Official Report 999KB pdf
Teacher Numbers
Scotland’s schools are critical to the fortunes and future of our country, but after 17 years of Scottish National Party rule, pupils and teachers are being failed. The SNP’s 2021 manifesto promised to increase teacher numbers by 3,500 so, at the very least, they should be rising. Are they rising, First Minister?
On Tuesday, the annual teacher census reported that there has been a reduction of 621 in teacher numbers from last year to this year. That was the subject of a statement that the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills made to the Parliament on Tuesday.
In response to that situation, the Government, as part of the budget settlement, has negotiated an agreement with local authorities in which the Government and local authorities will work together to ensure that teacher numbers are restored to 2023 levels, which means that, during the next year, teacher numbers will increase.
As the First Minister just admitted, Scottish Government figures this week show that teacher numbers are not up by 3,500, as the SNP promised, but down by 600 in this year alone. When he was education secretary, John Swinney promised more teachers, but instead there are fewer. He will not ever accept responsibility. Does he at least accept that the fact that there are fewer teachers is having a negative impact in Scotland’s classrooms?
I want to see teacher numbers rising, which is why the Government has negotiated an agreement with local authorities on restoring teacher numbers to their 2023 levels.
However, it is important that we look at the outcomes that are achieved as a consequence of the investments that have been made by the Government and local authorities. Figures that were published this week show record levels of attainment in literacy and numeracy in our schools, and the attainment gap in literacy has reduced to its lowest level ever.
The attainment gap in positive destinations has reduced by 60 per cent since 2009-10—[Interruption.]
Let us hear the First Minister.
In 2022-23, 92.8 per cent of school leavers were in positive destinations nine months after leaving school. Many of those measures were put in place by me as education secretary—[Interruption.]
Let us hear the First Minister.
Many of those measures were put in place by me as education secretary, in recognition of the fact that, if we want to close the poverty-related attainment gap—when poverty has been made worse by the decisions of the most recent Conservative Government in the United Kingdom—we must take long-term action and make a long-term commitment to strengthening education. That is precisely what the Scottish Government has delivered.
I would need all day to list all the Scottish National Party’s broken promises on the attainment gap. The truth is that fewer teachers are being expected to do more and more, and that is fuelling a collapse in discipline in our schools. Last year alone, there were almost 45,000 recorded incidents of violence and abuse. One teacher told me that female pupils and teachers routinely suffer sexual intimidation and even violence. Girls are too scared to use mixed-sex toilets because they risk being photographed under cubicle doors. As a parent, I would be worried. It would make my blood boil. Frankly, I would be on the warpath.
Those shocking incidents are happening because disruptive pupils know that there are no consequences for their actions. Is it not time for the SNP to crack down on the behaviour of the minority, who are ruining it for the majority?
The Government is taking action to address behaviour in our schools. It is doing so as part of the action plan that the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills has set out to Parliament. Schools are empowered to take decisions that are designed to address unacceptable behaviour. Let me make it absolutely crystal clear that the behaviour that Mr Findlay has recounted to Parliament today, which I know takes place in our schools, is completely and utterly intolerable.
However, I cannot allow Mr Findlay to denigrate the achievements of educators in our schools. The statistics that were published on Tuesday show that there are record levels of attainment in literacy and numeracy in our schools, and I will not have that denigrated by the leader of the Conservative Party.
I can tell Mr Findlay that although the measures that were taken by the most recent Conservative Government exacerbated poverty in our society and have made the challenge that the Scottish Government faces ever greater, this Government will deliver on Scottish education.
I will say this very slowly for the First Minister. He and his Government have been entirely responsible for Scotland’s education system for 17 years—no one else.
The First Minister mentioned an action plan, but there was also a summit last year, and it did not achieve anything. If a nation’s success was measured in talking shops, Scotland would truly be world leading. Instead of letting violence continue, the SNP must empower teachers to take a tougher approach where necessary, but all that John Swinney has done is to cut teacher numbers, break promises, let standards slip and allow toxic behaviour to spiral out of control.
After 17 years of SNP rule, our schools need change. John Swinney’s way is not working for pupils, it is not working for teachers and it is not working for parents. Is it not plain common sense what our schools need? [Interruption.]
Let us hear Mr Findlay.
More discipline and more teachers.
I have made it clear that unacceptable behaviour in our schools must be tackled in our schools. We have provided the approaches that are necessary to do that, and schools should feel empowered to do that.
