Meeting of the Parliament (Hybrid)

Meeting date: Thursday, September 2, 2021

Official Report 1023KB pdf

---

McVitie’s Factory Glasgow (Proposed Closure)

The next item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S6M-00275, in the name of Paul Sweeney, on our factory, our future: the fight to save McVitie’s at Tollcross, Glasgow. The debate will be concluded without any questions being put. I ask members who wish to speak in the debate to press their request-to-speak buttons now. I call Paul Sweeney to open the debate.

Motion debated,

That the Parliament condemns the proposals from Pladis to close the McVitie’s Victoria Biscuit Works in Tollcross, in the east end of Glasgow; understands that the proposed closure would put some 500 jobs in the area at risk of redundancy; recognises what it sees as the critical impact that closing the factory would have on workers as well as the community in the east end, which it has served since 1925; recognises the cultural significance of McVitie’s which is an iconic Scottish brand dating back to 1830; notes the view that there are viable options to avert complete closure, including the re-fitting or re-location of the site, and that these could be given careful consideration in order to maintain and grow production and associated jobs in Scotland; commends the efforts of McVitie’s workers and their trade unions, GMB Scotland and Unite, which have organised to oppose the closure proposals, including the creation of a petition, which, it understands has garnered the support of 50,000 people from the area, and notes the call for decisive action to be taken prevent absolute closure in line with the demands of the Save The Jobs campaign.

12:48  

Thank you, Presiding Officer, and thanks to all colleagues across the chamber who supported the motion for debate today. I declare an interest as a member of Unite and GMB Scotland, both of which are fighting relentlessly to protect as many jobs as they can.

The struggle that is faced by the workers at McVitie’s in the east end of Glasgow echoes the struggle of so many skilled industrial workers in Scotland over the past 50 years. From Michelin Tyres in Dundee to the Caley railway works in Glasgow, it is a grimly familiar story of an overseas owner asset stripping Scotland’s industrial base. However, as in so many other cases, closure is far from inevitable, and this Parliament, founded in the face of such struggles, has a duty to prevent it going the same way as so many other proud Scottish industries and brands.

The workforce is highly dedicated, talented and loyal. They are a workforce rooted in their local community who are incredibly proud of the work and the history, which extends back through generations of families to the foundation of MacFarlane Lang’s bakery in the Gallowgate two centuries ago, building a brand that is famous the world over. They are a credit to their community, and they should be extremely proud of their conduct throughout this period of distressing uncertainty.

We saw what the plant and its employment meant to the local community in the immediate aftermath of Pladis’s closure announcement in May. They sprang into action and, to date, their petition to save nearly 500 jobs has amassed more than 75,000 signatures.

To be fair, the Scottish Government is to be commended for at least setting up the action group that has developed the counter proposal with Scottish Enterprise and the Interpath consultancy as an alternative to the end of McVitie’s production in Scotland. It engaged with the relevant trade unions and agencies and put together a viable and credible alternative.

The blame for the closure lies squarely with Turkish-owned multinational Pladis, which took control of McVitie’s and the wider United Biscuits group in 2014. However, the Scottish Government is far from having exhausted all options at its disposal.

Pladis and its parent company, Yildiz Holdings, are classic examples of the unacceptable face of capitalism, loading their acquired companies with debt while extracting profits and running their assets down in a programme of managed decline.

I have long argued that Scotland, and Britain as a whole, must have an industrial strategy that protects home-grown brands from takeovers by asset-stripping overseas predators, and the situation at McVitie’s in Glasgow is just the latest example that proves exactly why that must now be a priority.

As far as I am concerned, Pladis’s conduct amounts to industrial vandalism, which will inflict misery on a working-class community that simply cannot afford it. The east end of Glasgow already has an unemployment rate that is almost double the national average. The latest available figures show that more than 5,000 people in the area claim unemployment benefits. We now face the prospect of another 500 being added to that figure, and it is not just 500 workers in isolation but 500 families who now face uncertainty. It is absolutely shameful.

