Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]

Meeting date: Wednesday, December 4, 2024

Official Report 874KB pdf

---

Budget 2025-26

The next item of business is a statement by Shona Robison on the Scottish budget 2025-26. The cabinet secretary will take questions at the end of her statement, so there should be no interventions or interruptions.

14:51  

I am proud to present a budget that delivers on the priorities of the people of Scotland. Over recent years, our nation has faced an unprecedented range of challenges: Covid, inflation, austerity and Brexit. Today, we can show that we understand the pressures that people are facing. We can choose to come together to bring hope to people, to renew our public services and to deliver a wealth of new opportunities in our economy. This budget invests in public services, lifts children out of poverty, acts in the face of the climate emergency and supports jobs and economic growth. It is a budget that is filled with hope for Scotland’s future.

The United Kingdom budget resulted in an increase in funding through the Barnett formula. That is welcome, but let us be clear: after inflation, it represents growth in resource spending—that is, day-to-day spending to pay for services—of only around 1 per cent, year on year. Substantial financial pressures therefore persist.

In the face of a Tory cost-of-living crisis, I am proud of the pay deals that give Scotland’s nurses, teachers and public sector workers salaries higher than those in the rest of the UK, and I am proud of the increased social security spending that keeps people out of poverty.

In one way, the UK Government has added to the pressures that Scotland faces, with the increase in employer national insurance contributions. That hike will add well over £700 million to the cost of delivering public services. Despite that, the UK Government seems to be saying that it will reimburse less than half of that cost. It has accepted that it should pay, but it plans to short-change our public services by hundreds of millions of pounds. Even now, though, the Chancellor of the Exchequer has an opportunity to do the right thing. Services in Scotland should not have to suffer. The Chancellor of the Exchequer should pay the full price for her own decisions.

This Government has had to take difficult decisions to manage financial pressures. I set out in my statement in September that that included using some or all of the ScotWind revenues. No one wanted to do that. That money was meant to be used for long-term investment to help to transform our economy. I was clear that I did not want us to use that cash to fund day-to-day spending, and we have not done so. Members will be pleased to hear that the ScotWind revenues have not been used up in this financial year. Instead, I am able to deploy more than £300 million of ScotWind revenues in 2025-26 for exactly the kind of long-term investment that they should be spent on. That £300 million will deliver substantial investment in jobs and in measures to meet the climate challenge. All of that is an investment in the long-term success of our nation.

Progress for Scotland—that is our promise. However, we can deliver progress for the people of Scotland only if there is a willingness to work together across this Parliament. More than 100 proposals have come from members across the chamber, and I thank Opposition members for their constructive engagement. Other proposals have emerged from the conversations that other ministers and I have had with people, businesses and organisations in communities the length and breadth of our land. We have listened, we have heard people, and we are acting. This is a budget for Scotland by Scotland, so I encourage all members to give it their support.

Eradicating child poverty is our top priority. Our action in the face of need includes policies such as the game-changing Scottish child payment and expanded funding for early learning and childcare. However, we want to go further. This budget will invest almost £800 million more in social security benefits in 2025-26, putting money directly into people’s pockets and ensuring that benefits rise in line with inflation.

We also recognise that families having a warm, safe and affordable place to live is critical to tackling child poverty. Far too many families are still in temporary accommodation. Shirley-Anne Somerville has told me about the conversations that she has had with mums who feel the pain of bringing up their kids in inadequate accommodation. That is why we are ramping up action on housing by investing £768 million in affordable homes, which enables more than 8,000 new properties for social rent, mid-market rent and low-cost home ownership to be built or acquired this coming year and returns spending to a level higher than it was at two years ago.

Given the scale of the housing challenge, I will look at all the levers that are available to me to deliver, and I confirm today that we will work with City of Edinburgh Council to unlock more than 800 new net zero homes at its Granton development site.

Housing is, of course, just one strand of our work in tackling poverty. In education, we will provide £120 million to headteachers, to support initiatives that are designed to address the poverty-related attainment gap. We will also work with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities to extend free school meals to primary 6 and 7 children from low-income families.

We are determined to go further still. I announce today that we will fund a new initiative that will deliver more breakfast clubs in primary schools across Scotland. They will be called “bright start breakfasts” and will make things a little easier for working mums and dads while also giving more of our kids a better start to their day.

We will help some of the most vulnerable people in our society with new funding of £4 million to tackle homelessness and for prevention pilots.

Following engagement with disabled people’s organisations, we are delivering more than £2.5 million to support actions within the disability equality action plan.

All of those steps will help people, but I say to members that, if we want progress on housing, learning, free school meals and breakfast clubs, this Parliament has to vote for it.

We know how important public services are to quality of life and the success of our nation, and none more so than our health service. Therefore, my biggest financial commitment today is to our national health service. Today’s budget provides a record £21 billion for health and social care, which is an increase of £2 billion for front-line NHS boards and is a record uplift. That money will make it easier for people to access general practitioner appointments, will improve accident and emergency services and will ensure that more Scots get the care that they need in good time. No public service is more important, and no budget has delivered a bigger vote of confidence in the NHS than this budget.

Neil Gray has spoken to me about the pressures across the health service. We know that many people’s experience of the NHS is excellent but that others’ experience falls short of what we expect. Therefore, today, I am investing almost £200 million in our plan to reduce waiting times and improve capacity, to reform the service and make it more efficient, and to remove blockages that keep some patients in hospital for far too long.

Because of today’s record funding, our health service can reduce waiting times. By March 2026, no one will wait longer than 12 months for a new out-patient appointment, in-patient treatment or day-case treatment. [Interruption.]

Let us hear the cabinet secretary.

The extra funding that we are providing will see more than 150,000 extra patients treated. Our record investment will also deliver additional support for GPs, targeted to address known pressures in relation to waiting times and prevention. It means that we can deliver on our commitment to increase social care spending by 25 per cent over this parliamentary session—a full two years earlier than planned. We will expand the hospital at home service with more than 600 extra beds. We will deliver an extra 20,000 cataract and other optometry procedures in the community and more than 6,000 additional hip replacements or similar procedures each year. That record increase in spending will fund more dental training places, new specialist long Covid nurses in clinics and more community-based support for teenage mental health.

However, it is not just the day-to-day resource spending that will increase—we are also increasing health capital spending. I can announce to members today that this budget will fund the replacement of the eye pavilion in Edinburgh, the Belford hospital in Fort William and Monklands hospital in Airdrie. [Interruption.]

Cabinet secretary, might I just stop you there? There should be no interventions or interruptions from members. We have a lot to get through this afternoon, and I am keen that we save time for members’ questions.

Every single project is a priority for the people of Scotland, and every project is something that members in the chamber have called for—delivered by this budget and by this Scottish National Party Government. However, I say again that, if members want investment in GPs, dentistry, long Covid nurses and young people’s mental health, they must vote for it.

Many services, from schools to social care, are delivered in partnership with local government. Here, I will set out a second record funding settlement. In 2025-26, the Scottish Government will increase local authorities’ funding by more than £1 billion. That will take their total funding to more than £15 billion, including £289 million to give real-terms protection to the general revenue grant, enabling councils to deliver the services that people rely on. It will also deliver the pay increases that have been agreed for our teachers, social care workers, refuse collectors and more. I remind members that pay increases will go ahead only if Parliament backs the budget. Although it will be for councils to make their own decisions, with record funding, there is no reason for big increases in council tax next year.

