Motion of No Confidence
This week, the veteran Scottish National Party MSP Fergus Ewing voted against his own Government when he refused to support Humza Yousaf’s decision to back Green minister Lorna Slater in a vote of no confidence. There are reports that Humza Yousaf is going to sack Fergus Ewing because of that. Is he going to do that?
I will not go into matters that are for our group, and I will take no lectures on leadership from Douglas Ross—the leader of the Scottish Conservatives who could not muster his own Scottish Tory MPs this week to vote to sanction Boris Johnson—[Interruption.] Douglas Ross says that they did, but the soon to be Lord Jack did not. Let us be honest—the leader of the Scottish Conservatives is not Douglas Ross but the Cabinet’s man in Scotland, Alister Jack.
Let us start with a number of areas. This is a Government issue, because it was a Government vote on a motion of no confidence in a Government minister. Surely, Humza Yousaf can be honest with people across Scotland if he takes it seriously that one of his own MSPs refused to support him.
On the day when farmers and crofters from all over Scotland come to Edinburgh for the start of the Royal Highland Show, the First Minister is reported to be considering sacrificing a former cabinet secretary for rural affairs and one of the longest-serving SNP MSPs for a Green minister who has failed time and time again—[Interruption.]
Thank you!
Fergus Ewing backed a Scottish Conservative motion of no confidence in the Green minister Lorna Slater because of her dreadful performance in post and especially because of the disastrous handling of the deposit return scheme, which has cost businesses time and money and has completely flopped. For Green support, the First Minister is sacrificing Fergus Ewing—the son of Winnie Ewing, one of the SNP’s most famous representatives—[Interruption.]
Members, let us have orderly conduct, please.
We have gone from, “Stop the world—the SNP wants to get on,” to, “Stop the SNP—Fergus Ewing is getting off.” Why is the First Minister considering losing a party stalwart, who is standing up for Scottish businesses, while keeping an incompetent Green minister who has lost businesses’ confidence?
I remind Douglas Ross that the Parliament voted to back Lorna Slater and the Government in the vote of no confidence. I will tell members why that was. The Parliament did that because the deposit return scheme was sabotaged—[Interruption.]
Excuse me, First Minister—
What are—
Excuse me, Mr Hoy. I ask all members who feel compelled to intervene any time that a member is asking or responding to a question to cease. We will conduct our proceedings in an orderly manner, as is required by our standing orders.
Conservative members do not want to hear this because the blame lies squarely with the United Kingdom Government for sabotaging the deposit return scheme. This Parliament backed the Scottish Government and Lorna Slater in the vote of no confidence because members know that it was the UK Government’s 11th-hour intervention that completely torpedoed the scheme.
What have we seen from the UK Government? What have we seen from Douglas Ross? We have seen more flip-flopping from him on the scheme. He stood on not one manifesto but two manifestos to include glass in the scheme, but, when Alister Jack gets involved, Douglas Ross suddenly changes his tune.
How dare Douglas Ross talk about the impact on farmers when it is the hard Brexit that the UK Government imposed that has caused such damage to our farmers up and down the country. Members do not have to take my word for it—they can take NFU Scotland’s word for it. Its president, Martin Kennedy, said:
“The Brexit dividend ... certainly hasn't come about at all. And all the things that we were concerned about, the whole reason that we backed remain at the time, they’ve all come to fruition.”—[Interruption.]
Members!
If Douglas Ross does not want to listen to me, perhaps he should listen to the farmers of this country.
I would love to listen to Humza Yousaf actually give an answer to a question. There are serious questions raised about the conduct of one of his MSPs, who has voted against his Government in a vote of no confidence. If he says that it was the right decision to back Lorna Slater, what does that say about Fergus Ewing? It looks as though Humza Yousaf, the First Minister who will not suspend Nicola Sturgeon, who is under police investigation, will suspend Fergus Ewing for challenging Green incompetence.
The First Minister has also said that the deal with the Greens is worth its weight in gold, but then he quoted NFU Scotland. So, let me do the same. At 10.50 this morning, from the Royal Highland Show, the National Farmers Union Scotland highlighted its concerns about the nationalist pact with the Greens. It warns—and this is a quotation from NFU president Martin Kennedy—that a
“hardening of the green agenda ... is giving cause for serious concern not only for rural businesses but for the Scottish economy as a whole.
