Tax
Rachel Reeves is going to raise taxes. Is John Swinney going to do the same?
There has been a huge amount of speculation about the United Kingdom Government’s budget. The Scottish Government will set out our position on tax in the budget on 13 January, and we will consider all the issues and the implications of the UK Government’s budget in November.
Labour is breaking promise after promise. Rachel Reeves called last year’s budget a “once in a Parliament” event. She claimed that she would not be coming back with more tax rises this year. She claimed that she would stick to her manifesto promise not to raise income tax and not to hit working people with higher bills, but that is exactly what Labour is set to do. If John Swinney will not rule out tax rises, does he think that Labour is right to increase income tax?
Decisions on tax issues have to be taken very carefully. The Chancellor of the Exchequer will be accountable for the decisions that she makes, and the Scottish Government will take our decisions accordingly and respond.
I observe that the decision that was taken in last year’s budget, to which Mr Findlay has referred, to increase employer national insurance contributions has had a profoundly damaging effect on the economy in a variety of areas, because it has increased the cost of employment. It was an absurd policy decision to take by a Government that is apparently focused on a growth agenda, because the decision is stifling growth in our country today.
I agree entirely with the First Minister about employer national insurance contributions, but he does not seem to know whether he supports Labour’s tax rises. I remind him of what he said after last year’s UK budget. He said:
“the UK Government should have increased income tax.”—[Official Report, 14 November 2024; c 13.]
The tax rises will be a hammer blow to Scottish workers. We have two left-wing parties that only want to tax, tax, tax. Labour is doing the same as the Scottish National Party has done for the past decade. Most workers in Scotland pay more than those in the rest of the UK who do the same job and earn the same amount. The SNP has increased taxes, driven away aspirational workers, damaged business confidence and held back Scotland’s economy. [Interruption.]
Let us hear Mr Findlay.
People deserve a break, so will John Swinney give a cast-iron guarantee that there will be no further tax rises—whether it is income, business or property tax—in the Scottish budget?
Mr Findlay will not be surprised to hear me say that those questions will be answered in the budget when the Scottish Government sets out to the Parliament the commitments that we are going to make.
We have asked some people in Scotland to pay more in tax, but I note that the independent Scottish Fiscal Commission has confirmed that the majority of taxpayers in Scotland are set to pay less this year than they would elsewhere in the United Kingdom. That is the judgment of the independent Scottish Fiscal Commission.
Of course, the public finances that we provide as a consequence of our decisions pay for different provisions in Scotland. Our decisions mean that university students pay no tuition fees. They mean that there is free bus travel for under-22s. They mean that no prescription charges are levied in Scotland. They mean that the Scottish child payment is helping to keep children out of poverty, with the level of child poverty falling in Scotland. Yes, there are tax issues to be confronted, but there are also public expenditure decisions that are improving the lives of people in Scotland.
John Swinney is spinning like a washing machine. Last month, he accused me of misleading the Parliament in what I said, but, in doing so, he misled the Parliament. He is at it again today. I will say it once more: most Scottish workers pay more income tax than is paid by those in the rest of the UK.
John Swinney’s answers today will not reassure any Scottish home owner or business owner. He will not rule out increasing the tax on buying a home, he will not rule out raising taxes on businesses, and it seems that he is plotting yet another income tax raid on hard-working Scots. On top of all that, the SNP’s plans could result in massive rises in council tax—reportedly as high as £6,500 a year. Raising taxes every year is not sustainable. Workers and businesses cannot afford it. People deserve to keep more of their own hard-earned cash. Should John Swinney not be looking to bring bills down, not hiking them higher, year after year?
I simply point out to Russell Findlay that council tax in Scotland is lower on average than it is for properties in England. That is the position today: council tax is much lower. Furthermore, as I said in my earlier answer, the majority of taxpayers in Scotland are set to pay less than they would elsewhere in the United Kingdom this year, according to the independent Scottish Fiscal Commission.
My Government will do what we have always done, which is to bring forward orderly budget provisions relating to tax and spending commitments, so that we can fund our public services and our investments in the Scottish economy.