However, we will not be able to increase teacher numbers if we follow Mr Findlay’s plans. This is the third week in which I have reminded Parliament of the folly that Mr Findlay has put in front of us. He has argued for a tax cut of £1 billion in public expenditure, which would reduce public spending by £1 billion. The savings that he has identified total £54 million. There is a £950 million gaping hole—[Interruption.]
Let us hear the First Minister. I am aware of loud shouts coming from across the chamber. Members, if you have not been called, do not speak.
There is a gaping hole of £950 million of public spending cuts in Mr Findlay’s plans. When I watched him being interviewed on television on Sunday, he could not provide one specific answer to any of the questions about where those cuts would come. It was an embarrassing interview, which the Conservative Party should be embarrassed about.
There are school pupils watching this exchange from the gallery and I say that if the behaviour of the members of the Conservative Party in this chamber was prevalent in our country’s schools it would need to be confronted and that the Conservatives are a disgrace to this Parliament.
Additional Support Needs (Support for Pupils)
It was revealed this week that 40 per cent of pupils in Scotland have additional support needs, which is a new record. At the same time, the number of ASN teachers has fallen by 400 on the Scottish National Party’s watch. The National Parent Forum of Scotland has said that
“many parents”
are
“left feeling that their children are being failed by our current system”.
Education was supposed to be this Government’s top priority, but it is clear that John Swinney and the SNP have failed, so does he accept that we need a change of direction from the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills and from this SNP Government?
What we must do is listen carefully to the views and contributions of educators and families to ensure that children’s needs are being met. That is exactly what the education secretary has done and it is exactly why the Government’s draft budget has set out an additional £29 million of investment for additional support needs, along with increased resources to support teacher employment within our schools. If my memory serves me right, there is an additional £40 million of expenditure to support teacher numbers and make sure that resources are in place. That comes on top of a real-terms increase in the core grant for local authorities to ensure that they are able to invest more in education, should they choose to do so.
What the Government has done in the budget will provide local authorities with the tools to address the very issues that Mr Sarwar puts to me and I look forward to the Labour party supporting the Government’s budget when the time comes.
John Swinney has been passing budgets for 17 years and things in Scotland keep getting worse, so he needs to wake up to the reality faced by Scotland’s pupils.
Educators, families and charities are saying that this Government is failing Scotland’s children. I said that 40 per cent of children in Scotland have additional support needs, but many do not get the support that they need, and a third of children are also regularly absent from school. However, that is the best answer that we can expect from a former education secretary.
The fact of the matter is that children across Scotland are not getting the support that they need, and that will impact on their whole lives. Education is meant to be the great leveller in our country, which allows every child to thrive, but, under this SNP Government, Scotland’s young people are not being given the opportunities that they deserve. Children are absent from school and miss out on the education that they need; pupils with ASN are not being supported, which holds back their potential; and thousands of children are crying out for help but being rejected by mental health services. I ask John Swinney, why is this SNP Government failing Scotland’s children?
I do not accept what Mr Sarwar has set out. The measures that the Government is taking are having a positive impact on the attainment of children and young people in our education system.
Let me return to the data that I went through with Mr Findlay, which needs to be repeated because Mr Sarwar has obviously not been able to adjust his questions following the answers that I gave to Mr Findlay. [Interruption.]
Let us hear one another.
The first point I will make—[Interruption.] I am answering the question, Mr Bibby; I do not need any prompting. [Interruption.] I do not—
First Minister, if I may. Members, let us conduct ourselves in a courteous and orderly manner.
The first point that I will make is that figures published this week show that record levels of attainment in literacy and numeracy have been achieved in our schools and that the attainment gap in literacy has reduced to its lowest level ever. The attainment gap in positive destinations has reduced by 60 per cent since 2009-10, with 92.8 per cent of school leavers being in positive destinations nine months after leaving school in 2022-23. Figures published just today show that, when young people leave school, more Scottish students than ever before are securing places at university, including record numbers of students from our most deprived communities.
In addition, the Government has secured agreement with local authorities on an increase in teacher numbers. We have also secured agreement about reducing teacher contact time to give teachers and professionals the opportunity to develop their practice, and we are putting in place resources to improve the levels of attendance in our schools, which are lower as a consequence of the Covid pandemic. We need to work hard with individual pupils to rebuild their attendance at school. That is the set of actions of a Government that is determined to strengthen Scottish education and deliver for the people of Scotland.