While the executives at Pladis were planning to wield the axe at the Tollcross plant, forcing hundreds on to the dole, they enjoyed a record turnover of £2 billion with profits amounting to £154 million. Is anyone really going to argue that any of that would have been possible without the dedicated and skilled workforce that they are now abandoning?

The counter proposal robustly addresses the company’s justification for closing Tollcross—a high cost per tonne and low volume relative to production capacity across the United Kingdom. The proposal centres around a purpose-built, state-of-the-art 250,000 square foot factory on Government-owned land at nearby Gartcosh, giving Pladis a blueprint to develop a new, highly efficient factory system in the future to replace what is admittedly an aged portfolio of seven production sites acquired by United Biscuits over the years.

The problem is who is going to pay for it. That is where my praise for the Scottish Government is not quite so forthcoming. Last month, the company rejected the counter proposal, meaning that we are now essentially in a stand-off situation. The company wants to know who will pay for the proposal, while the Scottish Government wants to know that Pladis is committed to maintaining a presence in Scotland before it will commit to detailed financing arrangements. For as long as that boardroom stand-off continues, 500 families are left in the lurch.

It is becoming increasingly clear that the company is not going to budge, which is why I implore the Scottish Government to put its cards on the table and take a lead. Do I think that the counter proposal is credible? Yes, I do. Do I think that the Scottish Government genuinely wants to save these jobs? Yes, I do. Do I think that it has exhausted all the options available? No, I do not.

Last night, the Scottish Government claimed that Pladis had given no indication that financial assistance and state aid would change its approach. In response, I ask the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and the Economy a simple question: has the Scottish Government, in negotiations, explicitly said to Pladis that it would provide the capital funding to build the new factory? If not, why not?

Pladis operates sale-and-lease-back arrangements for a number of its sites in Chiswick, High Wycombe and Carlisle. The assertion that it is not open to that financing structure is unconvincing and does not stand up to scrutiny. Frankly, we need more from the Scottish Government. Today, therefore, I once more ask it to commit to funding the counter proposal. Let us save those jobs and not add McVitie’s to the growing list of brands lost because of Scotland’s lack of an industrial strategy.

12:55  

It is incredibly disappointing that Pladis is refusing to change its position, which is likely to mean the loss of 468 jobs in the east end of Glasgow. In some cases, that will mean two or more wage earners in one family losing their jobs, so the financial implications for some will be huge.

I understand that there is also criticism of the redundancy packages that have been offered. I am sure that the GMB and other unions will be pressing Pladis on that, and I am sure that we will all want to help them if we can. I certainly trust that Jobcentre Plus, Skills Development Scotland and other public agencies will support those who lose their jobs.

I broadly accept that the biscuit and snack market is very competitive and there is probably overcapacity. Younger people do not seem to be eating biscuits as much as my generation did. When I have a Rich Tea, Ginger Nut or Chocolate Digestive with my coffee, I notice that younger staff who work for me tend not to do so. Therefore, it was highly likely that Pladis would have to close some factories, and I suspect that Tollcross might not be the last. In practice, Tollcross was competing with the other Pladis plants. I know that the Government, council and unions did not want to say this, but the reality is that, if we were to save Tollcross, it would be because another factory in Manchester, Liverpool or Carlisle was to close instead.

For many years, it has been clear that the Tollcross factory was not being invested in, so most of us have been half expecting its closure for a long time.

[Inaudible.]—does he not acknowledge that there should be a role for the Scottish Government to pre-emptively support industry and reinvest? Perhaps investment could be made in biscuits that young people do want to eat.

We will hear from the Government in due course. The Government, along with the council and trade unions, has put a lot of effort in. I am not aware that there is more that the Government can do, but we will hear its responses to the points that Mr Sweeney made.

Some years ago, Pladis was offered support to relocate in Glasgow. Scottish Enterprise and Clyde Gateway were involved in that, and the Government and the council have strengthened that offer in recent weeks.

The galling thing is that all of this has been happening at a time when the Scottish food and drink sector has been doing very well. Even within the biscuit sector, we see Tunnocks, Walkers and Border Biscuits doing well, while Baxters and AG Barr have been other success stories. We know that Scottish food produce is of a high quality and often commands a premium price on world markets, as is the case with salmon and whisky. One disappointment for me has been that McVitie’s has consistently refused to brand its goods from Tollcross as Scottish. I guess that that makes it easier to package all the biscuits in the same way, but the company has missed a trick there.