We have heard from Russell Findlay and the Conservatives for a consistent period that they are not prepared to engage in the tough judgments about delivering public services. They keep on asking for more money, but they will not take the decisions to enable money to be raised. That is pure and utter hypocrisy, and it is what we get from the Conservatives.
Scottish Ambulance Service (Waiting Times)
I start by welcoming the First Minister’s change of heart on holding an investigation into Scotland’s maternity services. Less than 24 hours ago, after hearing the heartbreaking testimony of mothers, he whipped his MSPs to vote against such an investigation. I am glad that he went home and thought again. Unfortunately, the situation in maternity services is just a snapshot of the crisis and chaos in our national health service. Scotland’s ambulance service is also in crisis.
This week, we heard about Queen’s Park Football Club defender Charlie Fox, who suffered a serious knee injury during a match at Firhill stadium that had a 3 pm kick-off. An ambulance was called, but it did not arrive until 1 am, nearly 10 hours later—10 hours lying in pain.
That happened just weeks after footballer Brooke Paterson was left abandoned on the pitch, waiting for an ambulance. What does John Swinney say to Charlie, Brooke and all other Scots waiting in pain?
I am very open with Parliament about occasions when public services do not meet the reasonable and legitimate expectations of members of the public. I looked into the Brooke Paterson case, and the examination of the information that was available to me showed that an error had been made in the classification of that call. That is regrettable, and I have apologised in writing to her.
In relation to the case of Charlie Fox, the length of time that he was left to wait appears to me to be completely unacceptable. The Scottish Ambulance Service is investigating the circumstances behind the incident, and I apologise for the length of the wait that he experienced.
Our public services continue to operate under enormous pressure, but they also deliver a fantastic service to members of the public in most cases, although not in all cases. In those cases in which they do not deliver, people can expect the First Minister to address those issues and to apologise accordingly.
Week after week, John Swinney apologises for the Government’s performance and things continue to get worse. A month ago, he apologised for long ambulance waits, but apologies simply will not cut it any more. When Scots call 999, they expect help to come.
That is what David McClenaghan expected when he had a heart attack. He called for help and gave his address, but when the ambulance arrived, the crew never even got out. David was later found dead on the floor. That was seven years ago, and a fatal accident inquiry is now under way. Since then, response times have got worse. Ten years ago, 83 per cent of life-threatening cases saw an ambulance arrive in 10 minutes; when David McClenaghan died seven years ago, that figure had fallen to just 73 per cent; and now, it is 61 per cent. That is shocking.
Why is the situation continuing to get worse and worse on John Swinney’s watch? Do not simply stand up and say that you are sorry.
Always speak through the chair.
I recognise that there will be occasions on which public services do not meet the expectations of members of the public. I think that the right thing to do—I will do this no matter what Mr Sarwar puts to me or how he characterises my responses—is to be honest and open with the public and to apologise when those standards are not met.
I can say that Scottish Ambulance Service staffing has gone up by 31 per cent in the past 10 years and that we now have more paramedics—the number of paramedics has gone up by 57.6 per cent in the past 10 years. I can also say that, according to the most recent data that is available to me, the median response time for purple calls was 7 minutes 51 seconds. That information is relevant and important because it relates to the optimum time for the delivery of a response by the Scottish Ambulance Service.
Our staff are working with more resources, under incredible demands, to meet the expectations of members of the public, and, in the overwhelming majority of cases in the country, that is exactly what they do.
That is the First Minister’s response to hearing that, 10 years ago, an ambulance arrived in 10 minutes in 83 per cent of life-threatening cases; seven years ago, that happened 73 per cent of the time; and, now, the figure is only 61 per cent. That is putting lives at risk right across the country.