Those are not my words but the words of the NFU president in Scotland. He went on to say that the NFUS doubts very much that solutions to key rural issues will be possible while the Bute house agreement continues. In the week of the Royal Highland Show, Scotland’s biggest agricultural event, does that not show that the SNP has abandoned rural Scotland?
The SNP represents most of rural Scotland, so let us leave that to the verdict of the Scottish—[Interruption.]
Thank you, members.
We were talking about a recycling scheme a moment ago. Thank goodness that brass can be recycled, because there is plenty of brass neck from Douglas Ross when he talks about the conduct of parliamentarians. For the leader of the Scottish Conservatives to talk about the conduct of parliamentarians after Boris Johnson has just been sanctioned—[Interruption.]—this very week shows an incredible level—[Interruption.]
First Minister—
—of hypocrisy—
Members, you will be aware of the requirement to conduct yourselves in an orderly manner. I will be grateful if members reflect on how they are behaving at this moment. People have gathered here to listen to questions and responses.
They do not want to listen. Listen to how they bark in defence of Boris Johnson whenever he is mentioned. It is simply a fact that the Conservatives have completely betrayed rural Scotland by imposing a hard Brexit on it. That is why the Conservatives will not back, for example, our sensible plans for a rural visa pilot scheme. That would help our agriculture community, our sector and our farmers up and down this country, who are suffering because of the hard Brexit that has been imposed by Douglas Ross’s Conservatives.
With regard to assisting rural Scotland as best we can, we know that rural Scotland is also suffering the consequences of the Tory cost of living crisis. High energy costs and high inflation have hit agricultural Scotland hard. That is why we provided support for community-led development, including £11.6 million in 2022-23 to more than 300 community-led projects, strengthening the resilience and sustainability of grass-roots rural community groups.
I will continue to show leadership not just of my party but of this country, to protect it from the harm, misery and, frankly, the cruelty of Conservative UK Governments.
It is all just deflection and spin from this useless First Minister. Questions about—[Interruption.]—Fergus Ewing are answered—
Mr Ross—
—with answers about Boris Johnson—
Mr Ross!
Questions about—
Mr Ross, let us conduct our business with courtesy and respect.
Well, I think that it is perfectly respectful. I think—[Interruption.]
Thank you, members.
Anyone viewing the three attempted answers by the First Minister will reach the same conclusion as I have. Questions about Fergus Ewing and an SNP MSP are responded to with answers about Boris Johnson, and the First Minister then stands up to quote the president of NFU Scotland, not realising what he said at the Royal Highland Show this morning and the damning assessment of his Government and the SNP-Green coalition Government that was made by Martin Kennedy, from Scotland’s farmers and crofters. When the First Minister visits the Royal Highland Show this week, I hope that he will listen to Scotland’s farming representatives and what they think about his Government.
It is clearer than ever before that the Green tail is wagging the SNP dog. The extremist Greens in Government seem to be calling an awful lot of the shots of this SNP Government. Their influence is having a damaging effect on every policy area. On the deposit return scheme, they are risking jobs and businesses. On farming, they are risking rural livelihoods. On gender reform, they are risking women’s rights. On fishing, they are risking the very future of the industry. On oil and gas, they are risking Scotland’s energy security.
The SNP is so out of touch with mainstream Scotland because it is being dragged that way by the Scottish Greens. Just why is Humza Yousaf, in the words of one of his MSPs, dancing to the tune of an extremist party?
I am being accused of being out of touch by the leader of the third party in Scotland. Of course, when Douglas Ross took over the mantle of leadership, his party was in second place. He has managed to lead it into third place. I am hardly going to take any lectures whatsoever on leadership from Douglas Ross. [Interruption.]
Let me talk to—
Excuse me, First Minister.
We will hear the First Minister.
Let me talk to some of the issues that Douglas Ross mentioned. He mentioned the deposit return scheme and the Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill. Of course, in a number of areas, including those two, the Conservatives have done nothing but allow their colleagues at Westminster to undermine this Parliament and devolution. That is hardly a surprise from the party that opposed the creation of the Scottish Parliament in the first place.
Douglas Ross asks why we are in a co-operation agreement with the Greens. We are in that agreement because I think that people want different political parties—yes, the SNP and the Greens have differences—coming together to work in the national interest. [Interruption.] But why else is that co-operation agreement so important? It is because the number 1 issue facing not only Scotland but the entire planet is the climate emergency, which threatens the sustainability of our planet.