Another significant factor is that McVitie’s was not under Scottish ownership with a Scottish headquarters. Being a Scottish company does not guarantee that there will be no problems and no closures. We know that other Scottish businesses have had to cut costs and trim staff. However, when the HQ is in Scotland, it means that there is generally a stronger commitment to continuing here and to supporting the local employees and outside contractors. It also means that the jobs here will tend to be of a higher quality than if the factory was just one among many branches. It therefore seems to me that one of the lessons we can take out of the situation is that we must resist more strongly the takeover of Scottish companies. I accept that that will not apply in every case, but it should be our assumption that it is better to keep HQs in Scotland unless there are specific reasons to do otherwise and not just make the shareholders a fast buck.

United Biscuits was listed on the stock exchange in 1948. Such a listing is sometimes seen as a sign of success, but it is also a sign that control has been lost and that the link with the business roots has largely gone.

There was an excellent article in The Herald in May this year by Martin Stepek of the Scottish Family Business Association. He argued that we need to look at other ways of succession for family businesses, such as selling to their employees.

I hope for the best for the employees of McVitie’s at Tollcross. If the Government can do anything, that will be great and we will all support it, but I also hope that the Government and Scottish Enterprise will take on board the need to keep more business headquarters in Scotland.

13:00  

I thank Paul Sweeney for securing a debate on such an important matter.

I am grateful for the opportunity to speak about a proposal that will have huge adverse consequences for the east end of Glasgow. Like many local residents, I am bitterly disappointed and frustrated over the fashion in which Glasgow’s McVitie’s factory has been pushed towards closure at the expense of so many jobs. First and foremost, my thoughts are with the workers and their families at this difficult time.

I pay tribute to the efforts that have been made by the many public figures, organisations and individuals across our communities who have come together to fight for the McVitie’s jobs in Glasgow. In particular, I would like to thank the members of the save our jobs McVitie’s Tollcross campaign, who, thanks to the sheer determination of their campaigning, attracted almost 80,000 signatures in support of saving the factory.

Despite the bitterly disappointing outcome, the efforts to leave no stone unturned in saving the jobs have been truly remarkable. However, more can still be done.

[Inaudible.]

Ms Thomson, I am not sure that your microphone is on. Is your card in? Can you try again?

I apologise for that.

Does Annie Wells recognise that the regulation—the control of which, as Paul Sweeney said, resides in the City of London—has allowed the company to pull money out, to have very opaque tax arrangements and so on? Will she join me in asking the Westminster Government to sort that out? The regulatory situation is a repeating theme, which has affected a number of businesses across the United Kingdom.

In this debate, we are talking about 500 individuals, and I want to concentrate on them. I will happily have a conversation with the member about the issue that she raises after the debate.

I know that my colleagues in the Glasgow Conservatives, including Councillor Thomas Kerr, have campaigned tirelessly, alongside their Labour and Scottish National Party counterparts, to champion the McVitie’s workers in the face of Pladis’s decision.

I share the anger of so many people about the fact that Pladis appears to be determined to press ahead with the closure of the Tollcross factory, which will result in the loss of almost 500 jobs. For too long, the company has failed to fully support the site. The proposed closure is the final blow to the workforce. The impact that it will have on the workers, their families and the local community cannot be overstated.

Generations of workers in the local area and beyond have helped to bring success to a historic manufacturing institution in Glasgow. More recently, workers have gone the extra mile by continuing to manufacture, despite the difficult circumstances that the Covid pandemic has brought. For the factory to close in such a fashion is a true blow to the local community and the whole of Glasgow. It is a slap in the face to a loyal and highly dedicated workforce.

