Seòmar agus comataidhean

Will the member take an intervention?

I must intervene on behalf of employers in the Borders and Midlothian, because they have certainly not lost “cheap labour”. They do not have bus drivers or people in hotels, and they certainly were not taking them on the cheap.

Before I proceed, I have to say that I am disappointed that the previous speaker had to be whipped to speak in this delightful debate—he made such a delightful contribution. Members’ business debates should be free and easy and should not require whipping. I just wanted to raise that with the member, knowing that he is an experienced politician.

I thank my colleague Kenneth Gibson for bringing forward this motion for debate, particularly as it has introduced me—and I suspect other members—to the adopt-a-road concept, which is completely new to me. I am aware of the adopt-a-station programme; indeed, I am the sponsor of a planter at Gorebridge station. That arrangement, which is of some years’ standing, took a substantial effort by local residents and negotiations with Network Rail, including on issues of safety, a matter that I will return to with regard to the adopt-a-road scheme.

I also endorse everything that has been said about littering. It infuriates me—and I have to say that is not always caused by local people. People just drop stuff out of car windows and then drive on. Of course, for some people in society, leaving sofas by the side of the road is almost essential. I do not know why.

I have noted the experience in North America; in particular, I have taken California, Texas and British Columbia as random samples. Their programmes are not identical, but they are similar. In the Californian adopt-a-highway programme, individuals can donate materials, equipment and services, and they can also help prevent pollutants. Seventy-three per cent of the people involved are volunteers and 27 per cent are sponsors.

In Texas—only in Texas—they have the wonderful motto, “Don’t mess with Texas”. Any group can apply to their local co-ordinators, where they are provided with—and here I come back to the safety issue that I mentioned earlier—safety vests, which they call “trash bags”, and safety training. There are also signposts that identify the adopters, so the people involved get a bit of credit for what they are doing.

The rules in British Columbia are different. Participants between the ages of 12 and 16 must be supervised, which just seems common sense, but you also have to give a 10-year commitment, which is a lot to ask of volunteers. As we know, people can be dead keen at the beginning and then they start to drift away like the melting snow.

In principle, I think that the programme is a good idea. I can think of several communities in Midlothian, South Tweeddale and Lauderdale that would express an interest in it; of course, I am not going to name them and land them in it, but I know that they already take good pride in their communities. Such a move might also encourage motorists to attend to the 20mph speed limit through many of those communities, particularly if there are signs identifying community engagement and the need to keep the area tidy.

I want to take the idea to both councils in my constituency—Midlothian Council and the Borders Council—but I also come back to what for me is the key issue: safety. It is why I find the requirements in Texas of particular interest. It is one matter picking up litter in a park, but doing so beside a busy road is another matter entirely. Moreover, such a scheme must neither supplant nor replace the duties that it is incumbent upon the local authority to carry out as a result of the council tax that we pay. It is an add-on.

With that caveat about safety, I will, as I have said, be contacting both my councils. Indeed, I have already thought of slogans like “Don’t mess with Texas”. Please bear with me, as they are only works in progress, but the ones that I would suggest are “Don’t blight Borders” and “Don’t mess up Midlothian”.

Almost half the country’s 32 local authorities will experience population decline over the next decade. We know that the issue is most acutely felt in remote and island areas. Local authorities have specific pressures in my constituency of Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale.

It is undeniable that Brexit, which Scotland voted against by 62 per cent, damaged Scotland’s economy even before more recent events, and it has exacerbated the trend of a diminished workforce. Freedom of movement of the workforce was previously evident in practically all aspects of Scottish life, including in sectors such as hospitality, transport, and health and social care. The UK’s skilled worker route excludes many from coming under the points-based system, with restrictions on salaries and so on. For example, for the skilled worker visa, someone must demonstrate that they have a job offer from a Home Office-licensed sponsor at the required skill level, and that they will be paid by their sponsor the relevant minimum salary threshold, which is normally £26,500 or the going rate for the particular job—whichever is higher.

In my constituency, I know from talking to local businesses—as I referred to in my intervention on my Labour colleague—that there are shortages of bus drivers and shortages in hospitality and health and social care directly as a consequence of the UK leaving the EU. It is not that people are being paid less; they are paid equally.

The loss of workers is exacerbated by the rurality of many areas for a range of reasons, not least that wages across the board tend to be lower and therefore beneath the UK threshold for visas.

We know that the population of Scotland grows older by the decade, and there also tends to be a more elderly population in rural areas. The young leave to work in more urban environments for understandable reasons, although they frequently return in older age, which adds to that elderly population. That puts additional pressure on services such as social care and health.

