Official Report 1134KB pdf
Ferries (Construction Contract)
I begin by echoing the comments that we heard in this chamber earlier this week, following the sad and untimely passing of our friend and Scottish Conservative colleague, David Hill. David died playing the sport that he loved for the Parliament team that he helped to set up. I know from having spoken in the past couple of days to his parents, Rodger and Sharon, that they are understandably utterly devastated and heartbroken, but they are so appreciative of the support that they have received from parties across the chamber.
I also thank you, Presiding Officer, and the Scottish Parliament team, who have helped not only David’s family, but his friends and colleagues who were with him when this tragic accident occurred. [Applause.]
Yesterday, Audit Scotland’s damning report on the Scottish National Party Government’s failure to build two lifeline ferries was published. Kate Forbes was put forward to respond in the chamber and to the media, but she could not say who made the key decision to sign off the disastrous contract.
Therefore, can the First Minister give a straight answer where the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and the Economy could not? Which minister gave the green light for the contract—against expert advice?
First, I take this opportunity to express my shock and distress at the untimely and tragic passing of David Hill. It is a mark of the man he was that he had such good friends right across the political spectrum in Parliament.
When David died, he was, obviously, doing what he loved most. I hope that, in time, that will be of some comfort to his loved ones. I had contact with David’s dad on Sunday, when I offered all possible help that the Scottish Government could provide. My thoughts are with Rodger, Sharon and David’s wider family and friends, and, of course, with all his Conservative Party colleagues.
Before I turn directly to the substance of the question, I say candidly that the problems with the procurement—or rather, with the construction; the procurement was not the issue—of the ferries have resulted in delay, cost overruns and a very negative impact on island communities. That is far from satisfactory, which is putting it mildly.
The report that Audit Scotland published yesterday is entirely fair and justified. There are a number of complexities, but the contracts in question are public contracts, so the buck stops with the Scottish Government. Pre-2019, there were issues with the quality of work and the progress of work when the yard was in private ownership. Since nationalisation of the yard at the end of 2019, more problems have been identified, with the cabling problem being the most significant. On top of that, of course, there has been additional delay because of Covid.
However, we remain focused on delivery of the ferries. The actions that the Scottish Government has taken have helped to secure jobs at the last remaining commercial shipbuilder on the Clyde. I think that that is important.
To turn briefly to Douglas Ross’s specific question about who was transport minister at the time, I note that that is, of course, a matter of public record. It was Derek Mackay, but our Government—I understand that the idea might be alien to the Conservatives—operates under collective responsibility. Ultimately, as with any decisions, whether I am personally involved in them or not, responsibility stops with me.
Many of the documents that relate to the decision have been in the public domain for some time. They clearly narrate the issue of the lack of a full-refund guarantee. They also clearly narrate the mitigations that were put in place to reduce that risk. Those documents are in the public domain and are available for anyone to review.
Yesterday, the finance secretary could not tell Parliament or the media who was to blame but, 24 hours later, the SNP spin machine has spun into action and it is the fault of the disgraced former finance minister.
Let me get this absolutely straight. The First Minister is claiming that she had no involvement. The Audit Scotland report confirms that SNP ministers were aware of the huge risk of the project, but carried on regardless. The Government that she leads willingly decided to charge ahead, against expert advice. The First Minister is now trying to blame Derek Mackay. It seems to be very convenient that the person who is getting the blame is no longer here. It was the First Minister’s Government, her Cabinet and her decision.
Let me ask again. She is saying that the transport minister took that decision. What input did the First Minister have in that decision, through the Government that she leads?
I am genuinely not sure whether Douglas Ross listened to a single word that I said. He asked who the individual minister was; I did not volunteer the information. It is a matter of public record who the transport minister was at the time of the decision; it is a matter of public record that it was Derek Mackay.
Here is the bit that I know does not suit the script that Douglas Ross prepared before he came into the chamber. Here is what I went on to say. I will repeat it, just to be absolutely clear. This Government operates by collective responsibility and I am ultimately responsible for all decisions that the Government takes. The buck stops with me. I have never tried to shy away from that on any issue. I know that that is not how things are done in the Conservative Government at Westminster, but that is how things are done here. Perhaps Douglas Ross might want to reflect on what I am actually saying, before he asks his next question. I am ultimately responsible for all decisions of the Scottish Government. That is why I am standing here answering questions.