Scotland will thrive as a nation only if our youngest people are nurtured. I am therefore increasing spending on education and skills by 3 per cent above inflation, which is an uplift of £158 million. Our choices will see staff in early learning and childcare paid at least the real living wage from April. That will support the 1,140 hours of early learning and childcare for three and four-year-olds and eligible two-year-olds. In a cost of living crisis, that funding frees parents to work and earn while giving kids the best start in life.

I have heard from Jenny Gilruth about the challenge that many children with additional support needs face in our schools. I will fund a £29 million ASN plan, which will deliver measures such as training, so that more of our teachers can become ASN teachers. More widely, the budget can maintain teacher numbers at 2023 levels and continue improvements in our school estate, with new projects from Shetland and Orkney to the Scottish Borders.

We will invest almost £4.2 billion across the justice system in 2025-26. That will maintain police numbers and continue policies that have seen levels of crime fall by 40 per cent since we came to office. From speaking to Angela Constance, I know that a particular area of concern to retailers is shoplifting. Once again, we have listened and we are acting by making an additional £3 million available to help to tackle retail crime. On prisons, we will fund replacements for HMP Inverness and HMP Barlinnie through the £355 million capital budget.

As I have set out, investment in public services is a priority, but reform goes hand in hand with that. I am therefore establishing a £30 million fund to invest to save. It will fund the costs of reform, drive out efficiencies, improve productivity and ensure longer-term sustainability.

I am also intent on putting pay on a sustainable footing. Our public sector pay policy, which has been published today, sets out a fair but flexible approach. It will deliver an above-inflation increase of 9 per cent over the next three years, and it will do so flexibly, with management and unions being free to agree how that increase will be structured. That will deliver progress on pay restoration and fairness to public servants and taxpayers alike.

Scotland’s biggest contributions to tackling the global climate challenge are, of course, our vast renewable energy resources, our innovation and our expertise. Simply put, we can help the planet while creating new jobs and opportunities here at home—and I saw a great example at Logan Energy this morning.

We will create opportunities for businesses and jobs for communities by allocating £25 million to support the creation of new jobs in the green energy supply chain here in Scotland. To help people at home and work, £300 million will be invested in upgrading heating and insulation. That money serves two hugely important purposes: it helps us to reduce our carbon emissions while tackling fuel poverty. Lower emissions and lower energy bills: that is an investment that is worth making.

Just as we are investing in tackling the climate crisis, we must also tackle the nature crisis. We will invest almost £90 million to protect, maintain and increase our woodlands and peatlands.

We will make it easier for people to walk, wheel or cycle, and we will invest in resilient and efficient bus services, with almost £190 million of funding. We will also expand our electric vehicle charging network.

I am happy to tell the Parliament today that we will not simply match the calls for £4.7 billion to be invested in tackling the climate and nature emergencies: rather, we will exceed that, with an investment totalling £4.9 billion.

Eradicating child poverty is this Government’s most important priority. We will do that by growing the wealth of our nation and sharing that wealth more equally. A thriving economy is not an afterthought—it is an essential requirement. When I was discussing budget priorities with Kate Forbes, she told me about the discussions that she has had with investors and with employers, big and small. We have heard their ambition, and we share it. Today I am able to announce that we will invest £321 million in Scotland’s enterprise agencies, thereby supporting emerging tech, including artificial intelligence and robotics, and programmes such as our ambitious Techscaler initiative.

We know that colleges, universities and the wider skills system make absolutely crucial contributions to economic growth, which is why, in this coming year, we will invest more than £2 billion in supporting them. We have listened to universities, and we are conscious that they must remain financially competitive with institutions in the rest of the UK. The Labour UK Government, rather shamefully, has increased student fees to pay for a 3.08 per cent increase in university funding in England. Here, we will not only keep tuition free, but will increase total investment in higher education by 3.5 per cent.

Critical to economic growth is capital spending and investment in infrastructure. I can tell the Parliament today that capital spend will total more than £7 billion pounds in this budget. A green reindustrialisation of Scotland is our ambition. After discussion with Gillian Martin, I can announce that we will use that capital funding to make a significant strategic decision to invest in this nation’s green future. I can announce today that we will almost triple our investment in offshore wind, to £150 million next year. That money will help to leverage in private investment of £1.5 billion in the infrastructure and manufacturing facilities that are critical to growing the sector. Capital funding of £150 million will accelerate our investment to support the offshore wind sector, which underlines our commitment to investing up to £500 million over five years.

Aberdeen is perfectly placed to become a global hub for green energy. To support that, we will establish a Scottish Government hub for offshore wind in the north-east to provide an additional route for industry to engage with our teams.

More broadly, we will provide £100 million for digital connectivity, thereby accelerating access to full fibre broadband. We will provide almost £1.1 billion to maintain and renew our rail infrastructure, and £237 million will be invested to maintain and improve our ports, and to deliver a more resilient and effective ferry fleet, new rail rolling stock, new ferries and the electrification of the East Kilbride rail line—all of which is investment to keep Scotland moving.

To ensure that our trunk road network is safe, resilient and efficient, we will invest £1 billion, including money to continue the dualling of the A9, which is a central priority for Fiona Hyslop and for all SNP members.

Our capital programme allows us to tackle another issue that has been raised with us. I know that many people want to see their local high streets thrive, so today I can announce that I will expand regeneration funding to £62 million to invest in towns and communities including Dundee, Arbroath, Possilpark, Pilton, Drumnadrochit and Stranraer town centre.

Our rural communities are also important, so more than £660 million will support the crucial contribution of Scotland’s farmers, crofters and the wider rural economy. Mairi Gougeon has told me about the discussions that she has had with the farming community and its concerns about recent UK Government decisions. As has been asked for by farmers, we are returning in full the savings that were used in previous Scottish budgets through a new capital transformation scheme, with £20 million to be returned in 2025-26 and the remainder in 2026-27.

The budget also increases to £50.3 million the dedicated funding that is available to the four councils that operate their own ferry services. Alongside that is £20 million of capital funding for Orkney Islands Council and Shetland Islands Council. The one-off investment will enable them to sustain and improve interisland connections, whether that means flights, ferries or—I know that members for the northern isles will be pleased to hear this—tunnels between islands. It will be for those communities to decide.

The budget will support businesses and communities through the non-domestic rates system. We have listened to concerns from business, particularly hospitality businesses, about significant financial pressures resulting from staff shortages, high energy prices and Labour’s national insurance hike. I can confirm that we will help. The small business bonus scheme, which provides the most generous small business rates relief in the UK, will be protected. In addition, the budget will provide 40 per cent in non-domestic rates relief in 2025-26 for the 92 per cent of hospitality premises that are liable for the basic property rate, to be capped at £110,000 per business. On our islands, the relief will be 100 per cent.

Outside the hospitality sector, we will also help by freezing the basic property rate at 49.8p—which is the lowest such rate in the UK for the seventh year in a row. Thanks to the budget, more than 95 per cent of non-domestic properties will pay lower property tax than they would pay anywhere else in the UK, with more than 100,000 properties being taken out of rates payment altogether.

The latest Scottish Fiscal Commission forecasts show that Scottish taxes will raise £24.6 billion in 2025-26, which is £777 million more than had been forecast in December 2023, which is due mainly to an increase in forecast income tax revenue. I am sure that members will be pleased to hear the good news that that increase is, in part, due to average earnings growing faster here than they are in the rest of the UK. [Shona Robison has corrected this contribution. See end of report.]

