Official Report 1069KB pdf
HMP Glasgow
The Scottish National Party Government previously told the public that it would cost £100 million to build the new HMP Glasgow. Yesterday, however, the SNP Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Home Affairs dropped a bombshell on Scotland’s taxpayers—she admitted that it would now cost £998,400,000. That is just shy of £1 billion, and I will place a bet with John Swinney right now that it will only go even higher. Does a £1 billion Barlinnie really represent good value for Scotland’s taxpayers?
It is essential that we replace HMP Barlinnie. We have numerous reports from His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Prisons for Scotland that encourage us to do so. The Parliament has pressed us to undertake the project, and we recognise that it has to be done.
Of course, the full rigour of cost analysis has been applied to the project, which is different from the original project that led to the estimate that Mr Findlay set out. I assure him that the Government will monitor and control the costs carefully as the project takes its course.
I think that the First Minister’s undertaking is causing some anxiety among taxpayers, because it is they who are paying the price for this SNP incompetence and its perverse priorities. Instead of building a high-security prison to lock up rapists and murderers, John Swinney thinks that he is building either a luxury resort or a nature reserve. [Interruption.]
Let us hear Mr Findlay.
The justice secretary says that it will be
“based around small communities living together and supporting each other.”
There will be an orchard of fruit trees, beautiful landscaped gardens, planting beds, polytunnels and amphitheatre-like steps. I am not making this up—there will be wee boxes for owls and bats to live in and special bricks for the birds.
The SNP expects hard-working Scottish taxpayers to pay for its nonsense. Surely we need some common sense by building a prison at minimum cost to taxpayers and not for maximum benefit to prisoners.
The tone of Mr Findlay’s question is absolutely reprehensible and despicable. [Interruption.]
Thank you!
If Russell Findlay wants to have a dividing line in politics on this type of stuff, I will happily be on the other side of the argument from him and all the cohorts that he is courting with his question.
I want to make sure that there is a replacement prison so that those who are sentenced to prison can be held safely and securely and that staff are safe and secure in undertaking their responsibilities. That is my duty as First Minister, and that is what the Government will concentrate on delivering.
The cohort that I am talking to is hard-working Scots. It is taxpayers who want every single pound to be spent on the best possible schools and hospitals, not on the best possible prisons. This is baffling to people in the real world. They expect the Government to build functional prisons at a sensible price and to be kept safe from dangerous criminals, but they are getting neither from the SNP.
As a result of the SNP’s failure to build prisons on time and within budget, it will release thousands of criminals before they have done their time. Police Scotland officers and victims groups say that that will result in more crime in Scotland’s streets. One billion pounds and more crime—does that really sound like a good deal to John Swinney?
This project is different from the one that was originally discussed about a decade ago. The original proposition was based on estimates for a 700-place prison. In fact, the new prison will accommodate more than 1,340 prisoners, so it will be almost double that size.
The Scottish Prison Service has looked at the comparative costs. A recent report by the National Audit Office shows that, in England and Wales, the expected cost per prison place has increased by up to 259 per cent since the initial business case. The price per place has risen to between £610,000 and £840,000 in England and Wales. The price per place for His Majesty’s Prison Glasgow sits in the middle of that range, at £740,000.
Mr Findlay can say all the things that he wants to say, and he can play to all the sentiments that he is very visibly playing to. However, as First Minister of Scotland, I expect my ministers to take rational decisions to protect the public purse and to protect the public by ensuring that those who are sentenced to prison can be accommodated. I will not play games with the type of rhetoric that Mr Findlay has put to the Parliament today.
John Swinney is protecting the public purse, apparently. The prison has doubled in size but will cost 10 times as much—that is SNP economics right there. It is squandering more on a five-star prison than it spent on Scotland’s flagship Queen Elizabeth university hospital, and it is releasing thousands of prisoners early. At the same time, it is building a prison with boxes for bats and bricks for birds.