Sadly, the public health emergency that is presented by the virus is still unfolding. Given that we face one of the biggest economic challenges in our lifetime, the need to secure Glasgow’s and Scotland’s economic recovery has never been more urgent. Many Glaswegians have been forced into financial hardship over the past 18 months, and we are supposed to be looking ahead to a new period of promising economic recovery. The loss of the highly valued jobs at the Tollcross factory is certainly not the start of the economic recovery from Covid that Glasgow needs. In addition, the major retailer Tesco Extra Parkhead, which is also in the east end of the city, has signalled that it might have to downsize, which could lead to further disruption of jobs and livelihoods in the local area.

I fully expect the parties involved to explore every avenue to protect as many jobs as possible. What matters now is that those who face the prospect of redundancy get the right support. I urge the Scottish Government to step up and to commit to making that the case.

13:05  

I refer members to my entry in the register of interests.

The McVitie’s factory means a great deal to me personally. I do not mean the building: I mean the people, the workers. For five years I worked with the GMB and with representatives such as Phyllis Riddell, Margaret Boyd and Tommy McDonald. We organised those workers in battles over skills shortages, understaffing, equal pay, long hours and capital underinvestment.

We won many battles. Some we lost, but those workers are now facing Armageddon, so I say to members here today that it is our duty and the duty of this Parliament not to walk away and accept defeat but to stand firm and fight with the workers.

There is simple injustice at the heart of what is happening here: the injustice that a company or a factory can be bought and sold—and now faces closure—with little or no say for the workers and a transnational corporation unwilling to co-operate; and the injustice that quality brands, some more than 100 years old, that were built up over decades by generations of workers can be taken over, asset stripped and robbed in just 2,000 days. That is nothing less than banditry.

People tell me that the idea of class is out of date and that class does not matter any more. Look at the concentration of wealth and power in the hands of the owners of Pladis. Look at how little wealth or power is in the hands of the workers of Pladis in Glasgow and tell me that there is no class system at work. If ever there was an example of why we so desperately need a different future, beyond this sort of corporate, extractive, asset robbing bandit capitalism run by an ever narrowing elite, this is it.

What is happening at McVitie’s should ring alarm bells for this Parliament and Government. Our economy is precariously exposed to external ownership, which the present Government appears to be, at best, agnostic about and, at worst, positively enthusiastic about. There are alarm bells about what happens when you separate corporate management and control from so-called “mere operations”, even though it is those mere operations that maintain the quality of the brand that makes the money that lines the pockets of shareholders. Alarm bells should also ring to say that, at last, we urgently need a Scottish industrial strategy that is investment-led, puts jobs first and that is people-centred, driven by manufacturing and based on democratic economic planning.

The day must surely come when working women and men like those at McVitie’s Tollcross finally have the power to shape their own destiny and when we have an economy that works in the interests of the many, not the few, where the rights of owners are not absolute and where jobs and livelihoods cannot simply be bought and sold—and sold down the river.

On Tuesday, we marked the centenary of the birth of Raymond Williams who once said:

“To be truly radical is to make hope possible, rather than despair convincing.”

That is why the Parliament must be awakened. Ministers must understand the workers’ anger. They know that the deck is stacked against them. Ministers must understand that we need concerted action from the new coalition Government: not sending in the PACE team, but concerted action. There is still time to save these jobs, to save the factory and to save the workers. That is the task that lies before us. That is what we were sent here to do. I do not want only old memories of the McVitie’s factory. I want today’s workers and the generations to come to have the new future that they deserve.

13:09  

I thank Paul Sweeney for bringing this important and timely debate to the chamber and for the work that he has done on the matter so far. The campaign has been incredible because of the amazing workforce at McVitie’s, and it has given us hope and motivation as politicians. We must win this fight.

The GMB, of which I declare that I am a member, and Unite have left no stone unturned in the resources that they have applied to the campaign, working with Kate Forbes, who we will hear from later.

I have worked with McVitie’s on various issues over the past five years, and there were points at which we felt that changes to the production line signified a lack of commitment. We were always given an assurance, but it has to be said that we had that doubt in the back of our minds.

As Paul Sweeney said, the Glasgow factory has been the highest performing of all the United Kingdom sites and there is no reason, on the face of it, for it to be selected. It has performed against key performance indicators in areas such as efficiency and maintenance, manufacturing and running on time, despite the fact that it has been up against it, given that it clearly needs investment.

