Official Report 361KB pdf
Deputy First Minister Responsibilities, Economy and Gaelic
Good afternoon. The first item of business this afternoon is portfolio questions, and the first portfolio is Deputy First Minister responsibilities, economy and Gaelic.
Employability Programmes (Support for Parents)
To ask the Scottish Government how its employability programmes support parents of children aged nine months to three years to return to work, in light of the lack of funded childcare for that age group. (S6O-05451)
Parental employability support is available for low-income parents through the no one left behind approach, which emphasises priority family groups, including parents with a child under one. Key workers provide tailored one-to-one support to help remove barriers to employment, identifying flexible work opportunities and linking to wraparound services.
The draft budget protects the £90 million for devolved employability services in 2026-27, with more than £40 million of that supporting parents.
The fact that mums are working full time does not mean that the costs of parenting, especially the cost of childcare, cannot ruin them financially. Yesterday, I heard from a mother of a two-year-old, who told me that, when she is working compressed hours plus two hours after her child’s bedtime, there is no time to mentally recover and that the low level of net pay after childcare means that there is no incentive for mothers to be in work. Does the minister agree that, if hard-working mothers who are earning reasonable wages are questioning whether they can still afford to work, because of the crippling cost of childcare, the system is broken and requires urgent reform, for the sake of the economy if nothing else?
Families across Scotland have benefited from 1,140 funded hours of high-quality early learning and childcare for all three and four-year-olds and eligible two-year-olds since 2021. If families paid for that themselves, it would cost more than £6,000 per eligible child per year.
We have been doing a lot in that area in the past few years, and we have invested heavily in that agenda. Of course, I agree with the sentiments that the member has outlined. We always think that there is a lot more to do, but the statistics show that we are saving a lot of families a lot of money by helping with childcare support.
I have also separately given some indication of what has been invested through the employability agenda.
Young Entrepreneurs (Start Up Challenge)
To ask the Scottish Government what support will be available for young entrepreneurs alongside the £2.5 million funding announced for the First Minister’s start up challenge. (S6O-05452)
The draft budget introduces a £2.5 million young entrepreneurs package to support young people to start, grow and scale businesses. The new funding package will build on existing support for young entrepreneurs including the entrepreneurial education fund and the young EDGE—encouraging dynamic growth entrepreneurs—awards. We will also work with a range of partners to develop new programmes of support, such as the recently launched First Minister’s start up challenge, which is led by the King’s Trust and Dechomai.
The Deputy First Minister will be as keen as I am to ensure that bright young people get to take up this opportunity. Many people in my constituency may face economic challenges or other barriers that mean that they think that opportunities of that sort are not for them. What can we do to let them know that they are?
Ruth Maguire is absolutely right. Role models and mentorship are two of the most critical ways to support young entrepreneurs who are furthest from that path. There is a nomination process as part of the First Minister’s start up challenge, which relates to how we should engage with disadvantaged and underrepresented communities to ensure that they are aware of the challenge and its opportunities. There is funding for projects across Scotland through the entrepreneurial education fund, which is supporting entrepreneurial learning from primary schools to colleges in order to expose more young people to entrepreneurship and the entrepreneurial mindset.
Of course, as the Deputy First Minister points out, the First Minister’s start up challenge fund excludes quite a lot of young people on the basis of their background. That risks the creation of a two-tier system of support for young entrepreneurs. Should support not really be based on the quality of the idea, its scalability and the growth potential that the idea represents in terms of wealth creation and job creation?
I agree with an element of what Stephen Kerr said—that we live in a very fair and open economy. We want to support great ideas and to support great people to start and grow businesses, irrespective of their background or where they live, but we know from the data that some find it harder to break into that than others. For example, 2p in every £1 of investment goes to female entrepreneurs at the moment. They may have a great idea and they might be great people, but there is a barrier there, and that is why we established the pathways programme. The whole point of the First Minister’s start up challenge and the pathways programme is to provide support that is additional to what is universally available, in order to ensure that people from disadvantaged backgrounds can access that help.
Question 3 has not been lodged.
Business Confidence
To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to the recent report by the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales showing that business confidence in Scotland has fallen for the sixth consecutive quarter and is lower than the United Kingdom average. (S6O-05454)
The latest Bank of Scotland business barometer shows companies in Scotland reporting higher confidence in their own business prospects month on month in January—up by 15 points to 53 per cent. That is encouraging.