John Swinney and the Scottish National Party are failing our national health service and failing the people of Scotland every single day. On his watch, we have an ambulance crisis that is putting lives in danger, a patient who has been waiting for more than four years for cardiology and neurosurgery consultations, another patient who has been waiting for six years for general surgery and a child who has been waiting for five and a half years for surgery. Shockingly, one Scot has been waiting for eight years to be seen—eight years. In that period, we have had five SNP health secretaries and three SNP First Ministers—we have even had a new King and a new Pope—but that person has still had no treatment. So, enough of the apologies, because they simply will not cut it any more.
Does that not prove that Scotland’s NHS cannot risk a third decade of this tired and incompetent SNP Government?
As I have said, where there are failings in our public services, I will honestly and candidly accept them and be held to account for them, but, equally, I will set out to Parliament the progress that has been made under my leadership in improving the performance of the national health service.
Mr Sarwar has cited issues to do with long waits. I have looked closely at long waits, along with the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care. In a range of individual cases, there can be significant complexities and health implications that make it impossible for particular procedures to be undertaken because of the vulnerability of the patients involved.
In general, however, there are too many people who have been waiting for too long. That is why we are now seeing reductions in the size of waiting lists and in long waits, with the figures in all the long-wait categories of 12 months, 24 months and 36 months coming down. We are also seeing an increase in the number of procedures that are being undertaken within the national health service. That means that more people are being treated and more procedures are being delivered. Of course, last year—I have told Parliament about this before, but I will say it again so that Mr Sarwar does not forget about it—a record number of hip and knee operations were carried out. That demonstrates the progress that the NHS is making under my leadership.
I am determined to deliver for the people of Scotland. That is what our initiatives and the investment that we are making are delivering, and we intend to ensure that that is applicable for people in every part of our country.
Equinor Application
The fossil fuel giant Equinor has submitted a new application to drill for more oil in the North Sea, but—[Interruption.]
Let us be courteous.
This time, it has had to admit that the Rosebank oilfield will be 50 times more polluting than it first claimed. There will be 250 million tonnes of carbon emissions, which will accelerate climate breakdown and destroy our hopes of keeping our planet safe.
The First Minister’s predecessors were crystal clear in their opposition to Rosebank. Nicola Sturgeon agreed that it would be
“the greatest act of environmental vandalism in”
her
“lifetime.”
Humza Yousaf said that approving the field was the “wrong decision”. However, so far, John Swinney has avoided taking a position. He has quietly ditched the Scottish Government’s energy strategy, the first draft of which opposed new oil and gas exploration.
The science is clear: if we are to have any hope of changing course and preventing total climate breakdown, there can be no new oil and gas fields. Does the First Minister agree with Nicola Sturgeon that it would be the greatest act of environmental vandalism in our lifetime? Will he oppose the Rosebank oilfield?
The approach that the Scottish Government has taken consistently through my time as First Minister, and the terms of Humza Yousaf and Nicola Sturgeon, is to insist on the importance of a climate compatibility assessment for any development that is proposed. That is the position that has been adopted in legal judgments that require the United Kingdom Government to go through the process that it is currently going through in relation to the applications that are being made. That is the point of consistency.
Any development of oil and gas licensing has to be compatible with our journey to net zero. The importance of that—which is widely accepted, and I think that even members of the Green Party accept it—is that, for some time, there will be a requirement to utilise fossil fuels as we transition from our current situation to net zero. The question that must be addressed, given society’s requirements in that respect, is: can any of that activity be compatible with our journey to net zero? That is the policy position of the Scottish Government.
I asked the First Minister a yes or no question, but I did not get an answer. Both his predecessors were capable of giving a clear answer to that question. He says that it is a question of climate compatibility, but Equinor has just admitted that Rosebank would create 250 million tonnes of new carbon emissions. That is clearly incompatible with any chance of meeting our climate ambitions.
However the First Minister spins it, approving Rosebank would be a disaster for people and planet. It will do nothing to reduce energy bills. All that it will do is funnel more money into the pockets of Equinor’s super-rich shareholders. Every single penny that those mega-polluters and Governments sink into new oil and gas projects takes us even further away from the investment in renewables that we really need.