That illustrates how detached the Holyrood bubble has become from the real world, and it is why so many people are disillusioned with politics. The John Swinney Government is neglecting what really matters to people. As a matter of urgency, will he commit to cutting those outrageous costs, or will he just expect taxpayers to pipe down and pay up?
All of us can see what Mr Findlay is up to today. [Interruption.] All of us can see it. [Interruption.]
Let us hear one another.
It is very visible what Mr Findlay is up to today. He is absolutely terrified of his party being consumed by Reform, as all the polls suggest, and he is playing into its hands with every bit of obnoxious rhetoric that he comes out with. [Interruption.]
Thank you!
I will reassure taxpayers, as they have—[Interruption.]
Let us hear the First Minister.
Mr Findlay has not balanced a single budget in his life for the public finances. I have balanced 10 budgets in this country and delivered value for money, and I will continue to do so.
I encourage Mr Findlay to go away and do his research. I have set out to the Parliament the issues that have arisen because of the significant inflation in construction costs with which we are wrestling. Why are we wrestling with those costs? We are wrestling with them because of the fiscal mismanagement of the Conservatives, including the Liz Truss budget and the higher interest rates that she bequeathed to us all, and Mr Findlay was right behind the mess that she created.
Nuclear Energy
Today, the United Kingdom Government has announced plans to speed up the development of new nuclear power. It is obvious that the plan has the potential to bring billions of pounds of investment to communities, to jump-start growth and to create high-skill jobs, all while ending our reliance on dictators such as Vladimir Putin to meet our energy demands. Will John Swinney end the Scottish Government’s ideological block on nuclear energy to ensure that Scots also can benefit from that opportunity?
The best thing that we can do is to power on with our plans for renewable energy development and ensure that Scotland can realise the extraordinary natural resources that we have. I saw that being developed at the Methil yard in Fife yesterday in a collaboration between the United Kingdom Government and the Scottish Government in securing investment from Navantia and securing the future of the workforce at Methil.
We should power on with renewables. That should be the clear policy signal from the Scottish Government.
It is not an either/or. At 10 o’clock this morning, National Grid’s live data showed that 23.9 per cent of the electricity being consumed in Scotland was from nuclear energy. The transition to net zero is a chance to create decent, high-skill jobs for the future, drive investment into Scotland and secure our national energy security. The First Minister should just ask communities in East Lothian or North Ayrshire, which have seen the benefits, about that.
For almost 20 years, the Scottish National Party has vetoed nuclear energy projects in Scotland, leaving jobs, growth and skills to go elsewhere. However, the next generation of small nuclear reactors could revolutionise our energy market. China is constructing 29 reactors and the European Union has 12 at planning stage. That is a huge advantage in the global race to harness new technologies to deliver cleaner, affordable and independent energy. Why is John Swinney determined to let Scotland fall behind?
I spend a lot of my time, as I did on Tuesday, engaging with the Scottish energy advisory board and other energy interests in Scotland. One of the pleas that the energy advisory board has made to me, which I acknowledge is important and which I faithfully try to deliver, is to provide absolute policy certainty so that investors can invest in the technologies that come forward.
In 2023, 70 per cent of electricity generated in Scotland was from renewable sources. That is a marked increase compared to the 32 per cent in 2013. Mr Sarwar should be careful not to create the impression that renewable energy is not delivering formidably for Scotland, because it is.
I think that investors will be really worried by Mr Sarwar’s language. Investors tell me that they know exactly where the Scottish Government stands today. We are right behind the renewable energy revolution and we are delivering that. In his pursuit of the new direction, Mr Sarwar wants to muddy the waters. He wants to add uncertainty. He wants to scare off investment from the renewable energy industry. I will not do that. I will give a clear green light to the green energy revolution in Scotland and I will be proud of what Scotland can deliver.
I am talking about more investment in Scotland. John Swinney has the power to unleash billions of pounds of investment and new jobs with the stroke of a pen but, instead, he is trapped in the politics of the 1970s, wanting thousands of jobs—[Interruption.]
Let us hear Mr Sarwar.
