Oil and Gas Production
This week, Scotland’s only oil refinery ceased operations. Hundreds of workers at Grangemouth have lost their jobs and now face an uncertain future. Scotland has vast oil reserves, but we will now need to import all our petrol, diesel and other fuels. That is the price of the Scottish National Party’s and Labour’s hostility towards oil and gas production. Before more damage is done, will John Swinney drop his Government’s presumption against new oil and gas exploration?
First, I express my support for and solidarity with all those in the Grangemouth workforce who face the prospect of losing their employment as a consequence of Petroineos’s decision to stop refining there. The company itself has come to that decision. As Mr Findlay will know from what I have said previously, I judge the decision to be premature, because there is an on-going need for refining activity. Indeed, such activity will take place in other parts of the United Kingdom, despite the issues that Grangemouth faces.
As we have been doing with Unite the union, the Scottish Government will continue to work closely with the workforce at Grangemouth to support the individuals who are affected. In collaboration with the UK Government and Petroineos, we will progress our work to explore alternative business ideas for developing the Grangemouth site so that it could contribute to our net zero agenda. An early decision on the Acorn carbon capture and storage project would help us to advance those efforts significantly.
The SNP used to say, “It’s Scotland’s oil.” Now, it wants to just stop oil. Nicola Sturgeon opposed the development of Cambo oilfield, and Humza Yousaf opposed Rosebank even though such opposition will result in higher energy prices and greater reliance on foreign imports. John Swinney personally brought the Greens into government. These dangerous fanatics want to shut down all oil and gas production. [Interruption.]
Mr Findlay, I remind you of the need for us to treat other members with courtesy and respect.
Okay, I will try again. These dangerous cranks want to shut down all oil and gas production. [Interruption.]
Mr Findlay, we have many questions to get through today. I ask you to remember the need to adhere to our standing orders.
These dangerous ideologues want to shut down all oil and gas production. The Grangemouth refinery is gone. Both Governments share responsibility for that, but greater blame lies with the Government that turned its back on Scotland’s world-leading and innovative oil and gas industry. If John Swinney does not support businesses, how can he act all surprised when they fail?
The first point that I will make in response to Mr Findlay is that we must recognise the climate emergency that we face and the necessity of adapting to that reality. I know that the Conservatives are involved in a pivot on net zero. In fact, they want to deny the climate challenges that we face.
However, the underpinning point, which is at the heart of the Scottish Government’s approach to consideration of further development in the North Sea oil and gas sector, is that any such decision must be the subject of a climate compatibility assessment. That is what the courts have now said is required to take place. The judgments that have been issued, which have led to the United Kingdom Government’s having to revisit parts of its process for determining such applications, have underlined the importance of carrying out such an assessment.
We cannot deny the realities of what we as a society face, and the Government will support industry to transition to that reality. The best thing that we can all do in this Parliament is to argue for the approval of the Acorn carbon capture and storage project, which the Conservatives refused to authorise when they were in office. The quicker we get Acorn approved, the better for Scotland’s climate strategy.
We are being honest with the public about the cost of net zero, but the SNP is not—that is the difference. Instead of learning lessons from the SNP’s harmful approach to oil and gas, the Labour Government is copying it. Even senior Labour figures and the trade unions can see it. Tony Blair says that Labour’s approach is “doomed to fail”, and the GMB says:
“Just switching off investment in the North Sea is absolute madness.”
John Swinney expresses solidarity with Grangemouth workers, but Unite the union says:
“John Swinney and Anas Sarwar will face the wrath of voters for their broken promises to the workers and the people of Grangemouth.”
Labour’s copycat approach will cost more Scottish jobs, increase bills and do more to harm the environment by requiring energy to be imported from overseas. Does John Swinney agree that Labour should in fact do the very opposite of what the SNP is doing?
