been trying to stress to Parliament on the handling of this important issue—I recognise its importance—is about the care that the Government has to take about decisions about a grooming gangs inquiry, given the role of the Scottish child abuse inquiry, which the Government established in 2015.

Earlier this week, Lady Smith, who chairs the Scottish child abuse inquiry, set out the basis of the phase 10 hearings of that inquiry. The inquiry’s press statement says:

“It should be noted that, where any conduct which constitutes grooming is alleged”,

the Scottish child abuse inquiry

“is able to investigate it if, overall, the circumstances in which it occurred are within its Terms of Reference”.

It adds that

“Grooming which took place outwith the establishments themselves may, depending on ... particular circumstances, be within”

the terms of reference.

The Government has already established a statutory public inquiry that has the ability, as Lady Smith has confirmed, to examine issues in relation to grooming gangs. [ Interruption .]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Thank you, members.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

That is some of the work that the Government has to do to make sure that we properly respect the independent inquiry that we established by statute, which has the power to look at many of these issues.

Russell Findlay (Conservative, West Scotland)

That is desperate, desperate deflection. The SNP has repeatedly closed the door to the Scottish child abuse inquiry for grooming gang victims in the past, and it will continue to do so. On Tuesday, I met a grooming gang victim known as Taylor, along with her mother. That afternoon, they then went to meet John Swinney. They, along with other victims, have lost all trust in Angela Constance.

John Swinney is continuing to defend a justice secretary who misrepresented an expert, misled the Parliament, misled the public and misled victims. Everyone in the chamber, no matter their politics, should expect honesty from Government ministers, and, if mistakes are made, they should at least be corrected. If John Swinney will not sack the justice secretary, we will give the Parliament the chance to have its say with a vote of no confidence. Will the First Minister order his MSPs to support his failing justice secretary?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

It is really important that I make it clear to Parliament that the Government has no ability whatsoever to close the door of any route of inquiry of the Scottish child abuse inquiry—indeed, we would break the law if we tried to do so. [ Interruption .] More to the point, Lady Smith would have none of it from the Scottish Government. [ Interruption .]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

I am sure that members will agree that robust scrutiny is possible without shouting from a sedentary position.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

It is really important that I make it clear to Parliament and to the public that the Government has no ability to hinder the role of the Scottish child abuse inquiry in any way.

I met Taylor on Tuesday, with members of her family. I apologised to Taylor, because it was obvious from what she said to me that she had been failed, as so many young people in care have been failed by our care system. That is why we established the Scottish child abuse inquiry, to ensure that those individuals could find justice. That is why we commissioned the independent review of care. That is why we are taking forward the delivery of the Promise, to ensure that care-experienced individuals in our society are never subjected to any abuse in the future.

That is the commitment of my Government, that is my focus and that of all the members of my Cabinet, and that is exactly what we will continue to do.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

This morning I lodged a motion of no confidence in the Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Home Affairs, Angela Constance. It is clear that she misrepresented Professor Alexis Jay on the serious issue of grooming gangs and misled the Parliament. She has had repeated opportunities to apologise and correct the record, but she has failed to do so. Despite what John Swinney says, she has had repeated requests from Professor Jay to correct the record but she has failed to do so, and victims do not have confidence in her. It is now clear that she cannot stay in her position. She must resign, or John Swinney must sack her. Why is John Swinney defending the indefensible and refusing to do so?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I am setting out to Parliament the substance of the issue and the actions that the Government is taking to ensure that we improve the lives of individuals who have suffered in the past as a consequence of abuse in the care of the state. That is what we are doing, and the Government will take forward that agenda.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

It is clear that victims have lost confidence in the justice secretary, and this looks like a First Minister trying to protect one of his own rather than doing the right thing by victims across the country. The rules are clear that a breach of the ministerial code is a sackable offence, but this Scottish National Party Government is addicted to cover-up and secrecy. The truth is that Angela Constance is not just a stranger to the truth; she is a stranger to competence as well.

Our justice system is in utter chaos. Violent thugs have joined the ranks of those being released early from our prisons, a sexual predator is less likely to end up in jail now than was the case five years ago, hundreds of drug dealers go unarrested, shopkeepers are left to defend themselves from professional gangs of shoplifters, and violent crime is on the rise, with more and more children falling victim.

Angela Constance and the SNP are soft on crime but experts at covering up. Will John Swinney explain to Scots why this incompetent and untrustworthy justice secretary is still in post?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Let me address what I think is the right thing to do. The right thing to do is what we did. What Angela Constance did in 2015 when she was Cabinet Secretary for Education and Lifelong Learning was to set up the Scottish child abuse inquiry. There was much resistance to that inquiry, but Angela Constance took the decision to set it up. That was absolutely the right thing to do, and I applaud her for taking that decision and for the justice that it will bring to individuals.

On the question of how the criminal justice system is operating, let me tell Mr Sarwar that, according to the latest data, the number of people who were given a custodial sentence has increased by 13 per cent from 2022-23, and there were 221 rape and attempted rape convictions, which is an all-time high. That was driven both by a high level of prosecutions and by a 10-year high in the conviction rate for rape and attempted rape. That is what the justice system is doing: it is standing on the side of victims, ensuring that the perpetrators of violence against women are brought to justice. I am proud of the Government’s record in bringing criminals to justice.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

Victims do not believe you, and they do not buy it. The First Minister talks about doing the right thing in 2015. Do the right thing now and sack the justice secretary.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Speak through the chair, please.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

The SNP Government is addicted to cover-up, and no issue is out of bounds for its spin.

The rules are clear that Angela Constance must go; victims are clear that Angela Constance must go; and every single person who is sitting at home watching John Swinney make these pathetic responses knows that Angela Constance must go. But John Swinney thinks he knows better.

Angela Constance misled the Parliament on the issue of grooming gangs; the Minister for Health and Social Services used public money to get chauffeured to football matches; his predecessor misappropriated public money to watch football on his iPad; and John Swinney, Nicola Sturgeon and Humza Yousaf all wiped their phones during the pandemic—[ Interruption .]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Let us hear Mr Sarwar.

Anas Sarwar (Labour, Glasgow)

They do not want to hear it, Presiding Officer. They all wiped their phones during the pandemic, so we will never know what really went on. They think that the rules do not apply to them. They think that they can always get away with it. Why do John Swinney and the SNP hold the people of Scotland in such utter contempt?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I do no such thing. What I do in office is focus my Government on making sure that it delivers for the people of Scotland, and it is doing so. On health, we have the highest number of operations undertaken since the pandemic; levels of literacy and numeracy across our primary and secondary schools are at a record high; business investment has exceeded 10 per cent of gross domestic product for the first time in 20 years in Scotland; unemployment is lower in Scotland than it is in the rest of the United Kingdom; and child poverty is falling in this country when it is rising in the rest of the United Kingdom. That is all because of the focus of my Government. I serve the people of Scotland with every fibre of my body, and I intend to continue doing so.

Ross Greer (Green, West Scotland)

Across the country, families just cannot get the services that they need locally. Every day in schools, children with additional support needs are being failed by a near total lack of specialist staff. More than 10,000 children will spend this Christmas in temporary accommodation, and far too many elderly and disabled people and their families just cannot get the care packages that meet their needs. At the other end of the spectrum, the wealthiest people in Scotland just keep getting wealthier.

For all the mistakes that she made in her budget, the Chancellor of the Exchequer’s mansion tax plans for England will raise hundreds of millions of pounds. However, that cash will be grabbed by the Treasury, rather than going to local councils. Does the First Minister agree with the Scottish Greens that we could use a Scottish mansion tax to fund local services, such as education, housing and social care, to deliver the support that our communities so desperately need?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I recognise many of the challenges and pressures that Mr Greer puts to me with regard to additional support needs. As a consequence of the agreement that we reached in the budget last year, in dialogue with local government, we invested more money into additional support needs. We have not only restored but exceeded previous budgets for housing, to ensure that we tackle the temporary accommodation issue. The greater than real-terms support for local government delivered a stronger position to deliver care packages, although I accept the pressures.

The issues that Mr Greer raised are material to the Government’s budget, which will be settled in January. I welcome the dialogue that has taken place with the Scottish Green Party. We are open to the ideas and suggestions that are being made, and we will give them every consideration. However, from the extensive discussions that he and I have had on these issues over the years, Mr Greer knows my commitment to investing in public services to meet the needs of the public.

Ross Greer (Green, West Scotland)

I appreciate the efforts that the First Minister and the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government have made to take into consideration the budget proposals that the Greens have already made, but this is an opportunity that we cannot afford to miss. The chancellor’s English mansion tax is definitely an overcomplicated and limited way of achieving a progressive outcome, but it is progressive to tax the wealthiest people in the most valuable houses fairly.

Two years ago, the Scottish Government developed proposals for far more effective changes to council tax for the higher bands. If those proposals were dusted down and those changes were made to bands F, G and H, it would put a desperately needed £126 million into local services, which is enough for thousands of additional support needs teachers or social care workers. The First Minister surely agrees with the Greens that our local services need more funding and that it is only fair to ask wealthier people to pay their fair share so that we can deliver that.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

There is a lot in what Mr Greer said that I agree with. As he knows, the Government has taken the decision, which, of course, is not warmly welcomed across Parliament, to ask people on higher incomes to pay more in taxation than they would if they lived in other parts of the United Kingdom. That is exactly the right thing to have done. We will consider other proposals, as Mr Greer knows. He is involved in discussions with the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government and the Minister for Public Finance, which I am fully across. We look forward to coming to conclusions when the Government’s budget is set out to Parliament in January.

Marie McNair (Scottish National Party, Clydebank and Milngavie)

To ask the First Minister what assessment the Scottish Government has made of the potential implications for its work to eradicate child poverty in Scotland of the UK Government’s child poverty strategy. (S6F-04525)

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Any measure taken by the United Kingdom Government that helps us in our work to eradicate child poverty is welcome. The decision to lift the two-child limit—this Government proposed and pressed for that lifting—is welcome, but the UK Government’s strategy still fails to recognise the damaging impact of the benefit cap or the local housing allowance freeze, which only further drive families into poverty.