However, business conditions remain challenging. The United Kingdom Government’s increase in employer national insurance contributions has had significant impact and has contributed to reducing business confidence in Scotland. We have repeatedly called on the UK Government to reverse that increase. We work closely with companies to provide greater certainty and stability, including by improving regulatory practice to make it easier to invest and do business in Scotland.
Hospitality businesses continue to report higher rates and energy costs than their competitors elsewhere in the UK, with industry leaders warning that closures are increasingly likely. They want an immediate pause to revaluation. Lochside House hotel, in my area, has invested in its property and it now faces having its rates increased by £271,000. Businesses are getting penalised for investing. There simply is not an incentive to grow. In the light of collapsing business confidence and the calls from the sector, will the minister today commit to pausing the upcoming revaluation? If not, why not?
The Scottish budget for 2026-27 will ensure the lowest basic property rate since 2018-19. It will support businesses and communities with a package that is worth an estimated £864 million. Many hospitality businesses will benefit from that.
Acknowledging the impact of the revaluation, we will introduce a revaluation transitional relief to protect those who are seeing the most significant increases in rateable values. That will ensure that the gross bills on an estimated 60,000 properties will be lower in 2026-27 than they otherwise would have been. We continue to offer a range of other benefits, including the most generous relief package in the UK for the energy-generating sector and reliefs in other sectors, such as through the business growth accelerator.
Does the minister agree that, whether it is through taxes on our world-class whisky industry, Brexit red tape on our local businesses or the running down of our industries in the north-east, Scotland is being hammered by the consequences of the choices that are being made by a Westminster Government that is out of touch with the reality in Scotland? [Interruption.] Can he say any more about what the Scottish Government is doing to combat that and boost confidence and growth in Scotland?
Yes, I absolutely agree with what Emma Harper has said. It is a shame that Conservative members are humming and hawing or sighing when they hear criticism of Westminster policies. I represent a constituency in the north-east of Scotland that straddles the Highlands, and many of the businesses in my local area—as is the case in much of Scotland—are heavily impacted by Westminster policies, particularly Brexit, which has been hugely damaging to our rural industries and our exports to Europe. They have taken a big hit because of it and because of a range of other policies, such as higher energy costs and the rapid rise in employer national insurance contributions. I agree with Emma Harper’s points. That is why the Scottish budget sets out a lot of support for the Scottish business community.
Financing of Capital Projects (Bonds Programme)
To ask the Scottish Government what implications the recent announcement of next steps for its £1.5 billion bonds programme will have for the financing of major capital projects across Scotland. (S6O-05455)
The multiyear bond programme will provide financing for major capital projects across Scotland. All proceeds from a future bond issuance will be used exclusively for capital investment, in line with our legal powers. Specific issuance plans will be subject to market conditions at the time. The bonds will support the delivery of capital infrastructure priorities that were announced in the spending review and the infrastructure delivery pipeline, both of which were published alongside the budget in January. The bonds programme is an opportunity for us to diversify into cost-effective sources of borrowing in order to attract investment into Scotland and to grow the economy.
Will the Deputy First Minister highlight the key sectors that will benefit from the bonds programme and explain how other Government agencies, such as the Scottish National Investment Bank and the Scottish Futures Trust, can help to leverage in additional funds?
The bonds programme will support a number of sectors across Scotland. Obviously, it underpins the infrastructure delivery pipeline. Although it is difficult to distinguish between sectors that might benefit from, for example, improvements to core infrastructure, such as roads and bridges, the programme includes key investments in projects that will improve our transport, boost digital connectivity, modernise the justice system and enhance health and education facilities.
Agencies such as the Scottish National Investment Bank are making mission-aligned investments across Scotland to grow the economy. The bank recently celebrated its five-year anniversary. Its investments have already crowded in more than £1.4 billion of third-party co-investment.
Will the cost of borrowing through the bonds be higher or lower than the cost of borrowing through the United Kingdom Treasury?
The member will know that the cost of borrowing will be determined at the relevant point in time. We all hope to have a more stable and prosperous economy, which might influence the cost of borrowing.
The key point is that the bonds programme is a direct response to the recommendation of the First Minister’s investor panel, which is made up of Scotland’s best and brightest minds on investment. The investor panel made it crystal clear that one of the advantages of the issuing of bonds is that it will put Scotland on the map and make it an attractive place for other private sector investment that might not be directly linked to the bonds programme. In other words, it is not public borrowing, but it will leverage in additional private sector investment.