I asked about ASN levels, pupil absence and children not being able to access mental health services, but John Swinney could not think of a different answer from the one that he rehearsed before he came to the Parliament.
The failure in our schools is on John Swinney. Let us not forget that he was the education secretary who downgraded the results of working-class kids during the pandemic, and now, as First Minister, he is overseeing the erosion of our public services. Just this week, it has been revealed that there are record levels of ASN pupils, that one in three children are absent from school, that there are falling teacher numbers, that crimes of domestic abuse are up by 11 per cent, that general practitioner numbers are falling, that accident and emergency waits are the worst since January and that 100 times more people are waiting for more than two years for treatment compared with people in England. On every measure, this Government has lost its way, and it is Scots who are paying the price. Why can John Swinney not see what the rest of Scotland can see—that it is time for a new direction?
This Parliament will face a set of decisions in the course of the next few months that are all about whether we are prepared to invest in strengthening the public services of Scotland.
Mr Sarwar suggested that the issues that he raised were not addressed. I addressed the issue about attendance, the issues about attainment and the issues about positive destinations, and I note that we are reducing the child and adolescent mental health service waiting times very significantly for children and young people.
There are of course challenges in the national health service. I want the best for Scotland and the best for the national health service, which is why there is £21 billion of investment in the Scottish Government’s budget that can be deployed to support the national health service. It is why I want to make sure that the substantial resources that the education secretary has secured to invest in education are able to be deployed. However, that will happen only if this Parliament passes a budget in February, and that is when the Labour Party comes into play.
I am interested in the Labour Party’s tactics here. Last night, most of the Labour Party members voted in favour of a motion that welcomed the steps in the budget to lift the two-child benefit cap and restore winter fuel payments to pensioners and looked forward to further discussions with the Government about the budget. I know that those discussions took place this morning with Mr Marra, and I welcome that. There was only one member who did not vote for that motion last night, and that was Anas Sarwar. It is not that he did not vote for it once; he managed not to vote for it twice. [Interruption.]
Do continue, First Minister.
All that I can say to Mr Sarwar is this: if the one thing that he has got to do in a day is turn up and vote the right way—and, most important, vote against an odious motion from the Tories—he should at least be competent enough to do it on that occasion.
Donald Trump (Discussions)
I was disappointed to hear that Scotland’s First Minister has been having friendly chats with President-elect Trump, with no discussion of his policy agenda. Donald Trump’s climate-destroying, racist and conspiracy theory-based politics are endangering people and planet and are the exact opposite of the future that we want for Scotland. Here in Scotland, we proudly welcome refugees and immigrants as new Scots. [Interruption.]
Let us hear Ms Slater.
We value democracy, our environment and the rule of law. I ask the First Minister: how can it be in Scotland’s interests to court the favours of someone such as Donald Trump?
I am responsible for the Government’s policy programme and its agenda. That agenda speaks for itself, and I answer questions on that here in a democratic Parliament, where I believe fundamentally in the rule of law. Lorna Slater and I are in absolute agreement about the importance of democratic processes and the rule of law—and I believe that the acceptance of that point is fundamentally part of my being.
I recognise that there will be political differences from one Government to another, but I also have a duty to promote and protect the interests of Scotland. President Trump and I had an introductory call, at his request, on Tuesday evening. He spoke positively about Scotland and I expressed the views and interests of the Scottish Government in relation to areas of co-operation with the United States—in particular, on relevant and important issues of the whisky trade, which matters to the Scottish economy. I have a duty to represent Scotland and to make sure that that is done on our terms, representing our policy agenda, and I assure Lorna Slater and other members that I will always take that approach.
There are risks to a friendly approach. Already, we see the Trumpification of Scottish politics. All week, the Tories have been working to demonise people who seek asylum—to pit one group of vulnerable people against another. It is shameful. At the same time, we see the rights of refugees and of LGBTQ+ folks coming under attack from Westminster policies. Will the First Minister stand up to Donald Trump, stand up for human rights, equality and democracy, and make it clear that we are proud of compassionate and humane policies such as the extension of free bus travel to people who seek asylum?
I believe that I represent those values every day in all my actions as First Minister of Scotland.