We will continue to engage with the UK Government on those questions and, of course, we will set out to Parliament in March the next tackling child poverty delivery plan, which is our statutory responsibility.

Marie McNair (Scottish National Party, Clydebank and Milngavie)

I thank the First Minister for that answer. Thousands of children are in poverty under Labour because it has kept Tory austerity. It bungled the scrapping of the two-child policy by keeping the benefit cap. Many families with more than two children may still be capped. The child poverty strategy was an opportunity for the UK Government to deliver real change, but it has fallen short of the bold action that is needed. In fact, the United Kingdom House of Commons library found that, if Labour matched key Scottish National Party Government policies, it could lift an additional 1.1 million children out of poverty across the UK.

While Starmer struggles to get a grip on the ever-growing poverty levels across the UK, what assurances can the First Minister provide to the people of Scotland that the SNP Scottish Government will do everything that it can to reduce child poverty here even further?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The action that this Government is taking is making a real difference. I assure Marie McNair that the Government’s focus in Scotland will remain absolutely on eradicating child poverty, and that it is a central issue for discussion in the Government’s budget.

The UK Government’s decision to scrap the two-child limit comes after sustained and concerted pressure from the Scottish Government and charities, and it is welcome. However, other measures are needed, and the Government in Scotland will take those steps in relation to the budget. I committed that, should the UK Government remove the two-child limit, the resources that this Government was going to spend on that would be allocated for other anti-child-poverty measures, and I reaffirm that commitment to Parliament today.

Miles Briggs (Conservative, Lothian)

To ask the First Minister what assessment the Scottish Government has made of, and support it is providing to, childhood dementia awareness. (S6F-04519)

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I thank childhood dementia Scotland—a collaborative partnership of experts and organisations set up by Alzheimer Scotland—for its work to raise awareness of the issues that are associated with childhood dementia through its new report. There is clearly more work to be done to understand the causes and the impact of childhood dementia, but we know that it is caused by a number of rare genetic conditions.

That is why we are collaborating with NHS Education for Scotland and NHS Inform through the rare disease action plan to improve awareness and understanding of rare conditions among healthcare professionals and the public. We will, of course, carefully consider the recommendations that childhood dementia Scotland set out.

Miles Briggs (Conservative, Lothian)

At lunch time, I will host a round-table discussion in Parliament alongside Alzheimer Scotland to discuss the findings of the report, which was published yesterday. Most people will not be aware of the rare genetic conditions that affect almost 400 children in Scotland and cause symptoms of dementia. The report has provided important evidence on prevalence, gaps in support and the impact that that has on families across our country.

Despite the courage and resilience of families who live with childhood dementia, too many families feel isolated and have to fight for the support that they need, as childhood dementia does not fit into many of the current pathways. Will the First Minister and the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care agree to meet me and campaigners, and will the Government consider the key recommendations in the report on childhood dementia being placed in the national dementia strategy, and those on developing national standards and better research in Scotland?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I am grateful to Miles Briggs for highlighting the issue and the important research work that has been carried out. I welcome the fact that he will be meeting campaigners and experts on the subject today. Of course, with the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care, I would be happy to meet the member and representatives of the organisations to look at those questions.

Essentially, Mr Briggs makes an argument that I accept entirely, which is that the way through is not to try to fit individuals into services, but to ensure that services meet the needs of individuals, who in this case are vulnerable children with acute health requirements. That is what I would call person-centred care, which must be at the heart of our health service. If we embark on our discussions considering how best we can deliver that proposition, I think that we can make progress. I am very happy to take forward those discussions.

Carol Mochan (Labour, South Scotland)

I thank the First Minister for his words on the matter. In Scotland, there is no framework, consistent referral pathway or single approach to the care of children with dementia. Sadly, 50 per cent of children with dementia die by the age of 10. Does the Scottish Government recognise that it is an urgent issue? Will it provide an official response to Alzheimer Scotland’s recently published report on childhood dementia?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Yes, we will provide a response. My answer to Miles Briggs will be how I will advise the Government to respond, which is that it should be in the frame of pursuing person-centred care. Carol Mochan makes the point that, sadly, many of the children who are affected by childhood dementia have a relatively short life expectancy. Maximising their life expectancy so that every precious moment is available for their families to be with them is absolutely vital. I will ensure that those issues are reflected in the Government’s response to the research that is being carried out.

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government’s response is to the independent investigation into NHS Scotland by the retired consultant surgeon and former president of the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Glasgow, Mr Mike McKirdy. (S6F-04529)

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The Government carefully considers all reports on the performance of the national health service.

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

Mike McKirdy’s comprehensive report lays bare the consequences of the lack of delivery in our NHS after almost two decades of Scottish National Party spin. Despite what the First Minister says, very little has improved under the SNP.

Let us take the longest waits: the former First Minister, Humza Yousaf, said that he would end waits of more than two years by September 2022. Three years on, thousands of people are still waiting. Now, the First Minister is promising to end all waits of more than a year in just four months’ time but, last month, we learned that 11,246 people are still waiting for more than two years.

I ask the First Minister: who should the public trust—the SNP, which overpromises and always underdelivers, or Mike McKirdy, a respected consultant who says that more of the same will not be enough? Is that not why Scots cannot afford another five years of the First Minister’s failing SNP Government?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Before I come to the substance of Jackie Baillie’s question, one of the issues that will affect the performance of the national health service is the upsurge in conditions that put it under incredible pressure. Today, the national medical director of NHS England, Professor Pandit, has issued a statement, which I shall read:

“This unprecedented wave of super flu is leaving the NHS facing a worst-case scenario for this time of year.”

I am simply saying that the health service will undoubtedly face enormous pressures when waves of cases come our way—[ Interruption. ]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Let us hear one another.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

That is exactly what is happening with performance in accident and emergency departments, because of flu pressures. If it is happening in England, it is likely to be happening in Scotland—which it is.

On Monday, Mr McKirdy said that his strongest advice to the Scottish Government should be a relentless focus on delivery. I reassure Jackie Baillie that that is exactly what is going on, which is why, in the period since April, new out-patient waits of more than a year reduced by 17.9 per cent. In the same period, the waiting list size for new in-patient and day-case procedures over 52 weeks has reduced by 26.1 per cent. It is why the number of general practitioners is increasing. That is all happening because this Government is relentlessly focused on delivery.

There is nothing for Jackie Baillie to worry about, because, as we saw from the opinion poll yesterday, nobody trusts the Labour Party on the national health service, and more people trust me and the SNP.

Emma Harper (Scottish National Party, South Scotland)

The evidence is clear that Scotland’s NHS is turning a corner, with downward trends across nearly all waiting list indicators. To suggest otherwise does a huge disservice to our fantastic NHS staff. I suggest that Jackie Baillie and her colleagues think twice about the impact of their scaremongering about our health and social care system in Scotland and the effect that that is having on the wider population—and perhaps also reflect on the dismal record of their colleagues in Wales and England before turning to our record. [Interruption.]

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Let us hear Ms Harper’s question.

Emma Harper (Scottish National Party, South Scotland)

Can the First Minister advise how the Scottish National Party Government is working to deliver our health service in Scotland, continue to drive down waiting times, and invest in a well-funded and well-supported NHS for those who need it?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The first thing to say is that we put in place record financial settlements for the national health service, which the Labour Party could not bring itself to vote for. We have also put in place the investment to make sure that we are increasing GP numbers and that operations are performing at levels that we have not seen since January 2020, before the pandemic. We have also seen an increase in the number of diagnostic tests performed, and, as I have just repeated to Jackie Baillie, long waits of more than a year have been down for five months in a row.

What this Government is doing is focusing on the people’s priorities. We are tackling the issues in the national health service, and we are delivering for the people of Scotland.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

We move to constituency and general supplementary questions.

Tess White (Conservative, North East Scotland)

My question relates to an issue that cannot be blamed on the super-flu.

Aberdeen’s new maternity hospital is facing further delays, more than a decade after it was first given the go-ahead. The Baird family hospital was originally planned to open in 2020, but more setbacks have meant that it might not be finished until 2027 at the earliest—that is seven years late. Millions of pounds of taxpayers’ money has been spent on rectifying design flaws. Local women are paying the price for that incompetence, while staff are struggling to cope with rising waiting times for maternity services, gynaecology, breast screening and breast surgery. First Minister, will you engage with NHS Grampian and visit the site to see for yourself the problems that are causing the delays?

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

Always speak through the chair.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I understand the significance of the points that Tess White raises. Obviously, the safety of national health facilities is absolutely essential. During the design phase of the Baird, issues have been raised about hospital construction projects that have been completed in other parts of Scotland, and those issues are the subject of inquiries. We have to be mindful of the safety issues, which explains a lot of the issues at play.

The Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care engages in detail with NHS Grampian to press for the earliest possible progress. I totally accept the importance of those services being available for Tess White’s constituents, and I assure her that there is relentless focus on those issues. However, we have to be mindful of the safety considerations that must be applied in all cases.

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

The First Minister will be aware of the significant financial pressures in the voluntary sector, with inflationary energy and food costs and, of course, increased national insurance payments. That increase in national insurance will cost the Scottish Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals an extra £400,000 a year, which has led to it having to look for voluntary redundancies. Does the First Minister share my concern that the Scottish SPCA will have to cut its services at the very time—after the festive season—when there will be an upsurge in demand as unwanted pets, given as Christmas presents, are rejected and abandoned when the novelty wears off?

I declare an interest as convener of the cross-party group on animal welfare.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Christine Grahame raises a serious issue. We are all concerned about the sustainability of the third sector in light of the additional costs that it has to meet due to the increase in employer national insurance contributions. That increase has been a significant factor for all sectors, and in particular the voluntary sector, to deal with.