Mr Findlay talks about honesty. In November of last year, Mr Findlay voted for carbon reduction targets in this Parliament, but when his United Kingdom Government leader questioned their merits—not just questioned but actually suggested that those targets be dumped—Mr Findlay called that refreshingly honest. I call it barefaced dishonesty in front of the people of this country to vote for climate change targets one minute—[Interruption.]
Let us hear the First Minister.
—and press this Government to act on those targets and then, on the instructions of the Conservative leader, desert the field when the going gets tough.
The Scottish Government’s budget, which Mr Findlay did not support, has made available financial support and assistance for the delivery of projects under the project willow umbrella, which will secure the future of the Grangemouth site. I return to my fundamental point that the quickest and best thing that can happen is approval of the carbon capture and storage project at Grangemouth. I hope that Mr Findlay will make up for the failure of the Conservative Government by supporting my call for that today.
I remind all members of the need to treat one another with courtesy and respect and to be very careful about the language that they use to describe other members.
I will tell you what—it is quite something to be lectured by a career politician about barefaced dishonesty when he has built a career on it.
Mr Findlay, please have a seat. We have many important questions that members wish to ask in this session. I am not going to ask again—can we please treat one another with courtesy and respect? Let us focus on the business of the day.
I assumed that the phrase “barefaced dishonesty” was reasonable and allowed, given that the First Minister has just used it.
Mr Findlay, I have addressed that comment. I have reminded the First Minister and all members of the need to treat one another with courtesy and respect. Let us carry on our session in that manner.
People in the real world know that using Scotland’s oil and gas is plain common sense. They also know that we need a mix of energy sources for a stable supply and to cut costs for families and businesses. A new generation of nuclear power stations could be part of that mix, and a new poll shows that most SNP voters agree.
Nuclear energy is green and clean. It produces a reliable and steady supply, and it would bring down people’s bills, but John Swinney is intent on inflicting self-harm on Scotland by blocking all new developments. That is nonsensical, impractical and irresponsible, but he is blinded by ideology. Nuclear energy makes sense for our economy, and it makes sense for our environment, so why does it not work for John Swinney?
It is for lots of reasons—not least that the cost of nuclear power will not bring down energy prices for householders in this country. Mr Findlay wants me to press ahead with the development of new nuclear power stations. The Hinkley Point C project—a nuclear power station—was due to be completed in 2025 at a cost of £34 billion. On current estimates, it is now expected that it will cost £46 billion and be delayed until 2031. If it was supposed to cost £34 billion but will now cost £46 billion, how will that bring down fuel bills in this country?
I say to Mr Findlay that we have a very developed strategy—[Interruption.]
Let us hear the First Minister.
We have a very developed and successful strategy for attracting investment to develop renewable energy capacity in Scotland. We have achieved significant decarbonisation of our electricity networks through the development of renewable technology. A few weeks ago, the Deputy First Minister and I, along with the Acting Cabinet Secretary for Net Zero and Energy, led an investment conference in Edinburgh, which brought hundreds of investors into Scotland to invest in renewable energy. That is the future for this country—clean, green energy that will lower fuel bills. People will get that from an SNP Government.
Mental Health Support (Children and Young People)
This week, statistics that have been revealed through freedom of information requests have shown that young Scots are being shockingly failed by the Scottish National Party Government. All over Scotland, children and young people who are at crisis point and in desperate need of mental health support are having to wait not just months, but years, for treatment. One young person in NHS Lothian was forced to wait six years for mental health treatment. That is scandalous. Why, on John Swinney’s watch, are people’s sons and daughters, nieces and nephews, waiting six years to get the treatment that they need?
I am very happy to address the particular case that Mr Sarwar raises with me and to say—which he knows from my previous answers—that, in general, we are working to reduce waiting times for individuals to access treatment across the health service in Scotland, and we are making progress in a number of areas in relation to that objective. He will also know that the Government has delivered increased investment in mental health support to expand capacity to meet young people’s developing needs. I want to ensure that our investments are well targeted in order to address the issues that Mr Sarwar has raised. That is why we increased the funding for mental health support, and that is why we are putting in place assistance around the country.
