Official Report 1035KB pdf
Deputy First Minister Responsibilities, Economy and Gaelic
The first item of business is portfolio questions, and the first portfolio is Deputy First Minister responsibilities, economy and Gaelic. I remind members that questions 3 and 4 are grouped together, so I will take any supplementary questions on those after the initial questions have been asked. There is an awful lot of interest in supplementary questions. I do not expect to be able to get through them all, but I will require brevity in questions and responses to get through as many as I can.
Question 1 has not been lodged.
Visitor Levy (Scotland) Act 2024
To ask the Scottish Government what steps it will take to monitor the impact of the Visitor Levy (Scotland) Act 2024 on small and medium-sized businesses in the local authority areas that apply it. (S6O-04283)
Councils that are planning to introduce a visitor levy are required to establish a visitor levy forum with membership from businesses to provide views on the scheme. In addition, the Scottish Government has been liaising with VisitScotland on re-establishing the expert working group. That will provide a national forum for business and stakeholders to reflect their views and advise on approaches to handling implementation. The Scottish Government will conduct a full review of the operation of the 2024 act within three years of the introduction of the first scheme.
Let me share a few brief samples of the many emails that I have received on the issue:
“This levy will decimate campsites in the Highland region”,
“We are already trying to compete with free, and we are losing”,
“Motorhomes are parking up in every lay-by and car park that you can imagine, sometimes right outside the gates of a campsite”,
“The proposed implementation of the visitor levy in Scotland is complex, burdensome, discriminatory and without precedent in Europe”
and
“It will potentially push small businesses above the VAT threshold”.
Constituents of mine, and the Deputy First Minister’s, are concerned about the issue. I am not even trying to be political; the levy is genuinely scaring small businesses, which are vital to our and other regions. Will the Deputy First Minister commit to look again at the form of the levy and what it encompasses and speak with councils about a potential pause on introduction while that happens?
I am obviously not the Deputy First Minister, but I shall answer the question as best I can from my lowly position. The responsibility for implementing and taking forward the consultation lies with local authorities—in this case, Highland Council. I encourage the member and all the businesses that have engaged with him and others to engage with the consultation process as it proceeds.
We recognise the importance of business input to the implementation of the levy in each council area and the input that businesses can make to how the funds are taken forward to better the local area for the use of visitors and make localities more attractive for visitors who will support those businesses.
This form of visitor levy is in place in the majority of European Union countries, so it is not unusual. We will continue to engage with businesses through VisitScotland and other channels to take on board the points that he has made.
We need brevity in questions and answers, please. Karen Adam has a supplementary question.
Raising revenue through a visitor levy has the potential to be transformative, particularly in high-traffic tourist destinations, and placing the powers in the hands of local authorities ensures that no region is disadvantaged in a one-size-fits-all approach. Will the minister say more about how the decision to empower local government could benefit communities and businesses across Scotland?
As briefly as possible, minister.
A visitor levy can help to support Scotland as a tourist destination. It gives councils the opportunity to invest funds in visitor-related facilities, expanding and enhancing the appeal of their local areas. It can provide support for local infrastructure and the maintenance of public spaces and deliver benefits for residents and visitors. By empowering local authorities in that way, we can help to deliver improvements that strengthen communities and enrich the visitor experience. We recognise the importance of engaging with businesses at a local level to ensure that the levy delivers on those aspirations.
With each council area devising its own visitor levy scheme, there is no universal assurance that patients from island and rural areas who require overnight accommodation to access healthcare and treatment outwith their home areas will not be impacted by the levy. What will the Scottish Government do, therefore, to ensure that island patients are not penalised when attending mainland hospitals?
I know that Beatrice Wishart has raised that issue previously, and has written in on it and had some response. I recognise the issue that she raises. As I said, the operation of the levy is for local authorities to take forward, working within the confines of the Visitor Levy (Scotland) Act 2024, and it is for them to consider the issues that are raised in that regard at a local level.
Ferguson Marine (Discussions)
To ask the Scottish Government when it last met with the board of Ferguson Marine and what was discussed. (S6O-04284)
The Scottish Government met with the Ferguson Marine board on 30 January. Updates were given by the chief executive and the chief financial officer, and there were discussions about the yard’s future strategy and business operations.