I am happy for the Government to co-operate with the Scottish SPCA in any way that we can to ensure that its important advisory and support services are available at all times during the year.

Daniel Johnson (Labour, Edinburgh Southern)

The First Minister will be aware that, over recent months, the University of Edinburgh has been embarking on cost-cutting measures, including 350 voluntary redundancies, salary freezes and reductions in hours.

Constituents of mine have highlighted a communication that the university has circulated, which outlines the possibility of compulsory redundancies. The University and College Union estimates that one in eight jobs could be lost. However, it is not just about Edinburgh university. Yesterday, the University of Strathclyde announced plans for 70 job cuts.

Does the First Minister accept that that is the result of long-term underfunding of Scottish universities by the Scottish Government? More important, what does he say to university workers who are contemplating a Christmas when they do not know whether they will have a job in the new year?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The issues in the university sector are complex. For example, the United Kingdom Government’s stance on migration does not help the university sector, because it does not help with the attraction of international students, which is one of the very significant factors that have affected the resources of the university community.

Of course, I accept that the Government publicly funds a proportion of university income, and these issues will be the subject of debate in the budget process. However, last year, Mr Johnson never supported the budget. The universities would have got nothing, according to Mr Johnson, because he was not prepared to support the budget.

I simply encourage Mr Johnson to engage with the Government, so that we can all make progress in supporting the universities and, into the bargain, their employees.

Jackie Dunbar (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Donside)

A new report from the Confederation of British Industry shows that business investment in Scotland has risen to a 20-year high, in contrast with a fall across the United Kingdom. This success for Scotland’s economy comes despite the UK Government’s tax on jobs and its low-growth model. How does the Scottish Government plan to build on that momentum and continue to deliver economic growth, even within the limits of devolution?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The CBI report is very welcome, because it indicates that business investment in Scotland has risen to a 20-year high, in contrast with a fall across the rest of the United Kingdom. That goes alongside the fact that unemployment in Scotland is lower than that in the rest of the United Kingdom, which is another indication of the strength of economic performance in Scotland.

Of course, we have heard the views of the credit rating agencies, which said that Scotland had a strong and diverse economy and that it benefited from prudent financial management of its public finances and from its institutional strength.

The CBI report demonstrates that Scotland is an attractive place for investment, that it is a successful and dynamic economy and that it has good stewardship of its public finances.

Pam Gosal (Conservative, West Scotland)

On Tuesday, I had a constructive meeting with Chief Constable Jo Farrell. She assured me that Police Scotland is complying with the Supreme Court judgment on the definition of the word “woman”. The chief constable told me that Police Scotland did not wait for any guidance from the Equality and Human Rights Commission, but instead produced its own interim guidance, which is based on biological sex. I ask the First Minister again—especially bearing in mind the Sandie Peggie judgment—why it has taken almost eight months for other public bodies to follow the law.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

One of the issues of which we have been mindful is the need to ensure that the complex legal judgment of the Supreme Court is correctly and properly applied in guidance. We have published new guidance in relation to a number of areas, such as schools and workplaces within the Scottish Government.

Obviously, there are issues that we have to continue to work through, as we saw in the judgment that was announced at the beginning of the week, on Monday, in relation to the employment tribunal to which the member referred. That is a further range of complexity that has to be wrestled with.

I reassure Pam Gosal that the Government is doing the work to ensure that those issues are properly addressed, and we have already done so in relation to the documents that we have published.

Richard Leonard (Labour, Central Scotland)

I hope that the First Minister will join me in welcoming yesterday’s Supreme Court decision in the case of Crozier v Scottish Power and commend Elaine Veale, whose father, Robert Crozier, died from mesothelioma in 2018, for her unrelenting struggle in an eight-year battle with his former employer, Scottish Power UK plc, to win the case.

Will the First Minister join me in condemning the actions of Scottish Power in resisting and obstructing the claim? Will he welcome the fact that, on this occasion at least, the Supreme Court has understood the clear intention of this Parliament in passing the Damages (Asbestos-related Conditions) (Scotland) Act 2009?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Mr Leonard raises an example of the importance of addressing the issues involved in the damages legislation and the enormous suffering that individuals with mesothelioma have experienced.

I associate myself very much Mr Leonard’s comments, and I am glad that the issue has been resolved satisfactorily, but it should not have involved going to such lengths to ensure that justice could be achieved.

Kevin Stewart (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Central)

Scotland is an energy-rich country, but people are struggling with sky-high bills to heat their homes. For too many years, Westminster has squandered Scotland’s energy, while failing to provide any meaningful support to people in Scotland to raise living standards.

While Westminster is sitting on its hands, can the First Minister advise what steps the Scottish National Party Scottish Government is taking to support people on low incomes with their fuel bills this winter? Can he say any more about what we could do differently with full powers over Scotland’s energy from the fresh start of independence?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Over this winter, the Government will invest more than £196 million in our winter heating benefits, providing vital support towards the cost of energy to those with a greater need for heat, including low-income households, families with disabled children and young people, and pensioners. In addition, low-income Scots, including pensioners, will continue to receive our winter heating payments, which are worth £59.75, this winter. Those payments are available only in Scotland. Those are some of the measures that the Government is taking within its existing powers.

Of course, people in Scotland are attracted by the very clear argument that it is vital that the enormous energy potential of our country benefits the people of Scotland. With all of the generation capability that we have, it is absurd that we have such high levels of fuel poverty. It is only the fresh start of independence that will address that issue.

Murdo Fraser (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

Hospitality and self-catering businesses across the country, which are already suffering from rising costs, are reeling this week from a rates revaluation that sees, in some cases, a threefold increase in the bills that they are likely to face, which they simply cannot afford.

I know, and the First Minister knows, that the assessors are independent of Government, but ministers set the statutory framework—the rules, the assumptions, the timetables and the methodology—under which the assessors operate. Will the First Minister take urgent action to address the issue before yet more hospitality businesses have to close their doors?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I understand the concerns that Mr Fraser raises with me. As he correctly says, the assessors act independently on this question. However, I am concerned by the detail that I am hearing about some of the decisions that have been arrived at, which is why the Minister for Public Finance has already engaged in considering the implications of the issues and what is driving the changes in the methodologies that are producing those results.

I assure Mr Fraser that the issue is already being addressed by the Government. It is an important issue, because it will affect the sustainability of many businesses as a consequence of the proposed changes. The matter is being pursued by ministers at this time.

Mercedes Villalba (Labour, North East Scotland)

Seven prisoners who are in their second month on hunger strike are now at risk of death due to their deteriorating health. They are part of a larger group of political prisoners who are being held under special terrorism conditions due to alleged association with the proscribed group Palestine Action. I oppose the ban on Palestine Action, I support those who have protested against the ban and I add my voice to the call for their immediate bail while awaiting trial.

On behalf of my constituents in the North East Scotland region who care deeply about the issue, will the First Minister join me in opposing any curtailing of human rights and the intimidation, discrimination and victimisation of those who oppose genocide?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I am a very strong supporter of human rights. I have deep anxieties with regard to what I am hearing about the consideration that is being given to curtailing the application and scope of the European convention on human rights in the United Kingdom. The obligation to observe the ECHR is one of the great developments during my lifetime. It has strengthened individual rights, and we are the better for it. I am concerned by the direction of travel on that question, and I assure Mercedes Villalba of my support on it. This evening, I will attend a Scottish Human Rights Commission event in the Parliament.

Mercedes Villalba will appreciate that custodial decisions are arrived at by the application of law in the United Kingdom and that it would be inappropriate for me, as First Minister, who has to observe the rule of law, to make any comment about independent decisions that are arrived at by prosecutorial or judicial authorities.

Foysol Choudhury (Independent, Lothian)

A constituent of mine who is on a national health service waiting list recently received correspondence from NHS Lothian informing them that, if they did not confirm within 21 days whether they wanted to remain on the list, they would automatically be taken off it. Although I understand that that policy is in line with Government guidance, I am concerned that it might result in a vulnerable patient, such as one who is elderly or who has special educational needs, missing out on essential treatment without their consent. Will the First Minister agree to instruct ministers and officials to review the policy to ensure that vulnerable patients are not struck off waiting lists unfairly?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Any individual who requires healthcare treatment should get that healthcare treatment. That is the simple premise behind the national health service, and it is applied in all circumstances. It is important that we have up-to-date information on the medical conditions of individuals to enable us to plan their treatment, and that is exactly what the national health service ensures.

Craig Hoy (Conservative, South Scotland)

Scottish National Party-run Dumfries and Galloway Council is set to vote today on the controversial £68.6 million Whitesands flood defence scheme, which is opposed by many residents and businesses. The Scottish Government is expected to fund 80 per cent of that project, despite serious questions remaining about its impact and effectiveness. Given that the Scottish Government faces a massive budget black hole and that Dumfries and Galloway Council could potentially be closing rural schools to deal with its financial crisis, will the First Minister withdraw his Government’s financial support for the Whitesands flood defence scheme project, which is likely to do more harm than good for residents, businesses and the local economy?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Flooding at Whitesands has been a long-term issue. There has been significant parliamentary and political pressure for a scheme to be put in place. A number of very well-designed flood prevention schemes have been put in place in different communities in Scotland that have provided respite for families who are affected. I simply observe that early weather information suggests that there will be very heavy rain in the south-west of Scotland over the course of this weekend, so there are challenging circumstances out there at all times.

Flood defence schemes are developed locally. They are put to wider discussion across all local authorities to determine the funding priorities, and the Government allocates funding to them accordingly. That is, essentially, the Government collaborating with a locally based approach to the design of flood prevention schemes. Mr Hoy is asking me to take that power away from local authorities and to decide on the issue in the centre. Normally, Mr Hoy rails against the Government deciding on such issues. I have had much correspondence over the years from people who do not like the scheme that is proposed at Whitesands, but it is important that we listen carefully to the expert advice about the right course of action on such issues.