You failed to meet your targets. You failed.
Mr Ross!
Time and time again, when we bring forward actions to tackle that climate emergency, where are the Conservatives? They oppose every single measure. Why do they oppose every single measure? Because, frankly, they are morphing into climate change deniers.
Labour Energy Mission
On Monday, Labour launched our mission to make Scotland and the United Kingdom a clean energy superpower. It is an ambitious and far-reaching plan with four objectives. It will deliver lower bills—[Interruption.] Your constituents will get lower bills. It will deliver more jobs and greater energy security, and it will make the UK and Scotland a global climate leader. It is backed up by Great British Energy, a new publicly owned energy company that will be headquartered here in Scotland. Does the First Minister welcome this significant and transformative investment?
I am delighted that Anas Sarwar has been able to clarify Scottish Labour’s position, because Labour has had about five different positions on this in about five different weeks.
I often say to Anas Sarwar that he is far more style than substance, so it was good to hear a little bit of substance from Scottish Labour today. The problem is, of course, that the substance was panned by those in the industry, panned by climate change activists, panned by the trade unions and, of course, panned by members of his own party. [Interruption.]
Members!
When we finally get Anas Sarwar talking about some substance, he manages to fluff it.
I say to Anas Sarwar very clearly that, when it comes to Scotland’s renewable energy, why on earth should the people of Scotland trust a Labour Party that, just a couple of weeks ago, scrapped its £28 billion green prosperity fund? Why on earth should they trust a Labour Party that has been part of successive UK Governments that have taken £350 billion from the north-east?
Anas Sarwar thinks that we should be thankful for the fact that Labour is going to base a little bit of a Government department here in Scotland. I will tell him what the people of Scotland want: they want full powers—[Interruption.]
Members!
—over our renewable energy so that it cannot simply be squandered by a UK Government, whether it is Tory or Labour.
Dearie, dearie me—that was a terrible answer from the First Minister. I am not sure whether this is the week that the First Minister should be talking about divisions in a political party.
This is a serious plan and a serious issue but, sadly, we do not have a serious First Minister, because Humza Yousaf cannot even bring himself to welcome these plans. This is billions of investment for Scotland, more jobs for Scotland, lower bills for Scotland and greater energy security for Scotland, but he would rather side with the Tories and—in his own words—“make life ... difficult for” Labour—[Interruption.]
Let us hear Mr Sarwar.
Let us look at what Humza Yousaf is opposing. He talks about substance, so let us look at the substance of what he is opposing: investment to make Scotland a leader in carbon capture and storage, onshore wind, offshore wind and hydrogen; 50,000 clean power jobs in Scotland; 17,000 jobs upgrading homes to make them energy efficient; 1.4 million homes upgraded; 1,000 local power projects, and GBE, a publicly owned energy company for the UK, headquartered here in Scotland. But no—Mr no style, no substance cannot support any of them.
Is the First Minister so blinded by his opposition to a Labour Government that he cannot accept what is good for Scotland?
Of course a GB energy company would be based in Scotland, because we have the majority of the renewables and natural resources here.
Anas Sarwar says that we should be thanking our London masters for the crumbs off the table—well, forgive me if I have far more ambition for our country than this leader of the Scottish Labour Party.
Anas Sarwar—[Interruption.]
Thank you!
Anas Sarwar says that he does not want to hear from me. I will tell him my thoughts clearly, but let us listen to what Barney Crockett, the former Labour leader of Aberdeen City Council, who quit following Labour’s green energy plan, said. He stated that Anas Sarwar should listen—[Interruption.]
Anas Sarwar asks whether we are siding with him. I am quoting a Labour councillor, for goodness’ sake, so why does Anas Sarwar not listen to what Barney Crockett had to say? He said:
“Margaret Thatcher never delivered a more brutal put down of an industry than that delivered by Keir Starmer in Edinburgh”—
Members: Oh!
Oh, there is more to come.
Barney Crockett went on to say:
“Moreover, he avoided answering any direct question about Aberdeen. Rather, he deflected to Anas Sarwar who made no specific response about the city”,
because, not for the first time, Anas Sarwar and the Scottish Labour Party are prepared to completely abandon every single worker in the north-east.
We simply will not do that. When it comes to a just transition, we have put our money where our mouth is: a £500 million just transition fund. Scottish Labour will put the workers of the north-east on the scrap heap, and we will not be prepared to do that.