I turn to the substance of the issue. As I said, the documents are available in the public domain. Caledonian Maritime Assets Limited had expressed a particular concern about the lack of a full-refund guarantee. Those concerns are set out in the documents. So, too, are the actions that were taken to mitigate the risks. The Government then came to a decision based on the balance of risk. The documents expressed the view that the current deal that has been negotiated with Ferguson Marine (Port Glasgow) Limited is the best deal that can be achieved, given the financial restrictions that the yard is operating under.
Three key changes were made; they are all set out in the Audit Scotland report. They were: that there was an increase in the final payment so that more money was being withheld; that CMAL would take ownership of all equipment, machinery and materials as they arrived at the shipyard; and that FMEL would require all major suppliers to offer a full-refund guarantee. Those were the changes that reduced the risk and underpinned the decision that the Government arrived at.
I return to the central point. I am not defending the cost overruns or the delay in construction of the ferries; they are completely unacceptable. However, at all points, the motivation of the Government has been to save jobs and the shipyard and to ensure that the ferries can be delivered, albeit that they will be late, which is a matter of deep regret. That is what we continue to focus on.
The First Minister says that she takes ultimate responsibility, then throws an ex-minister—a disgraced SNP ex-minister—under the bus. If we are looking for ultimate responsibility from the First Minister, will she tell us why a key safeguard that could have saved Scottish taxpayers hundreds of millions of pounds was removed? Will she tell us, with her ultimate responsibility, why Ferguson’s started building the ferries when there was not even an agreed design? With her ultimate responsibility, will she tell us why Ferguson Marine was given the contract in the first place? With her ultimate responsibility, will she tell us why there is not going to be a public inquiry into the whole scandal? We need a public inquiry because Audit Scotland tried to get answers but could not. Audit Scotland has said:
“There is no documented evidence to confirm why Scottish ministers were willing to accept the risks of awarding the contract to FMEL, despite CMAL’s concerns. We consider that there should have been a proper record of this important decision.”
The decision is one of the most reckless decisions that have ever been taken by a Scottish Government, and so far it is costing a quarter of a billion pounds of taxpayers’ money. Why cannot the body in Scotland that is charged with scrutinising public spending give a shred of evidence to justify your Government’s decision?
Nobody who had read Audit Scotland’s report could reach that particular conclusion, but I will come back to that.
I will say, first, that if Douglas Ross thinks that it is unimportant who the individual minister was and that—as I agree—the buck stops with me, why was his first question to ask me who the individual minister was? Clearly, he must have thought that it was important. I did not intend to come here and do anything but accept full responsibility.
I come to the questions—let me answer them one by one. I have already run through the decision to proceed and the lack of the full builder’s refund guarantee. That decision was clearly taken based on the balance of risks. CMAL had concerns about the matter, but a range of actions had been taken—I have set out exactly what they were—to mitigate the risks. The conclusion, which is in the documentation that is publicly available, was that the deal that was negotiated was the best one that could have been achieved in the circumstances.
I think that the second question that Douglas Ross asked me was why was the contract awarded to FMEL when it was the most expensive bid. That question, too, is answered in the Audit Scotland report. The review found that it was the most expensive bid—if memory serves me correctly, that was known at the time—but CMAL had
“also assessed it as being the highest quality”,
so
“Overall, it achieved the highest combined cost and quality score of the seven bids”.
That was the decision that was taken at the time. Of course, ministers are not involved in procurement decisions.
Lastly, on the question of a public inquiry, we have had a parliamentary committee look into the issue and we have now had a major Audit Scotland review. Audit Scotland itself recommends, at page 7 of its report, that on completion of the vessels, there should be
“a formal review of what went wrong ... with a view to learning lessons”.
The Scottish Government will consider what form that further review should take. We will consider the matter carefully and will, of course, report to Parliament in due course.
This is ridiculous. We are fortunate in Scotland to have two Governments, but only one of them is currently building ships in Scotland that actually sail. That is because of this First Minister’s record in government. Let us look at it again.