Alison Johnstone (Presiding Officer, Lothian)

That concludes First Minister’s question time. There will be a short suspension to allow people to leave the public gallery and the chamber.

Neurodevelopmental Conditions (Support)

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

The next item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S6M-19319, in the name of Daniel Johnson, on welcoming the report by the Royal College of Psychiatrists on support for neurodevelopmental conditions. The debate will be concluded without any question being put, and I ask members who wish to speak in the debate to press their request-to-speak buttons.

Motion debated,

That the Parliament welcomes the publication of the report by the Royal College of Psychiatrists in Scotland, Multi-system solutions for meeting the needs of autistic people and people with ADHD in Scotland; notes the reported unprecedented increase in the number of people across Scotland, including in Edinburgh, seeking support for neurodevelopmental conditions (NDCs), particularly attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and autism; understands that, as of March 2025, over 42,000 children and 23,000 adults were waiting for a neurodevelopmental assessment, and that this represents an increase of over 500% for children and 2,200% for adults since 2020; further understands that there is currently no standardised national pathway for diagnosis, treatment and support for NDCs, and that in the absence of appropriate services, individuals are being referred into general mental health pathways, not because they have a mental illness, but because there is nowhere else for them to go; believes that this is placing unsustainable pressure on Scotland’s mental health system; further believes that timely diagnosis and intervention for ADHD and autism can significantly improve quality of life, reduce suicide risk and prevent secondary mental illnesses; commends the work of the Royal College of Psychiatrists in Scotland in developing a comprehensive, value-based framework to address these challenges, and notes the view that simply expanding existing structures is not a sustainable solution, and that a multi-system and society-wide response is needed.

Daniel Johnson (Labour, Edinburgh Southern)

I thank members from across the parties who have supported my motion to enable this debate to take place. The debate is important for a number of reasons, not only to discuss the recommendations in the report by the Royal College of Psychiatrists but to mark the progress that we have made.

It is a little bit more than eight years since I first stated in the Parliament that I have attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and that I take medication for it. Then, in 2018, I held, I think, the first debate in the Parliament to discuss ADHD by itself.

We have made much progress. When I reflect on the context then and the context now, I think that it is now much easier to talk about ADHD. There is a much greater understanding and acceptance of it. Indeed, I find myself attending national health service briefings and other meetings at which I am not the only person raising the issue. Colleagues around the chamber find it equally important and raise the issues, too. That is fantastic.

However, there has also been an odd flipping of the situation. Back in 2017, there was stigma; it was difficult to speak up and the Government often found itself justifying why diagnosis and prescribing took place. Now, we have public demand for diagnosis, assessment and prescribing, and the Government is explaining why those things are not taking place. Most recently—and we need to talk about this in the debate—the Government has been explaining why diagnosis is not required.

That situation is dangerous, and we need to take care. We have to consider the scale of the problem. There are 42,000 children waiting for assessment—that is a 500 per cent increase. We also have 23,000 adults waiting for assessment—that is a 2,200 per cent increase. Unfortunately, we have had to rely on the Royal College of Psychiatrists to produce those numbers, because the Scottish Government is not producing them.

Behind those numbers is not just a cost in terms of the frustration and human misery caused by a failure to diagnose and provide support, but a real economic cost. It is estimated that undiagnosed autism spectrum disorder costs the economy £44 billion and undiagnosed ADHD £17 billion. In the prison population, 25 per cent are estimated to have ADHD against 3 to 5 per cent of the general population. There is a real cost to failure that we have to address. Indeed, there is not one single neurodevelopmental condition that is not overrepresented at least threefold in the prison population. That is why the report by the Royal College of Psychiatrists is so important—it sets out a clear plan of what we can do now in wider policy, and in clinical action and policy, to address the issue.

On the point about there being no need for a diagnosis, the report contains important recommendations—in particular, recommendations 1, 2 and 5 of the 10 that are made—on non-clinical pathways and how we can adjust approaches in education and wider public policy to help people with ADHD and autism. Those practical, reasonable adjustments do not need a diagnosis. Recommendations 9 and 10, which are about improving understanding more widely across the general population, are important, too.

However, the bulk of the recommendations in the report are on clinical pathways and access to diagnosis. Explicitly, recommendation 3 talks about increasing access to medication. I am not denying that medication is important. Let me be very clear, as I have been clear in the past: for me, as for many people, medication was the biggest single step that I could have taken to help me with my condition. Indeed, it is what many people approach me about, as they do constantly. They say that medication helps with their ability to hold down a job, maintain relationships with their family and deal with the chaos that ADHD often brings.

The report also sets out the need for new guidelines, including from the Scottish intercollegiate guidelines network, as we do not have any SIGN guidelines for ADHD. We also need new general adult psychiatric standards, and we need a four-tiered model for accessing diagnosis and support. Those are clear and practical points.

Another feature of the report is its statement that we need to tackle primary care head on. In recommendations 3 and 4, the Royal College of Psychiatrists makes it explicit that we need to bring forward a structure and a means by which general practitioners can actively participate in prescribing. We have seen changes and advances in our understanding of the condition, which is critical.

Let us talk about the other elephant in the room: shared care. The reality is that GPs across this country have stopped what was once the understood and received practice of entering into shared care on the basis of a private diagnosis. I do not think that someone should have to have a private diagnosis to get the treatment that they want, and I certainly do not want a system that relies on that, but we do need a pragmatic approach.

I have had lots of conversations about that in recent months, and GPs will say that they are not allowed to do shared care any more, but that is not true. Health boards are clear that they are not preventing it, and even the local medical committees say that the guidelines that they have produced do not prohibit it. However, health boards, GPs and local medical committees seem to be undertaking some kind of mutual blame activity, and are all pointing the finger in another direction.

We need a pragmatic approach in which it is recognised that private diagnoses are very often made by the very same people who would make an NHS diagnosis. Therefore, I am asking for that sort of practical approach with, as has been called for, the standardisation of what a good diagnosis looks like, so that we can accept diagnoses that have been made elsewhere.

Sandesh Gulhane (Conservative, Glasgow)

Will the member give way?

Daniel Johnson (Labour, Edinburgh Southern)

I am very happy to give way to Sandesh Gulhane, but he will have to be brief.

Sandesh Gulhane (Conservative, Glasgow)

I declare an interest as a practising NHS GP.

I would just note that, when someone gets a private diagnosis, it is no longer shared care, as they will no longer be seeing that private consultant. What we really need is for the diagnosis to be transferred into the NHS for shared care to happen.

Daniel Johnson (Labour, Edinburgh Southern)

I do accept that, and that view is adopted in the standardised approach. It is shared care if the person continues to see the private practitioner, but the NHS GP does the prescribing. However, we do need standardisation, pragmatism and, above all else, clarity.

To the minister, I say that we should have the numbers so that we can understand how many people are waiting; we should have clear standardised approaches; and we must have a plan to clear the backlog, because, behind it, tens of thousands of people are in crisis.

Paul McLennan (Scottish National Party, East Lothian)

I thank Daniel Johnson for securing the debate. Daniel and I have had a couple of chats about this issue over the past couple of months, and we are all aware of the issue through our constituents. It is multilayered and multi-agency, and it impacts on children and families in health and education settings.

As many others will have done, I met the RCP in Scotland just last week to discuss its report. A few issues have come through. A key issue is the impact of neurodevelopmental conditions on many aspects of people’s lives; indeed, they have major emotional, social and health impacts.

Daniel Johnson’s point about access to diagnosis and medication is incredibly important. As we have discussed, there is also an issue in relation to GPs in health boards such as NHS Lothian. The issue of standardisation is really important, given that different GPs take different approaches.

Daniel Johnson mentioned the number of people who are impacted—NDCs impact roughly 10 to 15 per cent of the population. It is good that people are beginning to talk about the subject, because I think that such conditions are probably significantly underdiagnosed.

Between 2019 and 2021, the number of referrals increased between 500 and 800 per cent across health boards. That increase is being driven by several factors, one of which is that society is more aware of such conditions. In addition, there are unmet historical needs, as well as population growth. There is no denying the impact of Covid, either.

As the RCP has said, this debate is not necessarily about finance, although I will touch on that subject in a moment. More important is the need for standardisation of the referral, treatment and support pathways, and I hope that the minister will pick up on that issue—I have already had a quick chat with him about it. Without a nationally agreed pathway, it is difficult to see how we can move forward. The pressure will only grow in the coming months and years as people become more aware of neurodevelopmental conditions. Constituents regularly approach me on the subject, because, even within East Lothian, GPs take very different approaches.

As for what we should do in the future, which is the key issue addressed in the RCP report, there are some lessons that we should take on board. As part of the national autism implementation plan, a feasibility study on pathways was undertaken in 2021; the fact is that we are still talking about pathways, and there is still a need for such pathways to replace single-condition approaches. That is an important point. Those pathways must be accessible across the 14 health boards.

Daniel Johnson also talked about the need to deliver local stepped care pathway models. I interact with Stronger Together for Autism and Neurodivergence, which is very active in East Lothian, and that is one of its key aims. Such models include third sector and community services, such as access to self-help, peer support and a range of other services prior to—and, of course, after—diagnosis.

The RCP makes a number of other key recommendations that must be progressed. For example, it talks about the need for a governance framework and a competency-building framework at all levels of service provision.

Daniel Johnson touched on the delivery of the RCP’s four-tiered pathway proposal. The first tier involves a national public health approach, which is all about developing a public health campaign to promote awareness and understanding of neurodevelopmental conditions, with an emphasis on self-management.

The second tier is the availability of national self-help resources, which will involve creating a centralised platform to provide comprehensive self-help. The third is about establishing specialist third sector commissioning for NDCs. That provision must be localised; indeed, we have discussed the importance of that with NHS Lothian. There is almost a blame game going on, with the health board saying that GPs are responsible for local provision, and we need to clear that up. A key issue is how we prioritise investment in developing local provision, and there needs to be a multidisciplinary approach that includes clinicians and GPs.