The First Minister wants thousands of jobs and billions in investment to go to England and Wales rather than come to Scotland, all while weakening Scotland’s energy security. What kind of nationalist is he?
Let me set out a new direction that a Scottish Labour Government will take. We will end the ideological block to zero-carbon nuclear energy. We will kick-start economic growth and bring billions in investment into Scotland. [Interruption.]
Members!
We will deliver thousands of high-skill, well-paid jobs for the future and boost Scotland’s energy security, all while delivering on Scotland’s ambitious climate change commitments. In the face of that huge opportunity, why are John Swinney and the SNP holding Scotland back?
I do not think that that is in any way, shape or form correct. The Deputy First Minister and I spent the evening yesterday with a number of investors who are investing in the renewables energy revolution in Scotland with the support of the Scottish National Investment Bank.
In my friend Mr Gibson’s constituency in North Ayrshire—Mr Sarwar mentioned North Ayrshire—we have just secured significant investment by XLCC in cable manufacturing, which will be absolutely critical for offshore renewables. That activity will be assisted by the investment by Sumitomo at Nigg that we have landed.
I encourage Mr Sarwar to go away and look at the cost issues in relation to nuclear power. If he thinks that the increase in costs in relation to HMP Barlinnie is one thing, his eyes will water when he sees the increase in costs in relation to nuclear plants that are taking their course in England.
Given the question that Mr Sarwar has put to me and the primacy that I attach to policy certainty, let me use this opportunity to make it absolutely crystal clear that the Scottish Government will continue with our support for the development of green renewables and that we will not give the green light to nuclear power stations in Scotland.
Temporary Rent Protections (Extension)
Rents across Scotland are skyrocketing. Tenants are paying the price while private landlords are lining their pockets. Although the Housing (Scotland) Bill will finally deliver the promise of permanent rent controls to fix the system, the provisions will not come into force until 2027. Right now, tenants are protected by temporary controls that were introduced while the Greens were in government, but those protections are set to expire in two months, which will expose tenants to extortionate rent increases. Despite having the powers to extend those protections, the Scottish Government has pledged not to do so. First Minister, will you do the right thing to protect tenants and ensure that those temporary protections are extended until permanent rent controls are in place?
Always speak through the chair.
I understand the significance of the point that Lorna Slater puts to me. The temporary changes to rent adjudication come to an end on 31 March, when the arrangements will revert back to the existing legal requirements, which are based on market rent.
I am aware of the concerns that have been raised. We know that a longer-term approach is required on rental policy, which is why the Government has introduced provisions in the Housing (Scotland) Bill to support the introduction of longer-term rent controls when that is needed and justifiable. The Government will focus on ensuring that we get that legislation correct as we bring it through Parliament.
The cost of living crisis for tenants has not gone away. Over the past 10 years, monthly rent for a two-bedroom flat in Edinburgh has more than doubled. Some tenants are already reporting spending more than 70 per cent of their income on rent. We agree on the need to provide for permanent rent controls in the Housing (Scotland) Bill, but the Government’s decision to scrap the vital bridging rent controls will give landlords free rein to hike rents for two years. It is absolutely no surprise that the Scottish Association of Landlords has called it “a very welcome announcement”. What does the First Minister have to say to renters who will be facing that cliff edge in just a few weeks’ time?
Most private tenants still have a right to seek a review of a rent increase if they consider it too high. I would, of course, encourage tenants who are concerned about a rent increase to apply for a review. In relation to other messages that I would share with tenants, I would indicate that the Government is investing more than £90 million in discretionary housing payments, which is an increase of £6 million on 2023-24 that has been facilitated by the welcome support from the Scottish Green Party—which I appreciate—for the Government’s budget. Those discretionary housing payments are in place to support tenants and to assist them in managing the costs that they face.
I assure Lorna Slater of the Government’s determination to make progress on the issue of rent controls. That is why we are legislating through the Housing (Scotland) Bill. With the welcome support of the Scottish Green Party for the budget, we are able to put in place the support through discretionary housing payments, which will be an essential part of our commitment to tenants.