I agree with Lorna Slater that this week marked a worrying departure from the prevailing approach that has taken place in the Scottish Parliament. When Their Majesties the King and Queen came to the Parliament in September, I quoted Winnie Ewing—a political figure for whom I could not have more respect—who, in the first words that were put in the Official Report of this Parliament, encouraged us all, regardless of where we had come from, to live compatibly and happily together with tolerance in Scotland. I said that, for 25 years, that view had been upheld and expressed by every single member of the Parliament, without exception.
I am afraid that this week represented a turning point in that respect, and I profoundly regret that. What was said on Wednesday by some members of the Conservative Party departs from that approach, and I deeply regret that.
On Tuesday evening, under the leadership of the Presiding Officer, there were public service awards in this Parliament. One of the awards was given to the Linda Norgrove Foundation, which is a wonderful organisation that succeeded in bringing 19 female medical students from Afghanistan to Scotland. That was enabled by wonderful co-operation between the United Kingdom Government and the Scottish Government. I have met those 19 women, as have the education secretary and Kirsty McNeill, the Scotland Office minister. We welcome all of that.
That is what we should be doing, as a mature and tolerant country—we should be recognising that people who seek asylum in our country are people who are in desperation. We should not demonise them but embrace them. We should be living up to the values that founded this Parliament, and we should turn our back on the populist rubbish that has consumed the Conservative Party this week.
Non-fatal Strangulation (Criminalisation)
To ask the First Minister what plans the Scottish Government has to bring forward legislation to criminalise non-fatal strangulation. (S6F-03622)
Non-fatal strangulation is an abhorrent act, and I fully recognise the significant physical and psychological impact that that type of criminality has on victims and their families. I have met Fiona Drouet, who explained the basis of the petition that she has presented to the Parliament to make non-fatal strangulation a stand-alone criminal offence.
Conduct amounting to non-fatal strangulation is already a criminal offence under the common law of assault, and carries maximum penalties of up to life imprisonment. However, we constantly keep the law under review. For a stand-alone offence to be put in place, we would need to be confident that there is a gap in the law. We will give the proposal serious consideration.
I thank the First Minister for that response. Non-fatal strangulation is a known, serious and growing problem. Thirty-five per cent of women between the ages of 16 and 34 have experience of it, and each year that passes sees more violence, strokes and deaths. It is clear that the common law route for dealing with this offence is not working. As Fiona Drouet, who lost her daughter, says,
“we know you are eight times more likely to be murdered by the person that has strangled you. We can’t ignore that, we can’t treat that like common assault because it’s far more complicated, far more complex and far more dangerous than that.”
A defence of so-called rough sex is being used and it is being accepted by courts. That resonates with the “she asked for it” idea—a misogynistic myth that it has taken years to overturn.
Doing nothing more is not an option. We require proper data collection via criminal health routes, an awareness-raising programme and a clearer prosecution route. Will the First Minister meet me, Professor Cath White from the Institute for Addressing Strangulation, Fiona Mackenzie from the We Can’t Consent to This campaign and Linda Thompson from the Women’s Support Project to take forward the issue?
I hope that, in my original answer, I indicated the seriousness with which I take the issue. The Government will give serious consideration to the matter.
I disagree with Michelle Thomson’s characterisation of the point that I made about non-fatal strangulation already being a criminal offence under the common law of assault. It is a serious criminal offence that carries a maximum penalty of up to life imprisonment. However, the Government will explore the question of the appropriateness of a stand-alone offence.
Michelle Thomson set out many actions that need to be taken. I am very happy for the Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Home Affairs to have a meeting on the matter, and I will obviously be close to the issue.
However, there is one other thing that needs to change, and that is the behaviour of boys and men. Last Thursday afternoon, I took part in a debate in the Parliament on violence against women and girls, because I take deadly seriously my responsibility as a male First Minister of Scotland to make it absolutely clear that the behaviour of boys and men is integral—central—to the experiences of women in our society. We will consider all the measures that we need to take on criminal offences, but I will lead from the front a campaign to say to boys and men in Scotland that their behaviour has got to improve.
At the Beira’s Place event that I co-sponsored with Claire Baker last week, we heard alarming feedback about what is going on and the frightening frequency of non-fatal strangulation. Within six to eight seconds, a woman loses consciousness. After 15 seconds, her bladder will be incontinent. After 30 seconds, her bowels will open. She will be brain dead within four minutes. I note the First Minister’s remarks to Michelle Thomson, and I implore him to take a look at the law.