Ferguson Marine’s was the most expensive bid figure, yet—as the First Minister has just said—it was chosen on the basis of quality. It was chosen on the basis of quality when ferries are two and half times over budget. Hundreds of millions of pounds of taxpayers’ money have already been wasted. There is a five-year delay at least, and there are still 175 faults with the ferries, which are still being built. This is one of the worst public spending disasters since devolution.
Who messed up? Who knows, in the Scottish National Party’s secret Scotland—because all the evidence is gone? Audit Scotland could not get to the bottom of a number of points. The only scraps of paper that we have left on the disastrous decision are the old SNP press releases that claimed that they were saving Scottish shipbuilding.
When the First Minister visited the ferries in 2016, were the painted-on windows not a sign that her decision was an absolute shocker?
What Douglas Ross has demonstrated is that he has not spent much time reading the hundreds of pages of documents that are in the public domain. There is one issue in relation to which Audit Scotland refers to a lack of documentation. That is a matter that the Government needs to reflect on seriously and well. However, there are hundreds of pages of documents. I have referred to many of them already, and I think that they would bear some attention being paid to them by Douglas Ross.
I said candidly at the outset that I think that the situation is deeply regrettable.
When I visited the yard it was, of course, in private ownership, and assurances were given about the completion of work. The problems that have led to cost overruns, delays and—worst of all—a negative impact on our island communities, are deeply regrettable. At every step, the motivation of the Government has been to secure employment and the shipyard, and to get the ferries completed. That is what we will continue to focus on. We will learn the lessons in the Audit Scotland report and we will make sure that all its recommendations are taken forward.
Douglas Ross might think that it is unimportant that we have saved 300 jobs and a shipyard, but I think that those things matter, which is why we will now focus on making sure that the yard has a positive future.
Spring Statement 2022 (Cost of Living)
As other members have done, I pay tribute to David Hill. I send my particular condolences to his family and friends and I recognise the wonderful tribute that Jamie Greene, who employed him, paid to David. I send my condolences to Jamie Greene and, in particular, to all our Conservative colleagues in the Parliament. David was respected across the political spectrum and he had friends not just among MSPs but among the many staff who work in and around the Parliament building.
Yesterday, faced with the biggest fall in living standards since rationing, the Chancellor of the Exchequer failed to present a spring statement that would make life easier for millions of families. He failed to introduce a windfall tax, he failed to put more money in people’s pockets and he raised the tax burden on millions of families across the United Kingdom.
He must have been taking lessons on missed opportunities from the First Minister. In her Government’s budget, the First Minister had the opportunity to tackle the cost of living crisis but, just like the Tories, her Government failed to do so. Copying Rishi Sunak’s policy, by giving households less than £4 a week in a council tax rebate, will not cut it. Will the First Minister accept that the actions that she has taken so far are not enough to confront the crisis?
In the Scottish Government’s budget, we doubled the Scottish child payment, which is game changing for families with children who are living in poverty. If memory serves me correctly, the Labour Party shamefully voted against that measure in the Scottish budget.
Yesterday’s spring statement showed a callous disregard for the misery that people are already facing and that will only get much worse. Household incomes are about to suffer their biggest fall in more than 60 years. The Resolution Foundation has estimated that an additional 1.3 million people across the UK, including half a million children, will be pushed into poverty. There was nothing in the spring statement to help the poor and those on the lowest incomes, which I think was shameful.
The most shameful thing about the chancellor’s announcements yesterday is that he squirreled away money for pre-election bribes. That money could be spent right now to help those who are in desperate circumstances. His actions yesterday in that regard were disgusting.
With regard to the Scottish Government’s actions, we have limited powers and resources but, due to our wider long-standing policies, people here already pay less, on average, in council tax, water bills and rail fares. Unlike people who live south of the border, people in Scotland pay nothing for prescriptions, eye tests or university tuition. In addition to the £150 payment through council tax, we have decided to uprate devolved benefits by 6 per cent. The failure to do so south of the border is having the biggest impact on low-income families.
As I have already said, we have introduced the Scottish child payment, we are investing in the Scottish welfare fund and we are increasing the fuel insecurity fund. We will continue to do everything that we can within our powers and resources, but anybody who is serious about helping the lowest paid would be arguing and demanding that powers and resources be taken out of the hands of Rishi Sunak and his type and put into the hands of this Parliament.