The situation is so bad that today’s Daily Record reports that Rod Stewart has offered to step in and pay for a young Scot to access the care that he needs.
The SNP claims that it is meeting its target for 90 per cent of children and young people to start mental health treatment within 18 weeks, but we can reveal that it is fudging the numbers and that things are much worse than it is letting on. Some health boards are now counting an initial assessment as treatment when, in fact, young people may still be waiting for months or years for their actual treatment to start, and health boards are now removing diagnoses of autism and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder from child and adolescent mental health services waiting lists. The SNP is fiddling the figures. Why does John Swinney think that it is acceptable to mislead the public about our young people and their mental health treatment?
That is not what we are doing. We are focusing on ensuring that support is in place in communities the length and breadth of the country.
It is often the case that CAMHS is simply not the correct service for children who are seeking a diagnosis for a neurodevelopmental condition such as autism or ADHD, unless they have a co-existing mental health condition. That is the key point that I need to get across to reassure parents, who will be anxious about the issues that Mr Sarwar raises. As he knows, we have made progress on the CAMHS waiting lists in the past year. The overall CAMHS waiting list decreased by 20.9 per cent in the previous year and that progress has continued in the latest quarter.
The Government will be focused on ensuring that the support that is necessary for individual young people is available to them, and that the right pathway is put in place to meet the needs of every young person in Scotland. That is the commitment that I give to Parliament today, and that is the foundation of the Government’s approach in that respect.
Let us talk about one of the parents. Michael Gregori is a father from Dumfries. His son Iain was one year old when a health worker told Michael that Iain could be autistic and recommended a national health service diagnosis. Three years on, Iain is still non-verbal and is still waiting on a diagnosis. Michael was a member of the Scottish National Party and campaigned for it to be in government, but he told me that it should now hang its head in shame, as it has let Scotland down. Speaking of his son, he said:
“Everyone’s saying he needs this diagnosis, he’s autistic. Everyone’s sure of it but at the same time he needs an official NHS diagnosis to get the resources he needs.”
Rod Stewart heard that heartbreaking story and has stepped in to pay for Iain’s diagnosis. Others will not be as lucky. Why, on John Swinney’s watch, do young Scots have to rely on the charity of a rock star to get the treatment that they need?
It is not the case that a diagnosis is necessary for young people to get support. It is absolutely critical that I make that point to Parliament today, because there are pathways that are available other than those involving a diagnosis for ADHD or a neurodiversity condition that enable young people to attract the support that will assist them in meeting the challenges that they face. It is vital that I convey that message at First Minister’s question time today, so that parents can be reassured that there is support available to meet the needs of individual young people.
The Government is making a range of interventions. We are expanding mental health support and supporting the development of community interventions, and we are working to ensure that young people get support at the earliest possible opportunity. A variety of pathways enable that to be the case, and ministers will continue to focus on delivering the services that young people need in our country.
Car Use (Reduction)
As with its climate targets, the Scottish Government is not on track to meet its targets to cut car use. It sounds like, instead of putting forward a practical solution for success, its preferred solution is to drop the target altogether.
We urgently need to cut car use to tackle the climate emergency. We need cheaper trains, buses and ferries to drive up passenger numbers. We need better connections for rural communities, and we need public ownership of bus services, so that they are run for the people who use them, not for private profit.
Will the First Minister confirm that the Scottish Government is scrapping the car-use reduction target?
As is well understood, there are significant challenges in our meeting the car-use reduction target, and that issue is being considered by the Government at this time.
It is important that I set out the range of other measures that the Government is taking to invest in supporting the use of public transport, which is our way out of the challenges that we face on the issue. One of those investments is the support for the concessionary travel scheme, which is now much more extensively available, since we expanded it—with the support of our colleagues in the Green Party—to under-22s. We have also invested significantly in active travel, with support sustained in the Government’s budget, which attracted support in Parliament earlier this year, to ensure that we address the necessity of changing the priorities of individuals.