I listened to John Mason’s speech. I have spent a lot of time in this Parliament and I have been a constituency MSP and a regional list MSP. I feel that there is something in him, as the constituency member, that seems to be holding back. He seems to be giving up this fight too easily. The lines at McVitie’s were adjusted to reduce the amount of sugar in the biscuits in order to accommodate what is an obvious concern for many factories that make products that contain sugar, so I think that that is a bit of a diversion.

The factory worked through the pandemic as an essential service. As MSPs, we all helped the workforce to get through that difficult time when it was there serving its community. When the workforce was told of the plans to close the site, it was shocked and devastated at the news, and the ripple effects and financial implications for Glasgow’s east end and the Scottish economy are deeply concerning.

I welcome the fact that Kate Forbes and Susan Aitken got together very quickly to work on an alternative plan, and we must work together on it.

I have said from the beginning, when I addressed rallies and spoke to the workforce, and also in the chamber directly to the First Minister, that I have always believed that her status as an international figure, which she is, was instrumental in getting Pladis to the table and I know that she has met the company. I am sure that the cabinet secretary, who has been dedicated to the fight, will appreciate the point that I am making: the involvement of the First Minister has added something and we need to make sure that she will fight with us on this to the death.

That the Government has more to give was one of the central points that Paul Sweeney made. There is more that the Scottish Government can do and can give to ensure that Pladis does not walk away from the site because the offer is too good to refuse. Those are the terms that we need to offer.

I will continue to fight alongside the workforce, the unions, Government ministers, my colleagues, John Mason and anyone who believes that we cannot give up the fight on behalf of the workforce, the people of Glasgow and the west of Scotland, and the industrial landscape that does not need the closure of the McVitie’s factory.

13:13  

I declare an interest as a member of the GMB union.

I congratulate Paul Sweeney MSP on bringing the debate to the chamber, and I thank my colleagues across the Parliament, as well as the GMB and Unite trade unions, for all the tireless work that they have done so far to protect the jobs at McVitie’s. I express my on-going solidarity with the workers at the Tollcross site and their families. I say to them that their fight is our fight and that we will be behind them every step of the way.

Glasgow is a great city and I am incredibly proud to represent it. The fact that it suffers from some of the worst poverty in Scotland is a tragedy, but it is not inevitable. Unemployment rates are rising more in Glasgow than they are in other parts of the country and almost half of Glasgow’s residents live in deprived areas. Glasgow consistently has more people claiming out-of-work benefits than anywhere else in Scotland. According to the Government’s data, last year 34 per cent of children in Glasgow were living in relative poverty.

To make things worse, social security is being cut to the bone. An estimated 40 per cent of Glasgow residents expect to have their benefits slashed by the upcoming changes to universal credit, and some of the worst-affected areas, with more than half of families with children being affected by the cuts, are in three of our city’s constituencies.

On top of that, the council’s budget has been cut by 11 per cent since 2014, despite the Scottish Government’s funding having increased by more than 3 per cent. The Government’s cuts are equivalent to more than £1,500 per household. People in Glasgow can take no more. We must go hard and fast on poverty and inequality all across the UK. When it comes to doing that, I am afraid that neither the UK Government nor the Scottish Government are hitting the mark.

Against that backdrop of poverty and insecurity, the workers at the McVitie’s factory in Tollcross have been told that they are losing their jobs. That is 500 more workers and families facing uncertainty, at risk of being of being pulled into poverty, and being let down by the lack of a safety net to protect people when they lose their jobs. Throughout the pandemic, the McVitie’s Tollcross workers showed up day in, day out. Tollcross is the highest-performing McVitie’s site, as we have heard, with a dedicated and diligent workforce. They have given so much to the factory, and this is the thanks that they get.

The factory has stood in Tollcross for almost a century. Generations upon generations of Glaswegians have worked there, and there are cases of whole households working there together. Many workers have said that the factory is like a second family to them, with others describing the overwhelming feeling of devastation at the prospect of losing it. The factory is not just a workplace; it is central to their lives and a cornerstone of the community.