There is much more that I could say, but I conclude by thanking Daniel Johnson for securing the debate. The issue will continue to be debated, and I look forward to hearing from the minister on the RCP’s report in particular.

Sandesh Gulhane (Conservative, Glasgow)

The RCP’s report lays out in clear and evidence-based terms what many of us have been warning of for years. Demand has soared. As of March 2025, more than 42,000 children and 23,000 adults were waiting for a neurodevelopmental assessment. We are not talking about a marginal increase. Since 2020, children’s waits have risen by more than 500 per cent, and adults’ waits have risen by 2,200 per cent. Those numbers represent lives on hold: children becoming adults and being sent to the back of the queue again; parents in despair; and adults left without clarity, support or hope.

However, let us be clear: the scale of the crisis is not simply the result of increased demand; it is also a result of the fact that, for years, the Government has reassured itself that everything is fine. It is most certainly not fine and, shamefully, the Government knows it because it has conflated data, changed the way in which data is collected and used flawed data to game the system.

The royal college’s recommendations are not radical and they are not rocket science. As Daniel Johnson said, access to medication is pretty basic. The recommended actions are the basic building blocks of a functioning system. The Scottish National Party Government should have put in place a clear national pathway with timely diagnosis and treatment and seamless support years ago. Instead, we have chaos.

Data collection is fundamentally poor. NHS Grampian cannot separate neurodevelopmental cases from child and adolescent mental health service cases in the data. We cannot even understand the scale of need. NHS Lanarkshire provided data that was two years out of date, and when we phoned the board, we learned that the real waiting time is two years longer than was publicly reported. That is not transparency.

Daniel Johnson (Labour, Edinburgh Southern)

Does Sandesh Gulhane agree that it is confusing when health boards say that they cannot report data but they can say how long people are going to wait? They clearly know what people are waiting for, but they are not reporting it. Does that not also confuse the member?

Sandesh Gulhane (Conservative, Glasgow)

It absolutely does confuse me. What health boards say to their patients about waiting times and what they publish are completely separate. We have seen that in NHS Lanarkshire. What we are talking about is not transparency but obfuscation, and it is unacceptable.

Without access to correct data, how can a service possibly be planned? Without a clear pathway, people will fall through the cracks, and the situation is placing intolerable pressure on an already overstretched mental health system.

We know about the consequences of that. We heard Daniel Johnson talk about worse educational outcomes, higher rates of unemployment and the significant overrepresentation of individuals with autism and ADHD in the criminal justice system. Untreated ADHD increases the risk of substance misuse. Untreated autism increases the risk of anxiety, depression and suicide. Early diagnosis is not optional; it is life changing and life saving.

The minister has called for a round table on 15 December. I will be honest and say that I am sceptical about that. We have had countless round tables and warm words, but we rarely see action, so I would like to ask a few questions.

What has been done since the minister appeared before the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee on 28 October? Has he met members of health boards to ensure that data is collected appropriately? Is reliable data now being collected? What steps have been taken to ensure transparency?

Scotland needs a multisystem, society-wide response. We cannot simply expand broken structures. We need coherent pathways from diagnosis to treatment to long-term support, and we need those now. The royal college has done its job; it is time for the Scottish Government to do its job.

Carol Mochan (Labour, South Scotland)

I thank Daniel Johnson for bringing this important debate to the chamber. Working with other members across parties, Daniel Johnson has been a real champion in the Parliament for people with autism, ADHD and other neurodevelopmental conditions.

The report adds to the growing body of evidence that change is needed to our approach to assessment, diagnosis and support for neurodivergence in Scotland. Members might be aware that, earlier this year, the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee conducted an inquiry that gave people and families who have experienced neurodevelopmental services the opportunity to share those experiences and recommend changes to ensure that we can better serve our neurodiverse constituents. I look forward to the report being published. It was an important inquiry and many lessons were learned, so I hope that the report will reflect that and will be useful in adding to other on-going work in the area.

The royal college report rightly points out that, despite the dramatic rise in need, Scotland still lacks a dedicated and standardised pathway. It goes on to say that, in the absence of appropriate services, individuals are being referred into general adult mental health pathways, not because they have a mental illness but because there is no suitable alternative. The report points out that those services have never been designed to assess or support people with those conditions and they have just become a catch-all for those referrals.

That structural mismatch is now overwhelming the system. Waiting lists have grown to unmanageable levels. It is therefore important that issue is addressed.

I think that members will recognise what the report is saying, and I want to raise the voices of my constituents, because the frustration of people and families cannot be overstated.

Over the four years that I have been in Parliament—I have said this before—the most frequent requests that I have got in casework have often been very simple. Constituents ask, “Please can you help me understand?”, whether it is to do with waiting lists or service provision for people with autism, ADHD or neurodivergence. They ask, “Can you help me?” with primary school or secondary school, or as children move between primary, secondary and further education, when families often find themselves in conflict.

Pauline McNeill (Labour, Glasgow)

Is the member aware and does she agree that, historically, ADHD has been underdiagnosed in girls and women as a result of differences in the presentation of symptoms? While boys often display hyperactivity and externalised behaviours, girls might show inattentiveness, emotional sensitivity and internalised struggles. The profession is only just realising that. Does the member agree that part of the strategy should focus on girls and women?

Carol Mochan (Labour, South Scotland)

I thank the member for that important intervention; I have had that issue raised with me in casework.

I believe that colleagues in the chamber have heard very similar requests from constituents. More recently, I have heard about the use of the private sector for assessment, which can be incredibly stressful, as other members have mentioned. Many children—and, as we now know, adults—are seeking private assessment after having made many attempts to get an assessment through the national health service. The long NHS waiting lists and the lack of service mean that exhausted families are often using much of their own money and resources to get a diagnosis. That is very stressful, and even after they do that, there is no clear pathway for them.

Many of us in the chamber have heard about how poorly co-ordinated shared care is. That has been mentioned today, so I will not go over it again. However, I note that families are often rejected not just for medication, but by GPs and CAMH services. A constituent raised with me a similar situation in our education system. Parents seek a diagnosis, and then, within the education system, children are denied community services such as occupational therapy or speech and language therapy because their private diagnosis does not link in with the school’s way of recording and reporting, and supporting people.

Parents report to me that they feel that public services—health services, social care, education and criminal justice—lack a basic understanding on the front line. That is an important point, and I will finish on it. The resources are often there, at what has been described to me as quite a high level, but the question is how we enable the front-line teams to pick up on the issues.

I would have liked to say more, Deputy Presiding Officer, but I appreciate the time.

Stuart McMillan (Scottish National Party, Greenock and Inverclyde)

I congratulate Daniel Johnson on securing this important debate. Mr Johnson and I co-hosted an event in October: the RCP report was launched in the morning, and a session took place later where colleagues came along to ask questions. I thought that it was a really helpful session. The report, in my view, is a very important offer to all of society in Scotland.

I will highlight one of the key messages that came out of that session, which was very unusual for the types of events that we all attend as members. Usually, when we go to such events, we always hear, “Can we get more money?”, but one of the key messages from that event was that there is a lot of money in the system—as Carol Mochan just touched on—that could be better invested in people. There was certainly an ask for more money, but it was not the key issue.

The 10 recommendations in the report are all extremely important, but I will touch on just three. The recommendations are helpful in promoting engagement and trying to deliver better outcomes for autistic people and people with ADHD. I have engaged extensively with constituents and with family members who have children with autism or ADHD, and I know that there is a societal challenge in Scotland that we have to try to address. There are, of course, wider issues in this area that exist not just in Scotland but around the world. Nonetheless, in Parliament, we need to think about what we, as parliamentarians, can do.

I sent the report to constituents to let them read and digest it, and make up their own minds as to what they think that it can actually do.

All 10 of the recommendations have merits, but some would be challenging to deliver, particularly in a short timescale. To me, recommendation 1, which Daniel Johnson touched on, is really important. I will read out the title for the Official Report . It is:

“Demand driven by the need for support in the workplace, in places of education and from the benefits system”.

What is proposed could be transformational in terms of healthcare being offered. There is a challenge regarding the Department for Work and Pensions, because we do not have those powers here. It might therefore take a bit of time to deal with that recommendation, but it should be dealt with. Constituents have regularly raised issues with me regarding a need for diagnosis before care is provided. The five suggestions that are made under recommendation 1 could be beneficial in that regard, although I am of the opinion that some of them would be challenging to deliver—the one that involves the DWP in particular.

Recommendation 2 calls for a public health-informed approach. That makes sense and, if we push for it, it could be achieved as a quick win.

Recommendation 5, which is on page 15 of the report, is about national strategies and resources. To me, it is one of the most important recommendations. I hear from people who are concerned regarding the high percentage of people who are diagnosed with neurodevelopmental conditions. It is challenging for those who need support, including those who need more advanced support, and the recommendation is crucial to help to deliver that.

I am conscious of time, so I will not go through all the recommendations, but I welcome the report, which is helpful. I hope that the recommendations will stimulate further discussion and dialogue, but also decision making so that we can get better outcomes for the people we all represent. We have societal challenges, but the report can certainly help to move the dial. Healthcare professionals have provided a set of recommendations to help. They know that there is money in the NHS system that could be better invested, and the recommendations are very worthy of consideration and further discussion, because they could genuinely make a huge difference for the people we are here to represent.

Brian Whittle (Conservative, South Scotland)

I thank my friend and colleague Daniel Johnson for bringing the debate to the chamber. I applaud his continuing drive to deliver a better pathway for those with neurodevelopmental conditions, and I applaud him for using his own experience to highlight the subject. I also thank the Royal College of Psychiatrists in Scotland for its comprehensive report on multisystem solutions for people with ADHD and autism.

Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder involves differences in attention, impulsivity and hyperactivity. Mr Johnson gave a comprehensive overview of the system’s failings and the dire need to deliver support and a national strategy for the hugely increasing number of people who are seeking assessment and support for neurodevelopmental conditions, given all the negative impacts that are associated with lack of support.

I will not rehearse all the important issues that Mr Johnson spoke about so well, but the one that worries me the most, which has reared its head again, is the lack of coherent and consistent data collection. As I have said many times, our health service lacks a universal system that allows data collection. In one way or another, we will have to address that across the health service in general, because such a tool would be a huge help in tackling issues.

I also want to highlight prevention, which is one of my favourite topics. I have some limited experience of coaching athletes with autism and fetal alcohol spectrum disorder, and what I have witnessed—

Daniel Johnson (Labour, Edinburgh Southern)

Will Brian Whittle take a brief intervention?

Brian Whittle (Conservative, South Scotland)

I will.

Daniel Johnson (Labour, Edinburgh Southern)

As I often say to people, beyond medication, the other critical factors are good sleep, hygiene and exercise. I emphasise that access to sport is critical in helping people to manage ADHD.

Brian Whittle (Conservative, South Scotland)

I thank Daniel Johnson for finishing my speech for me. [ Laughter .] I was going to say that I witnessed young people flourishing and developing in a training environment that delivered structure and self-discipline in their lives. It was great to see, and one of them even ended up doing a college course on health and fitness.

More telling is what happened to those athletes during Covid, when they were starved of that structure in their lives. Without that framework and focus, there was a significant slide, which was much worse than that for the other athletes in the squad. One ended up not being able to control his eating and being unable to get out of the house to take part in activities. He ended up putting on so much weight that he never got back to training—and he was an international athlete.

Having access to activity, a pathway to self-expression and a route to channel their energy can be so important for some people who have neurodevelopmental conditions, because it can help to provide balance.

I spoke to the Royal Society of Psychiatrists and some autism representatives in the third sector to see whether there was any agreement on the points that I am exploring. Thankfully, there was agreement.

I take every opportunity to highlight the importance of sport and activity to the nation’s wellbeing. I suggest that, in these instances, they can be even more important. I also suggest that the continued decline in opportunities to be active in the school environment and in our communities might be a contributing factor to the exponential and unprecedented rise in the number of people who are requesting ADHD assessments. I consider those numbers to have always been there, under the surface. However, I wonder whether, as part of prevention and, as Daniel Johnson put it, the non-medicalisation of the condition, many people with neurodivergent conditions would benefit from a reversal of the decline in opportunities to channel their hyperactivity.

Again, I thank Daniel Johnson for bringing the debate to the Parliament.

Michelle Thomson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk East)

I, too, thank Daniel Johnson for bringing the debate to the Parliament. I also thank him for his bravery in being so vocal about some of the challenges that he has faced, which is not something that people appreciate enough.

My interest in this issue was triggered by the eminent Dr Premal Shah, who set up the Lothian adult ADHD and ASD clinics. He is a long-term family friend and quite the force in this area.

I agree that the report is excellent. I enjoyed reading it, and I congratulate the Royal College of Psychiatrists in Scotland on its work. I particularly liked the framing of this issue as a “wicked problem”—one that is complex, interconnected and resistant to quick fixes. We need to bear that in mind. It is not just a health issue; it is a systemic challenge that touches every part of society.

We know that neurodevelopmental conditions intersect with education, employment, justice and social care. We also know that people are being referred into mental health pathways that were never designed for them, which—we must not forget—is overwhelming clinicians as well as delaying care for those who have severe mental illness. The number of vacancies in psychiatry is rising, and burnouts are accelerating. The system is fundamentally under strain from every angle.

We have heard waiting list figures for assessments. Some regions are experiencing delays of more than five years, and I have also had a high number of inquiries from my constituents about their own issues.

I want to focus my brief remarks on the financial cost of those problems to our economy. The figures that have been quoted directly reflect a loss of productivity, and we know that there are productivity challenges in Scotland and across the United Kingdom. Higher unemployment rates increase reliance on benefits. Businesses are losing skilled workers who cannot access timely support. Schools struggle to keep pupils engaged, which leads to lower educational attainment and reduced future earnings. The justice system bears additional costs through higher rates of offending linked to untreated conditions. Every delay in diagnosis and intervention translates into lost economic output and increased public spending. That is a cycle that we cannot afford to ignore.

We know that the funding is fragmented and insufficient. Unless there are dedicated funding streams, we cannot establish the specialist pathways that are needed. However, as I have said, the problem is complex, and so are the mechanisms for funding. We need to acknowledge that. I agree with the pragmatic approach that is suggested in the report that there should be, in the interim, a separate funding stream that is dedicated to wider service development.

Much more thought needs to be given to the potential for digital solutions. Coming from an information technology background, I know that that is easy to say, but I absolutely acknowledge the complexity, and I appreciate how difficult it will be to provide those solutions. However, if we could start to unlock the data sources, that would result in some very powerful tools.

I will pick up on some of the points that have been made on data. We cannot solve what we cannot see. I absolutely agree that we need robust data collection, but we need that data to be disaggregated by sex. We know that ADHD and autism present differently in women and girls. We know that women are much better at masking and at using coping strategies to hide distress, but that delays diagnosis. Such girls are underidentified in childhood, and women can often reach a crisis point before receiving—

Daniel Johnson (Labour, Edinburgh Southern)

Will Michelle Thomson take an intervention?

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

It would need to be brief, as the member is about to conclude.

Michelle Thomson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk East)

I am indeed. I was coming to my last sentence.

Without sex-specific data, we risk designing services that fail half the population. That is not a technical detail; it is the foundation for equitable care.

Tom Arthur (Scottish National Party, Renfrewshire South)

I thank members from across the chamber for what has been a thoughtful and constructive set of contributions. The strength of feeling that we have heard on behalf of autistic people, people with ADHD and those with other neurodevelopmental conditions, as well as their families and those who support them, underlines both the scale of the challenge and, I think, our collective determination to deliver meaningful change.

I thank Daniel Johnson directly for securing the debate and for acknowledging the important work of the Royal College of Psychiatrists in Scotland in producing its recent report. The college has made a valuable and timely contribution. The Scottish Government welcomes its focus on multisystem reform, early intervention and support based on need, not simply on diagnosis. Those principles strongly echo our own approach, and they reflect the perspective of professionals, families and communities, whose voices must continue to shape the way forward.

Members are absolutely right to highlight the unprecedented increase in demand for neurodevelopmental assessment and support. We are not alone in saying that. As I have said previously, that trend is emerging across the United Kingdom and internationally, with growing pressure on systems that were never built to manage demand on the present scale. We must meet the challenge, however, and we must do so in a way that recognises the diversity of neurodivergent people’s experiences and the complexity of the systems that they interact with across health, education and social care.

Members have spoken about waiting times. We appreciate that waiting for assessment or support can be challenging, but we are working hard to make that experience better for individuals and families. A diagnosis can be profoundly important to a person’s identity and understanding of themselves. For some, particularly those seeking ADHD medication, it is essential.

Diagnosis alone is not the solution, however. A traditional NHS waiting-list model cannot meet the scale or complexity of the need that we now face. I have heard from many experts about the risks in overmedicalising our response. As the royal college has emphasised, a co-ordinated multi-agency response is required, focusing on timely, needs-based support from the outset. For children and young people, the national neurodevelopmental specification sets a clear expectation that support should begin on the basis of need and should not be contingent on a clinical diagnosis.

Implementation has undoubtedly been challenging in the face of rising demand, but we have already taken significant steps. We have invested in service pilots, in the testing of digital assessment tools and in family support initiatives, and we are working to strengthen multi-agency pathways, building around our getting it right for every child national approach. We have also published the joint review of the implementation of the national specification, jointly carried out by Scottish Government and the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities. The review identifies short, medium and long-term actions to support children’s service partners to deliver the specification more effectively.

To drive that important work forward, we have established a new cross-sector task force, jointly chaired by senior leaders from education and health. Its purpose is clear: to accelerate and co-ordinate systems-wide improvement, drawing on lived experience, clinical expertise and good practice across Scotland.

Brian Whittle (Conservative, South Scotland)

I have listened intently to what the minister has said. I agree with much of it, but I caveat that getting a diagnosis involves an element of relief for many people, who then recognise that they need to deal with something. There is a relief and a mental health issue in getting a diagnosis.

Tom Arthur (Scottish National Party, Renfrewshire South)

I appreciate the problems. In emphasising the importance of a needs-based approach, I want to be absolutely crystal clear that I recognise the importance that is placed on diagnosis. I would not want my remarks to be misconstrued in any way, whether unintentionally or intentionally, nor to be suggestive of any language that relates to notions of overdiagnosis. I want to be very clear about the approach. My focus is on ensuring that people can access support as quickly as possible and that diagnosis should not act as a barrier to or means of gatekeeping that. I recognise that, for many, great importance is placed on diagnosis for identity and self-understanding and, in some cases—when it comes to ADHD in particular—for access to medication. We recognise the need to address all those issues quickly. However, as I have said, we need to do that with sensitivity and rigour, recognising the complex and diverse nature of the issue.

Members have raised the importance of pathways, including adult pathways. We are committed to ensuring that adults receive support that is as consistent and responsive as possible. Recent work is helping us to move firmly in that direction. That is why we have fully accepted the recommendations of the adult neurodevelopmental pathways report and are working with partners on implementation. Our autistic adult support fund and our investment in the national autism implementation team are already supporting more flexible, needs-based approaches for adults across Scotland.

Rightly, members have emphasised the lack of robust national data. Improving data is essential if we are to plan effectively, understand unmet need and support targeted investment.

Daniel Johnson (Labour, Edinburgh Southern)

rose—

Tom Arthur (Scottish National Party, Renfrewshire South)

Before I take an intervention from Daniel Johnson, I will say that work is already under way with health boards and local authorities to understand that data, including what data is currently collected and how we can move towards a more coherent national approach.