I call Anas Sarwar. Mr Sarwar, I would be grateful if you could avoid the use of nicknames in future questions.
Presiding Officer, I was responding to a criticism that the First Minister made of me—I was not using any nicknames to the First Minister—[Interruption.] I was clarifying that I was not using any nicknames.
It is really important to say that these plans will ensure that we do not make the same mistakes that Margaret Thatcher made, and the sleepwalking by this Government is what would repeat those mistakes.
This Scottish National Party Government has had 16 years to deliver for Scotland, and it has failed. In 2017, the SNP promised a public energy company—and then scrapped it. Alex Salmond told us that Scotland would be the “Saudi Arabia of renewables”. The SNP promised 130,000 green jobs, and failed to deliver. Nicola Sturgeon could have taken a public stake in ScotWind, but she chose to sell it off on the cheap.
After 16 years of the SNP in government, people across our country are looking for action, and Labour has a plan for more jobs, lower bills, greater energy security and climate leadership.
There is going to be a global leader in the clean energy revolution. The difference is that Keir Starmer and I believe that that global leader will be Scotland and the UK. Why do Humza Yousaf and the Tories not believe that?
I remind Labour—because it seems that Anas Sarwar does not know—what its policy is. Time and again, UK Labour politicians have said that they want to use Scotland’s natural resources to give a council tax freeze to people in England. Once again, Anas Sarwar and the UK Labour Party view our north-east as a cash cow; they want to take money from the north-east in order to be able to fund a council tax freeze for the rest of the UK.
The difference between Anas Sarwar and me is that I want to keep the profit that is made and invest it in communities here in Scotland while he wants to squander it, as successive UK Governments have continued to do. When it comes to investing in our renewables and our north-east, how on earth does Anas Sarwar square that with the fact that his party has just dumped its £28 billion flagship green prosperity fund? [Interruption.]
Anas Sarwar does not want to hear from me and he does not want to hear from his own councillor—somebody who was a Labour councillor before quitting the party in protest at Anas Sarwar’s plans—so why does he not listen to the trade union movement? The GMB union’s Gary Smith has warned of the dangers of “cliff-edge policies” for North Sea oil and gas. [Interruption.] I will quote him directly: he said:
“The inconvenient truth for some is that the UK is still going to need oil and gas until 2050 and ... beyond, and a ban on new licences ignores this reality”.
Members!
Let me say to Anas Sarwar, to end on a point of consensus, that neither he nor I see the future of Scotland being in unlimited extraction of oil and gas. The difference between Anas Sarwar and me is that he believes that turning off the taps today will be good for the north-east and good for Scotland, while I believe in a just transition that means that we will not leave a single worker in the north-east on the scrap heap. It is a shame that UK Labour does not feel the same way.
Climate Emergency (Leadership)
To ask the First Minister how the Scottish Government will recommit to the leadership needed to tackle the climate emergency. (S6F-02266)
This Government absolutely will lead on that. As set out in the policy prospectus, I am absolutely committed to tackling the climate emergency, urgently and fairly. This week, we published our response to the United Kingdom Climate Change Committee’s annual report, accepting 98 of its 99 recommendations, with the other one being on a fully reserved matter.
Although it is, of course, disappointing that we have missed the 2021 greenhouse gas emission targets, so narrowly, that demonstrates that we are not far behind where those world-leading targets dictate that we should be. Our draft climate change plan, which will be published in November this year, will lay out how we will reduce emissions to meet future targets.
We will also deepen our global leadership on international climate justice, pushing for bold action across the world, advocating the human rights of those most impacted by climate change and supporting vulnerable communities through our climate justice fund.
I thank the First Minister for that considered answer. There is, of course, a consensus for deeper and more far-reaching action on the climate emergency. Scientists, campaigners and communities on the front line are demanding it, and the public mood is shifting. Most MSPs in the chamber—apart, of course, from the extremist and increasingly climate-denying Tories—know what must be done yet, too often, when action is proposed it gets drowned out by naysayers, defenders of business as usual and those who are content with watching the planet burn. Time is running out, so will the First Minister commit to a climate conversation later this year—[Interruption.]
Let us hear Mr Ruskell.
—bringing together those focused on action to speed up the journey to a greener, fairer future?