My point is that taking a very narrow approach in relation to direct costs totally misses the point with regard to wider private sector investment.
There is a question not only about the cost of borrowing, but about transaction costs. Will the Deputy First Minister set out what the costs will be in bankers’ fees, accountants’ fees and fees to the credit rating agency for raising the bonds?
I will make two points. I address these remarks to Murdo Fraser, too. We would be more than happy to hold a briefing session, as that might help members to understand the process a bit more.
Those costs will be determined when we enter into such transactions with the third-party broker. Right now, the attractiveness of the Scottish economy to investors is growing. I do not think that any member could disagree with the merit of the individuals who sat on the investor panel. Its view was that Scotland had an opportunity to secure additional private sector investment over and above what might be secured through the bond issuance programme alone.
Question 6 was not lodged.
Trade Mission to United Arab Emirates (Exporters)
To ask the Scottish Government what the immediate economic outcomes were for Scotland’s exporters of its recent trade mission to the United Arab Emirates. (S6O-05457)
Our trade mission to the UAE enabled almost 30 Scottish companies to showcase Scotland’s strengths in energy transition, agritech, food and drink and critical technologies. Six Scottish universities joined the programme, which included official events and bilateral business meetings. I also held a number of meetings with UAE Government ministers and signed a bilateral investment memorandum of understanding, to deepen investment co-operation.
The economic outcomes for Scottish companies off the back of the week in the UAE are extremely strong.
Does the Deputy First Minister have further details on what specific support is available to help small Scottish firms to secure international contracts in that market over the coming year?
We are very conscious that Scottish firms are affected by the fact that there is quite a degree of instability around the world. Obviously, US tariffs are having an impact on some of those companies.
The Government is committed to ensuring that we open up new markets and support companies that want to export. Companies can take advantage of a range of export support that is provided by Scottish Development International, which includes bespoke export programmes and trade missions and access to our network of overseas trade specialists. I know from having spoken directly to a number of the companies that were in the UAE that each of them could reference specific advantages that they had secured as a result of doors being opened through that trade mission. We hope that that will ensure that Scottish exports continue to grow and that the value of those exports for Scotland and for Scotland’s economy continues to grow.
“Cities Outlook 2026”
To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to the “Cities Outlook 2026” report and the performance of Scottish cities. (S6O-05458)
The report is very interesting, and we read such reports with some interest. We have committed up to £1.9 billion of investment in city region and regional growth deals across Scotland. We are already seeing results, and that demonstrates the effectiveness of partnership working in upgrading public infrastructure and driving growth in our cities and regions.
According to the report, Scottish cities have seen a real-terms fall in disposable income since 2013. If Scottish cities had grown at the rate of the best-performing English cities, people in Glasgow, Edinburgh, Aberdeen and Dundee would be £12,000 a year better off. That is not random. Indeed, Scottish cities grew more quickly in the previous decade, so what changed? My view is that having combined authorities and devolving powers from the centre around planning, skills and infrastructure have delivered higher growth. Although Scotland’s cities have real strengths and real proximity to each other—we have a Scottish powerhouse—I have to ask the Deputy First Minister, when was the last time that the Scottish Government had a cities policy?
I know that Daniel Johnson always likes it when I say that I will take something away to think about, so I will say that I will think about his question. However, to respond directly to him, I can say that I absolutely believe in the strength of our cities in a global context: Aberdeen, in relation to the energy transition; Edinburgh, in relation to financial services; Dundee, in relation to life sciences; and Glasgow, in relation to culture and the growth that we have seen in financial services in particular. The strengths of our cities are incredibly impressive. Our commitment is to continue to empower the cities to make decisions that are appropriate for their areas.
The report lays bare the stark outlook for Aberdeen if it is left in the hands of a Labour Government that is apparently intent on the deindustrialisation of Scotland and content to risk thousands of jobs in the energy sector.
Who started it?
You!
Please resume your seat, Ms Dunbar. I make a plea to members on the front benches not to shout across the chamber while we are trying to hear a question.
Can the Deputy First Minister advise what discussions she has had with the UK Government around the removal of the energy profits levy, which experts, charities and workers are all calling for?