The two most recent former First Ministers were brave enough to say that but, today, the Scottish National Party’s Westminster leader, Stephen Flynn, demanded that the UK Government—
Briefly, Mr Greer. You must put a question.
He demanded that the UK Government give those planet-wrecking corporations a tax cut. The First Minister needs to pick a side.
Ask your question, Mr Greer.
I asked him again: will he oppose the Rosebank oilfield?
I think that, generally, people will see me as being on Scotland’s side in everything that I do. [Interruption.]
I am finding it difficult to hear the First Minister from here and I know that those who have gathered with us in the gallery would like to hear whoever is called to speak.
I have to be mindful of the fact that we are delivering a just transition—not any old transition, but a just transition.
A just transition enables me to look the staff of oil and gas companies in the eye and say that we are doing everything possible to manage the transition to avoid the industrial devastation that Scotland experienced under the mercenary actions of the Conservative Government in the 1980s, which I will not repeat.
The Scottish Government recognises that, as I explained in my first answer to Mr Greer, there will be a need for the utilisation of some oil and gas resources for the foreseeable future. That has to be undertaken in a way that is compatible with our journey to net zero. That is the approach that the Scottish Government will take.
Military Homes (Renovation)
To ask the First Minister what discussions the Scottish Government has had with the United Kingdom Government regarding the implementation of the proposed scheme for the renovation of military homes in Scotland. (S6F-04415)
When I provided evidence on behalf of the Scottish Government to the UK Government’s strategic defence review, I raised the fact that the quality and maintenance of service accommodation are a major concern for service families based in Scotland, and said that the UK Government should ensure that our service personnel and their families live in accommodation that is fit for purpose.
Plans for investment were initially announced in the strategic defence review earlier this year but, to date, there has been no discussion of the renovation of Ministry of Defence-owned housing in Scotland.
I am delighted that the UK Government is, at last, set on remedying the state of some military housing. I represent Glencorse barracks, which is in my constituency, and am well aware of how tough it is already for the families of servicemen and women who do not have a settled home and are nomadic on account of their partner’s postings. The very least that they deserve is decent accommodation, so I give a big tick to that.
However, the recently published 124-page UK “Defence Housing Strategy 2025”, makes only four references to the devolved nations and the use of surplus MOD land for civilian housing takes us straight into the issue of devolved competencies. Paragraph 3.13 of the strategy says:
“It is important that the Defence Housing Service works in a collaborative way across the UK Government”
and
“devolved governments”
but it appears that there has not been any collaboration. Will there be any, or is that another trampling over devolved powers?
All I can say to Christine Grahame is that the Scottish Government would be very willing to take forward discussions with the UK Government but that there have been no discussions with the Ministry of Defence on its proposals on funding for the renovation of military housing. The Scottish Government stands ready to do that because of the important issues of community connection that Christine Grahame raises; I assure her that the Government is willing to take part in discussions.
A96 Dualling
To ask the First Minister when the Scottish Government will announce a timetable for improvement works on the A96 north of Inverurie, following the publication of its corridor review consultation report. (S6F-04416)
The Scottish Government’s position is that it is committed to fully dualling the A96. The feedback received following the publication of the draft corridor review outcomes, a summary of which was published in June, will help to inform the final decision on how best to take forward improvements, while recognising the current economic challenges. Future decisions will be shaped by the available and planned budgets, which will be influenced by the United Kingdom Government’s autumn budget and by the forthcoming Scottish Government infrastructure investment plan, which will be published in the new year.
The north-east has been named Scotland’s road death capital after 24 people were killed and a further 384 were injured across the region last year.
Since the Scottish National Party first promised to dual the A96 under Alex Salmond’s Government in 2011, there have been no fewer than 16 transport secretaries and ministers, all of whom have kicked the can down the road. Will the First Minister give us an answer today, stop playing games with the lives of motorists in the north-east, and finally honour his party’s 2011 promise to fully dual the A96?