The Promise
To ask the First Minister whether he will provide an update on the Scottish Government’s work to keep the Promise, in light of the fifth anniversary of it being made. (S6F-03794)
I am grateful to Rona Mackay for raising that important question on the fifth anniversary of the Promise. The Parliament made the Promise unanimously and we all have a duty to keep it.
Yesterday, I spoke with care-experienced young people at the University of Glasgow. I heard about the challenges that they have faced and about their hopes for the future.
We are making progress to deliver the Promise. We have seen a 15.6 per cent reduction, since 2020, in the number of children in care and more than £110 million of investment in whole family support, and nobody under 18 is now admitted to a young offenders institution.
I assure Rona Mackay and the Parliament that I am absolutely committed to delivering the improvements needed. I welcome the report by the oversight board, which is clear that, although there is more to be done, the Promise can be kept by 2030.
That is a significant announcement and welcome news on the anniversary of the Promise. What does the Scottish Government hope and expect will be achieved through the £6 million increase in the whole family wellbeing fund that is being provided to children’s services planning partnerships? What improvements can we expect to see as a result of that funding increase from the Scottish National Party Scottish Government?
As I indicated in my earlier answer, we have already invested more than £110 million through the whole family wellbeing fund programme. The funding transforms how families are supported so that they can get the right help at the right time for as long as they need it.
The additional £6 million of funding that Rona Mackay referred to is for children’s services planning partnerships and will be used to improve local support in a way that best meets the needs of the families and communities and that ensures that Scotland can keep the Promise. Examples of that work include the provision of community-based family support hubs, services to support pregnant women, holistic support for parents with mental health or substance issues, and welfare rights advice.
The whole family wellbeing fund has underspends right across the country. However, the oversight board’s report, published yesterday, was clear that the
“Explicit leadership and drive from Scottish Government and scrutiny bodies to articulate a clear set of principles, outcomes and milestones”
to ensure that the Promise is kept by 2030 has been severely lacking. The report included more than 10 critical shortcomings that needed urgent attention, including workforce shortages, financial instability for care leavers, inadequate focus, fragmented services, lack of co-ordination—the list goes on. Is it not the case that the Scottish Government simply lacks the courageous leadership needed to take the decisive actions to meet the Promise by 2030?
I assure Roz McCall that I have every intention, working closely with my minister Natalie Don-Innes, to provide all the necessary focus, leadership and impetus. In the programme for government that was published in September, the concept of whole family support was absolutely pivotal to the achievement of the Government’s highest priorities related to the eradication of child poverty. I want to make sure that the work that we undertake to improve the experience of care-experienced individuals is right at the heart of our agenda on eradicating child poverty and providing the best start in life for children and young people. I assure Roz McCall of the Government’s absolute determination to ensure that that is the case.
The Promise oversight board’s report said that we are halfway between when we made the Promise and when we must keep it. However, we are not halfway to delivering on the Promise. One particular area of concern is the absence of a stable home, which, as the report highlights,
“increases the pressures on families and increases the likelihood of children in those families being taken into care.”
This week, a devastating report revealed that the number of children in temporary accommodation is at a record high. We, in this country, are in a dire situation in regard to that. What action is the Scottish Government going to take in relation to the number of children in temporary accommodation, which is a breach of the Promise and also a breach of children’s human right to accommodation?
I accept the importance of the point that Mr Whitfield puts to me. The Government is taking steps to reduce the number of children who are living in temporary accommodation. Indeed, in the statistics to which Mr Whitfield refers, across 20 local authority areas, councils have reduced the number of children in temporary accommodation.
However, it is not enough. That is why the Government has committed £768 million to invest in housing in Scotland in the forthcoming financial year. Increasingly, more of those resources are being applied to tackle void properties, for example, to make sure that those properties are available for families to occupy. In many local authority areas, that change in priority is already delivering better outcomes in which families have long-term accommodation.