On the points that Dr Gulhane raised, I am happy to confirm to him that I have continued my on-going engagement directly with health boards. Indeed, I met a health board just this morning and spoke at length about the importance of neurodevelopmental support and an understanding of the particular challenges and pressures that are faced.

I give way to Daniel Johnson.

Daniel Johnson (Labour, Edinburgh Southern)

I am grateful to the minister for giving way. The point about data is important. However, I will ask him about pathways, because there are clear and specific steps for having a consistent four-stage pathway. Most critically, it is about requesting SIGN guidance for ADHD and, most fundamentally, looking at who can prescribe and at what point in the system they can do so. Has the minister asked his officials to look at those specific points?

Tom Arthur (Scottish National Party, Renfrewshire South)

All the issues that Mr Johnson has related are part of the wider considerations. As was touched on, a summit is coming up on Monday at which we will have an opportunity to discuss a lot of the issues in more detail.

I have noticed the time, Presiding Officer. I have now gone over what was allotted to me.

Again, I thank members from across parties for their contributions. The challenge is significant. It requires a response that involves the whole system and all of society but, ultimately and most important, is also focused on the needs of the individual.

Michelle Thomson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk East)

rose—

Tom Arthur (Scottish National Party, Renfrewshire South)

I was intending to conclude, but I am happy to take an intervention.

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

Make it very brief.

Michelle Thomson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk East)

It will be extremely brief. I genuinely consider it imperative that data is disaggregated by sex, for the reasons that I have outlined. Is the minister able to commit to that?

Tom Arthur (Scottish National Party, Renfrewshire South)

That absolutely needs to be considered as part of the process. When it comes to understanding any data, we would not want to limit ourselves to sex, as important as that is for the reasons that Michelle Thomson set out about different presentations, such as when it comes to masking, for example; those are important points but, as has been touched on by other members, we also need to understand the socioeconomic implications. There is a lot that we have to do on data, and I recognise that.

I will close by again thanking members for their contributions. I look forward to working constructively with members of all parties, and wider partners, to improve our response.

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Cowdenbeath)

That concludes the debate.

Portfolio Question Time

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

The first item of business this afternoon is portfolio question time, and the portfolio is climate action and energy, and transport. There is quite a bit of interest in asking supplementary questions, so I make my usual plea for brevity in questions and responses.

Sue Webber (Conservative, Lothian)

To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to ensure that the CalMac vessels being constructed in Turkey are delivered on schedule and on budget. (S6O-05283)

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

Caledonian Maritime Assets Ltd and the Cemre shipyard are working hard to fully commission and deliver the MV Isle of Islay as soon as possible, and the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee was updated on the December target on 28 November. I can assure the Parliament of CMAL’s, CalMac’s and the shipyard’s combined strong focus during the final stages of vessel delivery.

I meet CMAL regularly and have spoken of the possibility of delivering the remaining three vessels earlier than at the six-month intervals currently indicated. CMAL is discussing all options with the shipyard to deliver the vessels as soon as practicable, and further updates will be provided. I am pleased to report that the costs for all four vessels remain on budget. When the MV Isle of Islay is delivered, the communities of Islay and Jura can look forward to a more resilient and modern ferry service.

Sue Webber (Conservative, Lothian)

Last week, it was announced that the MV Isle of Islay is going to be delayed. Considering that that is the first of our four vessels that are being built in Turkey, will the cabinet secretary say, in detail, what actions she is undertaking to ensure that the remaining three vessels will be delivered on schedule? How is she working with CMAL to ensure that the vessels can enter service more quickly and that they will not require immediate repairs on their arrival in Scotland?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

The CMAL and other testing—the sea trials and so on—for the first vessel will help to identify whether anything needs to be done, before the other three vessels begin sea trials. That is a very practical aspect. I regularly meet CMAL representatives to ensure accountability with regard to how the vessels are progressing. CMAL staff are regularly at the Cemre yard to ensure that progress is being made.

Paul Sweeney (Labour, Glasgow)

The four ferries being built in Turkey deliver precisely zero social or industrial value to the Scottish shipbuilding industry, and CMAL has confirmed that the tender scoring for the new northern isles freight flex vessels is weighted 70 per cent to quality and 30 per cent to cost, and only 3 per cent of the quality element score relates to community benefits. Yet again, that fails to meet the key recommendation of the national shipbuilding strategy that a minimum 10 per cent social value weighting should be applied to evaluations in new competitions, in line with Treasury green book guidance and the Cabinet Office social value model, so that a 30-year cross-Government shipbuilding pipeline encourages participation from the United Kingdom supply chain. Will the Scottish Government move to enforce the minimum 10 per cent social value weightings for new competitions from now on?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

We continue to have community opportunity and benefit across Transport Scotland contracts—a community benefit figure that is comparable. However, the member might be aware that there was only international interest, particularly in relation to the northern isles freighters that are being replaced—[Interruption.]

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

Mr Sweeney. Cabinet secretary, please continue.

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

In terms of—[Interruption.]

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

Please continue, cabinet secretary.

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

With regard to international yards and shipbuilding competitive tenders, and what can be enforced internationally, the member must understand the challenges of trying to enforce something in another jurisdiction.

Katy (Labour, West Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Government what steps it is taking to protect and improve ferry services to Scotland’s island communities. (S6O-05284)

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

We set out our long-term vessels and ports plan in May. The first of six major vessels, the MV Glen Sannox, was delivered into service earlier this year, and we expect the first of the Islay class vessels to be delivered soon. We have commissioned seven electric vessels for routes across the west coast. Taken together, those measures mean that the Government has invested in renewing more than a third of CalMac’s entire fleet. We have also awarded the new Clyde and Hebrides ferry service contract and CMAL is progressing the procurement of two freight vessels for the northern isles routes that serve Orkney and Shetland.

Katy (Labour, West Scotland)

Islanders on Cumbrae are concerned about CalMac proposals for scheduled maintenance windows, which could lead to a direct cut to the island’s vital lifeline ferry services, and believe that CalMac and Transport Scotland must drop the proposals, which could mean that services are withdrawn for either six hours per week or one 24-hour period per month. Will the cabinet secretary provide reassurance that there will be no reduction in service and capacity next year, and that the 2026 summer timetable will match this year’s one?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

The Largs to Cumbrae service will benefit from the cascade and redeployment of existing younger vessels for that route, and a new slipway and shoreside facilities for Cumbrae are currently being built, following the awarding of more than £10 million of Scottish Government funding.

On the maintenance proposals, one of the points of the new direct award contract is that there is engagement, particularly on things such as maintenance. Maintenance is important, and I was keen to ensure that maintenance was in the contract as a regular part of the servicing of our vessels. That is the correct thing to do, but it has to be done with communities. That is why it is a proposal that can be engaged with. I have had representations from people in Cumbrae and others, including from Mr Gibson, who is the constituency MSP. I encourage all communities, when they are looking at the maintenance schedules, to engage directly, and I have asked CalMac to ensure that it is engaging.

Kenneth Gibson (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame North)

There is no justification for the reduction in service to Cumbrae, which has been excellent for many years, and people wish it to continue that way. I commend the cabinet secretary and CMAL for the £13.5 million, which is the total level of investment, going into Cumbrae for the new slipway and associated works. Will the cabinet secretary give an update on phase 1 of the small vessel ferry replacement programme and how Cumbrae, in my constituency, will benefit from the cascading of vessels?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

The small vessel ferry replacement programme is progressing well. The seven new vessels in phase 1 will help to improve connectivity and the resilience of island communities with their electric operation, which will help to reduce carbon emissions. Progress is demonstrated by the steel cutting for the first vessel, which took place in September this year, two months ahead of the original schedule. Further construction milestones will take place soon, as the build programme gathers pace. As I have indicated, the Largs to Cumbrae service will benefit from the cascade and redeployment of existing younger vessels for the route, which, again, is an improvement on top of the investment for the slipway and shoreside facilities that Kenneth Gibson mentions.

Beatrice Wishart (Liberal Democrat, Shetland Islands)

Shared cabins were removed on the northern isles ferry service without consultation. No thought was given by the Scottish Government to the impact that that decision would have on the concessionary voucher entitlement, which has in essence been halved. The cabinet secretary wrote to me saying that entitlements could not be restored as it would be unaffordable and would exacerbate capacity challenges, but there is no recognition of the connection between those issues and the loss of the shared cabins policy. Will the cabinet secretary agree to meet me so that we can discuss the issue in full again?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

I have previously met Beatrice Wishart in her constituency, and she knows, as I explained then, that the decision on shared cabins was the operator’s. The Scottish Government did not introduce that directly, but, in supporting the operator’s responsibilities, I understand why it did that, and I think that Beatrice Wishart does as well. On how we can benefit the community, the new contract, in which I am sure Beatrice Wishart will have an active interest, is being developed. My colleague Jim Fairlie is leading on that for the Government. These are the sorts of issues that can and should be raised as part of the preparation for the new contract as it is developed.

Roz McCall (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

To ask the Scottish Government when it will publish further details of the estimated true cost of its net zero policies for households in Scotland. (S6O-05285)

Gillian Martin (Scottish National Party, Aberdeenshire East)

The draft climate change plan, which was published on 6 November, is the first climate change plan in the United Kingdom to set out an assessment of the costs and benefits of the policies within it. Most of those financial benefits are expected to accrue to households and businesses. The draft plan includes the net cost, which is financial costs minus financial benefits, of delivering its policies. That is in line with the approach that is used by the Scottish Fiscal Commission and the Climate Change Committee. That cost to the Scottish economy from 2026 to 2040 is estimated at £4.8 billion.

We are seeking views on the presentation of costs and benefits during the plan’s consultation period and will consider those for the final publication.