A range of different measures have been taken by ministers to address the issue of safety on the A96. I recognise that significant challenges remain, but ministers are fully engaged in that particular question. In relation to the capital investment programme, the Government will set out to Parliament in January the infrastructure investment plans and the issues that we can take forward within the current fiscal context. That information will be shared with Parliament and subject to the usual scrutiny.
Consolidated Accounts (Report)
To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government’s response is to the Auditor General’s report, “The 2024/25 audit of the Scottish Government Consolidated Accounts”, which indicates a £1 billion underspend by the Scottish Government. (S6F-04424)
I welcome Audit Scotland’s unqualified opinion and the points raised by the Auditor General, which recognise that the underspend does not represent a loss of spending power to Scotland.
This knackered Scottish National Party Government’s handling of public money is a disaster for Scotland and the Auditor General could not be clearer on that point.
Labour has delivered an additional £5.2 billion for Scotland’s services. [Interruption.]
Let us hear Mr Marra.
Mr Swinney ludicrously labelled that a continuation of austerity, but we now know that he underspent that budget by £1 billion while one in six Scots suffer in pain on national health service waiting lists. First Minister, where on earth has the rest of the money gone?
Always speak through the chair.
If that was an explanation of the intellectual capability of the aspiring Labour finance secretary, Scotland has a lot of trouble coming its way if Mr Marra gets anywhere near the public finances.
Mr Marra is a member of this Parliament—indeed, he is a member of the Finance and Public Administration Committee—and he should have some idea of what he is talking about, but he has just demonstrated to Parliament that he does not have a clue about the public finances.
Not a single penny of the underspend announced in the annual accounts of the Scottish Government—on which I repeat that the Audit Scotland opinion was unqualified, as has been the case for every single year of this Government’s term in office since 2007-08—represents a loss of spending power. Every year there has been an unqualified opinion. Mr Marra does not understand that the resources that are contained in the underspend are all used in this current financial year—they are allocated, supporting the reductions in waiting lists that I am presiding over and providing—[Interruption.]
Let us hear one another.
They are providing for the expansion of social security, including the Scottish child payment. For absolute completeness, I also say to Mr Marra that £247 million of the underspend cannot be used for public services in Scotland because it is part of the United Kingdom’s control of the budget.
I suggest that Mr Marra goes away and gets a book about elementary accounting before he asks me any more questions.
Eastern Airways
To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government’s response is to the recent news that Eastern Airways, which runs lifeline regional services in the Highlands and Islands, has entered administration. (S6F-04425)
The decision by Eastern Airways to file a notice of intention to appoint administrators is a matter of significant concern, and it will have a significant impact on communities and businesses. I understand that this will be a worrying time for the airline’s staff, including those who are based at Sumburgh airport in Shetland. Should individuals be facing redundancy, the Scottish Government will provide support through our initiative for responding to redundancy situations, which is partnership action for continuing employment. Individuals can access support online or by calling the helpline. Advice for affected customers is available on the Highland Council website.
The news about Eastern Airways will be devastating to the more than 330 workers who are facing redundancy, including nine people in my constituency. The Wick to Aberdeen public service obligation contract is a lifeline route for people in the far north, and passengers need assurances now about its future. The First Minister will be aware that Sumburgh airport, given its proximity to the offshore energy sector, is a vital part of the North Sea connectivity network. What discussions has the Government had about an alternative airline for the PSO route and transport for oil workers? Will he commit to a statement from the Scottish Government outlining its approach to the impact of the collapse of Eastern Airways?
I recognise the significant practical issues that Beatrice Wishart raises. The Aberdeen to Wick PSO is a Highland Council PSO. We are engaged with Highland Council in trying to find alternative solutions to the situation, and we are in regular contact with the council. Measures have been put in place for alternative transport arrangements, but I accept that the Aberdeen to Wick link is very important to the local community. We are working with Highland Council to establish what alternatives can be brought forward. I will, of course, be very happy for members to be kept updated on the issue by the relevant minister.
One of the issues with the link was the unreliability of the aircraft. People were maybe not using the link as much as they would have done had it been more reliable. Has the Scottish Government given any consideration to doing the same thing that it did in Barra when the aircraft there was unreliable, by purchasing an aircraft and leasing it to an operator, so that the service is reliable and can be used?