There is a deadly serious point at the heart of Mr Whitfield’s question, which is that I can take the action that he wants me to take on housing only if the Parliament approves the budget. We all—every one of us—are committed, as a Parliament, to the Promise. Therefore, we have to take the necessary steps to make it happen, and we can take those steps only if we have the financial investment to do so.
I leave the point with Mr Whitfield to reflect on over the week-long recess that lies ahead that, if he wants to turn his rhetoric into reality, he should support the Government’s budget at stage 3 and ensure that the investment is made in housing. If he does not do that, it is just empty rhetoric from the Labour Party.
Rosebank and Jackdaw Oil Fields
To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government’s response is to the Court of Session’s decision regarding the Rosebank oil field and the Jackdaw gas field. (S6F-03781)
The Government is considering carefully the court rulings that were announced last week. Decisions on offshore oil and gas licensing and consenting are currently reserved to the United Kingdom Government. We have been consistently clear that the UK Government should approach those decisions case by case on a rigorously evidence-led basis, with robust climate compatibility and energy security being key considerations.
Our North Sea workers are being failed by the Labour Government and by this devolved Scottish National Party Government. The decision on Rosebank and Jackdaw is a hammer blow to the north-east. We will import more oil and gas instead of using our own resources and supporting our own workers.
A poll by True North shows that nearly three quarters of Scots back the North Sea oil and gas industry. Will the First Minister also back the industry and drop his disastrous presumption against new oil and gas production before more jobs are lost?
What I will do is everything in my power to secure a just transition for everybody involved. We all realise that we will have to make a transition from dependence on fossil fuels, unless, of course, we are going to deny the climate crisis that we are facing. I, for one, am not going to deny the climate crisis.
I want to do everything that I can to support the transition for the workforce in the north-east of Scotland, just as I would like us to be in a position to do more to support the workers at Grangemouth who have been served with redundancy notices. I am deeply concerned by the lack of impetus that we have been able to secure, particularly in projects such as carbon capture and storage, which would provide such opportunities for the future of Grangemouth.
The Government will consider the court’s judgments. We will work with the oil and gas sector to manage the transition that lies ahead, because I want to ensure that we have a strong and prosperous future for those who are involved in oil and gas in Scotland and that we have a strong and prosperous future for the Scottish economy.
We are in a time of huge international tension and an ever-increasing risk of trade tariffs. The First Minister mentioned energy security. Is not the best way to protect energy security here and in Europe to produce as much oil and gas as we possibly can—not least because, as I hope the First Minister will know, the Equinor plan for the development of the Rosebank field states that the carbon footprint will be half the level of the existing North Sea average? Given that it will be electrification ready, the carbon footprint could reduce to 3kg of carbon per barrel, which is 25 times less than the carbon footprint of fracked gas from the USA or Qatar. Which is better for the environment: producing our own oil and gas or helping Donald Trump?
What I am interested in doing is ensuring that we manage the transition to net zero, because we cannot deny the climate crisis that we face. That will be the position that I adopt and observe, because the science tells me that that is the rational position for us to take. It will also dictate the approach that I take on energy policy and encouraging the move to sustainable energy security by the investments that we make in offshore renewables. Again, that is supported by the Government’s budget, which passed stage 1 on Tuesday, and is facilitated by outstanding interventions such as that from SGN in Methil, where there is a pilot project on using hydrogen as a replacement for gas in domestic power systems.
Scotland is leading the world on such innovation, and I am immensely proud of what our academic institutions and companies are doing to take forward that agenda. They will have the full support of the Scottish Government.
Clinical Radiologists
To ask the First Minister what action the Scottish Government is taking to address the reported shortage in clinical radiologists, which is projected to rise to 263 fewer posts than needed by 2028. (S6F-03787)
The work of radiologists is absolutely crucial in effective delivery of a wide range of services, including cancer diagnostics. I take this opportunity to thank the radiologist community across the country for their commitment on our behalf.