Overall, the tax decisions that we have taken have delivered £1.7 billion more in 2025-26 than if we had followed UK policies. I thank those with the broadest shoulders who are paying a little bit more, because they are enabling Scotland to spend more on the things that matter most—protecting and improving our NHS, growing the economy and lifting children out of poverty.

The new UK Government has increased employer national insurance contributions—a policy the impact of which the Office for Budget Responsibility has told this Parliament will fall mainly on employees’ wages. It is estimated that that will take more than £2 billion out of the Scottish economy next year. In the light of that, I confirm that the Scottish Government will not introduce any new bands for, or increase the rates of, Scottish income tax for the remainder of this parliamentary session.

I will go further. Because Labour has hit the pay packets of working people in Scotland, I have decided to provide tax support for low-income and medium-income earners. Although the UK Government has frozen all income tax thresholds, the basic and intermediate rate thresholds in Scotland will increase this year by 3.5 per cent—in effect, twice the rate of inflation. [Applause.]

Thank you, members.

That means that more of people’s money will be taxed at the starter and basic tax rates. It also means that the majority of taxpayers in Scotland will continue to pay less income tax than those in the rest of the UK. I commit to that remaining true until at least the end of this parliamentary session while, as in the rest of the UK, thresholds for higher, advanced and top rates will be maintained at their current levels.

Taking our tax and social security choices together, including the choice on pension-age winter fuel payments, 60 per cent of Scots will be better off because they live in Scotland. That is what delivering for the people of Scotland looks like.

Finally on tax, the additional dwelling supplement rate for next year will increase from 6 per cent to 8 per cent with effect from tomorrow, unless legal missives were signed on or before today. We will also match England by legislating to increase the standard rate of the Scottish landfill tax to £126.15 per tonne and the lower rate to £4.05 per tonne from 1 April 2025.

We have listened to people in communities across our land, and we have heard them and acted. We have heard, in particular, the concerns of the culture sector. It rightly flags the threat that the Tory cost of living crisis, inflation and Labour’s national insurance hike pose to its future, but the SNP Government will help. Earlier this week, Labour called on me to deliver a £25 million increase in the culture budget and to exempt music venues from non-domestic rates. Yes—we will provide NDR support to music venues, but I will not increase the culture budget by £25 million. Instead, I will increase it by £34 million next year, which is another record increase. [Applause.]

Thank you, members.

We are committed to increasing arts and culture funding by £100 million. After only two years, we are halfway there. Next year, subject to the normal budget processes, I aim to deliver a further £20 million increase. Taken with this year’s rise, that means that multiyear funding can be provided to cultural organisations across Scotland, which Angus Robertson has told me will be transformational for the sector. That includes our world-class Scottish festivals, whose budget we are doubling, and thousands of grass-roots artists, who will also benefit from that support.

I have one final announcement to make in this budget statement. Our first priority is tackling child poverty. The two-child cap is a pernicious part of the UK welfare system. Introduced by the Tories, it has caused misery for children and families in Scotland. Many people expected an incoming Labour Government to abolish the cap. We have waited, but Labour has not delivered. The SNP Government will. Just as with pension-age winter heating payments, we will act. We will mitigate the two-child cap.

The detailed work of building the system to do that will start with this budget, but implementation requires the co-operation of the UK Government. It controls the Department for Work and Pensions, which means that it controls the data. We do not, but we have a year. We will work as hard as possible in 2025 so that we can start paying families as early as possible in 2026. That is more than reasonable, but members should be in no doubt that the cap will be scrapped.

My challenge to Labour is to work with us and to join us in ending the cap in Scotland by giving us the information that we need. However, either way, let me be crystal clear: this Government is ending the two-child cap and, in doing so, will lift more than 15,000 Scottish children out of poverty.

Let me summarise the measures that the SNP Government has set out today: record NHS investment, including money to reduce waiting lists and make it easier for people to see their GP; tax choices that put money in the pockets of low-income and middle-income earners and that help hard-pressed local pubs and restaurants; winter heating payments for older Scots; more affordable homes; investment in childcare and nursery education through more jobs and business growth; more breakfast clubs in our schools; £4.9 billion for positive climate action; a record increase in funding for local services; transformational increases in culture spending; and an end to the two-child cap, which will lift 15,000 children out of poverty. That is what the people of Scotland want and will vote for. The question is whether Opposition parties will, too.

This is a budget that delivers progress for Scotland. It is a budget that delivers hope for Scotland. I urge the Parliament to support it.

The cabinet secretary will now take questions on the issues that have been raised in her statement. I intend to allow about 60 minutes for questions, after which we will move on to the next item of business.

Today’s budget was a chance for the SNP to set a new direction on tax and spending. It was an opportunity for John Swinney to undo some of the damage that he has done to Scotland over the past 17 years. However, the budget is just more of the same—inputs, not outputs, and half-hearted attempts to fix the problems that the SNP has created.

The era of high tax and free spending is far from over. Once again, people in Scotland will pay more and get less. [Interruption.]

Let us hear Mr Hoy.

Thanks to the SNP, workers and businesses will pay more in tax, only for that money to be wasted by SNP ministers who let public services decline.

What a boast it was today to say that, under a new policy, people will have a 12-month wait for an in-patient or out-patient appointment in our NHS. That is a scandal, and John Swinney’s fingerprints are all over it.

The SNP’s economic mismanagement has held Scotland back. Is it not the reality that the only growth in the economy is in the size of the SNP Government and the scale of the black hole at the heart of its finances? The reality is that we are paying a heavy price for years of SNP waste on ferries, gender reforms, failed independence bids and a national care service that has already cost the nation £30 million.

The benefits bill, which will rise by a further £800 million, is out of control because the Government cannot get people back into work. NHS waiting lists are so long that sick people are staying sick. The budget confirms that the SNP has wrecked public services. John Swinney is out of ideas, and his Government is running out of time.

The NHS is on its knees and needs urgent reform, so we welcome today’s budget increase for healthcare—[Interruption.]

Let us hear Mr Hoy.

—but our NHS needs more than money; it needs leadership and a serious plan from the Government. We have set out proposals to reduce bureaucracy so that more can be invested in accelerating treatment on the front line. Will the SNP make those necessary changes, or is its only solution more money, which has not reduced waiting lists one bit to date? Was the Auditor General for Scotland not right when he said that the Government has no vision for the NHS? The Government now has record levels of revenue and tax receipts, but it has no vision for Scotland, for our NHS or for economic growth. In fact, a £33 million cut to the enterprise budget was announced today.

I am pleased that, after years of failing to hand over rates relief to Scotland’s struggling businesses, the SNP has in part met our demand for rates relief for hospitality, but why did it take so long? How many pubs and restaurants have gone to the wall in the interim? Why has retail been left out of the announcement? Hard-pressed householders will also face more pain in the form of council tax rises, as the Government sweeps away the council tax cap to make up for the SNP’s decade and more of underfunding councils.

Our income taxes are still the highest in the UK, so why has the Government not listened to those who warn that Scotland’s high-tax regime and high tax rates are hitting growth? Rather than just tinkering with thresholds, why did the Government not take up the option of reversing its damaging tax increases? Why did the minister not come to the chamber and admit what everyone else in Scotland can see—that the SNP’s experiment of hitting Scotland with higher taxes has failed monumentally?