The Government has examined and explored a range of different options to support the development of our policy. We will continue to do that as we work, as part of our climate agenda, to reduce car use and to increase the reliance of members of the public on public transport.
Scotland simply cannot afford any more broken promises on climate issues. Economists have found that, if we do not act now, Scotland could be up to £140 billion poorer by 2035. Through their soaring energy bills, people have been paying the price for a lack of progress on insulating our homes and moving away from expensive gas heating.
There is no route to net zero by 2045 that does not involve making our homes warmer and cheaper to heat by insulating them and replacing gas heating systems. Bold action is needed on climate to get Scotland back on track. What new action will next week’s programme for government contain to reduce our sky-high energy bills and achieve the rapid cut that is needed in the use of fossil fuels?
Obviously, the details of the programme for government will be set out next Tuesday, but we have already given a commitment to the introduction of the heat in buildings legislation, which will be introduced in this parliamentary session to support us in our efforts.
We have also committed to investing, in this current budget year, £300 million in the heat in buildings programmes, which will increase energy efficiency and provide financial support to do exactly what Lorna Slater has put to me. That comes alongside more than £1.63 billion of funding through our heat in buildings schemes in this parliamentary session so far.
I simply say to Lorna Slater that I understand—and share—her passion and determination to make progress on the climate agenda, and that it is at the heart of the Government’s priorities. However, we must also recognise the formidable financial commitments that have been made to decarbonise heating systems in the homes of our constituents and ensure that, through that mechanism, we contribute to reducing their effect on the climate. That will be at the heart of the Government’s agenda as we move forward.
Economic Growth (Implications of EY ITEM Club Spring Forecast)
To ask the First Minister what assessment the Scottish Government has made of any implications for its work to grow Scotland’s economy of the EY ITEM club spring forecast, which downgraded expectations for United Kingdom output over the next two years. (S6F-04049)
The EY ITEM club forecast reflects the negative impacts that global trade disruption and uncertainty will have on the economy, highlighting the need to commit ourselves to Europe and its single market.
We will continue to do all that we can to support businesses and households through those challenges. Our programme for government will focus on delivery, including targeted initiatives to boost Scotland’s economic prospects now and for the long term, particularly sustainable and renewable energy resources, to draw in new investment and create rewarding and well-paid jobs.
It is becoming increasingly clear to the Chancellor of the Exchequer that we cannot cut our way to growth, and the Labour Government must urgently abandon its tax on jobs and the austerity fiscal rules under which it is operating. Does the First Minister agree that abandoning those measures is key to unlocking greater investment in our economy, and can he speak to the actions that his Government is taking to stimulate growth?
The United Kingdom Government has taken on fiscal targets that it inherited from the Conservatives and which are enormously damaging to a growth agenda, and it has compounded that error with the increase in employer national insurance contributions, which will be a further depressant on growth in the economy. The conflict and contradiction between the rhetoric on growth and the reality of decision making is becoming ever more apparent, because of the global economic challenges that we face.
The programme for government will set out additional measures that the Scottish Government will take to build resilience in the Scottish economy, to support our economy to have an international focus and outlook, and to make sure that we support and encourage innovation in the Scottish economy, which is the route to success for Scotland.
One of the key issues that is holding back economic growth is the high cost of energy, which we have already discussed today. Last year, the Scottish Government was very enthusiastic about the idea of zonal pricing of electricity. Is that still its view?
There has to be a careful assessment of the impact of zonal pricing on a variety of factors. For example, will it bring down energy prices for householders, which is the absolutely critical and urgent priority? Will it secure the necessary investment in the future of our energy systems? Will it enable us to contribute towards the economic growth and economic development agenda? I notice that Mr Fraser asks me this question while being associated with a party that presided over sky-high energy prices in this country and did absolutely nothing about the problem.