I thank the Deputy First Minister for that answer—no doubt, at that meeting, the progress of the Glen Sannox and the Glen Rosa would have been discussed. This morning, the Public Audit Committee heard that there could be delays to the Glen Rosa, and extra costs, which is quite alarming.
I have subsequently been told by a source that that delay could be until April. Does that chime with what the Deputy First Minister understands? Would she regard April as an unacceptable delay? What would be a reasonable extra cost, in her view?
I am afraid that I do not operate on the basis of sources—I operate on the basis of the letters that are sent to the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee as updates on progress that is being made. As the member will know, those letters address matters around timetabling and matters relating to cost. As he knows, the Glen Rosa is now the yard’s primary focus, and all of the workforce is focused on delivering that vessel.
On a point of order, Deputy Presiding Officer. The Deputy First Minister just referred to letters that should be sent to the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee. I would like it noted on the record that the letter that was due at the end of January has not yet been received, nor has there been any reason given for why it was late.
That is not a point of order.
Ferguson Marine (Running Cost)
To ask the Scottish Government what the total monthly running cost of Ferguson Marine is. (S6O-04285)
The running costs are a commercial matter for Ferguson Marine to answer. Monthly charges to the Scottish Government fluctuate, based on the work that is undertaken under current contracts.
Let me help the Deputy First Minister in answering that question. The monthly under-recovery, as quoted by Ferguson Marine, is £1 million per calendar month. It has been suggested that it costs £20 million a year to run Ferguson Marine if there is no recovery of any works. That is £84,000 per job. How will the Scottish Government fund that if it does not give the small vessels contract to Ferguson Marine?
I hope that the member is not recommending that we break procurement law. The yard is tendering for new vessels, and that will be managed as it should be in accordance with procurement law.
The number that the member quotes, if I understand it correctly, covers all employment at the yard, plus overheads in central administration costs. Perhaps he can clarify that.
Now that the Glen Sannox has been completed, the bulk of the workforce at Ferguson Marine is working on the delivery of the Glen Rosa, and those costs are therefore recoverable.
I have a lot of supplementaries here; I will not get through all of them, but I will get through as many as I can.
Does the Deputy First Minister agree that the Scottish Government’s £14.2 million investment—as we heard this morning in the Public Audit Committee, £9 million of that is for the next budget year—would be a significant step in helping to develop the yard so that it can secure both public and commercial contracts?
The £14.2 million will be invested over two years. It will support a range of initiatives to improve productivity and will help to give the shipyard the best possible opportunity to bid for and secure new work.
Securing future work will be key to securing the future of Ferguson’s yard. Board papers from May last year say that it got positive legal advice on a direct award for the small vessel replacement programme. The GMB union would like to know what the Scottish Government’s reaction was to that advice and why the Government did not act on it. If Ferguson Marine does not get the award of the contract in the first round, will the direct award still be considered for the second round?
As I said in my answer to Edward Mountain, a live procurement process is underway and it would not be appropriate for me to comment on it. It needs to go down the road that is understood for those processes. The Scottish Government has set out an approach to future work, and the Cabinet Secretary for Transport will update the Parliament on the tender and procurement for the second phase of the small vessel replacement programme.
Does the cabinet secretary agree that it is essential that the demand signal from public sector procurement underpins Scottish ship building? To achieve that, could she look at emulating what the Australians have done with the Australian marine complex in Perth? It is set up as a common user facility, which means that, regardless of who wins public procurement contracts, the companies can use the infrastructure and the facility in Australia to deliver the programmes.
Right now, we are working with Ferguson Marine to focus on improving productivity and to invest in the equipment and machinery that it needs to update in order to enable the company to compete internationally for procurement work. Irrespective of what ends up happening with the ownership of the yard, our commitment is to continue to invest in it as a shipbuilding facility. The first step is to ensure that it can compete internationally.
Artificial Intelligence Sector
To ask the Scottish Government how it is working to increase investment in Scotland’s artificial intelligence sector. (S6O-04286)
The Scottish Government is working with our enterprise agencies to promote investment and growth in our tech and AI ecosystems, which help AI companies at all stages of growth and facilitate collaboration between AI companies, academic institutions and other partners to support knowledge exchange and innovation. We are working closely with partners across the private and public sectors, including the Data Lab and the National Robotarium, to maximise the impact of our programmes and help the AI sector to flourish. We support economic opportunities for AI through the AI Alliance, which is our delivery body for our AI strategy.