Let me welcome what I think is a welcome for the record investment in the NHS, although the issue is not just the investment but where the money is spent. As I said in my statement, reform, efficiency and productivity are at the heart of that investment, and I assure members that the Minister for Public Finance is driving that across the Government.

I will correct Craig Hoy on a number of points. More than half of Scottish taxpayers will pay less under the Government’s proposals. He also talked about sustainability and the benefits bill being out of control. What is out of control is his leader’s letter calling for £1 billion of tax cuts. Let us imagine the impact of that on fiscal sustainability—less money for investment in our public services, less money for the NHS, less money for local government and less money for other services.

When it comes to retail premises, I have set out an affordable proposition for hospitality businesses that will mean that about 11,000 hospitality businesses benefit. I say to Craig Hoy that going further would not be sustainable. His proposition would cost more than £350 million, and we would not get that money from the UK Government. We got only £145 million this year in consequentials, and there will be no consequentials next year, because the UK Government is moving to a different business tax rate system that cannot be replicated here. The Scottish Government is taking sensible, sustainable decisions on business rates, taxation and investment in public services.

As for council tax rises, we are making a record level of investment in local government. I am sure that local government will welcome that.

The budget benefits from an additional £5.2 billion from the UK Labour Government. In July, the people of Scotland turned the page so that Labour could end austerity and take the tough decisions to deliver urgently needed investment in our public services.

That means that today we have the opportunity to take a new direction in Scotland. It is not just a question of how we spend £5 billion; it is a question of how we spend an unprecedented £60 billion budget. It is an opportunity to deal with the country’s challenges and deliver better outcomes, rather than trumpeting a shopping list of inputs. If only the Scottish Government had the imagination to take that new direction.

Instead, in recent days, the SNP has invited us to stretch our imaginations, to suspend disbelief and to accept that this is John Swinney’s first budget. The First Minister is supposedly now the fresh-faced ingénu of Scottish politics—a break from the past that he would like the country to forget. In reality, John Swinney has personally delivered 11 SNP budgets from that very spot, and for all that time they have hidden behind grievance and blaming a dreadful Tory Government.

However, today must finally be the day when the excuses end, because today’s budget lands in the midst of a rapidly escalating crisis in our NHS, from Aberdeen to Glasgow and everywhere in between. The frost has barely bitten, but the predictable—indeed, predicted—crisis is unfolding. The Auditor General has set out in the starkest terms possible that that is a failure of this Government. He is repeating his warnings of 12 months ago with added feeling, and that feeling is that he is banging his head against a brick wall. It is abundantly clear that nothing of any effect has been done—no reform, no vision, no plan.

Scotland is going in the wrong direction under the SNP. One in six Scots is on an NHS waiting list. Schools are falling further behind. There is a national housing emergency. Growth is lagging behind that in the rest of the UK. Every Scottish institution is weaker.

Does the cabinet secretary agree that it is not enough just to try to correct the mistakes that were made last year by putting back the money that was slashed in the budget or in the cuts chaos of the now-annual SNP emergency budget in the middle of the year? Can she finally accept that her statement amounts to quite literally more of the same and is sending Scotland ever faster in the wrong direction?

I must have missed the welcome for the record funding for the NHS, the record funding for local government and the funding for affordable housing. Michael Marra started by talking about the funding from the UK Government, and there is indeed an uplift in funding, which is very welcome, but it is theoretical unless that money gets to front-line services, and the only way in which it can get to front-line services is if members vote for the budget. [Interruption.]

There is huge interest in questions this afternoon. If I have to keep interrupting so that we can hear one another, members will have to understand that there will be a consequence, in that we will be able to take fewer members.

Michael Marra mentioned something about the frost biting. Let me say this to him: surely Labour is not going to vote against winter fuel payments for our pensioners for a third time in a row—surely not, because that really would lack a lot of credibility. Surely Labour is not going to vote against the measures that we are taking to mitigate the two-child cap. I hope that, among all the froth from Michael Marra, he and his colleagues will recognise that the budget puts money into front-line services, lifts kids out of poverty and gives our pensioners the winter fuel support that they need. I cannot imagine a scenario in which Scottish Labour will vote against that.

The £4.9 billion for climate and nature sounds positive and I will read with interest what it contains, but it cannot be padded out with greenwashing. I am glad to see free bus travel for asylum seekers and free ferry travel for young islanders. Both those commitments were secured by the Greens when we were in government but were cut by the SNP this year, so I am glad that those cuts have been undone. I am also glad that the Government has agreed to the Green proposal to increase tax on the purchase of second and holiday homes.

Despite the cabinet secretary’s claims, the budget contains a huge cut to core council services such as schools and social care. It fails to expand free school meals to pupils in primary 6 and P7. It cuts the nature restoration fund and the cycling, walking and safe routes funding, and the efforts to make homes warmer and greener fall short by £250 million.

I will not dismiss the positive steps that have been taken, but does the Scottish Government accept that, if it wants Green support, significant further changes will be required? The budget will need to do much more for people and planet.

I do not accept that. I ask Ross Greer to look carefully at the budget. For example, he should look at table 4.12, which sets out the local government settlement. Because the budget compares with the autumn budget revision position—which is something that the Parliament’s Finance and Public Administration Committee wanted for the committee process—there needs to be a recognition of the in-year transfers that happen, particularly from health and education. All that is set out in table 4.12, which shows the £1 billion of extra investment in local government. I urge Ross Greer to look at that.

I welcome the welcome that Ross Greer has given to the very substantial investment of £4.9 billion in positive climate action. I am sure that Green colleagues will welcome that, and I am happy to continue to discuss with him and others the content of the budget.

After 17 years, this country is badly off course and, if we are honest, we know that the only thing that will truly bring about the change that Scotland needs is a change of Government.

In the meantime, Liberal Democrats will work hard to unpick some of the damage that has been done. It is right that the Government has listened to us and included spending on social care, affordable homes, insulation, winter fuel payments for pensioners, additional support needs, ferries and tunnels, GPs, dentists, long Covid, mental health, Edinburgh’s eye pavilion, the Belford hospital and business rate relief for hospitality. Liberal Democrats demanded spending for all those areas, and that is in the budget.

However, let me be clear: that does not guarantee our support. As with all budgets, the devil will be in the detail, and we will look closely at that.

In previous years, the SNP has done this dance many times. At the start of the process, it says that it has spent all the money, only to find huge amounts of cash down the back of the sofa as we move forward. Will the cabinet secretary dispense with that charade, be clear with Parliament now and tell us how much she has kept in reserve and what she is willing to do with it?

First, I welcome Alex Cole-Hamilton’s welcoming of some of the contents of the budget. I started the budget statement by talking about the engagement that we have had across the Parliament. I think that I have managed to speak to most of the issues that have been raised by members across the Parliament, perhaps with the exception of those raised by the Tories, who came to the process with a £1 billion list of tax cuts. Most other members and parties have taken a very constructive approach to the process. Given that we are a minority Government, that is how we need to proceed. I am keen to continue to have engagement across the Parliament.

With regard to Alex Cole-Hamilton’s final comment about unallocated resources, the only unallocated resources will be in the ScotWind territory. However, we would not, I would have assumed, want to invest all the ScotWind money in one financial year. That funding can be invested over a number of financial years, and we are keen to talk to members about that.