Neurodevelopmental Assessment Services (Report on Tests of Change)
To ask the First Minister, in light of the reported high demand for neurodevelopmental assessment services, when the Scottish Government plans to publish the report on the work that it funded on the five “tests of change” across Scotland, which concluded in March 2024. (S6F-04036)
Following development of the neurodevelopmental specification, which aims to ensure that children and families receive timely support that meets their needs, the Scottish Government has provided £1 million of funding across Highland, Fife, East Lothian, Aberdeen city and Forth Valley for projects to test and support implementation. A report on the five tests of change will be published this summer.
Not imminently, then.
In the Highlands, we have a situation in which the health board has a neurodevelopment assessment waiting list of 1,958 young children—four times greater than it was three years ago. NHS Highland says that some children will have to wait in excess of five years even to get an assessment, and that it will take some 15 years to fully clear the existing waiting list. Does the First Minister consider it acceptable that some children will go through their entire school career waiting for an assessment, or that parents will have to fund private care to ensure that their children get the most from their schooling?
As Mr Mountain will know, NHS Highland was supported with funding for a time-limited test of change, which has concluded, as I said earlier. A new neurodevelopmental pathway is in development with local partners to address exactly the issues that Mr Mountain has put to me. I encourage NHS Highland to progress that work, using the £7.1 million of funding that it receives as part of the overall funding given to national health service boards by the Scottish Government to support neurodevelopmental services.
I would stress the importance of seeing a range of different interventions, some of which are assisted by the counselling services in schools that the Government has funded. We continue to provide £16 million a year to local authorities to ensure that there are counselling services in every secondary school in Scotland, and we are maintaining financial support through the mental health assistance that we have in place. All those factors are contributing to addressing the issues that Mr Mountain has put to me.
The First Minister has set out the factors that are addressing the issue, but there are currently 9,000 school-age children awaiting a diagnosis in Glasgow. At the same time, the cuts to the integration joint board in Glasgow mean that planned attention deficit hyperactivity disorder pathways have been shelved and vital pilot programmes have been cancelled. The First Minister can say that there are pathways, but those 9,000 children are stuck waiting, some of them for years.
What does the First Minister say to the 9,000 people who are on the waiting list in Glasgow? Exactly what pathways are available to them, and when can they expect to get their diagnosis?
I come back to one of the points that I made to Mr Sarwar in my earlier response, which is that not all of those young people require a diagnosis to make progress in addressing the circumstances that they face. Therefore, we must have available a range of community-based interventions, supported by some of the financial assistance that I have set out, to ensure that the needs of those young people are met at the earliest possible opportunity.
As a consequence of that, the Government is working to ensure that we have those mechanisms available in all localities so that young people can access those services. That is what the funding that I set out in my response to Mr Mountain is designed to achieve.
Council Housing Allocations (Suspension)
To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government’s response is to reports of local authorities suspending council housing allocations. (S6F-04032)
I am aware of the City of Edinburgh Council’s recent announcement on the issue. The emergency measure taken by the council will redirect all available council-owned housing stock to people who are experiencing homelessness, with the exception of those with a disability with gold priority for housing or those who are awaiting discharge from hospital.
It will be essential to monitor the impact of that temporary measure, as the council seeks to fulfil its legal responsibilities as well as reduce the use of unsuitable temporary accommodation in the city. The Government will continue to deliver our investment of £768 million in affordable housing this year, the majority of which will be for social rent.
The reality of the housing emergency in Scotland is that local authorities such as the City of Edinburgh Council have been left in an impossible position. They are routinely breaching their legal obligations and are now having to take emergency measures, and all of that is having huge impacts on families in desperate need of an appropriate home.
The Scottish Government has been reviewing the affordable housing supply programme target for more than a year, instead of focusing on building those houses. Will the Government commit to building those 110,000 homes in the final programme for government, as it did in the first? Does he recognise that a lack of supply across all tenures is driving the housing emergency? Will he look at the action being taken by a United Kingdom Labour Government, and which is now being proposed in Canada, Australia and other parts of the world, to really drive up housing supply?