Our investment in the radiologist workforce over the past 10 years is evidenced by an almost 25 per cent increase in consultant radiologist numbers. We continue to invest heavily in radiology training, funding 192 speciality training places in clinical radiology, including 78 extra places that we have added since 2014, based on modelling of future workforce need.
Clinical radiology training programmes, which have been filled at 100 per cent in Scotland every year since 2013, enable doctors to train, and to enter the workforce following completion of training, which takes a minimum of five years.
We know that outsourcing scans is a sticking-plaster approach that is favoured by the Scottish Government, but the British Medical Association and the Royal College of Radiologists say that there is a real need to train and recruit more radiologists if we are to have a sustainable service in the long term. The First Minister knows that the lack of radiologists results in increased waiting times for cancer diagnosis and treatment. The last quarter’s performance shows that the 31-day and 62-day targets were both missed yet again, which is worse than the previous quarter. The First Minister has been at the heart of this Government for the past 18 years, so can he explain to the people of Scotland why cancer waiting times are worse on his watch?
Again, it is turning out to be my obligation to try to put some of Jackie Baillie’s comments into their proper context. We are treating more patients with cancer on time, within both standards, compared with the same quarter 10 years ago—12 per cent more within the 31-day standard and 6 per cent more within the 62-day standard.
Jackie Baillie talked about the fact that the 31-day standard had been missed. The target is 95 per cent and the performance was 94.3 per cent. I accept that that is a missed target—[Interruption.]
Let us hear the First Minister.
If anyone is remotely interested in hearing my answers, I am happy to give them.
I accept that we missed the 95 per cent target, but I want to reassure the public that the overwhelming majority of patients have been treated within the 31-day target. It is important that Jackie Baillie does not come here every week and spread alarm among the public when our staff are doing their level best to protect the public.
We move to general and constituency supplementary questions.
Grangemouth Refinery (Redundancies)
Yesterday, 435 workers at the Grangemouth refinery in my Falkirk East constituency were given redundancy notices, and refining will cease at the end of June. Despite statements from the Prime Minister, and from the leader of the Labour Party in Scotland, who promised to
“step in to save the jobs at the refinery”
and
“put hundreds of millions of pounds behind it”,
the UK Government has instead prioritised eight sites—none of which are in Scotland—for the likes of sustainable aviation fuel.
I understand the need to transition, but the “just” in just transition has turned into “just wait” for the workers, the wider cluster and the community. Will the First Minister join me in condemning the United Kingdom Government for its lack of action? Will he set out what specific steps the Scottish Government is taking right now to support the workers and ensure that there remains a skills cluster from which to transition?
I understand entirely the concerns of Michelle Thomson, who has tenaciously spoken on behalf of her constituents in Grangemouth. I pay tribute to her for what she has contributed to the debate on their behalf. I understand her frustration at the lack of an immediate solution, which the Labour Party promised at the election. Indeed, Anas Sarwar stood beside me in an STV debate and made that very promise, and it has not been fulfilled.
When I last met the Prime Minister, I was clear with him on the need to support and retain the highly skilled workforce at Grangemouth. I am becoming increasingly impatient about the fact that no decision has been taken to award the Acorn carbon capture and storage project to Grangemouth. I was assured by the most recent Conservative Government that it would be the case that such a decision would be taken. The matter has not been taken forward by the Labour Government.
If there is an interest in trying to fulfil the United Kingdom Government’s commitment that it would intervene to act in Grangemouth, I urge the UK Government, as a matter of priority, to authorise the Acorn carbon capture project and to give certainty to the workers in Grangemouth.
Flotation Energy (Contract Award)
The Scottish National Party’s Westminster leader, Stephen Flynn, lobbied the Scottish Government on behalf of the renewables company Flotation Energy, which was awarded consent for a project. Thirty days later, Stephen Flynn received a £30,000 donation from a director of that company.
Today, we find out that, behind closed doors, SNP ministers had “real concerns” about the process for the awarding of the contract and questioned whether the assessment had been rigorous enough. The Cabinet Secretary for Net Zero and Energy was given the final 217-page document at just before 2 o’clock in the morning, and she signed off on it at just after 9 o’clock in the morning.