I am very happy to explore particular issues. As I said in my answer to Beatrice Wishart, the Aberdeen to Wick PSO is a Highland Council PSO. The Barra PSO is a Scottish Government PSO, I think.
No.
It is not—I am being corrected. I will take the issue away and we will explore the possibilities. I acknowledge that the connections are important and that the distances that are involved for other transport mechanisms are very significant for members of the public. We will explore the idea that Rhoda Grant has put to me.
We move to constituency and general supplementary questions.
United Kingdom Government Local Growth Fund
The UK Government recently announced £547 million for Wales as part of its local growth fund, which is to be delivered directly by the Welsh Government. If this is a union of equals, surely Scotland must receive its consequential share. Will the First Minister confirm whether the Scottish Government has received any information as to whether that funding will be replicated in Scotland, or is Scotland being short-changed yet again?
This issue relates to the successor funds to European funding, which has been of great significance to Scotland for many years. That funding has helped us with a range of priorities, particularly in relation to employability and the delivery of local infrastructure. In essence, the UK Government has provided a sum of £547 million to the Welsh Government but it proposes to bypass the Scottish Government in not deploying those resources in Scotland. The finance secretary has raised the issue with the UK Government, but the responses have been unsatisfactory, as have the details from the UK Government about the direct connection that it has established with local authorities. Frankly, the information is woefully presented to local authorities.
However, the key point that Mr Gibson raised is that the Labour Government in the UK is bypassing democratic procedures in Scotland. It is another example of how the Labour Government in the UK is determined to undermine the Scottish Parliament, and people in Scotland need to wake up to the threat from the UK Labour Government.
Dumfries and Galloway Council (Budget)
Is the First Minister aware of the swingeing budget cuts that are being proposed by SNP-run Dumfries and Galloway Council? Those include the closure of the Hillview leisure centre in Kelloholm, the removal of free music classes for children, and cuts that would result in the closure of the entire citizens advice bureaux network. Will the First Minister look the people of Dumfries and Galloway in the eye and answer the question of why those cuts are being proposed? Is it because the SNP Government in Edinburgh is not properly funding Dumfries and Galloway Council, or is it because the SNP-run administration is not properly managing its finances?
The local government settlement provides record funding of more than £15.1 billion, which is an increase of more than £1 billion, or 5.5 per cent in real terms, compared with the figure for 2024-25. Local authorities have to look at all the choices they have and at the issues that affect the delivery of public services, and that is exactly what Dumfries and Galloway Council will do. The administration in Dumfries and Galloway is led by my party, and I am very proud of the work of my party leadership in Dumfries and Galloway. It has taken over from the Conservatives, and everyone who takes over from the Conservatives has to clean up the mess that the Conservatives leave behind them.
Let me just say to Mr Hoy that it is a bit rich for him to come to this Parliament asking for more money for local government when he is not even prepared to vote for the money that we have put in place. That is yet more hypocrisy from the Conservatives.
Online Child Abuse
The First Minister will be aware of the chief constable’s comments to the Criminal Justice Committee this week that reports of online child abuse have more than doubled in the past year. The chief executive of Children First, Mary Glasgow, has said that Scotland is sleepwalking into the digital destruction of childhood.
How will the young people of Scotland see the First Minister and his Government commit to meeting this crisis? How will the Scottish Government draw on children’s services, education, child protection, justice, the third sector and technology companies to solve the crisis?
I acknowledge the seriousness of the point raised with me by Martin Whitfield and the comments made by the chief constable. Police Scotland has adapted and changed its presence and the composition of its staff to ensure that it has more capability to interrupt the networks that Mr Whitfield raises with us. I pay tribute to Police Scotland in that respect.
The child sexual abuse and exploitation national strategic group, which comprises operational partners including Police Scotland, is taking forward a series of priorities and actions to prevent and disrupt child sexual abuse and provide support to victims and their families. I assure Mr Whitfield of my Government’s determination to work with all relevant partners—including Mary Glasgow, whom I met yesterday and who is a fantastic individual and advocate on behalf of children—to do everything in our powers to address the situation.