Let me reassure Mr Griffin that the Government is not spending all its time reviewing the affordable housing supply programme target; it is spending its time making sure that more houses are available for occupation by individuals in temporary accommodation or facing homelessness. The actions of the Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice and the Minister for Housing in making more resources available to local authorities to tackle void accommodation are having an impact on the availability of accommodation in the city of Edinburgh as we speak. We have pivoted in our policy to ensure that more accommodation can be available.
Also, over the lifetime of this Government, we will have built more houses per head of population than in any other part of the United Kingdom, by a country mile. We have invested £768 million in the affordable housing supply programme for the current financial year, which will be spent and will support the increased supply of housing. Mr Griffin and his colleagues never voted for that, and he has a bit of a brass neck to come here and complain to me about housing when he is not prepared to vote for the money that is being given to make something happen about it.
It is deeply concerning that the City of Edinburgh Council has decided to suspend council housing allocations, especially when so many people in my constituency and others are already waiting to be housed.
Labour has been in power in Edinburgh for around 35 of the 40 years of my life, and it is clearly a statement of fact that, over decades, its Labour-run administrations have not invested enough in the city’s social housing stock. Will the First Minister, in contrast, outline what additional steps the Scottish Government is taking, has taken and will take to play its part in tackling Edinburgh’s acute housing emergency, and what additional actions are being considered with partners to help address that very serious situation?
I will address Mr Macpherson’s point directly, because he makes substantial points about the record of the Labour Party.
Since we declared the housing emergency last May, we have prioritised working most urgently with five local authorities, including the City of Edinburgh Council, and we are accelerating and accentuating the interventions in Edinburgh to address the very significant issues that Mr Macpherson has put to me. We have also, as I said in my response to Mr Griffin, reshaped investment to ensure that we can support local authorities in tackling void accommodation, and we have increased support for adaptations in properties to enable people to be supported in their housing.
I appreciated the opportunity to discuss those issues with Mr Macpherson when we visited the former Granton gasworks site some weeks ago. The Government has invested £16 million to enable development of that site, which will lead, if my memory serves me right, to the creation of more than 800 affordable homes in the city of Edinburgh. That is the type of targeted action that the Scottish Government is taking to address the housing emergency, and it will be the underpinning of our housing programme in the years to come.
We move to constituency and general supplementary questions.
Reinforced Autoclaved Aerated Concrete Crisis (Funding)
The Press and Journal has reported as part of its trapped by RAAC campaign that the crisis in Aberdeen caused by the use of reinforced autoclaved aerated concrete is leading to unremitting and inescapable negative health consequences for homeowners. My solution, which is to use the unspent £20 million housing fund promised to Aberdeen by the Government in 2016, is being widely reported today. Does the First Minister support that, and will he commit his Government to doing everything that it can to help the Torry homeowners?
I have every sympathy with the homeowners in Torry and the issues that they face. I understand that ministers are meeting residents and homeowners tomorrow to discuss those issues, and I am sure that the suggestions that Mr Kerr has made will be part of that conversation.
PA Scotland (Staff Cuts)
Given that Scotland’s media relies on PA Scotland’s output, I am sure that the First Minister will share my concern about its planned cuts to staff that were reported this week. Those cuts could have considerable impact on news operations in Scotland, particularly in the year running up to an election. Will the First Minister join me in calling on PA Media’s management to reconsider the cuts in order to protect impartial journalism and preserve the important role of media scrutiny in our democracy?
I join Rona Mackay in indicating support for the important role that the output of PA Media and PA Scotland plays in reporting events and political discourse in Scotland. PA staff are an integral part of the authoritative and reliable reporting of events and political engagement, which is essential for our democracy and supports the availability of information to news organisations the length and breadth of the country. I have written to PA Media, urging it to reconsider the proposals, and I hope that the organisation is able to take a different approach and ensure the independence, long-term sustainability and resilience of news reporting in Scotland through it.