I note that the First Minister referred to Fiona Drouet, whose daughter Emily tragically took her own life in Aberdeen after being choked by her boyfriend. If the First Minister believes that common assault reflects the gravity of the crime, I ask him to consider meeting the experts and campaigners and to do that in a cross-party way—as he did with placental growth factor testing—and to explore why they are all calling for legislative change.
I hope that I have given Parliament enough reassurance about the seriousness with which I take the issue. However, I have to say that non-fatal strangulation is treated as a very serious criminal matter. I understand the rationale and the argument for a stand-alone offence, but I do not want these exchanges to suggest in any way that the practice, which I deplore, does not, under common law, carry a very serious criminal penalty of up to life imprisonment. It is a very serious offence. We will consider whether it should be a stand-alone offence, but I do not want these exchanges to suggest in any way that the penalties for that type of behaviour are anything other than very serious.
It is important to recognise that, in the survey that Michelle Thomson referred to, the figure of a third of people who had experienced choking during consensual sex includes men and women. The survey shows that non-fatal strangulation during consensual sex is becoming increasingly common, to the extent that it is being normalised.
On a connected point, earlier this year, the Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Home Affairs advised me that the Scottish Government would work with key partners on promoting and sharing guidance issued by the Institute for Addressing Strangulation, and that officials would engage with health officials and Police Scotland on the issues of non-fatal strangulation and improving pathways between healthcare and policing. Can the First Minister update us on the progress on that work, particularly in relation to the public health messaging that needs to go out to people aged between 16 and 35, which is the group in which the practice is increasingly common?
The work that Claire Baker has set out is part of the approach that the Government takes on gender-based violence. As I have said, important messages have to be communicated to change behaviour and to make people aware of the risks of that practice. It is important that that is informed by the Government’s activities, and I will ensure that a detailed response on the actions that the Government has taken is given to Claire Baker as a consequence of our exchanges today.
Library Closures
To ask the First Minister what discussions the Scottish Government has had with local authorities regarding the reported impending closure of library facilities across Scotland. (S6F-03621)
Libraries are at the heart of Scotland’s communities and, although library policy is devolved to local authorities, which have a statutory duty to ensure the adequate provision of library services for their residents, they are a hugely important community and cultural resource that is valued by us all.
The First Minister will have received the many emails that have been sent to Mid Scotland and Fife MSPs and constituency MSPs in the region from Perthshire residents who are complaining bitterly about the threatened closure of five public libraries, in Scone, Birnam, Alyth, Comrie and Auchterarder. I hope that he will also recall his appearance before the Public Petitions Committee in 2017, when he gave a firm commitment to support library access for our young people.
In a week in which new statistics show that two in five Scottish pupils require extra help with their learning, and when members of the public across Perth and Kinross are furious about the impending closures, given that their council tax is being hiked by 10 per cent, what does the First Minister believe should happen to keep those essential services open?
As Liz Smith knows, I am really quite familiar with Perth and Kinross, since I have had the privilege of representing the county for 27 years, and I intend to carry on representing it for many more years to come. I tell Liz Smith that what would enrage the people of Perth and Kinross would be a £1 billion unfunded tax cut. This is where the Conservative Party is really in a mess in Parliament just now.
Liz Smith is a member of Parliament for whom I have the greatest respect, and I understand the seriousness of the question that she puts to me about libraries, but how is that situation going to be helped if we have a tax cut of £1 billion, which takes £1 billion out of public expenditure? That is going to make the situation much worse.
The Government is giving local authorities a real-terms increase in their core revenue grant. We have increased the money that is available to local authorities as a whole by £1 billion. I hope that, out of that, local authorities will be able to make measured decisions about the level of the council tax and about the funding of public services.
Liz Smith said that Perth and Kinross Council has implemented a 10 per cent council tax increase. That is not the case. The council has considered indicative council tax increases, but it has not yet had the financial settlement specific to Perth and Kinross, which will be set out later today, when the local government circular is issued. Perth and Kinross Council is planning on a flat-cash settlement, but it has a real-terms increase, and I hope that, when it sees that circular, it will see that it has more money than it expected. I am sure that the people of Perth and Kinross will be reassured by my answer and will not be hoodwinked by the false promises of the Conservatives.
Education (Additional Support Needs)
To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government’s response is to reported comments from the Children and Young People’s Commissioner Scotland that “children are being let down” by an education system that needs “radical reform”. (S6F-03628)
On Tuesday, the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills made a statement to the Parliament setting out the Government’s long-term strategy for Scottish education. In addition to that, data was set out to the Parliament, as I have rehearsed, on the narrowing of the attainment gap and improvements in attainment in our education system.