The release of Chinese AI DeepSeek shows how quickly the artificial intelligence sector is moving and how important it is that we support investment in Scotland. The Prime Minister recently announced AI growth zones to accelerate growth and innovation in the sector, and said that Scotland has a great potential to be designated as one of those zones. Will the minister welcome a Scottish AI growth zone and discuss it with the United Kingdom Government?
I raised that issue with the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology, Peter Kyle, during a phone call prior to the Prime Minister’s announcement. His announcement was a bit disappointing, given that he spoke about AI strengths throughout the UK, but stopped at the border and did not mention any of the strengths in Scotland. That was a great pity, because Scotland leads the world in some aspects of AI, according to many commentators. We need the UK’s AI strategy to support Scotland, and we need UK secretaries of state to stop talking up the golden triangle of London, Oxford and Cambridge and calling that the home of innovation, which they are doing at the moment. I am pursuing those priorities.
Last year, I secured a members’ business debate that gave MSPs the chance to discuss the rapid evolution and potential of artificial intelligence. I firmly believe that we have a duty to assess the risks and to protect society and vulnerable individuals from harm by taking swift action to regulate the reach and use of AI. In the light of that, what is the Government doing to ensure that, while embracing the positives of AI, it is also keeping a close eye on the developing dangers of it?
The member raises very important issues. Our AI strategy is built on the premise of delivering trustworthy, ethical and inclusive AI for the people of Scotland. Although regulation in relation to many of the points that the member raises is reserved to the UK Government, we are taking a lot of steps in Scotland to promote the appropriate use of AI.
The Scottish AI Alliance has a number of programmes, such as living with AI, the Scottish AI playbook and the children and AI project, which are pursuing the aims that the member has mentioned.
Funding for an AI supercomputer at the University of Edinburgh was pulled by the Labour Government. It has followed that by announcing that it will be investing in AI projects elsewhere, including in Oxford and Cambridge, as the minister said.
Given that the Labour Government now seems to avoid investing in Scotland, what discussions has the minister and his colleagues had with it on the issue? Can he say any more about how the Scottish Government is working to grow the tech industry here?
That is ridiculous. Stop talking Scotland down.
The member raises some important issues, which I understand that members on the Labour benches, who are muttering away, do not like to be aired in the chamber.
It is really important that an AI growth zone in Scotland is announced shortly. The first zone will not be in Scotland, but we want one in Scotland to be announced through the UK Government’s new AI action plan, as soon as possible, which is an issue that I have raised with Peter Kyle. I also raised the issue of the exascale supercomputer in Edinburgh, which has been cancelled or postponed, and that we now have a window of opportunity to revisit the issue through the AI action plan. On-going discussions will be taking place between the University of Edinburgh and the UK Government on that issue, and we will lend our support to the University of Edinburgh in its efforts to secure that investment for Scotland as quickly as possible.
It is really important that the UK Government recognises Scotland’s strengths and stops talking up only Oxford, Cambridge and London, which is what it is doing at the moment. [Interruption.] We have to face up to that reality, so let us pursue the issue.
I discourage members on the front benches from providing a running commentary.
South of Scotland Enterprise
To ask the Scottish Government whether it has carried out an assessment of the economic impact on Dumfries and Galloway and the Scottish Borders of the South of Scotland Enterprise agency, since its inception in 2019. (S6O-04287)
South of Scotland Enterprise has delivered tangible benefits for businesses and communities in the south. Last year, the agency invested £13.7 million in business and community enterprises and £5.7 million in 48 strategic projects, including the Chapelcross energy transition zone and Borders innovation park.
The agency helped to create or safeguard more than 1,700 jobs, worked with more than 1,400 entrepreneurs and led the first pathways pilot to help underrepresented founders to start their own business.
It is clear that SOSE has had an important impact across Dumfries and Galloway and the Borders, with its teams working hard to support and grow local businesses as well as supporting communities. Can the Deputy First Minister comment on what conversations have been had regarding projects that will attract business and, in particular, young people to the region to grow the local economy?