Delivery of services in rural areas is necessarily more time consuming, given the distances between towns and villages, and therefore more costly.

The need to retain a younger demographic has to be addressed. Rural life must be made more attractive, with reasonable access to urban areas. On that, I congratulate the Scottish Government on bringing back the Borders railway, which has seen the population grow in places such as Gorebridge and Newtongrange, with young families moving in.

There was a scheme, many moons ago—50 years ago, actually—in which the local authority offered houses to key workers, such as school teachers and GPs, so that they would to take up positions. That worked, and I benefited from it as a secondary teacher moving to Dumfries and Galloway. That, to me, is a community-driven approach, and it would be attractive to not just younger people and families, but migrants. Not only do we need more relevant immigration rules from Westminster, but they need to be targeted and more flexible, with input from local businesses and public services, as happened 50 years ago.

For my constituents—and not just the elderly population—to have mixed and thriving communities not only provides staffing for our social care and health sector, but sustains local services, such as public transport, and local businesses, such as the local plumber, and keeps the local shops on the high street open. It is essential that we are able to offer people Scotland as their home. I fully support rural visa pilots. I am glad that the cabinet secretary is back in the chamber, because I am bidding for the Borders to be one such pilot area. I know that he is a great favourite in the Borders—creep, creep!

We in Scotland surely understand better than the rest of the UK the economic need for immigration, because in many parts of the world we are migrants ourselves. We know the challenges and opportunities that exist when we make our lives in another country. The Scottish diaspora runs into millions—way beyond our indigenous population.

Unfortunately for Scotland, we are—for now—tied into the UK’s useless, heavy-handed and counterproductive immigration system, born to appease the south-east of England, and Brexiteers, who falsely blame EU migrants for economic issues, particularly in the north of England. All of those are falsehoods.

I note that Donald Cameron, who is often consensual, referred to the commitment in the 2019 Scottish Tory manifesto to targeted migration. I do not, however, share his optimism that a Liz Truss Government will resuscitate that. In any event, she has her hands full with the economic chaos that she has brought about.

Independence gives us that essential control over the macroeconomy. Part of the reason why Scotland has been losing population is that we have not had control of our macroeconomy since the union. We need control over our macroeconomy and migration, and with the actions demonstrated by the Truss-Kwarteng financial duo, I tell you that it cannot come soon enough.

I am too old for that—I am done with that sort of thing.

I share Katy Clark’s concern about some aspects of policing during the proclamation and, later, during the funeral procession on the Royal Mile. I understand that there were many different police forces on duty then. Can the cabinet secretary confirm that Police Scotland had overall control and operational policy control? I note what the cabinet secretary said about the debriefing and the review. Will the outcome of that review be made public or, certainly, can he ask the SPA whether that can be done?

As the First Minister is aware, this is international, as well as national, suicide prevention week. Without scaremongering, I would say that both domestic and business inflationary pressures may very well push some folk to the brink. What measures can the Scottish Government take to help desperate people, liaising, for example, with organisations such as the Samaritans, which I commend for all that it does?

I welcome the announcement in the statement yesterday of emergency legislation to freeze rents across the private and social rented sector.

I have many constituents in Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale who are concerned about mortgage payments as interest rates rise. What interventions—if any, given that a lot of this is reserved—are open to the Scottish Government to assist them?

The bigger picture will be short, but important—

Oh! I just extended my speech because I thought that we had time.

I welcome the increase in the child payment to £25 and the extension of the payment to every child under the age of 16 in a qualifying household, which is due by the end of the year. This is the only part of the UK with that intervention. More than 2,500 children in Midlothian and a similar number in the Borders are already benefiting from the payment. Surely to goodness members across the whole chamber can say that the policy is a great idea.

The freeze to rents for private and social housing is a bold but necessary move—we are in a crisis. Free school meals for primary 5s and those younger—with the determination to extend the policy to all children in primary school—assist fundamentally the wellbeing of children and the family at large. In the first three years of the policy, baby boxes have been delivered to more than 144,000 homes, with an incredible 93 per cent uptake. We have free prescriptions, while prescriptions now cost more than £9 per item in England. We have free bus travel for all under-22s and over-60s. We have no tuition fees. Those are just a few examples of the socially just measures that the Scottish Government has carried, and is carrying, forward.

That is a different world from the one south of the border, and it is a pity that Pam Duncan-Glancy is not here—[Interruption.] Oh, she is back. I am glad that she is here, because she seemed to think that we are sitting on our hands. If that is sitting on our hands, let us have more of it. I am proud of those initiatives.