However—I do not make this point in any way pejoratively; I make it deadly seriously—the regulation of social media companies is the preserve of the United Kingdom Government and Ofcom. I will be the most trenchant supporter of the toughest measures that the UK Government puts in place to regulate those individuals and organisations. The UK Government is taking steps in the Online Safety Act 2023, but we will be prepared to work with the UK Government to maximise the effectiveness of those measures. I assure Mr Whitfield that we will take all the actions that we can, but we also need to take the toughest stance on social media companies, because there is lawlessness out there online. That lawlessness is damaging our children and must be arrested.
Jobs Cuts (North-East)
A recent report from Aberdeen and Grampian Chamber of Commerce found that one in four businesses in the north-east has cut jobs as a result of the United Kingdom Labour Government’s fiscal regime. Does the First Minister agree that the UK Labour Government must urgently change course to protect the supply chain and local jobs? What steps can the Scottish Government take to protect industry and livelihoods in the north-east?
As I recounted in my answers to Mr Greer, a significant economic challenge is coming to individuals who are employed in the North Sea oil and gas sector, which is why the issues that Audrey Nicoll raises are so serious. There is an opportunity for us to build the renewable industries and clean energies of the future, and the Scottish Government is taking that forward. However, we have to ensure that that activity is aligned with activities in relation to the oil and gas sector.
The energy profits levy, which has been a key part of UK Government interventions, was always supposed to be a temporary measure. Anyone looking at the performance of the levy could demonstrate that there are significant issues with its performance in relation to the UK’s public finances that are also having an effect on employment in the oil and gas sector. There has to be a careful reassessment of the energy profits levy, and I encourage the UK Government to do that.
Ambulance Response Times (Galloway)
Last week, a receptionist in a local general practitioner surgery in Galloway in my constituency had to call 999 for an ambulance for a patient. It took more than 55 minutes for that call to be answered and, when it was answered, the receptionist was told that there would be a four-hour wait for an ambulance. That does not even take into consideration the one-hour drive to the nearest accident and emergency department. First Minister, can you imagine being with a loved one who has suffered a heart attack, a stroke or an asthma attack and having to wait almost an hour just to have your 999 call answered? What reassurance can you give my constituents that they can expect a fit-for-purpose emergency response, both in getting through to 999 and in receiving timely ambulance care? There is no way that 55 minutes is an emergency response. What urgent action will the First Minister take to stop such unacceptable delays?
Through the chair, please.
If Mr Carson wants to furnish me with the details of the specific case, I will examine it, because waiting that length of time for a call to be answered sounds completely unacceptable to me. I will look at the case, if Mr Carson gives me the details.
The median response time for purple calls is 7 minutes and 51 seconds. The Scottish Ambulance Service will work extremely hard to ensure that it meets the public’s expectations.
Accident and Emergency Wait Times (Glasgow)
Last week, one of my constituents waited for more than six hours, after presenting at A and E with significant blood loss and severe pain. Not only was he left for hours, but he was kept on a plastic chair with no blanket or pain relief. Having lost blood, he was extremely cold and could have become hypothermic.
Another constituent attended A and E following gallbladder removal. She had been vomiting, was in agony and had not been to the toilet for ages. She was left sitting in a corridor without pain relief or medical attention for an entire day.
Those constituents do not need apologies—they need action. What specific action will the First Minister take to ensure that my constituents get seen quickly, are warm, comfortable and given appropriate pain relief, and are not abandoned in a corridor to fend for themselves while they wait?
The action that I take is the action that I take every single week, which is that I meet the leadership of the national health service to press for the strongest possible performance in our national health service. As I explained to Mr Sarwar a moment ago, the fruits of that activity are that we now see falling waiting lists, a reduction in long waits and more people being treated in our national health service. That will be the focus of my attention.