To see Pladis turn its back is appalling. It is yet another example of how the people of Glasgow are being disrespected. That assault on our jobs and communities cannot be allowed to continue. The McVitie’s workforce deserves better, Glasgow deserves better and the people of Glasgow want better. As of today, the save our jobs petition has 77,456 signatures—a staggering number that speaks to the overwhelming volume of support that the people of Glasgow are showing for the workers at Tollcross. There have been displays of solidarity, including the rally in Tollcross park and the tireless efforts of the GMB and Unite to protect jobs.

Support for the McVitie’s factory reaches beyond Glasgow, because we know that the McVitie’s story reaches beyond our city. For example, there have been demonstrations outside Marks and Spencer stores in Edinburgh and Dundee. The people of Scotland see this injustice and they demand action.

It is not good enough to sit back and watch as 500 people lose their jobs. We have a responsibility to do everything in our power to prevent closure of the site. There is a window of opportunity; it is vital that we grasp that opportunity and do absolutely everything that we can. With the right funding and support, there is no reason why the factory needs to shut. I welcome the efforts that have already been made by the Scottish Government to try to save the Tollcross factory and protect jobs, and I echo the sentiments of my colleagues on the Labour benches.

Pladis’s decision to reject the counterproposal and to continue with the plan to cease operation should not mean that we give up and turn our backs on the workers. Instead, we need now to double down on our efforts and not rest until we have exhausted every option. There are solutions available, whether it is capital funding or investment in machinery and resources.

Should the worst-case scenario come to be, the Government must continue to support the workforce. It must support them into new jobs without allowing anyone to slip into poverty, and it must use all the powers that it has in social security in doing that.

The workers and their families deserve our support. The fight is not yet over and we have their backs. Now is the time to step up the fight for the future of McVitie’s Tollcross factory. I urge everyone in the chamber, regardless of political party, to join the fight and work together to save those jobs.

I call Kate Forbes to respond to the debate. The cabinet secretary is joining us remotely.

13:19  

I thank Paul Sweeney for bringing the debate, and I welcome union representatives including Pat Mcilvogue to Parliament.

As we have heard from members, the importance of McVitie’s Tollcross calls for robust cross-party collaboration and very strong partnership with trade unions to save the factory. I believe that over the past few months, since the announcement by Pladis, we have all risen to the challenge. I would like to thank the trade unions in particular. They work tirelessly to represent their members, even in the face of constant hurdles. I also pay tribute to local representatives, especially David Linden MP, for all that they have done to engage the UK Government in the fight.

I am disappointed not to be in the chamber today, unexpectedly, which is due to my contact with a positive Covid case in the family. Nevertheless, I hope that I can speak robustly for the workers. I know that it is not normally possible to take interventions when speaking remotely, and it is perhaps not the done thing, Presiding Officer, but I wonder whether you would allow me to pause later in my speech to take questions or interventions from members who want to intervene. If I pause, perhaps you could call anybody who stands up.

The announcement by Pladis in May that it planned to close its site in Tollcross, with the loss of almost 500 jobs, was, as other members have articulated, a devastating blow not only for the workers who are directly affected, but for the local area and, indeed, our country. The implications of the decision will have a ripple effect—not just on the workers themselves, who have been through a hugely stressful period, but on supply chains and others whose work relies indirectly on the factory.

Paul Sweeney and others have rightly pointed out that the site has a very rich history in the east end of Glasgow, having been established almost 100 years ago. In addition to the direct effect on the people who are employed, the loss of the brand to Scotland is difficult to accept. That is why, from the very beginning, my priority has always been the workforce at the site. I have ensured that the Scottish Government and others have taken every action possible when it comes to Pladis.

We moved very quickly at the outset to respond to the news with a collaborative partnership approach. We immediately established the action group, and I have chaired that action group alongside the leader of Glasgow City Council. The action group’s membership includes the Scottish Government, Glasgow City Council, a number of public sector partners including Scottish Enterprise, and GMB and Unite. Representatives of the non-unionised staff are also members of the action group, and they have made invaluable contributions and have represented their workforce admirably throughout this very challenging process.