Let us keep talking. At the end of the day, we need support across the Parliament, and I think that what I have put on the table today should garner that support.

I thank the cabinet secretary for that statement and for the SNP Government’s continued support of Scots.

A number of mitigations were already in place to alleviate Tory Westminster austerity, and, today, additional measures have been taken to alleviate UK Labour austerity. Personally, I am heartened to see the growth plans for housing, enterprise agencies, digital connectivity, artificial intelligence and robotics, skills, roads, the invest to save fund, capital spend, offshore wind and supply chain and, most of all, the protection of ScotWind funds.

Which areas does the cabinet secretary believe will add most to ensure that Scotland’s economy prospers and make this Scottish budget a budget for growth?

I think that there is a lot in this budget for growth. For a start, the investment in green energy is very important. The investment in our enterprise agencies is also important, as is the investment in our trade offices. When I visited an energy company this morning, I heard about Scottish Development International’s support for that company. That support has been crucial in its securing investment into Scotland on a global stage. The Tories want to remove that spending from the budget. It is very strange for a party that is supposed to support economic growth to want to prevent one of our key agencies from doing the good work that it does with companies such as Logan Energy. That is inexplicable.

Michelle Thomson will be pleased to hear that the budget will also help to provide a positive future for Grangemouth, by providing £7.7 million to support work to secure a long-term and sustainable future for the industrial cluster. I am happy to keep engaging with her on that point.

In her statement, the cabinet secretary talked about the need for a thriving economy. That is very welcome, because Scotland’s low growth, compared with that of the rest of the UK, has cost our economy £11 billion since 2011. However, the budget cuts spending on the enterprise portfolio by a further £33 million. Coming on top of last year’s cuts, that delivers a cut over two years of £100 million, or 20 per cent, in the budget for the Deputy First Minister’s portfolio. How will that help to grow the economy?

As I said to another member in an earlier answer, Murdo Fraser should be cautious about the comparison with the ABR figures. He should look at where some of that transfers. Areas have been transferred out of the Deputy First Minister’s portfolio into other areas, and we have to be absolutely clear about that. I will write to Murdo Fraser with the detail of that and with detail of the investment in the Scottish National Investment Bank, which is a hugely important investment.

Murdo Fraser talked about figures relating to the Scottish economy. I laid out some of the tax revenue gain in my statement, which I think is very positive. Productivity has grown by a higher average rate than that of the UK. Gross domestic product per capita has been growing at a faster rate than that of the UK since 2007. A record number of foreign direct investment projects were secured in Scotland in 2023, maintaining Scotland’s position as the top-performing area of the UK outside of London for the ninth year running. However, those projects have been put at risk by the Tory cuts to Scottish Development International. We also have net migration to Scotland across all tax bands. That says to me that the Scottish economy is resilient and doing well. We should get behind it and support our businesses.

It will come as welcome news to my constituents in Coatbridge and Chryston, as well as to people in Neil Gray’s Airdrie and Shotts constituency, to hear that the increase in NHS capital funding will allow for the new Monklands hospital replacement project to go ahead. What discussions has the cabinet secretary had with NHS Lanarkshire with regard to that announcement, and what are the Government’s expectations on the progression of the project, which is urgent and very much needed for the people of Lanarkshire?

NHS Lanarkshire will prepare the full business case for scrutiny by the Scottish Government’s capital investment group. That is the normal process. Officials will liaise with the board regarding funding for that business case and design work. All that will now go forward at pace, and I know that the people of Lanarkshire will very much welcome the investment.

At the start of the SNP Government, health spending per head of population was 17 per cent higher in Scotland than it was in England. Over the past 17 years, that difference has been eroded to less than 3 per cent. That tells you all that you need to know about the SNP’s priorities. Less money was given to the NHS over the entire time that John Swinney was either the finance minister or the Deputy First Minister. The £2.5 billion for health from the Labour UK Government is welcome and transformational, but it needs to be accompanied by reform and political leadership. Does the finance secretary understand why people do not trust the SNP to deliver reform, given that it has been in charge for 17 years and has completely failed NHS staff and patients?

Of course, the £2.5 billion funding for the NHS only gets to the NHS if members vote for this budget. As for the £21 billion record funding, Jackie Baillie fails to mention that it includes social care funding, which is absolutely vital if we are to tackle delayed discharge and look at the system as a whole system, including both the NHS and social care. That is why we have put record investment into social care, including, of course, by ensuring that our social care workers get the pay that they deserve.

Will the cabinet secretary advise how this SNP budget will provide increased support for local government and the delivery of vital public services under its responsibilities, including for my local authority, East Ayrshire Council?

The local government settlement provides record funding of more than £15 billion, including £289 million of general revenue grant for local priorities. Individual local authority allocations will be provisionally published in the local government finance consultation circular on Thursday 12 December.

We will invest £3.3 million in the learning estate investment programme and the Scotland’s schools for the future programme. In East Ayrshire, those programmes will support the Doon valley community campus, St Sophia’s primary school, the Barony campus, Gargieston primary school, Hurlford primary school, Muirkirk primary school, Whatriggs primary school and the William McIlvanney campus.

The Scottish Fiscal Commission forecast told us that social security spending was predicted to increase from £6.283 billion in 2024-25 to £6.861 billion in 2025-26. That is an increase of £578 million, whereas the cabinet secretary is saying that the uplift will be £800 million. That is a huge difference, so where on earth is the money coming from to pay for that uplift?

We see investment in social security as an investment in people and in tackling poverty. I know that Liz Smith and her Tory colleagues do not share that aspiration. In fact, they wanted to cut social security; that was set out by Russell Findlay in his letter. The real risk to fiscal sustainability is £1 billion of tax cuts that removes funding from health, local government, social security and all areas of public spending. That is not just wrong in terms of fiscal sustainability—it is not morally sustainable, either.

In a generally very positive and welcome statement, I am disappointed that, although the ferry service capital allocation rises by an impressive 50 per cent from £158.9 million to £237.1 million, there is no information as yet for my Ardrossan and Arran constituents who are awaiting the long-promised Ardrossan harbour redevelopment. That project is essential to both Arran’s lifeline ferry service and the 165 Arran jobs that are directly reliant on the port. Is redevelopment at the forefront of Scottish Government plans? If so, when might we hear some good news as to progress?

First, I recognise Kenny Gibson’s tenacity on this matter. He has campaigned for it for a long time and I assure him that the Scottish Government remains absolutely committed to ensuring that the Arran ferry service is fit for the future, and to finding a solution at Ardrossan that can be delivered in a cost-effective way, reflecting the needs of all the partners involved. The Scottish ministers have been clear that it is vital that the business case to support the harbour upgrade is robust, to give greater certainty on the project costs and the financial packages that are required. We will look to provide updates when notable progress is made, and I will make sure that that is provided to Kenny Gibson in due course.

Allocated skills funding is flat in this budget, at £202 million. Not only does that represent a real-terms cut of 2.4 per cent; it means that spending will be some £50 million or more less than is raised by levy payers in Scotland. When the Government has £5 billion more to spend, does that not undermine attempts to grow jobs and wages? Does it not further undermine employers by spending less on skills than they are being required to pay?

First, I remind Daniel Johnson that I set out in my statement the increases around the colleges, universities and wider skills system. We will invest more than £2 billion in supporting them. The total investment in higher education will increase by 3.5 per cent. It is not an issue that I remember his colleagues raising at any of the meetings that we have had, but if he wants to follow it up post this budget statement—this is a draft budget that we have to continue to discuss with parties across the chamber—I am more than happy to do that.