Forgive me, Presiding Officer; I apologise for shouting across the chamber. However, I take this opportunity to confirm that Mr Hoy asked, “Who started it?” When it comes to the energy profits levy, I am delighted to confirm to the chamber that it was the Conservatives who started it, and that Labour has doubled down on it, increased it, extended it and failed to end it when that was required. Meanwhile, it is having a hugely damaging impact on jobs, investment and opportunities in the north-east of Scotland. We are doing what we can to call on the Chancellor of the Exchequer to remove the energy profits levy and replace it. We hope that other members who are seeing the damage will do likewise.
Getting back to the substance of the question, let us talk in particular about Glasgow, Scotland’s largest city. It is ranked 35th out of the 63 largest cities and towns in Britain when it comes to productivity. In economic terms, that lost productivity measurement is £7.3 billion. There is a logical question to be asked on the basis of the fact that we have had a growth deal in Glasgow for some years now. What tangible, realisable and measurable improvements have there been in Glasgow’s productivity because of the growth deal?
The answer is found in the investors and developers who have chosen to relocate to Glasgow precisely because of the skills of the people and the potential to grow. JPMorganChase and Barclays are examples of global firms that could locate anywhere but have chosen Glasgow and have made Glasgow a financial hub. Whatever I say, anyone who speaks to them will find that they are quite clear about why they did it—the reasons involve access to skill and labour—and what their hopes are for growth and aspiration.
That concludes portfolio questions on Deputy First Minister responsibilities, economy and Gaelic. There will be a short pause before we move to the next item of business to allow for a change in front-bench members.
Finance and Local Government
14:20
The next portfolio is finance and local government. I remind members that questions 1 and 5 have been grouped; I will therefore take any supplementary questions on those after the substantive questions have been answered.
Draft Budget 2026-27 (Local Government)
To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to the statement by the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities that the draft budget 2026-27 “represents a very poor settlement for local government which fails to address the financial situation being faced by councils across Scotland”. (S6O-05459)
Independent commentators agree that the local government settlement has increased in real terms. The budget reality analysis by the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities acknowledges that there is an additional £234.9 million of uncommitted core revenue funding for councils. The budget also provides a further £773 million of funding consolidation and multiyear envelopes to support forward planning.
It was not an independent commentator but COSLA’s resource spokesperson—Scottish National Party councillor Ricky Bell—who said that
“Leaders agreed that this year’s settlement is a very poor settlement for local government”.
If the Scottish Government cannot convince SNP leaders and councillors that the budget is good for councils and communities, why should the public believe it?
I do not think that there has ever been a budget that COSLA has not taken some issue with. That is its role on behalf of local government. It asked for £750 million for adult social care in a single year. That would have been more than the resource consequentials for the entire spending review. The quantum that COSLA would have liked just did not exist. However, we have given COSLA the flexibility of nearly £235 million in the general revenue grant and we have baselined hundreds of millions of pounds more in funding. It is a real-terms increase, as confirmed by commentators that include the Scottish Parliament information centre and the Accounts Commission.
Draft Budget 2026-27 (Discussions with COSLA)
To ask the Scottish Government what discussions it has had with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities following the publication of its draft budget 2026-27. (S6O-05463)
The Scottish Government met the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities on 14 January for formal post-budget engagement and continues to meet COSLA and individual local authorities regularly to cover a range of topics, including the 2026-27 budget.
Cuts to councils are cuts to schools, to care services and to street cleaning. However, members should not take my word for it: senior Scottish National Party councillor Ricky Bell has warned that the SNP Government’s proposed real-terms cuts to council budgets will result in
“reductions in services and jobs.”
The convener of the Finance and Public Administration Committee, who is also a senior member of the cabinet secretary’s party, has called local government the “poor relation” of the budget. Does the cabinet secretary agree with her SNP colleagues, or is she saying that Councillor Bell and Mr Gibson are wrong?
Councillor Ricky Bell and COSLA have a job to do on behalf of local government, and I totally respect that. However, independent commentators, including the Scottish Parliament information centre, which informs MSPs in this Parliament—whether they heed its advice is another matter—confirm that there is a real-terms increase in funding to local government.
As recently as 16 January, SPICe confirmed that the past three Scottish budgets all included real-terms increases for the local government revenue settlement; the Accounts Commission has also confirmed that. If Neil Bibby believes that there should be more money for local government, he can propose that on behalf of his party in the stages of the budget bill—but he will then, of course, have to say where that money has to come from. If he wants to come and see me and propose where that money should come from, my door is always open.