I think that all of us would have liked to have had representation from Pladis itself on the action group. It would have given the group an opportunity to understand the company’s thinking at first hand. It would also have allowed us to put to management direct questions on the company’s rationale. Most important is that it would have allowed us to use all the evidence and data to build the best possible counterproposal. I have written numerous times to Pladis’s managing director inviting him to attend the action group but, to date, every single one of those invitations has been declined.

Instead, we have worked closely with the unions, offering advice and support as they developed the counterproposal, which they presented to Pladis on 27 July. We enlisted the help of external commercial advisers to support and assist the unions in development of the proposal, which is, as others have said, well formed and compelling. The proposal took a lot of effort to produce, which makes it all the more disappointing that just two weeks after it was presented to the company, Pladis rejected it and announced its decision to proceed with closure.

What is doubly hard to take for workers, unions and the action group is that that disappointment is compounded by the fact that when the First Minister and Deputy First Minister met Pladis’s global chief executive on 29 July, he gave very firm assurances that there would be full consideration of, and engagement on, the proposal. Both I and the First Minister have written separately to Pladis, after its decision, to remind the company of that commitment and to ask that it honour it.

At this time of difficulty, I want members of Parliament and the workers to know this: we have worked tirelessly to save the factory and we will not give up. Richard Leonard said that we should not walk away—we have not. We have constantly, continually and unrelentingly pursued the matter. Richard Leonard said that ministers should understand the anger of the workforce. I understand that anger, because I have been speaking to the workers, and I understand that we should not send in the PACE—partnership action for continuing employment—team. We will not. We have established the action group to look at all alternatives to closure. The evidence for what I say in my speech this afternoon is in every step that we have taken over the past few months, in every meeting that we have had with Pladis—at which robust words have been exchanged—and in every action that all of us have taken.

We were prepared to engage with Pladis on how best to progress a commercial proposal, but before discussions had begun, it confirmed its intentions. Our aim was always to present the most compelling case, and we will continue to work together to try to secure the best possible outcome. We stand prepared to continue to engage with Pladis on how we can help to maintain a presence in Scotland.

Before I see whether there are any interventions, I want to touch on a point that a number of members have raised. If we are to continue to provide support—the trade unions, I think, agree with this—we need assurances and commitments from Pladis that it is committed to and will remain in Scotland, and that it will continue to provide employment for the longer term.

To pick up on Paul Sweeney’s question about finance, I make it clear that the First Minister and I have been absolutely transparent and open about our willingness to provide financial support if it means that Pladis will keep the factory open. We have articulated that position in letters as well as in—albeit virtual—face-to-face conversations.

What would not be helpful to the workers or the negotiations would be our offering a blank cheque without any firm commitment that Pladis will keep the factory open. Of course, the fear is that whatever we offer will always be too low for a company that is determined to shut down the factory. My last letter to Pladis in the past few weeks—and, indeed, the First Minister’s last letter in the past week or so—asked a very clear question: what value would be enough to keep Pladis in Scotland? If what we have offered so far is not enough, what will it take to keep the factory open? The answers to those letters, one of which I received, have still not answered that question.

I know that it is not the done thing, Presiding Officer, but I am happy to take interventions at this point.

In response to that offer I say that I am sure that your willingness to engage in that way in the debate is very much appreciated, given that you are self-isolating and are therefore not in the chamber.

However, I have been advised by the senior clerk that the technical platform simply does not allow meaningful engagement in that way at this time. I am confident that members who wish to take up the cabinet secretary’s offer will find the means to do so through correspondence, email, oral or written questions or some other way.

We will have to leave it there, cabinet secretary, so I ask that you bring your remarks to a conclusion.

Thank you, Presiding Officer. It is worth trying to be pioneering, at the very least.

I am very happy to continue conversations and discussions with members outwith the debate. I am not someone who likes to give up, and I am absolutely adamant that the Tollcross factory is vital—not just locally and not just to each of the workers, but nationally. We will continue to work on trying to secure a future for Pladis and its staff here in Scotland.

13:28 Meeting suspended.  

14:30 On resuming—