Alcohol Harm
Alcohol harm continues to be a key concern in Scotland. In East and South Ayrshire, an area that I represent, a combined total of 50 lives were lost to alcohol in 2023. Today, a briefing signed by more than 70 organisations has been published, which calls for urgent action on alcohol harm. It states that the current Scottish Government action is not proportionate to the scale of the problem and it makes a range of recommendations around early diagnosis for liver disease and funding for recovery treatment and support services. Will the First Minister consider that important briefing’s proposals as he prepares to publish the programme for government next week?
Those issues and representations will be taken very seriously by the Government. We engage and support that effort through the alcohol and drug partnerships around the country; Carol Mochan will be familiar with those in the communities that she represents.
We have taken a number of measures to tackle alcohol harm in our society, and we will continue to consider what further measures we can take. I recognise that the measures that we have taken so far have not addressed all the circumstances that we face, and we must be open to some of the suggestions that are made. There is space for us, as a Parliament, to find areas of common ground to try to make progress on this agenda, because it requires long-term intervention and action—a combination of public awareness and healthcare and support services to meet individuals’ needs.
Renewable Energy Supply Chain
This week, Scottish Renewables published its latest supply chain impact statement, which showcases a diverse range of businesses working across Scotland’s renewable energy supply chain, including Apollo, GQS and Ternan Energy in Aberdeen. Will the First Minister join me in welcoming the report, which represents nearly 10,000 jobs? Will he also outline how the Scottish Government is supporting the renewable energy supply chain to capture economic benefits for Scotland?
I join Audrey Nicoll in welcoming the report. The Government has a long-standing commitment to support supply chain developments in renewables—indeed, that was very much a focus of the investment conference to which I referred earlier. We are investing up to £500 million over five years to anchor our offshore wind supply chain in Scotland. We have also been successful in securing major investments such as Sumitomo at Nigg, the investments at Ardersier by Haventus and a number of other projects that are in active development to secure supply chain benefits for Scotland from the significant opportunity of renewable energy.
Antisocial Behaviour on Buses (Under-22s Concessionary Pass)
At this week’s Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee meeting, Sarah Boyd from Lothian Buses made it clear that there is a link between the increase in antisocial behaviour on the Lothian Buses fleet and the under-22s concessionary bus pass. Will the minister provide an update on progress to find a mechanism to remove the under-22s concessionary pass from those who persistently engage in antisocial behaviour?
Work is under way to develop that mechanism. If we were to take that step, there is the likelihood that secondary legislation would be required to enable the mechanism to be put in place. The Government is actively considering those issues. For completeness, I should also say that the under-22 bus travel initiative has been enormously successful. It has attracted a huge amount of participation and it has increased the mobility of young people. The overwhelming majority of young people exercise their participation in the under-22s scheme wisely, thoughtfully and effectively. We have to be prepared to tackle unacceptable behaviour, but we also have to applaud young people for the positive contribution that they make to our society.
CitizenCard Identification
I was contacted by a constituent with epilepsy, who is not eligible for a driving licence. For identification, they use the CitizenCard, which is part of the proof of age standards scheme. However, they find themselves refused service from many places that have a blanket policy for ID. Does the First Minister share my concern that my constituent is being unfairly treated due to their condition? Will he direct ministers to improve acceptance of the CitizenCard for those people who do not have a driving licence?
It is not a point with which I am familiar, but I will look at it on Mr Choudhury’s behalf, if he could supply me with more details about the specifics to enable me to do so.
Various mechanisms are available to individuals, not least the under-22s concessionary scheme—although I am not sure of the age of the constituent whose experience Mr Choudhury puts to me. If he would like to write to me, I will certainly consider those issues.