The First Minister can list and input all the selective data that he likes, but the reality is plain to see. The commissioner spoke for many when she said that education needs “radical reform”, but the reality is that that is not on offer from the Government. Its supposed reform bill is little more than a rebrand and, as the commissioner said, it
“will barely move us forward”
while education is in decline.
The GMB has said that support staff have been left with post-traumatic stress disorder. NASUWT has said that the Government
“cannot continue to ignore their duty to every child”.
Parents have said that the situation has reached crisis point, and a senior headteacher has said that, put simply, Scotland is “being let down” and is letting down young people.
Passing the buck to local authorities is not acceptable. The sector is screaming the reality, and I am afraid that the Government is not listening. Why is the First Minister right and the children’s commissioner, teachers, unions and parents wrong?
The Government takes forward its education priorities in consultation with all stakeholders in the education system. That is why the Government will take forward an education assurance board with local authorities, which have the statutory and legal obligation to deliver education in our communities the length and breadth of the country.
The Government will support that endeavour. We have put more resources into additional support needs, which were proposed in the budget and argued for by the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills. We have allocated more resources to boost local government funding, so that local authorities have more choice for investment. We have taken forward a behaviour in schools action plan, and we have taken forward steps to ensure that the attainment gap is narrowed.
Pam Duncan-Glancy will have to start making some choices. She has to decide whether she will support the Government’s budget in February. I am getting a bit more encouraged that the Labour Party might actually see sense and might see that an investment has to be made in public services. That will happen only if the Government’s budget passes in the Parliament. It is time for the Labour Party to get off the fence and support the Government’s budget.
Time is tight, colleagues, so I would be grateful for concise questions and responses.
Children in Scotland are undoubtedly being let down. How many children in Scotland have been dragged into or kept in poverty by disgraceful policies such as Labour’s two-child limit? Will the First Minister tell the chamber how the policies of his Scottish National Party Government and the budget are delivering for Scotland’s education system and for our bairns and young folk?
There is a way to address the two-child limit issue that Jackie Dunbar has put to me, and that is by passing the Scottish Government’s budget, which will take measures to lift the two-child limit and, as a consequence, will lift more children out of poverty. That is the first thing that the Parliament can do. That could be added to the measures that we are taking in the budget to provide the Scottish child payment, which is helping to keep 100,000 children out of poverty. We can strengthen the outcomes for young people by supporting the Government’s budget, which invests more in education to support additional support needs and deliver more teachers. That is some of the action that the Parliament can take when it supports the Government’s budget.
When the First Minister became First Minister, he said that enterprise was one of the key aspects of education that he wanted to grow and to be invested in. Why, therefore, has the Scottish Government decided this week that Youth Enterprise Scotland will not be funded? It is laying off 17 members of its staff. The organisation has delivered enterprise education to young people across Scotland for 30 years. Why has the Scottish Government decided to shut it down?
That is not happening. The Government has provided financial support to Youth Enterprise Scotland. We value the work that it is doing and will continue to support it.
We move to constituency and general supplementary questions. Again, concise questions and responses will be appreciated.
Scottish Budget
On the subject of the Scottish budget, new polling this week showed that 78 per cent of Labour voters, 69 per cent of Tory voters and 81 per cent of Liberal Democrat voters support the Scottish National Party Government’s record funding for the national health service in the proposed Scottish budget. Does the First Minister agree that that clearly shows that the budget speaks directly to people’s priorities across Scotland and that it is vital that Opposition parties listen to their voters and support the budget?
The First Minister should address only matters for which the Government has general responsibility.
I take great heart from the motion on the budget that was agreed to by the Parliament last night. The only people who voted against the motion were the Conservatives and Anas Sarwar. Despite Mr Sarwar’s opposition, I am generally more hopeful and optimistic that we are moving in the right direction. The Parliament approved our motion, which welcomed the steps in the draft budget
“to introduce a universal Winter Heating Payment and create the systems necessary to effectively scrap the two-child benefit cap in 2026, and looks forward to further engagement between the Scottish Government and the parties represented in the Parliament in advance of the next stage in the budget process.”
I welcome the fact that the Parliament supported the motion.
The Conservatives are in a poor place and are obviously not prepared to be part of the dialogue. They do not even want to have more discussion about the budget; they have closed the door on that.