Roz McCall (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

The much-delayed climate change plan that the cabinet secretary mentions revealed that the Scottish National Party’s net zero plan will cost the Scottish economy £4.8 billion by 2040, as she has said. The plan also admits that many of the proposals have not been fully costed. There is a lack of detail on how those costs will be split between households, businesses and the public sector. Will the cabinet secretary commit to publishing more detail on those proposals, including how much the average Scottish household will be left out of pocket by the plan?

Gillian Martin (Scottish National Party, Aberdeenshire East)

It is a 15-year plan. Uncertainty around United Kingdom Government action, technological advancements and market decisions make the distribution of costs extremely challenging to estimate. We have set out the costs in line with the legislation. We know that the scale of change that will be needed for the next part of our net zero journey is significant, and that delivering our net zero target by 2045 will require the transformation of our economy and society, underpinned by sustained investment, both public and private. I end by quoting Professor Graeme Roy, the chair of the Scottish Fiscal Commission, who said:

“Doing nothing, not responding to the challenge of climate change, will be far more expensive and damaging to the public finances than investing in net zero … it is simply not an option.”

I agree whole-heartedly with Professor Roy.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

We have a number of supplementaries, which I hope will be brief.

Bill Kidd (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Anniesland)

It is vital that we ensure that Scotland’s buildings become warmer, greener and cheaper. However, the high cost of energy continues to be prohibitive to many energy-efficient heating upgrades. Do you agree that we need substantial reform of the energy system to achieve affordable climate goals? Can you give any more detail on the Scottish Government’s work?

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

Members should speak through the chair.

Gillian Martin (Scottish National Party, Aberdeenshire East)

Bill Kidd is absolutely right that, in an energy-rich nation such as Scotland, no household should be struggling to heat their home. Measures that were announced by the chancellor will reduce average bills by only £12 a month, while significantly scaling back investment in energy efficiency and clean heating, when those are the actions that would cut bills permanently. Most powers in this area are reserved to the UK Government, so it is important that it uses its full powers and the levers at its disposal to make clean heating more affordable. It is vital that the electricity and gas markets are further reformed.

On the Scottish Government’s work towards energy efficiency, we recently consulted on proposals for homes in the domestic private rented centre to meet new energy performance certificate heat retention rating band C by the end of 2033. The requirement will apply to new tenancies from 2028. We also recently introduced new regulations on energy performance certificates, which will bring an improved EPC rating system into force. We are taking steps to ensure that poor energy efficiency is no longer a driver of fuel poverty, which will positively contribute to the eradication of child poverty.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

We will need brevity in both questions and responses.

Sarah Boyack (Labour, Lothian)

I very much agree that the lack of action there has a cost. It is really important to look at it at a local level. Will the cabinet secretary comment on why we are not getting the same focus on the homes that are vulnerable to flooding? At the moment, the figure for that is 284,000 homes, and the Scottish Government’s website says that another 100,000 will be vulnerable to flooding over the next few decades. What will be done to ramp up support for households that are currently at risk?

Gillian Martin (Scottish National Party, Aberdeenshire East)

If the member does not mind my saying so, that is a bit of a tangential question about flooding, although it is an important issue. Most of the flood protection schemes are in the hands of local authorities, which are given substantial funding to put them into action. Given that the initial question was not about flooding, I might have to write to Sarah Boyack to give her more detail.

Pam Duncan-Glancy (Labour, Glasgow)

I refer members to my entry in the register of members’ interests. This week, I met local home owners and constituents in Glasgow who spoke passionately about the co-operative retrofit model. The model works in communities to share information about options for retrofitting for all income groups. Is the cabinet secretary aware of the co-operative work in that space? What support could she provide to help communities and local industry to replicate and adapt the co-operative retrofit model for their areas, including community organising, peer support, specialist consultancy, and start-up grants?

Gillian Martin (Scottish National Party, Aberdeenshire East)

I am always keen to hear about action that is happening on the ground that can be replicated throughout the country. Certainly, I will take an interest in that particular scheme, and I will pass on the comments to Màiri McAllan, the Cabinet Secretary for Housing, whose portfolio might have appropriate levers in place.

David Torrance (Scottish National Party, Kirkcaldy)

To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to the road safety management safe system capacity building programme in Scotland being awarded a Prince Michael international road safety award. (S6O-05286)

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

I am delighted that Transport Scotland has received that prestigious award. The Government recognises that, in order to really embed the safe system approach to road safety, leadership and co-ordination need to be set out from the top, and that is why we invested in that programme for the people of Scotland.

It is critically important that we continue to change the road safety culture in our country. The programme consisted of publishing the world’s first safe system manual for practitioners and a cultural maturity playbook, and providing bespoke training for more than 500 of our partners. The success of the project solidifies Scotland’s position as a world leader in safe system delivery. It is vital that we continue to work with partners at all levels to reach our vision of Scotland having the best road safety performance in the world by 2030.

David Torrance (Scottish National Party, Kirkcaldy)

The award is welcome recognition for Scotland, but we must never lose sight of the fact that one life lost on our roads is one too many. As the Government continues to work towards realising its long-term vision of no one being killed or seriously injured on Scotland’s roads by 2050, how will the Scottish Government build on the work that it has already undertaken?

Fiona Hyslop (Scottish National Party, Linlithgow)

Any life lost on our roads is one too many. We are committed to that vision zero ambition, and we need to build on those foundations. That is why we have invested record levels of funding in road safety—£48 million for this year. That includes measures to reduce casualties across the trunk road network. The money also helps local authorities through the road safety improvement fund and is helping with 20-mile-per-hour roll-outs, targeting safety cameras and delivering national driver behaviour change campaigns.

We are engaged in a mid-term review to assess where we go next. Yesterday, I chaired the national road safety partnership, in which Police Scotland, local authorities and a variety of other partners, including Public Health Scotland, come together to help to drive that improvement. I have taken a keen interest in that approach, and I think that the leadership that the partnership provides will start to bring about the necessary change.

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

To ask the Scottish Government what assessment it has made of the impact of the energy profits levy on energy jobs and the energy supply chain in the north-east. (S6O-05287)

Gillian Martin (Scottish National Party, Aberdeenshire East)

The United Kingdom Government’s retention of the energy profits levy in its current form will continue to hit jobs and investment across Scotland’s energy sector. Those reserved policy decisions are driving an accelerated decline of North Sea oil and gas before renewable alternatives are sufficiently developed, placing a just energy transition at risk.

The Scottish Government continues to monitor and consider a range of evidence in relation to Scotland’s energy sector. As part of that approach, we review reports on employment from industry, trade unions and other bodies. Analysis that was set out in a recent joint letter from Offshore Energies UK and Scottish Renewables found that replacing the energy profits levy with a fairer fiscal regime could unlock £40 billion in investment and safeguard 160,000 jobs across the UK.

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

The energy profits levy threatens jobs and investment in the north-east, particularly in my constituency of Banffshire and Buchan Coast, yet Scotland produces a vast surplus of low-cost energy. Does the cabinet secretary agree that it should be unthinkable for an energy-rich Scotland to have anything other than energy-rich Scots, and that Westminster UK Government control is what stands in the way of that?

Gillian Martin (Scottish National Party, Aberdeenshire East)

I absolutely agree with Karen Adam’s assessment of the situation. In an energy-rich nation such as Scotland, no household should be struggling to heat its home and no business should be struggling to pay its bills and keep its head above water. The UK Labour Government promised that it would reduce bills by £300 when it came to office, but choices made by the Chancellor of the Exchequer to significantly scale back investment in energy efficiency and clean heating will not permanently cut bills.

The UK Government’s damaging approach to the energy profits levy means that Scotland’s energy industry is facing an existential threat. When he met the Prime Minister at the British-Irish Council on 5 December, the First Minister made it clear that the decision to extend the EPL to 2030 threatens tens of thousands of jobs across the UK energy sector and places the entire energy transition at risk.

Douglas Lumsden (Conservative, North East Scotland)

I agree that the energy profits levy is a disaster and threatens jobs, but so does the Scottish Government’s presumption against new oil and gas. The cabinet secretary does not want to debate the energy strategy next week, so can she tell me when the Scottish Government will bring forward that energy strategy? Will it remove the disastrous presumption against new oil and gas?

Gillian Martin (Scottish National Party, Aberdeenshire East)

The judgments and issues in the energy strategy and the just transition plan are informed and influenced by a range of on-going developments in the UK Government’s energy policy and recent court decisions. Those include, but are not limited to, the announcement by the UK Government about the North Sea future plan, of which we have had no advance sight. We are taking sufficient time to analyse and reflect on those developments and their impact on Scotland—a point that I have made many times before to Douglas Lumsden.

Mercedes Villalba (Labour, North East Scotland)

Since its introduction, the energy profits levy has raised more than £11 billion for the public purse and is forecast to raise a further £11 billion by 2030, redistributing excessive profits from energy giants to those struggling in fuel poverty, including in the north-east region.

Does the minister not agree with Great British Energy’s founding premise that

“the ... people should have a right to own and benefit from our natural resources”?

Will she not join me in welcoming the launch of GB Energy’s £1 billion supply chain initiative—which is called energy, engineered in the UK—to grow the domestic supply chain and create jobs in Scotland?

Gillian Martin (Scottish National Party, Aberdeenshire East)

Mercedes Villalba might be a cheerleader for GB Energy. Fair play to her—if she wants to get behind what GB Energy is doing, that is absolutely her right. However, would it not be great if the £11 billion that has gone to the Exchequer as a result of the EPL was ring fenced for decarbonising our gas supply? Would it not be great if that went into just transition? Would it not be great if it brought forward a great deal of investment in low-carbon opportunities, which would help the just transition? Frankly, I do not know where that £11 billion is going. Until we have details on that, maybe we are all a bit in the dark about what the EPL is actually doing, other than destroying jobs in the north-east, because it is a tax on the people and the sector in the north-east of Scotland.

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

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on pedestrian safety improvements. (S6O-05288)