How much will local authorities have to find in 2026-27 to meet the on-going costs of the United Kingdom Government’s public-private partnerships from some 20 years ago—which I believe are still costing us around £1 billion a year—and the increased employer national insurance contributions that were imposed on local authorities from April last year?
Kenny Gibson is right to draw attention to the fact that local authorities will be paying the price for the Labour and, indeed, Tory flawed private finance initiative and PPP deals for some years to come. I think that the scale of the costs were outlined in an answer to a written question that he received.
Kenny Gibson is also right to point to the additional costs as a result of the increase in employer national insurance contributions. The increase means that public services in Scotland face a £400 million annual shortfall, which will have an impact on local government. If Labour colleagues want to be helpful, perhaps they could lobby the UK Labour Government to give us full funding for the increase in employer national insurance contributions.
This morning, I met Councillor Ricky Bell from COSLA, which remains extremely concerned about the budget settlement, particularly the Scottish Government’s failure to fully fund living wage pay increases and the resulting cash crisis that health and social care partnerships face. On the budget and the spending review settlement, the Institute for Fiscal Studies disagrees with the cabinet secretary. It has said:
“Local government and finance is set to see reductions averaging 2.1% a year in real-terms, which would require council tax increases of around 8% just to hold budgets constant.”
Will the cabinet secretary admit that people have seen through her smoke and mirrors and concede that, as a result of decisions that the Scottish Government has taken, Scottish councils are being forced to raise tax on hard-working Scots?
What irony, given that the Tories want to make £1 billion of unfunded tax cuts. [Interruption.] The £235 million of local government funding in the general revenue grant would have to be cut immediately to fund £1 billion of tax cuts.
As for the real living wage, I am very surprised that Tory politicians do not think that employers have a legal obligation to pay the statutory minimum wage. The funding that we are providing is for the real living wage top-up.
Only a proportion of it.
Employers should pay the statutory minimum wage, as they are required by law to do. We are providing hundreds of millions of pounds to provide the real living wage. Craig Hoy’s colleagues never did that when they were in government in the UK—not a penny went to providing the real living wage for those working in social care.
So why is COSLA so unhappy?
I will take another supplementary question from the Conservatives, but I hope that they will listen to the question and the answer with a bit more courtesy than was shown during the previous answer.
Once again, the cabinet secretary has claimed that local government funding has risen in real terms. Given that the Scottish Fiscal Commission, the Fraser of Allander Institute and the Institute for Fiscal Studies talk about a 0.4 per cent increase in real terms, does she accept that councils the length and breadth of Scotland will have to pay more to get less and that individuals and communities will suffer as a result of the budget?
If Alexander Stewart wants to propose more money for local government—I have said this to other members—he is welcome to come to my door and tell me where that money should come from, but that never happens.
The real-terms increase in the local government settlement, when we compare budget with budget, is 2 per cent. As SPICe has told members, we cannot compare the figures in the budget with those in the autumn budget revision because of the in-year movements in funds. Perhaps it is time that members started paying attention to and reading SPICe briefings. If they need any help in understanding them, my door is always open.
Draft Budget 2026-27 (Support for Families in Aberdeen Donside)
To ask the Scottish Government how it envisages its draft Scottish budget 2026-27 will support families in the Aberdeen Donside constituency to address cost of living pressures, including childcare costs. (S6O-05460)
The Scottish budget sets out a range of support that will benefit families right across Scotland. That includes continuing to invest in the provision of 1,140 hours of funded childcare, which would otherwise cost families £6,000 a year; setting out plans to go further by delivering a universal breakfast club offer for primary school-age children; and investing an additional £2.5 million each year to increase wraparound after-school clubs for families. That support is in addition to wider action to tackle the cost of living, including through investment in our warmer homes Scotland scheme, free school meals and the game-changing Scottish child payment.
I thank the cabinet secretary for that answer. The enhanced cost of living support included in the Scottish budget means that people in Scotland will continue to benefit from the most generous cost of living package anywhere in the UK. The delivery of a new universal breakfast club offer for primary school-age children will be of significant benefit to many of my constituents. Can the cabinet secretary provide any further information about how many children in Scotland are anticipated to benefit from the measure, and can she also advise how much that is anticipated to save families per week?
The Scottish Government’s investment will ensure that, from 2027-28, breakfast clubs will be free and universally accessible for all primary school children in Scotland. The overall benefit in terms of the savings to families attending will be shaped by the numbers attending, but it would be equivalent to an hour’s additional childcare. We anticipate that that additional flexibility will support employment opportunities, whether in new positions or in enabling parents to take on additional hours.