We welcome the doubling of the Scottish child payment, but that plan predates the cost of living crisis. More than 270,000 children will not benefit from it, and poverty campaigners say that it needs to go further. The First Minister wants to obsess about powers that she does not have, but she has been in power for 15 years, so she has power and she should use it to change people’s lives, because that is what the job is for.
Let us look at what she has done with the powers that she has. She has copied Rishi Sunak’s council tax rebate, failed to target support to those who are most in need, increased rail fares and put up water charges for Scottish households. We have published detailed plans on how to confront the cost of living crisis but, so far, the Scottish National Party has not listened.
Here is another meaningful action that the Government can take: Scottish Water, which is owned by the Scottish Government, is currently sitting on a cash mountain of £428 million, so Scottish Labour is calling not just for the freezing of water charges but for a £100 rebate for every household in Scotland. Does the First Minister believe that that money is better off in Scottish Water’s bank account or in struggling families’ accounts?
We will consider everything that we can reasonably do to help. Anas Sarwar said that the doubling of the Scottish child payment predated the cost of living crisis. That is, of course, one reason why, this very afternoon in the Parliament, Shona Robison will deliver a statement accompanying our updated tackling child poverty delivery plan, setting out the further action that the Government will take to lift children out of poverty, rather than putting more children into poverty, as the United Kingdom Government is doing. I am surprised that Anas Sarwar did not know that.
Yes, my party has been in government for some time, which is why people in Scotland do not pay for prescriptions or eye tests, or to go to university. It is why we have, on average, lower council tax than England and Labour-run Wales have. It is why more people pay no council tax at all, because we retained the council tax reduction scheme. We are using our powers, and the doubling of the Scottish child payment is the principal example of that.
We will continue to look at what more we can do. Anas Sarwar is right to continue to press us to do more, but he would have more credibility if he did not also back the retention of the powers over welfare and public spending that are in the hands of Boris Johnson and Rishi Sunak. Until he changes that position, I do not know whether many people in Scotland will take him seriously.
That is simply not good enough. People are struggling right now and, as per usual, the First Minister wants to make this a constitutional debate. I hate to break it to her but, see whether people voted yes or no, their bills are still going up and they need help from the Government. The First Minister should take action to tackle the cost of living crisis.
Let us look at the tragic stories from across the country over the past week. We have heard about people stealing fuel canisters in the Highlands; families turning down fresh vegetables from food banks because they cannot afford to turn on the gas cooker; and people digging up their gardens to grow their own food because they cannot afford to buy it.
That is why Labour has set out the actions that both Governments should take: a windfall tax on oil and gas giants to reduce bills by £600; the £200 as a grant, not a loan; and, here in Scotland, a £400 support payment for struggling families; a £100 rebate on water bills; and a freeze on water charges and rail fares. That is real help. It is supporting families with more than £1,000, in contrast to the Government’s flagship cost of living policy, which would give families less than £4 a week. When will the First Minister understand that she has to do better than that?
Our flagship policy is the Scottish child payment, which, of course, Anas Sarwar and his colleagues voted against when the budget came before the Parliament.
We will continue to look at everything and anything that we can do within the powers and resources that we have. Shona Robison will set out further actions when she delivers her statement this afternoon. There is real misery—a wave of human misery—being experienced right now, which will only get worse. On that, Anas Sarwar and I do not disagree, and we will continue to do everything that we can.
However, I am afraid that there is a real issue at the heart of this. If members look at the Joseph Rowntree Foundation analysis that was published this morning, they will see that those in the lowest income decile will see their household incomes cut by almost 6 per cent. The main reason for that is the failure to uprate benefits by more than 3.1 per cent. Where we have control of benefits here, we have uprated them by 6 per cent.
The reason why we cannot do that for the main benefits such as universal credit is that we do not have the power. The reason why we cannot impose a windfall tax to help with energy costs and why energy costs remain reserved is because, when it came to a choice between yes and no, Anas Sarwar encouraged people to vote no, and because people voted no, those powers remain in the hands of Boris Johnson and Rishi Sunak. Until Anas Sarwar addresses that issue, we in this Parliament will always be limited in what we can do. When will he wake up and realise that?