I hope that Mr Sarwar will recover from his little indiscretion last night and that the vote indicates that we are moving towards a point of agreement. We deliberately constructed the budget in the hope that there would be broad agreement in the Parliament on the investment in health, local government, housing and culture funding. I encourage the Parliament to support the provisions in the budget.
University of Dundee (Budget)
Universities Scotland has said that the sector is in an “immensely difficult place”. The University of Dundee, which is of critical importance to the city and to Scotland, faces a budget deficit of up to £30 million. In the short term, what reassurance can the First Minister provide to University of Dundee staff? In the long term, will the Scottish Government consider changes to governance mechanisms to mitigate the risk of such situations arising at the University of Dundee or, indeed, any Scottish institution?
Mr Golden has raised a significant and serious issue. On the general position, the budget settlement includes more than £1.1 billion of funding for teaching and research in our universities, which will be distributed by the Scottish Funding Council. As Mr Golden will appreciate, the University of Dundee is an independent institution, as are all universities, but it is in all our interests that those independent institutions are able to thrive and flourish. Like Mr Golden, I am concerned about the situation at the University of Dundee, which is an important university in the locality that I represent.
The Scottish Funding Council has been engaging with the University of Dundee, as has the higher education minister, Graeme Dey. The Funding Council will work closely with the university, on the understanding that the Government wishes to be kept very close to the discussions to ensure that we can provide exactly the reassurance that Mr Golden has asked of me, because it is vital that the university community feels confident about the future.
The University of Dundee is a magnificent institution that has tremendous strength in a variety of sectors, not least its contribution to life sciences research in Scotland. It is vital that the university gets a vote of confidence from the Parliament, and I am grateful to Mr Golden for providing me with the opportunity to say exactly that.
Scottish Budget
I am sure that the First Minister shared my surprise that, last night, Anas Sarwar voted with the Conservatives against the Scottish National Party Government’s budget—[Interruption.]
Thank you, members.
—which will mitigate Westminster Labour’s cut to winter fuel payments for pensioners and the callous two-child cap. The rest of the Labour group backed those two policies, which will right the party’s wrongs. Does the First Minister agree that, if Labour members want to tackle child poverty and support our pensioners, they should support the budget, with or without their leader?
I call the First Minister on matters for which he has general responsibility.
Of all the things that I have ever thought about Anas Sarwar, I have never had him down as a rebel, but every day is a day of difference.
Members will perhaps hear that I am gently encouraging the Labour Party to get behind our budget, because it will do very good things for Scotland. Given that it now looks pretty obvious that the Conservatives are implacably opposed to the sensible investments in strengthening local authority services and the health service, I encourage the Labour Party to get in behind us.
NHS Lothian Maternity Services
An investigation into Edinburgh maternity units found that
“Mothers and newborn babies came to harm”
from
“a ‘toxic’ culture”,
fuelled by
“staffing shortages”.
That comes almost a year after the British Medical Association Scotland warned that national health service staffing levels were becoming “dangerously low”.
We are now seeing the consequences, with mothers and newborns needlessly being put at risk by the Scottish National Party’s mismanagement of our NHS. Will the First Minister listen to those concerns, stop pretending that nothing is wrong and step up to protect patients and staff?
Mr Choudhury has raised a very significant issue, and I have naturally been very close to the issues that have been raised in that regard in the past couple of days.
First, I make it clear that the greatest importance is attached to ensuring the safety of all services in the national health service, and that must be especially the case for maternity services. We have taken forward the Scottish patient safety programme perinatal programme, which has received a great deal of international commendation because of its focus on improving patient safety. We have also taken steps to increase the number of qualified midwives, and there has been an increase in that number over the past 10 years, especially in the past year.
However, all that said, the issues that have been raised publicly about the climate in NHS Lothian maternity services are not acceptable, and they must be addressed. The Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care is insisting that NHS Lothian addresses those issues, because mothers must feel safe going into maternity services.
I consider, on the best advice that is available to me, that those services are safe, and I reiterate that point to Mr Choudhury today. However, I do not want in any way to suggest anything other than that there must be improvements in the relationships in NHS Lothian maternity services to ensure that the fundamental concerns that whistleblowers have raised are properly and fully resolved, because that will be in the interests of mothers and babies in those maternity services.
That concludes First Minister’s question time.
Air ais
General Question TimeAir adhart
Point of Order