We are committed to doing more than that. I am more than happy to take away consideration of the idea of a climate conversation or convention to bring together the appropriate stakeholders, because we know that, for the good of our planet, we have to go faster and put more urgency and pace behind the action that we are taking. That is why the Scottish Government has an enviable track record on making sure that we invest in our just transition and why we have an enviable record when it comes to ensuring that we unleash the potential of the green economy.
Mark Ruskell is absolutely right that, every time the Scottish Government brings forward proposals to tackle the climate emergency, there are far too many—across the chamber but particularly in the Conservative Party—who oppose our actions time and time again. We will continue with our commitment to that just transition to net zero and that unwavering £500 million fund, and I am more than happy to commit to a meeting, conversation or convention ahead of COP28—the 28th United Nations climate change conference of the parties—to discuss what more we can do to meet our climate ambitions. However, it is so important that we do not just talk the talk—[Interruption.]
Members!
—but that, when the Scottish Government brings forward important interventions, they are not opposed time and time again by the climate-denying Conservative Party.
Given the cost of living crisis that is hitting both renters and home owners, and the urgent need to decarbonise our homes to meet our climate targets, how many homes will the Scottish Government’s funding help to retrofit this year? What lessons have been learned from last year’s failure to spend the allocated £133 million on refitting our homes to make them energy efficient and affordable to heat?
I do not have the exact figures to hand, but I am happy for the appropriate minister to write to Sarah Boyack with the detail that she is requesting. It is so important that we reduce the emissions that come from heat in buildings, which is why the new standard was recently published, as we know that around 20 per cent of our emissions come from heat in buildings.
As well as investing in new buildings, we are committed to investing in retrofitting, which is an important issue. Of course, the issue does not just affect Scotland or the rest of the United Kingdom; the whole world will have to look at putting serious investment, both public and private, into retrofitting both residential and non-residential buildings.
We take the retrofitting issue seriously. The member will be aware of our heat in buildings bill, which we will introduce shortly. I ask all political parties to engage in it in the spirit of collaboration, because we know that, when it comes to tackling the climate emergency, we will all have to come together, particularly on issues around heat in buildings, in order to tackle the biggest threat that the planet faces.
Sexual Health Advice
To ask the First Minister what action the Scottish Government is taking to improve access to sexual health advice. (S6F-02259)
Access to sexual health advice and services continues to be one of the Scottish Government’s priorities, which is why we are currently revising the sexual health and blood-borne virus framework. Sexual health is also a key priority in our women’s health plan, which looks to improve access to contraception services.
The NHS Inform women’s health platform is being developed, which provides easy access to information, including on contraception and sexual health. We have ambitious targets to eliminate hepatitis C as a public health threat by March 2025 and to eliminate HIV transmission by 2030. The framework will set out priorities for sexual health and BBV, and we will make an announcement on its publication shortly.
According to Public Health Scotland, cases of gonorrhoea were steadily increasing prior to the Covid pandemic but have increased rapidly since the end of 2021 and are now almost 50 per cent higher than in 2019.
Does the First Minister agree that those figures speak to the need to, first, redouble our efforts to encourage people of all ages and at all stages of life to practise safe sex and, secondly, to end the stigma around seeking medical assistance in cases of sexually transmitted infections?
I agree whole-heartedly with Clare Adamson. The emphasis that she puts on people of all ages is really important. Although a lot of outreach work and awareness-raising campaigns on STIs are targeted at young people, they can of course affect people of all ages. We know that, following the pandemic, sexual health services especially have been working hard to try to reduce the backlog in contraception provision and to recover to pre-Covid levels of services.
There are simple and painless tests for gonorrhoea, which can be cured and harm-limited if antibiotics are given at an early stage. To add to my earlier point, Professor Nicola Steedman, who is the deputy chief medical officer, has written to national health service boards to highlight the importance of early diagnosis of gonorrhoea. The Government will do everything that it can to raise awareness of that important issue and to ensure that the campaign is not just targeted towards one specific demographic. Given that people of all ages can be affected by STIs, including gonorrhoea, we will ensure that we take a broad-brush approach in that respect.
As an NHS general practitioner, I see those patients all the time. Unfortunately, they keep coming back to see me to say that they are unable to access sexual health clinics. What would the First Minister say to my patients?
I would just say what I said a moment ago: that backlogs are being worked on. I understand that there might be slightly longer waits than any of us would like, which is why funding is being provided to NHS boards annually through our outcomes framework to deliver on a range of those strategic priorities.