We move to supplementary questions.
Historical Forced Adoption (Consultation)
A constituent of mine is a victim of historical forced adoption and is concerned about confidentially of victims who are responding to the Scottish Government consultation. She explains that filling in the responses is quite difficult for victims, as it brings up a lot of emotion and has a big impact on people filling it in. That could have a significant impact on the responses given and the effectiveness of the consultation.
What assurances can the First Minister give my constituent and all victims of forced adoption that any information that they give will be treated confidentially and that they will not be identifiable from their responses?
That is a really important issue. I recognise that it is also an extremely sensitive issue, so I thank everybody who has responded to the consultation so far. I appreciate that it takes a lot of courage to share deeply distressing stories such as that.
We are offering a private space for people to come forward to share experiences in complete confidentiality. I reassure the member’s constituent that participants can take part entirely anonymously and that no data that could identify an individual will be retained.
We also have a dedicated helpline, in collaboration with Health in Mind, to provide interim support to individuals who want to make a contribution. The closing date for responses is 20 April. Following that date, all responses will be analysed and considered, along with any other available evidence.
Murray Royal Hospital
Over the past decade, no fewer than four women have died while patients on the Moredun ward at Murray royal hospital in Perth, while suffering acute mental health disorders. Today, The Courier reports that a fifth patient died on the ward in the same period, but their death and the circumstances have never been made public.
Those patients were in hospital to keep them free from harm, but they and their families have been failed. Why is that happening and what is being done to stop it?
Those are very serious issues, and where lessons need to be learned, they are learned by health boards and, where necessary, by the Government. I am not aware of the detail of the case reported in The Courier today. I will ensure that I become aware of that detail and, when I have had the opportunity to do so, I am happy to write to Murdo Fraser.
Hourglass
Hourglass is a 24/7 helpline supporting older people and their families dealing with abuse and neglect. It is the first service of its kind in Scotland and it has just launched, as a result of a 46 per cent rise in elder abuse calls during the pandemic. Elder abuse is an undersupported and underreported area. Given that shocking statistic, the Hourglass helpline will be a very welcome resource.
Hourglass is funded by the Home Office to provide a service in England. Will the First Minister agree to meet Hourglass and consider providing support for that valuable service in Scotland?
Services such as Hourglass are very important. Elder abuse is awful, and the pressures of the pandemic are understood by all of us. I am happy to have the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care meet or talk to Hourglass, to see what the Scottish Government can do to support it.
Displaced People (Support)
My constituent’s family have, thankfully, made it safely to Glasgow from Kyiv, including a 68-year-old relative travelling on a Ukrainian passport. They have asked me whether their relative will qualify for the concessionary travel scheme—I hope that the First Minister can confirm that.
More widely, though, what steps is the Scottish Government taking to assist those arriving in Scotland from Ukraine, or indeed elsewhere, to access all the services and entitlements that they should have the right to receive at such a difficult time?
I am relieved and pleased to hear that Bob Doris’s constituent’s family have made it safely to Glasgow. I know that they will receive a warm welcome here. I would be happy to provide any detailed information on the support services that are available, given their particular circumstances. We have a proud history of welcoming displaced people and a wealth of experience from previous schemes.
We are working with a range of partners to ensure that wraparound support is in place for all displaced people who arrive here in Scotland. Those who come from Ukraine will have a right to work, and access to social security benefits and public funds. We will be working to make sure that people are aware of that and get access to all those services.
We are standing ready to welcome—I hope—significant numbers of people fleeing the situation in Ukraine. We are pleased that the supersponsor scheme that we proposed to the UK Government went live on Friday. We have multi-agency efforts in place to provide support. We now need to see visas begin to be granted In significant numbers so that we can get more people to Scotland and give them the support that they need.
On that issue, let me take the opportunity to welcome—on behalf of all of us, I am sure—the Dnipro Kids children, who arrived in Scotland last night. I know that they would all rather be at home in Ukraine but, while they are here, all of us would want to ensure that they are surrounded by love, care and support.