Local Government Payroll (Discussions with COSLA)
To ask the Scottish Government what engagement it has had with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities regarding payroll practices in local authorities that can result in two wage payments in a single universal credit assessment period, and can lead to reduced entitlement and rent arrears, including in relation to support available for those affected. (S6O-05461)
The Scottish Government has repeatedly called on the United Kingdom Government to address the fundamental issues with universal credit, which we have spent £1.3 billion mitigating the worst aspects of over the past 15 years. As part of the Department for Work and Pension’s on-going review of universal credit, the Scottish Government has written to the UK Government to set out a number of concerns that we believe reduce the effectiveness of universal credit.
I am grateful to Clare Adamson for raising that important issue. The Scottish Government will seek to engage with COSLA to explore it further.
One of my constituents was affected by the issue in December, when she received two payroll payments, despite no increase in annual income. The issue affects the most vulnerable people in our society. It affects universal credit and housing benefit, leading to rent arrears.
I welcome the minister’s answer, but has he investigated with those employers in the Government’s sphere of influence whether the practice is more widespread?
I certainly intend to further investigate the extent of the issue across the public sector and understand its impact, and to understand whether there are opportunities to address the issue with regard to payroll timing by discussing it with those public sector employers.
On wider support to help households in Scotland who are struggling with their housing costs, we are investing a record £100 million in discretionary housing payment this year to reduce poverty, safeguard tenancies and prevent homelessness. Further, the Scottish welfare fund provides people on low incomes with emergency grants if they are facing a crisis, homelessness or other housing or caring challenges.
I encourage anyone who is concerned about rent arrears to contact their local authority to access support.
Question 4 has not been lodged.
Local Government Finance Settlements (Rurality)
To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on the work that it is doing to recognise rurality in local government finance settlements. (S6O-05464)
Rurality is a key element of the needs-based distribution formula that is discussed and agreed with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities on behalf of all 32 local authorities each year. The Scottish Government and COSLA keep the distribution formula, including rurality indicators, under constant review through the joint settlement and distribution group to ensure that it targets funding towards those with the most need.
Aberdeenshire Council is the lowest-funded rural council in Scotland, and its public services are among the most expensive to deliver across miles of coast and glen. Years of penny-pinching Scottish National Party budgets and eye-watering cuts mean that there are no real savings left to be had. We have more than 3,000 miles of road to be maintained and more than 1,800 bridges—more per capita than anywhere else in Scotland.
When cuts are implemented, rural areas suffer more. Bin collections are cancelled, public transport comes to a halt and grit bins are not where they need to be. The result is that residents in some parts of the shire pay the same council tax as those in larger towns—and, indeed, in other parts of Scotland—but receive noticeably less in return. Does the cabinet secretary recognise that her underfunding of councils has created a postcode lottery in public services in Scotland?
Alexander Burnett should be honest with his constituents that proposing £1 billion of unfunded, unaffordable tax cuts would wipe out any increase to the local government settlement. The £235 million that local government has received for the 2026-27 budget—absolutely every penny of it—would go, and there would be not a single penny of extra funding for Aberdeenshire Council. Alexander Burnett should be honest with his constituents about that.
If Alexander Burnett disagrees with the distribution formula, which has to be agreed with 32 local authorities and COSLA, I am sure that they would be very open to any suggestions that might be made. Any change would of course require the agreement of the 32 local authorities, but I am sure that they would be very keen to hear any constructive proposals that Alexander Burnett would like to put forward.
I have a constituent farmer, Neil Gordon, in Balnaan, who relies on the use of Balnaan bridge to carry out his work. The bridge has recently been closed because of safety concerns in relation to work that requires to be done. As a result, after doing a day’s work, he has to undergo a trip of 100 miles in his car. That is making his business nearly inoperable, to be frank, and it all comes down to money—money that Highland Council does not have.
If the cabinet secretary wants to know where she can get that money from, there is the £250 million for peat restoration; the £200 million for decarbonisation of buildings; or the £20,000 increases that were granted recently to salaries of people at NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde and NHS Lothian, just for doing their jobs. There is plenty of money, cabinet secretary, but it is going to the wrong things and to the wrong people.
Always speak through the chair, please, and supplementaries should be relevant to the substantive question.