There are across the south a number of exciting projects in development that will provide opportunities for young people. South of Scotland Enterprise is delivering a pioneering pathways project that will support young entrepreneurs to bring their business visions to life through coaching, advice and financial support. Its youth advisory forum ensures that young people’s voices are heard and that they are involved in finding solutions to the barriers that they face.
South of Scotland Enterprise works closely with business, Borders College, Dumfries and Galloway College and Scotland’s Rural College to design curriculum choices that target growth sectors.
South of Scotland Enterprise’s budget is proposed to be cut from £35 million in 2023-24 to £29 million in the forthcoming year. What effect will having £6 million less to invest than two years ago have on the agency’s economic impact?
Both the resource funding and the capital funding that are being allocated to South of Scotland Enterprise in 2025-26 reflect an increase in funding compared to 2024-25. Due to the reduction in the financial transactions that have been allocated to the Scottish Government by the UK Government, we have not been able to maintain South of Scotland Enterprise’s financial transactions allocation, which accounts for most of the difference in funding between 2022-23 and 2025-26.
As Colin Smyth said, we are seeing a 15 per cent cut in the Scottish Government’s funding for SOSE in its budget for the year ahead, compared to the funding from last year. If it is such a valuable organisation, why is its funding being cut?
These questions are starting to sound a little like groundhog day, because we have written to Murdo Fraser. I am happy to write to him once again to outline the fact that he is not comparing like with like. As I set out in my answer to Colin Smyth, both the resource funding and the capital funding that are allocated to South of Scotland Enterprise in 2025-26 reflect an increase in funding compared to 2024-25.
My ambition is for the enterprise agencies to focus more on what they are able to distribute rather than on expanding themselves, because the role of enterprise agencies is to be the front line of support for industry and business.
Postgraduate Business School (Proposal)
To ask the Scottish Government what discussions the economy secretary has had with ministerial colleagues regarding establishing a stand-alone postgraduate business school to help create more companies, attract talent and boost innovation. (S6O-04288)
Scotland is already home to world-class institutions. As outlined in our national innovation strategy, we are committed to maximising the economic impact of university research through commercialisation and the creation and scaling up of start-ups, spin-out companies and so on. There are no current plans to establish a stand-alone postgraduate business school, but we are focused on working with our universities to make Scotland a world-leading entrepreneurial nation.
I agree with everything that the minister said. In recent engagements with entrepreneurs, we have discussed how innovative Scotland is and how good existing business schools in universities such as the University of Edinburgh are. Could we build on that and benefit from an additional internationally prestigious, postgraduate-only establishment, similar to INSEAD in France or the London Business School, to help further develop Scotland’s remarkable economic potential in the 21st century? Would the Scottish Government be open to further engagement on that proposal?
It is important that we are ambitious, and although we have no current plans to set up such a school, I would be happy to have further engagement on the idea with Ben Macpherson and the university sector, as appropriate.
Investment in higher education and business is critical to attracting and retaining the best talent, which is needed to help to deliver economic growth. However, the Institute for Fiscal Studies has reported a large-scale real-terms decrease in the funding that is provided to Scottish universities, and there are real concerns that that investment has not been prioritised. How realistic are plans to establish a stand-alone business school?
As I said, there are currently no plans to establish a stand-alone business school, albeit that I am very happy to explore whether that is an option for Scotland.
Having spoken to the university research sector in Scotland, as I regularly do, I know that one of the biggest barriers is immigration regulations and the bureaucracy involved in getting academics and appropriate staff into the country. We should also be conscious of that.
The budget includes more than £1.1 billion of investment in teaching and research at Scottish universities.
Is the issue not that our business schools are trying to compete with one another? As a result, none of them is in the top 50 of the QS World Rankings. Should we not ask our business schools to collaborate, particularly on areas of expertise such as renewables, food and drink, and financial services?
I have a lot of sympathy for the point that the member makes. We have seen a lot more collaboration among our universities in recent years. I promoted that as the minister responsible for universities a few years ago, and it has been paying dividends. If there is scope for further collaboration among our business schools to achieve greater international status, we should explore that, and I would be interested in finding out more about it.