Child Protection (Local Authorities)
I call Meghan Gallacher.
Is your card in, Ms Gallacher? Bear with us for a second. There you go.
I refer members to my entry in the register of members’ interests, as I am a serving councillor on North Lanarkshire Council.
On 24 February, the First Minister gave a commitment to explore Christine Grahame’s suggestion that local authorities should not investigate their own complaints in cases relating to child protection. Does the First Minister agree that an independent national whistleblowing officer should be established for public bodies, and does she agree that those who cover up child protection issues should be reported to Police Scotland immediately?
As the member rightly says, I gave a commitment to Christine Grahame a few weeks ago. I hope that she accepts that consideration of those issues is still under way. I will make sure that, as part of that consideration, the proposals that she has made today are properly considered.
Domestic Abuse (Reoffending)
To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government is doing to ensure that perpetrators of domestic abuse do not go on to reoffend. (S6F-00948)
Domestic abuse is an insidious and dreadful crime. It has a devastating impact on victims, and it is vital that perpetrators are fully held to account. In partnership with key stakeholders, we are implementing equally safe, which is Scotland’s strategy to tackle all forms of violence against women and girls. It aims to prevent violence from occurring in the first place, to build the capability and capacity of mainstream and specialist services to support survivors and those at risk, and to strengthen the justice response to victims and perpetrators.
As a tangible example of that, we have committed to expanding the availability of the accredited Caledonian system, to ensure that more male perpetrators of domestic abuse are directed to services that challenge harmful behaviours, to reduce reoffending and to improve the lives of women and children.
As a very young child, I watched victims of domestic abuse come to my mum’s shop on Argyle Street for help. Not enough has changed. Half of the 65,000 domestic violence incidents reported in 2020-21 were committed by reoffenders. It is clear that whatever the Government is doing is not working. We need to work together to provide a true deterrent for this horrible abuse. Will the First Minister’s Government commit to doing more on the issue and back my proposal to create a domestic abuse register?
These are serious issues, and I want to ensure that we take them very seriously. On the specific issue of an offender register, we keep the law under continual review. We are always keen and willing to explore any options to reduce crime and reoffending, so we would be very keen to understand the detail of that proposal and give it due consideration. All registered sex offenders are already placed on the sex offender register and, as such, must register with the police as part of those requirements. However, I appreciate that that does not include all perpetrators of domestic violence. The issues need careful consideration, and I certainly undertake to give them that.
On the broader issues, it is definitely the case—and it should be welcomed—that more people feel able to come forward when they are victims of domestic abuse or sexual violence. That is to be encouraged. However, sentences for perpetrators are obviously a matter for the courts, and it is important that we all recognise that. A range of work is under way to ensure that there is better support for victims and that those who commit these dreadful crimes face up to the consequences of their actions. The Caledonian system that I referred to is an important part of that. We are also investing more in the support services that victims need and get so much benefit from. A range of work is under way, but the Government will remain open minded to any further proposals that are put forward on the issue.
Refugees (Ukraine)
To ask the First Minister what work is being done to extend the “warm Scots welcome” to Ukrainians arriving in the United Kingdom. (S6F-00947)
We all continue to be horrified by the illegal war in Ukraine, and we are ready to extend the warmest of Scottish welcomes to those who are fleeing the war. We have been working rapidly with a range of partners to ensure that displaced Ukrainians arrive to a place of safety and security. We have established welcome hubs at key entry points, to support people with what they need immediately on arrival and to assess their medium to longer-term needs.
We are working with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities to provide accommodation, as well as exploring all viable public and private sector housing options and, of course, offers from members of the public who have generously offered to open their own homes.
I thank the First Minister for the Scottish Government’s on-going work in the area. I also congratulate my good friend and colleague Neil Gray on his recent appointment as the minister for Ukrainian refugees. It is a fitting appointment. Our two constituencies, which make up the wider Monklands area, have a rich shared history, and we have both been deeply touched in recent weeks by the magnitude of the response of people in Coatbridge and Chryston and Airdrie and Shotts to the crisis and their tremendous willingness to support those who are seeking refuge. How will the Scottish Government ensure that the welcome hubs that she mentioned support displaced people from Ukraine to find peace and safety in Scotland after the stress and trauma of escaping from an illegal war?