For example, £800,000 of funding will shortly be allocated to projects that support progress to improve sexual health and blood-borne virus outcomes. We have received a large number of high-quality bids and will be confirming the successful ones in the coming weeks. We have also provided £500,000 to support the development of an online STI testing service, which is a pilot project that is currently under way in NHS Lothian.
I am not denying the points that Sandesh Gulhane has made. There are still challenges as we recover all our NHS and social care services following the pandemic. The Government is putting the appropriate and requisite funding in place to try to alleviate the backlogs and ensure that people get the services that they need in a timely manner.
Road Safety and Condition
To ask the First Minister whether he will provide an update on whether the Scottish Government is fully committed to improving the safety and condition of all of Scotland’s major roads. (S6F-02273)
We are fully committed to improving road safety. As such, we continue to invest in the safety and condition of our motorway and trunk road network. For example, we are currently progressing or have recently completed key improvements on the A9, A96, A92, A90, A77, A737, A720, A83 and A82. Our future investment priorities are set out in the second strategic transport projects review, which was published in December 2022 and has a focus on improving safety, climate change adaptation and resilience of the road network.
It is also worth noting that Scotland’s 32 local authorities are responsible for the operation and maintenance of their respective local road network.
I thank the First Minister for that update. Rightly, much has been said in the chamber about the dismal progress on improving the A9 and the A96. However, right across Scotland, the reality is that there are far too many roads that are not just crumbling but costing lives, including, in the south and west of Scotland—my area—the A75, A77, A737, A84, A85 and A8, and the M8, which is in permanent gridlock. I could go on and on. Far too many single-carriageway roads are accident hotspots, and, over the past three years, we have, sadly, lost more than 450 lives—each one a tragedy. It should not be a discussion about whether those roads will receive upgrade investment; it should be a conversation about when they will receive upgrade investment.
I have a specific question to ask the First Minister. Are there any major and vital road-building projects or upgrades that were promised and pledged by the Scottish National Party Government that will no longer go ahead as a direct result of the Bute house agreement?
Of course, what makes our job more difficult when it comes to capital infrastructure projects are the continued cuts to our capital budget by the United Kingdom Government over the years. We therefore have a limited pot to invest in capital infrastructure—not just road-building projects but other capital infrastructure projects that are crucial to the people of Scotland up and down the country.
We have a strong record when it comes to investing in our trunk road network. Jamie Greene mentioned a few of the roads that we have invested in. For example, £430 million has gone into the dualling of the A9, and we are fully committed to ensuring the A9 dualling between Perth and Inverness. Jamie Greene mentioned the A77, and this Government is proud to have invested in the A77 Maybole bypass. He mentioned the A75, on which we have made improvements, and Transport Scotland has submitted an A75 business case to the UK Department for Transport for development funding following its union connectivity review. We are hoping that that will get backing from the Scottish Conservatives and the UK Government.
We have a strong track record of investing in our trunk road network, but that job would be far easier if the UK Government did not continue to cut our capital budget.
Industrial Action (Further and Higher Education)
To ask the First Minister how the Scottish Government is responding to the on-going industrial disputes in further and higher education. (S6F-02272)
Although the Scottish Government has no direct role in resolving industrial disputes in the further and higher education sectors, we are clear that we expect trade unions and employers to work together to resolve issues around pay and terms and conditions. The Minister for Higher and Further Education has met college and university employers and trade unions in recent weeks, urging them to engage in constructive and meaningful dialogue in pursuit of a resolution to the disputes.
I recognise that students are being adversely affected by the industrial action, and I expect colleges and universities to have appropriate mitigations in place to minimise disruption, including from the impact of marking and assessment boycotts.
The chamber might be aware of the news that has broken in the past few minutes that the young man on the Titan submersible is a student in Glasgow. I am sure that all members will join me in sharing our thoughts with him and his family at this unprecedented and difficult time.
I am afraid that the First Minister’s answer is unacceptable and is evidence of a further lack of leadership. I and my Labour colleagues support the staff and trade unions and their right to strike, and we stand with them in their decision to do so. We know that it has been one that they have not taken lightly; they have been pushed to the brink.
The First Minister must accept that that industrial action is a result of the Scottish Government’s lack of leadership and complete inaction in the further and higher education sectors, and a consequence of years of real-terms budget cuts that have left staff and students paying the price. Will he intervene and end that inaction, or will he allow students to walk across the stage at their graduation ceremonies with a blank piece of paper?