Night-time Economy (Glasgow)
To ask the Scottish Government what it is doing to support and grow the night-time economy in Glasgow. (S6O-04289)
The night-time economy is vital to Glasgow’s prosperity. We continue to do everything that we can to support hospitality businesses to thrive. We are offering a 40 per cent relief, which is capped at £110,000 per business, for hospitality premises as well as music venues with a capacity of up to 1,500 people that are eligible for the basic property rate. Around half of properties in the retail, hospitality and leisure sectors will continue to be eligible for 100 per cent relief under the small business bonus scheme. We are also supporting the sector through the tourism and hospitality industry leadership group and the new deal for business.
Glasgow’s night-time economy generates £2.16 billion annually and supports 16,600 jobs, yet pubs are closing twice as fast as in England, and nightclubs have declined by 35 per cent in four years. Businesses are struggling due to reduced transport options, prohibitive rail costs, low-emission zone taxi restrictions and extended parking costs.
The 40 per cent rates relief that the minister spoke about will help a few, but I am concerned that most of Glasgow’s night-time economy venues will miss out. To quote the Scottish Licensed Trade Association, the move will
“catch headlines but will do little to stop closures and significant job losses in the sector.”
Given those challenges, will the minister outline what measures he will take to revive Glasgow’s night-time economy?
I am conscious of the priority that is placed on the night-time economy, not just by members of the Scottish Parliament but by Glasgow City Council. A range of factors have impacted night-time economy industries in Glasgow and across Scotland and the wider United Kingdom, stemming from the pandemic, the cost of living crisis, increased energy costs and the forthcoming increase in employer national insurance contributions.
We are committed to working constructively with our local authorities to ensure that the night-time economy can prosper in all parts of Scotland. That is why we have provided support through specific, targeted relief for hospitality in the non-domestic rates system. That sits in the context of a suite of other interventions—short, medium and long term—to support the viability and prosperity of our city centres, from which the night-time industries derive their potential.
Clare Haughey has a very brief supplementary question.
Does the minister share my concerns that the Labour Government’s oversight of increasing—not decreasing, as we were promised—energy bills and changes to employer national insurance contributions are placing vast cost and workforce pressures on businesses in the night-time economy in and around Glasgow?
Minister, please answer as briefly as possible.
The matters that Ms Haughey has raised are echoed by numerous businesses, not just in hospitality but more widely, with which I engage.
When it was running for office, the Labour Party said that energy costs would fall; however, energy costs have increased. It said that it would not increase national insurance; however, it is increasing employer national insurance contributions. That is having a negative effect on the wider economy and will clearly have an impact on night-time industries. However, as I said, the Scottish Government is committed to supporting our night-time industries and will continue to do so.
I apologise to those members whom I was not able to call. We move to the next portfolio.
Finance and Local Government
Again, members who wish to ask a supplementary question should press their request-to-speak buttons during the relevant question.
School Building
To ask the Scottish Government what discussions the finance secretary has had with ministerial colleagues regarding infrastructure investment plans for the building of new schools, in light of the recent Audit Scotland report, which noted that further borrowing will be needed to invest in these. (S6O-04290)
The Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government continues to discuss with Scottish ministers the issues that affect local government. Although it is the statutory responsibility of local authorities to manage their school estate, the Scottish Government will continue to provide them with significant funding support through the £2 billion learning estate investment programme, which will deliver modern, state-of-the-art learning environments and benefit tens of thousands of pupils across Scotland.
My constituency has certainly been grateful to benefit from the Government’s investment in schools over recent years, with some fantastic examples of new builds across Coatbridge and Chryston, including the very recently opened Riverbank primary school and Chryston primary school. However, there are still areas for which the council has no plans for new schools. One of those is in the village of Moodiesburn, where the community strongly feels that there is an urgent need for new school buildings and the associated community facilities. Many constituents have now raised that with me. What more can be done to ensure that North Lanarkshire Council is able to bring all schools in the area up to the same modern standard, including in places such as Moodiesburn?
As Fulton MacGregor rightly points out, the Scottish Government has already provided North Lanarkshire Council with significant funding support for the delivery of new schools, even though it is the statutory duty of local authorities to manage their school estate. The proportion of Scottish schools that are in good or satisfactory condition has increased from 62 per cent in 2007 to 91 per cent in 2024. We have committed to working with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, local authorities and the Scottish Futures Trust to explore how we can deliver further improvements in the school estate across Scotland.