The secrecy and the lack of transparency are shocking, and something at the heart of the process stinks. Does John Swinney not realise how dodgy this looks?
The First Minister can answer on matters for which he has general responsibility.
The concerns that the cabinet secretary raised were about the time taken for the decision-making process as a consequence of Government scrutiny. The minister expressed her concern that the Government had to speed up its decision-making processes in that respect. That has happened as a consequence of the actions that ministers have taken in the intervening period.
I am struck by the fact that, on 23 April 2024, one of Mr Hoy’s colleagues said that consent times were
“a huge issue”
for offshore wind farms, and he called on the Scottish Government
“to streamline the necessary regulatory and administrative processes, to expedite the approval and implementation of offshore wind programmes”.—[Official Report, 23 April 2024; c 6.]
Those were the words of Douglas Lumsden MSP as they appear in the Official Report of the Scottish Parliament.
I suggest that the Scottish Conservatives decide whether they want to have projects delivered timeously or whether they want to get in the road. Either way, the Conservatives look as though they are in their usual muddle today.
Community Right to Buy (North Queensferry)
The Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2016, which was passed overwhelmingly by this Parliament, helped to extend the community right to buy to the compulsory purchase of land or a building for the purposes of sustainable development.
In Fife, a group of local residents is struggling to get a ministerial decision on its part 5 right to buy application of 31 October 2023. The building that the group is trying to purchase, which is a 200-year-old building at the heart of North Queensferry, is in an increasingly derelict state, and the delay is causing it further harm. The recent storm has made that much worse. The residents wish to restore the building to serve the local community, but they are struggling to get a response from the community land team. Will the First Minister agree to look into the matter and find out why, to date, there has been no progress?
I am not familiar with the case, but I understand that Shirley-Anne Somerville, as the local member, has met the responsible minister, Mairi Gougeon, to discuss the issue.
Let me take away the point that Mr Rowley has put to me. I understand the community’s aspiration to acquire the asset and to be able to utilise it for community benefit. I know from my constituents’ experience that such things sometimes take longer than they should. Indeed, I have just been wrestling with the issue of things sometimes taking too long.
Let me do what I can to help Mr Rowley, because I understand the significance of the point that he has raised. I will write to him with an update as a consequence of my inquiries.
Jacqueline McQuillan (Fatal Accident Inquiry)
The First Minister will be aware of the news this week that a fatal accident inquiry is to be held into the death of Coatbridge resident Jacqueline McQuillan at Monklands hospital in 2018. Since that time, my office team and I have been supporting the family, and Jacqueline’s sister, Lynne, in particular. They are my constituents, and I know how important the announcement is for them in their on-going search for answers.
I know that the First Minister cannot comment on the specifics of the case, but will he join me in acknowledging the difficult time that the family has been through and in calling on the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service to keep the family fully up to date as the case progresses?
I welcome Mr MacGregor’s point. He acknowledges that I cannot comment on the substance of the case, because it is live, but I assure him that the Crown Office has made significant improvements in its engagement with families in recent years, as is reflected in its family liaison charter. I fully expect that the family involved in this tragic case will get the support that they require. If there are any concerns about that, I know that Mr MacGregor will faithfully raise them with the Lord Advocate on behalf of his constituents.
Violence in Schools
I have spoken time and time again in this chamber about the horrors of violence and abuse in our schools. Yesterday, staff at Kirkintilloch high school, in East Dunbartonshire in my region, went on strike because of a culture of abuse and violence from pupils. Violence against pupils and school staff has got out of hand and our schools are no longer safe. That shocking situation is a direct result of the Scottish National Party’s weakening of Scotland’s justice system and failure to protect pupils and teachers. When will the First Minister’s Government finally get a grip of the situation?
Everyone who goes to school, whether they are a member of staff or a pupil, should be safe, and it is incumbent on every local authority in the country to ensure that our schools are safe. For some children, school will be the safest place they can go to because of the challenges that they face elsewhere in society.