First and foremost, let me associate myself with Pam Duncan-Glancy’s remarks about the young man on the Titan submersible. I was not aware of that news and, of course, my thoughts are with everyone—the families, the loved ones and the communities—who will be affected by it.
With regard to our leadership in the higher and further education sectors, Pam Duncan-Glancy is wrong to characterise the situation by saying that we have not appropriately funded those sectors. Over the past decade, since 2012-13, the college sector’s resource budget has increased by more than £168 million, or 33 per cent, in cash terms. In the same timeframe, between 2012-13 and 2019-20, the resource budget of the university sector increased by £23 million. Therefore, we are providing appropriate funding.
Of course, there will always be calls for us to fund those sectors more. As I said when I met trade unions earlier this week—the University and College Union was present—this Government will continue to call for employers to get round the table and enter into meaningful discussions with our trade unions, because we know that industrial action is not wanted by anyone. We know that trade unions do not want to go on strike. Employers are, of course, severely affected but, importantly, the most adverse impact is on our students, so I urge everyone who is involved to get back round the table to ensure that a fair funding settlement is achieved.
On the right to strike, Pam Duncan-Glancy was well off the mark when she said that we do not support that. This Government does support people’s right to strike—their right to withdraw labour. It is, of course, Keir Starmer who has told his front bench not to join picket lines up and down the country. I will not say that to any politician. We support any worker, whether they are in higher education or further education, to exercise their right to strike.
It is important to reiterate that universities and colleges are autonomous institutions and that, as the First Minister said, the Scottish Government has no locus to involve itself in internal disputes.
As we know, it is the people who work in the further and higher education institutions across Scotland who have made those institutions a major international success story. Therefore, it is vitally important that a settlement is based on fair work principles and that the people who run those institutions reach a proper financial settlement, and develop a proper relationship, with the staff as soon as possible.
I could not agree more with that. The whole point of the letter that was sent to the sector by Graeme Dey was to reiterate those very points. That letter, which was sent to all college principals, could not have been stronger on the importance of our commitment to fair work principles.
Bill Kidd is absolutely right. Operational decisions on resourcing and staffing matters are for individual institutions. As ministers, we do not have a direct role in those decisions. However, the fair work principles must be the guiding light when it comes to the settlement of the disputes. I again urge all the employers to engage meaningfully, get round the table and ensure that we get a settlement. That is in the best interests of staff but, more importantly, it is in the best interests of the students who have been affected.
What is so terribly disappointing about the way in which the First Minister is answering these questions is that he is using it as an occasion to engage in political knockabout, when we know that the issue is about young people. Regardless of whether we agree with the lecturers, surely the First Minister recognises that these students have had their education disrupted by Covid restrictions and are now being used as collateral in the current dispute.
Therefore, will the First Minister take the opportunity to send a message from the Parliament that young people should not be treated as collateral in the dispute, and that their work should be properly assessed and properly celebrated?
I am happy to reiterate that point, because that is what I said in response to the questions I was asked just a moment ago. Time and time again, when asked about those disputes, I have said that students, young and not so young, are all being impacted and affected.
When I spoke to the trade unions this week, I got the very strong impression, as I often do, that they have taken industrial action only because they see that as a last resort. I do not doubt that for a minute or a second.
It is important that we in this chamber come together and that I, as First Minister, send a very clear message that we expect employers to get back round the table with the trade unions to come to a settlement that is embedded in our fair work principles.
We move to constituency and general supplementary questions.
Online Harassment (Women)
Last week, I chaired a round-table meeting with media representatives, campaigners and cross-party members on the role of the media in tackling violence against women. We have agreed to meet again, and the First Minister would, of course, be welcome to attend.
In the meantime, what analysis has the Scottish Government done on the impact that gendered online harassment has on women’s safety?
I am grateful to Rona Mackay for raising the issue. I record my admiration for her for having done so on many occasions. Other parliamentarians have also, rightly, done so. If Rona Mackay invites me to have another conversation and I am unable to attend, I will ensure that someone else from the Scottish Government does attend.
We all know that abuse and bullying, online and offline, are totally unacceptable. We continue to work closely with the United Kingdom Government and Ofcom to develop proposals for stronger online safety measures to protect children and young people through the UK Government’s Online Safety Bill. Rona Mackay will be aware that I have written to the UK Government on the back of the Daily Record’s excellent and important campaign about violence in our schools, because I believe that our media companies could do far more in that regard.