As the local constituency MSP, I passionately believe in the significant potential for the development of Granton waterfront to help tackle Edinburgh’s housing challenges, to transform the northern part of our capital city for the common good and to deliver economic growth, new opportunities and multiple positive benefits for existing communities in the area and for our country more broadly. That is why I have worked constructively to highlight all of that to ministers.

I am therefore delighted and grateful that the finance secretary has committed to working with the City of Edinburgh Council to deliver 800 more affordable homes. Can she say more about the Scottish Government’s commitment to the development of Granton waterfront as a strategic site and the positive impact that that will deliver for the people of northern Edinburgh and Scotland as a whole?

Ben Macpherson is absolutely right. This is a big deal for Edinburgh. We will work with Edinburgh over the coming months and we hope to announce details on the deal to support this multiyear project early in the 2025-26 financial year.

I talked in my statement about unlocking 800 new net zero homes of mixed types and tenures; I also spoke about sustainable transport links and placemaking initiatives. This could be a game changer for Edinburgh. I am acutely aware of the housing need in Edinburgh and I think that this is part of the solution and will go a long way to helping with that.

I remind members of my entry in the register of members’ interests as an active farmer. Hundreds of farmers stood outside this building less than a week ago calling for fair funding. The SNP said that it would listen. The budget falls significantly short of what NFU Scotland saw as a baseline figure, and the £46 million that was snatched in previous budgets will not be given back in full. This is a budget that, fundamentally, seems to have left our farmers and fishermen abandoned. Is it not the truth that this budget fails to deliver the money that is needed not just for farmers but for the whole of rural Scotland?

No, that is not true. Through the return of the funding, we will deliver a transformation fund for agriculture and food security. Many of those things are things that the farming community and its representatives have asked for. They wanted the money in capital, and they wanted it in a way that meant it could be spent. That money would be difficult to spend in one financial year, which is why it will be spent over two financial years. However, this is a guarantee to the farmers and to rural Scotland that every penny of that funding will be returned—but, of course, only if the budget passes. If Tim Eagle wants money to go to farmers and to rural Scotland, I suggest that he votes for the budget.

Before I call Emma Roddick, I ask members to resist any temptation to contribute when they have not been called to speak.

It is very welcome that the Scottish Government is continuing to make substantial financial support available to tackle child poverty, including through the Scottish child payment, mitigating Labour’s two-child cap and ramping up housing investment without additional funding from the UK Government to do so.

The recent autumn statement by the chancellor was a missed opportunity for Labour to follow our lead in tackling child poverty. Can Shona Robison provide further detail on how the budget helps to progress this Government’s priority of ending child poverty?

I can confirm that this budget is focused on eradicating child poverty, and that is this Government’s top priority. That is why we are investing in a package of benefits and payments that is available only in Scotland, totalling £644 million in 2025-26—including the Scottish child payment, with 356,000 children now forecast to be eligible.

Further investment includes the expansion and testing of free breakfast clubs, free school meals provision for primary 6 and primary 7 children in receipt of the Scottish child payment, and continued support for the school clothing grant.

What I have announced today in terms of the progress on scrapping the two-child cap will lift 15,000 children out of poverty—some of the most vulnerable children in our communities. I am sure that that will be welcomed by many across Scotland.

In real terms, the housing budget was £925 million in 2022-23. It went down to £790 million in 2023-24 and down to £610 million in 2024-25, but it is going up to £770 million for next year. That is like a dodgy black Friday deal in reverse, where retailers inflate their prices to give the impression of a good deal on the day. However, the cost of this is thousands more children in temporary accommodation.

The cabinet secretary previously said that housing was the number 1 priority for additional funding. How can the Government still claim that that is the case in the face of more than £150 million-worth of cuts to the housing budget from 2022-23?

If Mark Griffin had listened to the housing organisations, he would know that they were asking for the restoration of that funding. That is what this budget delivers. It delivers the restoration of that funding—and, of course, that is in addition to the £80 million that was already announced in relation to measures to tackle the very issue that Mark Griffin raised about temporary accommodation.

I agree that we need to drive down the number of families in temporary accommodation. This investment will help to do that. However, the investment will get to housing, and to the housing organisations, only if the budget passes, and therefore I hope that Mark Griffin will support it.

Monica Lennon described the two-child cap as the “wrong position”, Pam Duncan-Glancy said that it was “horrific” and Anas Sarwar called it “heinous”.

Does the cabinet secretary share my view that, given that the UK Government has refused to scrap that heinous policy, Labour MSPs must back this budget if they are to have any credibility on tackling child poverty at all, and to lift more than 15,000 kids out of poverty?

I invite the cabinet secretary to respond on matters for which the Government is responsible.

Kevin Stewart is absolutely right. Actions speak louder than words, and it will be about the actions of those on the Scottish Labour benches and whether they vote for this budget, which, among many other things, takes steps to scrap the two-child cap.

They can either get themselves into the same awkward position that they got themselves into on winter fuel payments, or they can do the right thing by supporting a budget that does the right thing by some of our most vulnerable families. The public will be watching.

This SNP budget is a damp squib for the north-east. We still have no energy strategy and no just transition plan. [Interruption.]

Let us hear Mr Lumsden.

The much-trumpeted £500 million just transition fund for the north-east and Moray sees its annual allocation at a paltry £15.9 million next year. It will take decades to stump up at this rate. Of course, that comes after the shameful abandonment last year of the £80 million carbon capture fund. Surprise, surprise—there is no sign of it again this year. Thousands of jobs across the north-east are being lost while this devolved Government defers, dithers and delays. When will the SNP Government deliver a just transition, or will it admit that that was another empty promise to the north-east of Scotland?

I have never heard anybody so raging at £150 million investment in green energy for the north-east of Scotland. If that is Douglas Lumsden on a good day, welcoming something, I would not like to see him on a bad day. It is money that will be welcomed by businesses across the north-east of Scotland. Do you know why Douglas Lumsden is so angry? He knows it, too.

I will start by sounding a cautious note of consensus with the Government. I believe that this budget is a step in the right direction. However, many Scottish households are under immense pressure, which is why, in my budget dealings, I sought to protect children and pensioners via winter fuel payments and extending free school meals. I welcome the progress that the Government has made on those two issues.

However, the Government promised in 2021 to provide free school meals for all primary school children, and this budget does not deliver on that commitment. Why not?

First, I welcome Ash Regan’s welcome of the substantial contents of the budget in relation to winter fuel payments and the two-child cap. We have decisions to make about where we think the investment can make the biggest impact on eradicating child poverty. That is why the Government has concluded that the biggest impact is to lift 15,000 of our most vulnerable children out of poverty through the scrapping of the two-child cap.

Our programme of investment in free school meals will continue, targeting those children in primaries 6 and 7 who are in receipt of the Scottish child payment, and we will go further in the future, as resources are available. However, faced with a choice of what makes the biggest impact for the most vulnerable and poorest children in our society, eradicating the two-child cap wins every time, and that is what we will do.

I recently met Hospice UK, and it was sobering to hear that UK Labour’s national insurance increases will rob Scotland’s hospices of £2.5 million each and every year. Combined with challenges over core funding and matching NHS pay awards, an under-pressure sector needs support. How can today’s budget help Scotland’s hospices?