The new Ardrossan academy was originally estimated to cost £31.5 million but, by last year’s budget, that cost had more than doubled, to £75 million. What more can be done to support councils that are having to meet the soaring construction costs that are required for new projects, and how is that taken into account in budget allocation?
I have already made it clear that the Scottish Government continues to support local authorities through the £2 billion LEIP funding and it will continue to do so. Clearly, construction inflation is impacting us all. That has not been helped by Brexit and a range of other factors, but the Government will continue working with local authorities to do what we can to support their efforts to build on the substantial improvement that we have seen in the condition of the school estate across Scotland over the past number of years.
Carol Mochan joins us remotely.
Local Government (Staff Recruitment and Retention)
To ask the Scottish Government what it will do to address any difficulties with recruitment and retention in local government due to the reported declining value of pay. (S6O-04291)
The Scottish Government values the contribution of local government workers. In 2024-25, we provided £77.5 million of additional funding to support local government to make a pay offer that protected the value of pay for those on the lowest incomes by providing an uplift of 5.63 per cent. The offer was better than that made elsewhere in the United Kingdom and additional funding is baselined in the 2025-26 budget.
Although decisions on pay are for local authorities as employers, the Scottish Government will continue to engage with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities on recruitment and retention, wider workforce planning and pay.
The value of pay for local government workers has been declining for many years. Over the past year, mortgage interest payments have increased by 17.6 per cent and average two-bedroom rents are up by 6.2 per cent, yet local government workers are expected to get by on a pay increase that is well below that level. Minister, would you apply for a job in which the value of your pay is almost certain to decrease every year?
Always speak through the chair. I call the minister. [Interruption.]
As a member is shouting from the back benches, ministers have not taken a pay increase for 18 years.
I absolutely recognise the member’s point. As I said, that is why the Scottish Government provided that £77.5 million of additional funding last year to support local government, which resulted in an uplift of 5.63 per cent for the lowest-paid workers. I reiterate that that is a better offer than was made elsewhere in the UK. Additional funding is baselined in the forthcoming year’s budget, and it was at the request of the unions that successive pay deals have prioritised the lowest-paid local government workers.
Will the minister confirm that Scotland’s average public sector pay is £2,300 a year higher than it is in the rest of the UK, amounting to an additional £1.3 billion, much of which goes to local government workers, and that Scotland’s lowest-paid local government employees not only have the UK’s highest basic pay but are liable for lower income tax and council tax? Will he therefore encourage his Labour counterparts in England and Wales to match Scotland’s local government rates of pay?
I thank the member for pointing out those facts. I am proud of the pay deals that give Scotland’s public sector workers, nurses, teachers and others higher salaries than those in the rest of the UK.
The First Minister and the COSLA president wrote to the Chancellor of the Exchequer at the start of January to call on the UK Government to fully fund the costs of all public service providers in Scotland. Yesterday, the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government announced an additional £144 million for local government, which is equivalent to the net revenue that would be raised nationally by a 5 per cent increase in council tax, to help councils avoid inflation-busting council tax rises.
We now need the UK Labour Government to step up and provide full funding to avoid councils having to make hard choices to impose a tax that goes straight to the Treasury coffers when it sets its budgets later this month.
Local Development Plans (Planning Guidance)
To ask the Scottish Government whether it will consider reviewing the planning guidance provided to local authorities relating to issuing a call for ideas/sites when undertaking their statutory requirement to prepare a 10-year local development plan. (S6O-04292)
Local development planning guidance that was published in May 2023 advises planning authorities on using an optional call for sites or ideas when preparing their local development plans. That is one of several ways in which people can have their say. Further advice is set out in our guidance on effective community engagement in LDPs, which was published in December 2024.
Planning authorities are responsible for preparing LDPs, including gathering information that is needed to support decisions on future development. The Government is monitoring the progress of new-style LDPs and will consider updating the guidance if experience suggests that that would be appropriate.
Scottish Government local development plan guidance includes a reference to a call by councils for ideas or sites, including
“for development sites or types of development e.g. housing.”
In practice, landowners and developers are given an early opportunity to influence the development of a plan. For instance, a potential developer has used a call for sites to put a large-scale housing development on a green-belt site at Blackhill Road in Summerston, in my constituency, although it had been rejected previously for very good reasons.