This is a vital priority. As Pam Gosal will know, I hosted a cross-party summit on 13 January, which involved her colleague Sharon Dowey, to explore some of the issues around youth violence. I will always take such questions seriously, but I do not want the impression to be created that our schools are anything other than safe. I also do not want any impression to be created other than that the vast majority of young people across Scotland do not engage in violence and that they attend safe and stable schools.
If there is an issue in a particular school, let us address that, but let us not characterise every single school in the country in the fashion that Pam Gosal has done, because that does not serve anyone’s interests, and it certainly does not serve the young people of our country.
Cumbernauld Theatre (Funding)
On 30 January, Cumbernauld theatre staff, the theatre’s supporters and the wider community were relieved when it was announced that all organisations currently funded by Creative Scotland would secure significant additional multiyear funding. However, that relief turned to heartbreak when they were told that that would not be the case for the theatre, that they had missed out on core funding and that the theatre was the only arts organisation that had been funded previously but was now losing support. I am told that that is due to a technical issue—the supporting evidence that they provided was too extensive.
To add insult to injury, the theatre also failed to receive any support from the newly created development stream, with Creative Scotland deciding that Cumbernauld theatre is not of strategic importance, despite its fantastic new facilities and despite the fact that Creative Scotland itself has praised those facilities and the work done by the theatre for decades.
Does the First Minister agree with Creative Scotland that Cumbernauld theatre is not of strategic importance? Will his Government urgently review that devastating funding decision?
I am well aware of the case and have discussed it with Jamie Hepburn, the local member, in the course of this week.
Such decisions are taken by Creative Scotland, which works independently of Government, as the law requires. Creative Scotland makes those decisions in line with the criteria that it has set out. I understand that there is to be a meeting next week between the chief executive of Creative Scotland and Cumbernauld theatre to consider the issues.
I recognise the enormous disappointment that will be experienced in Cumbernauld. However, Mr Griffin must accept that there is not parliamentary support for the Government to intervene in Creative Scotland’s decision making, because Parliament has determined that Creative Scotland should be able to take those decisions for itself.
I hope that there is a constructive conversation that can find some way of resolving the issue. Among all the other decisions that have been taken, the content of the Government’s budget has given an absolutely colossal boost to culture and the arts in Scotland. There is a real improvement in the funding that is available, and I am glad that that has been able to be felt across communities the length and breadth of our country.
Robot-assisted Surgery
The latest figures show Scotland reaching a major milestone with more than 10,000 patients across Scotland benefiting from da Vinci robot-assisted surgery since 2021. I was introduced to robotic surgery, including early da Vinci models, when I worked in an operating theatre in Los Angeles in the early 2000s. What assessment has the Scottish Government made of the impact of surgical robots on national health service productivity? Can the First Minister say any more about the steps that the Scottish Government is taking to support the delivery of robot-assisted surgery in Scotland?
The approach is obviously having a beneficial effect given the number of procedures that are being delivered through it. To ensure that we have robust data and to allow us to better identify how robot-assisted surgery can be used across the national health service, we have commissioned Public Health Scotland to audit the experience. That data will be vital in ensuring that we can continue to scale up, drive equitable access and maximise patient benefit.
On a point of order, Presiding Officer. Can you advise the Parliament whether Scottish ministers have approached you and asked to make an urgent statement on the developing situation at the Grangemouth refinery? Frankly, it is just not good enough that Scottish ministers sit in this chamber and engage in a blame game when there is serious work to be done to secure jobs and the local economy in Grangemouth.
Thank you, Mr Kerr. I confirm that I have not been approached, but you will be aware that you can raise the issue with your business manager and that such matters can be addressed by the Parliamentary Bureau.
That concludes First Minister’s question time. There will be a short suspension to allow those who are leaving the chamber and the public gallery to do so.
12:47 Meeting suspended.Air ais
General Question TimeAir adhart
Alcohol Use Disorder in the Justice System