Employer National Insurance Contributions
Fraser of Allander Institute research has found that almost half of Scottish firms are hiring fewer staff because of the increase to employer national insurance contributions that was imposed by the United Kingdom Labour Government. That tax on jobs takes a wrecking ball to the Scottish Government’s ambition of growing Scotland’s economy. What discussions have ministers had with their UK counterparts regarding the impact of Labour’s unwanted tax hike? Has the Labour Government shown any sign of listening to the concerns of Scottish businesses, charities and the public sector?
The Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government has raised that issue on a sustained basis with the United Kingdom Government. I agree with Mr Gibson’s analysis and commentary that the increase in employer national insurance contributions will deflate employment opportunities in Scotland, which I very much regret, as it will be another impediment to the agenda of delivering economic growth in Scotland.
Given the enormous external challenges that we face, the Government’s focus is to ensure that we do all that we can to support economic growth. It would assist us enormously if the UK Government changed its position on employer national insurance contribution rises.
Probationary Teachers
This week, Scottish Teachers for Permanence published its 2025 report on the views of probationary teachers. It makes grim reading: 80 per cent of those who were surveyed are set to end their probationary year without a permanent job, and more than 75 per cent say that they are not feeling supported during the time when they should be supported most. Those highly trained teachers are telling us—these are their own words—that once they have qualified, they are being “thrown onto” the supply pile and are scrambling for scraps of work with no security and no permanent role, and, in some cases, are not even guaranteed supply work. The Scottish Government has said that supply is a choice, but that is not true. If the First Minister’s Government truly values education, why is it abandoning the next generation of teachers at the very start of their careers?
We are not doing that. The Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills met Scottish Teachers for Permanence in November and discussed many of the issues that Mr Ross has raised. We have seen an expansion in the number of schoolteachers in post since 2014, and the number of permanent posts has remained stable at more than 80 per cent over the past 10 years.
Decisions about the employment of teachers are taken by local authorities, and the Government works closely with them to ensure that we increase levels of permanence in the teaching workforce so that the investment that is made in training high-quality teachers can be used for the benefit of pupils around the country.
Youth Violence
Earlier this month, in my West Scotland region, two young girls were brutally assaulted by other teenagers during two horrific incidents just days apart. The incidents were recorded and shared widely on social media. I am sure that the whole Parliament will agree that such incidents are completely unacceptable and will join me in the concern that there is now an increasing list of similar incidents across the country.
The Government’s answer to the wider problem so far seems to have been that the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills has led a number of summits on the issues. However, surely an important part of the Government’s response must be more safe places and local facilities to support young people. What decisive action will the Government finally take to tackle these issues? Will it reverse years of cuts and closures to youth centres, youth clubs and programmes due to its chronic underfunding of local authorities, or will the First Minister simply instruct the education secretary to hold yet another talking shop?
I drew together a gathering as a consequence of the initiative that was started by the Daily Record and some of the families affected by the unacceptable violence that Mr O’Kane refers to. I was pleased to host that summit on 13 January with cross-party representation. If memory serves me right, Pauline McNeill from the Labour Party attended and made a constructive contribution to the discussion, in which members of all parties and ministers participated and listened to the voices of young people.
Let me say at the outset that what Mr O’Kane recounts to the Parliament is completely unacceptable. We are taking a number of measures through our various awareness campaigns, such as the mentors in violence prevention programme, which is delivered in more than 200 schools in local authorities across the country; the work of the cashback for communities programme; the work of fearless, the youth arm of Crimestoppers; and the work of the Scottish Violence Reduction Unit. All those measures are aimed at creating a culture in which the things that were set out by Mr O’Kane do not happen to young people. We invest in facilities around the country through a variety of interventions that are set out in the Government’s budget, which has delivered a real-terms increase to local authority funding and supports third sector interventions to meet the needs of communities around the country. We will continue to do that.
That concludes First Minister’s questions. The next item of business is a members’ business debate in the name of Emma Harper. There will be a short suspension to allow people to leave the public gallery and chamber.
12:46 Meeting suspended.Previous
General Question Time