I ask the Scottish Government to consider how guidance could be improved to give a greater voice to communities at the earliest stage. I know that many of my constituents want to see local brownfield sites developed and the green belt protected; they would wish a development plan to reflect that very thing.
The guidance sets out that any call for ideas is expected to be open to everyone to propose ideas for any aspect of the plan. It is not limited to suggestions for development sites or types of development.
Our guidance on effective community engagement in local development planning, which was published in December last year, outlines all the opportunities for individuals to have a say in local development plans.
Local place plans can also be used by communities to outline their aspirations for the future development of their place, and those must be taken into account in local development plans. I encourage the member to look into that, and I am happy to engage with him on the detail of that approach.
Does the minister agree that, despite all that, the planning system in Scotland remains fundamentally discretionary? That can often introduce conflicts in the planning process when plans are just presented and are developer led.
The German system could be an interesting benchmark. It is more codified, which means that people know well in advance what the preferred styles and densities are for developments. That can introduce a less contentious system and give greater certainty for developers to invest, because they know what they can build out and where.
One of the drivers behind the move to the revised national planning framework 4 has been for the planning system to be plan led as much as possible. We see that as encouraging developers to focus on the land that has been identified in local development plans, that have been made through the process that we have outlined, to make sure that developments are plan led and that not as many applications are made outside the plan.
I am happy to engage with the member on opportunities for us to further develop the plan-led system, to give more of the clarity that he describes.
NHS Fife (Infrastructure Investment Pipeline)
To ask the Scottish Government what discussions the finance secretary has had with NHS Fife regarding the revised infrastructure investment pipeline. (S6O-04293)
The importance of health infrastructure was a key consideration in the 2025-26 budget-setting process. Additional capital investment of £139 million will support improvements across the national health service estate and will provide increased core capital funding for NHS boards as well as funding to support boards’ priority areas for infrastructure investment.
The Scottish Government is working closely with all NHS boards, including NHS Fife, to develop a whole-system NHS infrastructure plan. That will consider health infrastructure needs for the whole of Scotland to inform the allocation of funding. The approach supports the continued safe operation of existing facilities and the determination of longer-term investment priorities.
The minister may not be aware that Fife Council has just granted planning permission for the new medical centre for Lochgelly.
Now that there is clear support from NHS Fife and the local community, recognition by the Scottish Government that the current site is not fit for purpose and planning permission in place, will the Scottish Government fulfil the promise that it made way back in 2011 to deliver a new medical centre for Lochgelly?
As we announced in the Scottish budget, there is continued challenge and uncertainty in the capital funding position. Combined with the reductions in capital funding in recent years, that means that we cannot afford all our capital commitments or all the projects that we might wish to commit to.
The member is correct in saying that Lochgelly medical centre was not included in the infrastructure investment plan from 2021-22 to 2025-26, which identified the priority health capital projects for funding in that period. However, the infrastructure investment plan pipeline beyond that period will be reviewed after the United Kingdom spending review. All due consideration will be given to which projects can be included in that revised pipeline, including the Lochgelly facility that the member mentions.
Annabelle Ewing was quite right to raise that issue, because it is extremely important.
Does the minister agree that the provision of out-of-hours services in St Andrews, which has been under considerable pressure, also deserves Government attention to ensure that its widespread use is continued?
As I indicated, the process that we have in place means that health boards identify their local priorities and they will be considered as part of the whole-system NHS infrastructure plan. I am sure that the requirement that Liz Smith identified in St Andrews will get due consideration as part of that process.
Stratheden hospital, near Cupar, provides mental health services, but it is housed in a Victorian building. It has inadequate services, insufficient room and a lack of privacy, and there is not enough space for therapeutic services. The Mental Welfare Commission for Scotland has been critical of its facilities. Will the minister consider Stratheden hospital in the infrastructure plan?
I thank the member for raising the situation in that locality in addition to the others that have been raised. As I have indicated, the process will give due consideration to all those priorities.
As part of the process, the whole-system NHS infrastructure plan will be pulled together and the infrastructure investment plan pipeline will be reviewed, as will the specific asks of any other member who raises an ask for funding in any other supplementary question.