The Parliament has previously been unanimous in its support for the climate action that is required to be taken for Scotland, and I think that it would be disappointing if we were to remove the critical investments in peatland restoration and decarbonisation and avoid Scotland playing its part.
However, on Fergus Ewing’s point of concern about the bridge, I am very happy for communication to continue with Highland Council. I think that there has been communication with the Cabinet Secretary for Transport, but I will check that, and I will make sure that Fergus Ewing gets a response on the current status of those communications.
If the rural funding formula for councils is working and is fair, why is SNP-run Dumfries and Galloway Council currently consulting on the ending of free music tuition, removing funding for school-based police officers, shutting the Hillview leisure centre in Kelloholm and scaling back on gritting the roads across the region?
Craig Hoy, of course, is the author of the tax policy that would remove every penny of funding that I have provided to 32 local authorities. The Tories cannot come here demanding more money for local government when they would remove every single penny—
Answer the question.
—of local government funding that the budget provides. Of course, they are going to vote against the £235 million of funding—
Answer the question!
—for local government that will help the 32 local authorities, including the local authority to which Craig Hoy referred.
As I said earlier, the rural distribution formula is agreed with the 32 local authorities through the joint settlement and distribution group. I am sure that they will be more than happy to hear Craig Hoy’s positive contribution to the debate, and I suggest that he contacts COSLA to make those representations on behalf of the local authority that he says that he represents.
Mr Kerr, I have given you a couple of supplementaries during portfolio question time. If you want to ask another supplementary question, please press your button rather than shouting from a sedentary position.
Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer.
Draft Budget 2026-27 (Investing in Communities Fund)
To ask the Scottish Government how much has been allocated in its draft budget 2026-27 to replace the investing in communities fund when the current funding ends in March 2026. (S6O-05465)
Following the publication of the budget, ministers have agreed funding to support an extension of the investing in communities fund for the organisations that are currently supported by the fund. The funding will provide support for 2026-27. We will give effect to that at the appropriate point through the budget bill process, which I hope that Jeremy Balfour and other members across the chamber will support.
Although I am grateful to the minister for the limited extension, there is still a question of what comes next. What does the minister expect charities such as Dr Bell’s Family Centre and the Broomhouse hub in my region that rely on the funding to do in a year’s time when they are faced with the cliff edge again?
Jeremy Balfour raises an important point. I and other members across the chamber are well aware of the importance of the fund for local communities. As I have indicated, the fund will continue during 2026-27. With a new Government coming in in May, I am sure that discussions will begin shortly thereafter on what funding will continue beyond 2026-27.
Richard Lochhead said in response to my question last week that the ICF projects would receive assurances of funding for the next financial year. Recently, they have received correspondence that instructs them to submit a claim by 20 February. Does the minister recognise that that timescale is problematic, given the notification periods for potential staff redundancies and the like? Therefore, can he give any update or an indication of how long projects will have to wait to hear about transitional funding after 20 February?
As I have indicated, funding is in place to extend the fund through 2026-27. I will undertake to engage with officials to ensure that that is communicated adequately to the organisations in question so that they have surety about the continuation of the funding.
Draft Budget 2026-27 (Universal Breakfast Clubs)
To ask the Scottish Government how much it has allocated in its draft budget 2026-27 to support local authorities, including North Lanarkshire Council, to provide universal breakfast clubs from August 2027. (S6O-05466)
As announced during the 2026-27 draft budget statement, we will continue to invest £3 million to fund breakfast clubs that were funded in 2025-26 through the bright start breakfasts fund. We will also provide additional investment of £15 million to phase delivery of a national breakfast club offer. From 2027-28, we will invest £44 million each year to deliver breakfast clubs for all children in primary school across Scotland by August 2027. Acknowledging the draft budget, decisions have not yet been made on funding distribution. We are working with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, local government and wider partners to agree to that.
With around 25,000 pupils in North Lanarkshire alone said to benefit from that policy, including a significant number of young people across Scotland, can the minister set out what the expected impact of the policy will be in sustaining reductions in child poverty in Scotland?
Our £3 million investment in the bright start breakfasts fund is already benefiting families that are most at risk of poverty and it is an important step in meeting the First Minister’s key priorities. The programme will reduce food insecurity, support parents to take up, sustain or increase employment, which will address barriers, particularly for families on low incomes.
That concludes portfolio questions on finance and local government. There will be a brief pause before we move on to the next item of business.
Next
Points of Order