The welcome hubs are a really important initial part of what we want to offer. They will assess immediate needs, take a multi-agency approach and provide wraparound support. That will include having trained staff on call to support people who are experiencing trauma. The welcome hubs will also be able to begin the assessment of longer-term needs, including accommodation requirements.
We now have the supersponsor route in place. That is in addition to the homes for Ukraine route and, of course, the family route. We have the support ready to be provided here. The bit in the middle is getting the visa applications granted so that people can start to arrive in numbers.
I will get an update later today, but the update that I had yesterday was that more than 1,000 applications had been made through the supersponsor scheme, and there had been just under 1,000 individual matching applications, I think. Obviously, we are still improving data flows, so there will be some uncertainty around those figures. However, we need to see a significant speeding up of the granting of those applications in order that people can come here and start to access the support that we have ready for them on that multi-agency basis.
National Health Service (Dentistry)
To ask the First Minister what action the Scottish Government is taking to ensure that people are able to register with national health service dental practices and receive NHS dental treatments in the wake of the Covid-19 pandemic. (S6F-00929)
It is a priority to ensure that patients are able to access NHS dental care. We have committed to abolishing dental charges in the lifetime of this Parliament, and that will help to remove at least one of the barriers to accessing high-quality NHS dental services.
To support patient care and access, we recently announced revised payment arrangements for dentists from 1 April that will more closely link payments to the number of patients seen and treatments provided. That multiplier funding arrangement will see additional investment in dentistry increase by almost £17 million in the first quarter of the new financial year. That comes on top of the 9 per cent planned increase in the budget for NHS dental services in the coming financial year and the support that has been given during the pandemic of £50 million in financial support for the sector and a further £35 million for personal protective equipment.
Many constituents have told me that, due to the total lack of NHS provision in their areas, they have been left with untreated dental pain and conditions and that they often miss check-ups that could spot life-threatening conditions such as oral cancer. Does the First Minister realise that she is increasingly overseeing not even a two-tier system, because, for many people in Scotland, dentistry is effectively privatised already?
No. We continue to support NHS dentistry. In fact, we are investing around 40 per cent more, proportionately, than is being invested south of the border, as we have around 40 per cent more dentists per 100,000 of the population than there are elsewhere in the United Kingdom. There are significant challenges because of the pandemic. That is why we have financially supported dentists during the pandemic, and it is why we are taking action now to further support dentists.
The multiplier funding arrangement that I referred to in my earlier answer is extremely important, and it has been welcomed by many dentists. I think that the British Dental Association has also welcomed its introduction. That arrangement recognises the importance of linking payments to the number of patients and the treatments that are being provided.
We will continue to support NHS dentistry and ensure that people have access to it. As I said, removing dental charges will also take away one of the barriers that, traditionally, some people have experienced.
I had my own experience with dental problems last week. I do not directly blame the First Minister for that.
Douglas Thain from the Scottish Dental Association said that decades of underfunding by the Scottish Government has created a toxic environment as dentists battle rising costs and inadequate fees paid by health boards. Does the First Minister not see that her current approach endangers dental provision for the people who need it most?
I said earlier that the buck stops with me, but I am afraid that that does not include Stephen Kerr’s teeth problems. I just hope that the glue is working better today. I will move on, because the issues are too important for such levity.
The issues are important, and there are more dentists here. If I look at where Stephen Kerr’s party is in government, I see that the number of dentists per 100,000 of the population is 39.9. In Scotland, it is 55.6, which is 40 per cent higher. For this financial year, our Government’s investment in core community dental services is 40 per cent higher.
That does not remove all the difficulties, but it shows the foundation that we have in place in Scotland, which is why the additional investment that I am speaking about is so important. It recognises the additional problems that are caused by the pandemic. We will continue to focus on supporting NHS dentists in order that people across the country can have the access to them that they have every right to expect.