The minister will understand the frustration from around the chamber because of the number of projects that members want, but the infrastructure investment pipeline is something of a holy grail for the Government. It is fabled and never found, and it is difficult to determine where it might be. We expected it with the budget in December 2023, but it never came. We were told that we would have to wait until after the spring budget in March 2024, but it never came. Next, the cabinet secretary for finance said that it would come with the medium-term financial strategy in May 2024, but it never came. Can we have a commitment from the finance minister that it will come before the summer recess?
The cabinet secretary indicated the timing of the plan, but the member needs to recognise that the certainty that we require from the UK spending review is hugely important in giving us clarity on what funds are available to support projects that would be included in the infrastructure investment plan. Without that certainty, we are unable to take forward that plan.
Income Tax
To ask the Scottish Government what factors it considered when determining not to introduce any new bands or increase the rates of Scottish income tax for the remainder of this parliamentary session. (S6O-04294)
As part of our recently published tax strategy, we engage with 65 different organisations in Scotland, including businesses, think tanks, academics, civil society groups and tax professionals. After listening to the views of those stakeholders, we are providing a period of stability on income tax for the lifetime of the parliamentary session. That will provide businesses with the confidence to invest in Scotland and support our economic growth priorities. Stakeholders have praised that approach and have welcomed the opportunity to contribute to the development of our tax strategy. We will continue with that engagement as we implement the strategy.
Speaking last year, the Deputy First Minister, Kate Forbes, warned that the nature of tax policy in a devolved context means that it is very easy for people to move. Despite that warning, the Scottish National Party continues to increase tax by stealth by freezing the thresholds in the upper bands, meaning that more Scots are paying higher marginal rates of tax in what is already the highest-taxed part of the UK.
Scots also have to contend with the complexity and compliance costs of income tax rates of 19, 20, 21, 42, 45 and 48 per cent. If the minister will not join us in our commonsense crusade to cut tax, is it not time that he tackled the complexity of the Scottish National Party’s high-tax regime by reducing the overall number of Scottish tax rates and Scottish tax bands?
Common sense dictates that the Conservatives’ plans to reduce tax rates would result in up to £1 billion less for the Scottish Government to spend on public services. I will try to square that with the member’s previous question, which was on more investment in public services across the country.
The reality is that we watch the behavioural impact of taxation very closely, and more people—across all tax bands—continue to move to Scotland from the rest of the UK than move in the other direction. The tax strategy and tax policies that have been adopted in Scotland have, so far, raised significant additional funds to invest in our public services, and that additional investment in public services is one of the reasons why more people continue to move to Scotland from the rest of the UK than move in the opposite direction.
Question 6 was not lodged, and question 7 has been withdrawn.
“Local government in Scotland: Financial bulletin 2023/24”
To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to the Accounts Commission report “Local government in Scotland: Financial bulletin 2023/24”, which was published on 28 January 2025. (S6O-04297)
[Interruption.]
Can we have a little less chatter from some members?
I welcome the Accounts Commission’s independent confirmation that the local government settlement increased in real terms in 2024-25 and in 2025-26. I share the commission’s view that the transformation of front-line services must be progressed at pace by all public bodies, including local authorities, and that any transformation must be taken forward in partnership with local communities.
Does the minister accept that, despite the increases in funding for local government, the report paints a pretty bleak future for local government finances? Specifically, I draw his attention to the fact that the Fife health and social care partnership is currently projected to overspend by £34.8 million, and it is looking at a number of horrendous proposals that would impact the poorest, the elderly and the most vulnerable in Fife. If it does not achieve those savings, NHS Fife and Fife Council will have to cover the overspend. Will the minister look again at the Fife health and social care partnership’s base budget, which is clearly inadequate to meet the needs of the people of Fife?
The funds for health and social care partnerships are determined by local partners and the funding for local government through the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities formula. Alex Rowley should recognise that the Accounts Commission said that the local government settlement for 2024-25 provided a real-terms increase in funding and that the 2025-26 draft settlement, which was published in December 2024, indicates that there will be another real-terms uplift in funding for councils. The Accounts Commission’s report states:
“This initial 2025/26 draft settlement allocates £15 billion of revenue and capital funding to councils, a 5.8 per cent real terms increase on the 2024/25 draft settlement.”
Air adhart
Medication Assisted Treatment Standards