The Scottish Government is starting work to consider how we can gather greater analysis regarding online harm, building on the reflections of the women’s justice leadership panel.
The Promise (Oversight Board Report)
The First Minister will be aware of the publication today of “The Promise Oversight Board: Report TWO June 2023”. The report says that, due to the current slow pace of change, the
“Board does not believe that delivering the original aims of Plan 21-24 is realistic by next year”
and that a lot more needs to be done to keep the Promise by 2030.
The board also calls for
“explicit leadership and drive from the Scottish Government ... to articulate a clear set of principles, outcomes and milestones that will guarantee the promise is kept so that Scotland’s care experienced young people’s life chances are not defined by the fact they have been in care.”
What will the First Minister do, right now, to ensure that keeping that Promise remains on track?
That issue is of the utmost importance—not only to me as First Minister, and to the Government that I lead but, I am certain, to every single parliamentarian here. I give an absolute guarantee and a cast-iron commitment to every person who has experienced care, whether they are young or at any other stage in life, that we fully intend to keep the Promise.
The oversight board report that Roz McCall has referred to, which was published today, is a reminder and a wake-up call that we must move with more urgency and pace. That report has now been published and we will give it full and due consideration. It is important to note that the oversight board report says that the 2030 target can be met, but that that will require swift and urgent action.
We have already progressed a range of actions. I am happy to ensure that Natalie Don writes to Roz McCall with details of what we have done. I can also absolutely confirm that we will introduce a Promise bill by the end of this session of Parliament to make any further legislative changes that will be required to keep the Promise.
The Yard (Funding)
The First Minister will be aware of the calls that have been made by my constituent Lawrence Cowan and his four-year-old daughter Eilish for improved funding for disabled children across Scotland. Eilish has a rare genetic condition, and the Yard in Edinburgh is a place where she is celebrated for who she is and is not defined by her disability.
The Scottish Government’s decision to freeze funding levels since 2016 means that the Yard’s funding has, in effect, reduced from £163 per family to just £39 per family this year. Will the First Minister agree to meet the Yard and its families to discuss how the Scottish Government can work better with them to ensure that no disabled child in Scotland feels alone?
I absolutely agree with the sentiment behind Claire Baker’s question. I am happy to look at the case in more detail and I will, of course, ensure that the Government meets the families who have been affected by the issue that Claire Baker raises, given the good work that the Yard does. If she will forgive me, I will look at the detail of the work that is done by the Yard and the funding issues that have been raised, and I will ensure that we engage in the way that she has asked.
I say to Claire Baker that there is much that we have done, particularly through Social Security Scotland, to help people with disabilities, but I take her point—especially given that the cost of living crisis has affected the most vulnerable people in our society harder than it has affected everybody else. There is absolutely more that we can do; I am open to exploring what that is. In relation to the work that the Yard is doing and the issues that have been raised by Eilish and her family, I will ensure that the Scottish Government engages to hear more about that good work.
Ferry Bookings
My constituents cannot book sailings between Shetland and Aberdeen beyond 30 September because Transport Scotland has not opened up the booking system beyond that date. That appears to be a bureaucratic decision that has little to do with meeting the needs of the people who rely on that lifeline service to the Scottish mainland. It is the third time that islanders have faced a cliff edge for bookings in the past 12 months.
Results from my survey, which had over 1,000 responses, show that 85 per cent of people want to book more than three months in advance. Indeed, Serco NorthLink frequently tells islanders to book early. I have repeatedly been advised that the system will open as soon as possible, but those are hollow-sounding words for my constituents.
Does the First Minister agree that his Glasgow constituents would not put up with such travel restrictions? Can he say why mine should?
Beatrice Wishart raises very important points. I do not think that it is helpful to pit one part of the country against another, because we should all have access to transport services. In the case of Beatrice Wishart’s constituents, they are lifeline services, which are so important.
Beatrice Wishart has raised a very important point. There can be technical reasons why booking systems cannot be opened, but I will look into the issue personally and ensure that the Minister for Transport engages with Beatrice Wishart on the issue. If the booking system can be opened earlier, that would clearly be of great help and use to Shetlanders and the island communities. We will see what can be done in that regard. I will ensure that we update Beatrice Wishart as soon as we can.
That concludes First Minister’s question time.
Air ais
General Question TimeAir adhart
Point of Order