Spring Statement 2022
To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government’s response is to the spring statement. (S6F-00950)
Yesterday’s spring statement was a missed opportunity on the part of the Chancellor of the Exchequer to give families and businesses the support that they need now in the face of rising costs. It showed a callous disregard for the poorest in our society. Despite the largest annual fall in living standards since the 1950s, as confirmed by the Office for Budget Responsibility, the chancellor’s decisions will mainly assist the better-off and will provide no real help to those on low incomes, with ever more households left facing poverty. In contrast, within our very limited powers and resources in this regard, the Scottish Government is taking a range of targeted steps, including, of course, doubling the Scottish child payment, uprating our devolved social security benefits by 6 per cent and extending our fuel insecurity fund.
Brexit and the volatile cost of oil and gas are playing a massive role in the cost of living crisis, but there was no recognition of that Tory legacy in the chancellor’s statement. What is worse is that there was nothing in his statement to help those who are struggling the most with rising costs. With the Office for Budget Responsibility warning about the biggest annual fall in living standards since records began, what can the Scottish Government do to build on what we have already delivered to tackle the cost of living, such as free bus travel for young people, free school meals for primary school children and, as the First Minister has just said, doubling the Scottish child payment?
It is absolutely right to point out the impact of the chancellor’s statement yesterday on the poorest in our society. This morning, the Joseph Rowntree Foundation published analysis that I recommend every member of the Parliament look at carefully. Those in the richest decile will see their incomes fall by less than 2 per cent, while those in the poorest decile will see their incomes fall by almost 6 per cent. That is principally down to the failure to properly uprate benefits. Given the fact that the chancellor had access to more money, the decision not to do that is disgusting and completely indefensible.
I have already set out the actions that the Scottish Government is taking, and we will continue to look at further actions that we can take. Indeed, as I said earlier, in the statement on the tackling child poverty delivery plan that she will deliver later, Shona Robison will set out further actions that the Scottish Government will take.
Given the woefully inadequate spring statement from the Chancellor of the Exchequer in the face of a fierce cost of living hike, does the First Minister agree that for people on fixed incomes such as pensioners, many of whom became housebound in these Covid years, heating costs will be devastating, with the United Kingdom state pension being the worst in Europe? Does she also agree that Anas Sarwar, for example, must wake up to the position that, without power over pensions and other benefits, mitigation has its limitations?
Christine Grahame is absolutely 100 per cent right: we cannot use powers that we do not hold in this Parliament. Where we do hold powers, we are using them, so we are taking game-changing action to lift children out of poverty.
We do not have control over pensions. We tend to talk about the invidious choices that, in these circumstances, people face between eating or heating their homes. In the face of this cost of living crisis, there will be some people who cannot afford to do either. That is the reality.
This Government will do everything that we can with the powers and resources that we have, but as long as so many of those levers lie with a Conservative Government at Westminster, we are going to see more of what we saw in the spring statement yesterday. Anybody who really cares about these issues would be not just arguing for those powers to be taken away from Rishi Sunak and Boris Johnson and put into the hands of this Parliament as quickly as possible, but demanding that it happen.
Wealth Tax
Millions of workers are facing a cost of living crisis that they did not create. The People’s Assembly has been organising mass demonstrations up and down the country to make it clear that workers cannot pay—and will not pay—for the crisis. Campaigners are calling for the introduction of a wealth tax on the richest 1 per cent, which would raise £14 billion a year for tackling the cost of living crisis and investing in public services. Does the First Minister back that call?
Yes, I think that we should see those who can afford it contribute the most. However, a wealth tax, like a windfall tax, is not something that this Government has the power to put in place. If Labour wants these things to happen in Scotland, it cannot just talk about the ends that it wants to see—it has to actually equip this Parliament and this Government with the means to do something about it. That is what is called making this Parliament independent.
I will take a general supplementary from Liam McArthur.
Islands Connectivity Plan (Internal Ferry Services)
The Scottish Government has informed Orkney Islands Council that the islands connectivity plan will exclude lifeline internal ferry services in both Orkney and Shetland. Can the First Minister explain why her national islands plan does not appear to include the needs of all Scotland’s islands?
We have been discussing with the island authorities for some time the interisland ferry services, and we will continue to do that. I will ask the Minister for Transport to engage with Liam McArthur in more detail on what further steps we are able to take.
Thank you. That concludes First Minister’s questions.
Air ais
General Question TimeAir adhart
World Tuberculosis Day 2022