I absolutely agree with Bob Doris about the importance of our hospice sector. We will provide £4 million for the hospice sector and, from 2025-26, will align the support that we provide for pay uplifts in the hospice sector to the outcomes of the NHS agenda for change negotiations. I know that that is a really important matter for our hospice sector. That will ensure that hospices get the additional funding that is needed to enable their healthcare staff to receive pay increases that match those of NHS staff. I hope that Bob Doris and others will welcome that.

The budget fails to deliver the change of direction that we need for our schools, colleges and universities. It continues on the Government’s failed path, which has led to falling standards, overstretched staff and managed decline. In some cases, it is not even more of the same for the Government—it is less. How on earth will providing less than £1 million each to local authorities in relation to additional support needs and delivering cuts to colleges’ and universities’ budgets for student support possibly improve outcomes and spread opportunity for all of Scotland’s children and young people?

I say to Pam Duncan-Glancy that the situation is quite the opposite. There is more money in the budget for teachers, there is more money for additional support needs and there is more money—£1 billion more—for local government, which, at the end of the day, is the deliverer of education. We are providing the resources to local government so that it can get on and provide the standard of education that parents and children across the country expect.

I refer members to my entry in the register of members’ interests, which states that I am employed as a bank nurse by NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde.

I welcome the record-high NHS funding that the cabinet secretary announced today. We know that treatment close to home is preferred by many people and is preferable for many conditions. How will the budget enable more people to get the NHS care that they need in or close to their own home?

Clare Haughey is absolutely right. More than £2.2 billion for primary care will help to deliver essential reform, improve capacity and patient access in local communities and reduce demand on acute services. The budget also supports primary care enhancements and the expansion of the hospital-at-home programme, which has been a huge success.

As I mentioned in my statement, the budget also includes nearly £200 million to reduce waiting times and to help to reduce delays in hospital discharge. It will help to support frailty units that are linked to every accident and emergency department and to support community re-enablement. As I said, it will expand the hospital at home programme to meet 20 per cent of Scotland’s NHS bed base by December 2026.

Providing for the safety and security of the public is one of the most important duties of any Government. Although the manner in which money allocated is spent is an operational matter for blue-light services, can the cabinet secretary provide more detail regarding the funding allocations for Police Scotland and the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service?

We will spend £1.62 billion on policing in 2025-26 and £412.2 million in support of the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service. The money will support capacity, capability and front-line service delivery and will drive key areas of transformation, as outlined in Police Scotland’s three-year business plan and estates master plan. That continued resource and capital investment will support the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service in its ambitious strategic service review programme to better align resources to current and future risks and to continue to keep our communities safe.

We all read in the paper this morning about the Scottish Government’s proposals for affordable housing. That was a key ask of stakeholders, but we cannot ignore the fact that cutting and then reinstating budgets creates instability in the market, as developers simply cannot trust whether that budget will still be in place next year.

We also have to acknowledge that cutting the budget last year caused a huge amount of damage and lost investment in our housing sector. If the cabinet secretary is serious about listening to housing stakeholders, what will she do to encourage developers and developments, and to deliver what developers are calling for, which is to scrap the disastrous rent proposals that will have devastating impacts on our housing sector? Is she confident that the Scottish Government will finally achieve its housing target of 110,000 affordable homes by 2032?

I welcome Meghan Gallacher’s welcome for the investment in affordable housing. It will help to lever in substantial additional resources, not least from the private sector and the funding that can be raised by registered social landlords, to make sure that that money goes as far as it can. The housing will be a mixture of new build, acquisitions and bringing empty homes back into use. We will also make sure that we target a lot of that investment at addressing the issues of temporary accommodation, which I mentioned in my reply to Mark Griffin.

The only other thing that I will say to Meghan Gallacher is that that investment would be put at serious risk if the contents of her leader’s letter were enacted, because £1 billion of tax cuts would mean £1 billion less for investment in affordable housing, our NHS and local government. That cannot be reconciled with her party asking for more money for any aspect of public services in Scotland.

The cabinet secretary thanked high-income earners for making the fairer contribution that they do. I am sure that she also wants to thank the Greens for designing Scotland’s more progressive tax system, which has raised that extra £1.7 billion a year. The Greens made the case for that while the SNP was still resisting it.

It was also the Greens who led the way on cheaper public transport, especially with the hugely successful bus pass for young people. Will the Scottish Government back our current call for a £2 fare cap for all bus passengers, to make public transport more affordable for everybody throughout the country?

The £1.7 billion that has been raised through tax revenues is hugely welcome and a really important contribution to public services in Scotland. However, given the pressures on resources, we have asked taxpayers to go as far as we can in the current climate. Given that we have the resources available to us to make those substantial investments, the tax position that I set out in my statement is a balanced position, which recognises the needs of taxpayers and the needs of public services.

In response to Patrick Harvie’s question about buses, we have made substantial investment in the bus network in this budget. We are delivering free bus travel for asylum seekers—one of the things that the Greens asked for—and a substantial investment in many areas of positive climate action, amounting to £4.9 billion.

We will continue to have dialogue, but I hope that Patrick Harvie will recognise that this budget is good for the climate with regard to the action that we need to take in Scotland. I hope that he and his colleagues will welcome that.

As the cabinet secretary mentioned in her statement, Labour issued a press release in which it demanded that the budget provide £25 million more in order for culture and music venues to get 40 per cent business rates relief. Now that the cabinet secretary has announced a game-changing increase of £34 million for culture and delivered 40 per cent relief to grass-roots music venues, does she agree that, if it tries to block that funding, the Labour Party will have some serious explaining to do to the artistic community in Paisley and throughout Scotland? Does she think that the Labour Party will want to follow the example of the UK Labour Government and cut culture funding?

I agree with George Adam that Labour will have some explaining to do if it votes against the budget—for the whole variety of reasons that I have set out. It is curious that Labour has not quite got round to asking me about culture funding. I am sure that, if time allows, somebody might ask me, or even welcome the investment in culture that this Government is making through the budget. I am sure that, if we wait long enough, we might just hear that.

Local Government funding is in dire straits. Local authorities have been warning for years that they are on the brink. In her statement, the cabinet secretary said that local government funding has increased, yet the figures show that the budget is nowhere near what local government needs. [Interruption.]

Let us hear Mr Stewart.

How on earth does the budget support local government and councils across Scotland to thrive and survive?

Here is Russell Findlay’s letter. Nowhere in the letter does he ask for more money for local government. He asks for £1 billion of tax cuts. That will mean less—

Cabinet secretary, it is one thing to read a letter but another to use it as a prop.

My apologies, Presiding Officer. In the letter, Russell Findlay asks for £1 billion of tax cuts. He does not ask for £1 billion of funding for local government. I have read it a number of times, but that is not there. It is a bit rich for Alexander Stewart to come here asking for money for local government when his leader is asking for less money for local government and for £1 billion of tax cuts. I think that you really need to get your story straight here.

Always speak through the chair.

Scotland’s teachers work incredibly hard, day in and day out, to ensure that our children receive the highest quality of education. How will the Scottish budget support local authorities, including South Lanarkshire Council, to maintain teacher numbers in our schools and to offer permanent contracts to the workforce?

The budget will help local government to deliver on education. As I have mentioned, it provides more money for teachers and for additional support needs, and it continues the investment in the school estate.

On the investment in teachers, the latest figure that I saw for teacher pay showed that a newly qualified Scottish teacher at the start of their band would earn in the region of £6,132 more after tax than their equivalent south of the border would. That is a good investment in our teaching staff and in education.

The cabinet secretary said that she was restoring the affordable housing budget, but we are in a housing emergency. Does that not mean that we should be doing more than restoring? I see that we are spending £1.1 billion on trunk roads. Does she think that the balance between roads and housing is right?

On the roads budget, it is important that we have a safe road network, and lot of that funding is essential spend on the maintenance of our road network. We have our commitment to the A9. We have set out the next stages of the A9 dualling project, and we will continue with that work.

On the affordable housing budget, I think that the level set is achievable and deliverable. It will help the sector to scale up in order to deliver on new builds, acquisitions and empty homes and to tackle temporary accommodation. It will enable us to do all of that.

We have spending reviews in the spring for resource and capital. I am keen to see a continuation of investment from the UK Government, particularly in the capital space, and I agree with John Mason in that regard. Once we see what that is, I am more than happy to have a discussion about multiyear funding, particularly in the affordable housing space.

I welcome the range of measures that have been outlined in the budget proposal. They will certainly increase economic growth and send the message that Scotland is very much open for business. How will the support and actions that are outlined in the cabinet secretary’s budget support businesses in the Inverclyde community?

The resources that will go to Inverclyde locally will be set out in the circular that I mentioned earlier. Without a doubt, the investment will help many businesses in the Inverclyde area, and I am sure that Stuart McMillan will welcome that. In fact, it will help businesses across the whole of Scotland. It is a significant investment that will reach all parts of Scotland.

The legal aid crisis seems to have been ignored in the budget, with a £14 million real-terms cut compared with 2023-24. What does that signal to those who need a legal aid lawyer in both civil and criminal cases? What allocation is there in the budget to address and sustain the legal aid system to attract new lawyers to the profession? I ask that question not simply in the interests of the legal profession but in that of the system that supports ordinary people who need good-quality representation in their lives, whether it is for a civil or criminal matter.

The budget maintains the substantial increases in legal aid fees over recent years to support the vital work of Scotland’s legal professionals. The legal aid fund resource budget has been increased to £155 million, which is an increase of almost 10 per cent. The legal aid fund is demand led, and all eligible costs will be met in-year. I think that that might be where Pauline McNeill is looking. Let me assure her that it is a demand-led budget, and that all eligible costs will be met in-year. The legal aid administration budget has been increased to £22.5 million. That additional funding is to support increased operating costs and non-cash budget cover for an accrued pension liability. I hope that Pauline McNeill will welcome that.

Staff in private and voluntary nurseries receive a far lower wage than equivalent workers in council nurseries, even though they do exactly the same job. I supported a former First Minister when he promised to close that funding gap. Why is that not in the budget?

First, I recognise the issue. We have invested significantly in early learning and childcare, including for early learning staff. I understand the points that have been raised by those in the sector, and it is important that they are able to continue to recruit. I am more than happy to follow that up with Willie Rennie in the next stages of our budget discussions.

North Ayrshire Council has had its budgets cut by £100 million since 2010, with disproportionate cuts to local government over the past 17 years. The council is now consulting on cuts to teacher numbers, on abolishing all school crossing patrollers, and on closing libraries and the Arran outdoor education centre. Can the cabinet secretary confirm that the budget, which continues with increased ring fencing for councils, will still mean that more vital public services will be cut in the coming year, or can she give assurance that it is sufficient to address the immediate funding pressures and to start to undo the damage of the past 17 years?

The budget provides £1 billion extra to local government, but only if it passes. Therefore, I welcome Katy Clark’s support for that measure in the budget, and I am sure that she will vote for it.

On the ring-fenced funding, I think from recollection—I will correct this if it is not right—that there is an extra £500 million-plus that is being de-ring fenced in the local government settlement, which I am sure Katy Clark will welcome. The real-terms increase in the general revenue grant, the removal of ring fencing and the council tax flexibility will all help with local government funding of local services, and I am sure that Katy Clark will welcome that.

I hope that the cabinet secretary will respond to my question in the spirit in which I ask it. Mental health waiting times, particularly for young people, are shockingly high in Scotland. As we all know, our drug and alcohol deaths are at record and alarming rates.

The devil is very much in the detail of budget announcements. I note that the alcohol policy and mental health service budget lines have attracted marginal increases next year, which I do not believe are proportionate to the urgency and scale of the problems that we face as a nation. Will the cabinet secretary give the chamber some confidence that those serious societal issues are front and centre of the Government’s approach to the budget? Will she do what she can as she goes through the budget process to ensure that those in our society who need help are given it?

I welcome Jamie Greene’s constructive tone, and I am very happy to continue to discuss those matters with him. There have been increases to mental health spending. He will recognise that, although it has been a challenge, there has been substantial progress across the country in child and adolescent mental health services performance, which is to be welcomed. In my statement, I mentioned further support for teenagers on mental health support, which I hope he will welcome.

I absolutely recognise the importance of tackling the issues on alcohol and drugs. We are maintaining record levels of funding for drugs and alcohol, and there will be some funding transfers within the year for alcohol and drugs partnerships. I am very happy to continue to discuss those matters with Jamie Greene as we go forward.

Budgets should not just be about spending ever more, or indeed less, money; surely, they should be about achieving far greater value from every pound that is spent.

One in three of the acute beds in the Highlands are currently occupied by people who are at the end of their lives—I see the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care nodding. Highland Hospice reckons that 40 per cent of those people could, and should, be receiving palliative care by other means, normally at home, which is where most people wish to have it. Is the cabinet secretary, as I am, bothered, bemused and bewildered that NHS Highland is not collaborating far more effectively with bodies such as Highland Hospice, which can provide and arrange palliative care in the community far quicker, far cheaper and far better?

Cabinet secretary, please answer in relation to the matters that were raised in your statement.

First, I agree with Fergus Ewing that we need to get maximum value for every pound that is spent in our public services. I reassure the member that the Minister for Public Finance is on that 24/7, not just because he passionately believes in it but because it is the right thing to do on behalf of the Government.

The point about where people are cared for is critically important. In my statement, I mentioned the hospital at home service, which is important in supporting people at home to avoid hospital admissions. I also touched on the important role of the hospice movement, which we are investing in. I understand that the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care has also asked for more collaboration and for that work to move forward at pace, which I am sure he will update the member on. On the point of principle, I totally agree with Fergus Ewing.

That concludes the ministerial statement on the Scottish budget. [Interruption.]

My apologies, Mr Mountain. I am getting ahead of myself. Edward Mountain has the final question.

Thank you, Presiding Officer. You have saved the best until last.

Just £6 million of the £30 million EV infrastructure fund, as announced in 2023, has been spent. Can the cabinet secretary confirm that £24 million will be allocated within the energy efficiency and decarbonisation line, or has it been cut like the mode shift revenue support scheme?

I am glad that Edward Mountain got his question in, because it enables me to tell him that we have reached our targets on EV charging two years early. I am sure that he will welcome that progress and I thank him for the opportunity to put that on the record. I will continue ensuring that all the elements that are part of our tackling of the climate emergency receive the funding that they require and my statement included a substantial package of investment that will help on all those fronts.

That concludes the ministerial statement on the Scottish budget 2025-2026.