On Tuesday, the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care and I met the chief executives of all the national health service boards around the country to reiterate the importance of timely attention to scheduled and unscheduled care. It is unscheduled care that Pam Duncan-Glancy raises with me. That, along with maternity issues, was the subject of discussion with the health service leadership, and that will continue to be my focus.
Energy Prices (Sizewell C Nuclear Plant)
The First Minister will be aware that energy bills across Scotland have risen yet again. That increase has been partly caused by the United Kingdom Labour Government’s costly nuclear tax that we are now paying for Sizewell C—the world’s most expensive nuclear plant. It is estimated that it will cost Scottish households something in the region of £300 million over the next decade alone. What assessment has the Scottish Government made of the impact that that will have on Scottish households, and does the First Minister agree that further expansion of nuclear power will bring not only environmental risks but the risk of pushing up energy prices even further?
That issue lies at the heart of the choices that are to be made about our energy future. That is why I believe that expanding our renewables, storage, hydrogen and carbon capture activities will help us to build an affordable, resilient and clean energy system. That is why I do not support the development of nuclear power resources in Scotland: I think that they are expensive and we have alternative sources that are much cheaper.
The practical effect of all that is that a Labour Government that pledged to cut bills by £300 has presided over an increase of bills of £190 since the general election. Let us hear that again: the Labour Government promised to reduce bills by £300 but they have gone up by £190. No wonder the people of this country do not trust the Labour Party in Scotland.
I will take two further brief questions.
Public Office (Accountability) Bill
Earlier this week, I wrote to the First Minister urging the Scottish Government to support the Public Office (Accountability) Bill—the so-called Hillsborough law—and to lodge a legislative consent motion so that its provisions can be fully applied to Scotland. The bill, which has now passed its second reading in the House of Commons, establishes a statutory duty of candour for everyone in public office and guarantees parity of legal representation and non-means-tested legal aid for families that are impacted by state failures. Will the First Minister ensure that families in Scotland are not left at a disadvantage in seeking truth and justice?
The Scottish Government is in dialogue with the United Kingdom Government about the bill. In principle, we support it. We obviously have to go through the process of consideration around legislative consent, which the Scottish Government will do in a timeous fashion, and Parliament will of course be engaged in that consideration. It is important that the principles and values that are enshrined in the bill are taken forward.
Asylum Seeker Housing (Cameron Barracks)
Cameron barracks in Inverness is close to the city centre, near two schools and lies in a residential area. Many constituents harbour serious concerns about the Home Office’s plans to house up to 300 unchecked males of whatever colour—their concerns are not born of racism. Will the First Minister do something that he has not done so far and publicly and expressly call on the United Kingdom Government to rethink those proposals, to abandon Cameron barracks as a location and to work positively with the Scottish Government to come up with a fair, reasonable and suitable location, which many people of compassion in Inverness feel is the right approach?
I assure Mr Ewing that we are engaging constructively with the United Kingdom Government on the housing of asylum seekers, and particularly on the Cameron barracks proposal. The social justice secretary answered a question in some detail on the issue in the Parliament, setting out the importance of dialogue in ensuring that the legitimate issues and practical concerns that I understand the Highland Council will debate today are properly and fully addressed.
The social justice secretary also had a conversation with the UK Government on Tuesday morning, in which she set out the range of practical questions that must be explored to address the issues that Mr Ewing is, understandably, raising on behalf of his constituents. However, I have to say—and I say this for transparency in the Parliament—that there has been no substantive, detailed response to the legitimate points that have been made. The starting point for any consideration of the matter must be substantive engagement on the issues of substance so that members of the public in the Inverness area, the Highland Council and the Scottish Government can come to a conclusion on a matter that must be addressed.
Asylum seekers are housed in the city of Perth, right in the heart of my own constituency, and they are supported with appropriate arrangements. I therefore recognise that the task must be undertaken, but there has to be good and substantive engagement with communities and public authorities. Regrettably, in relation to Cameron barracks, such engagement has been completely absent from the United Kingdom Government’s approach.
That concludes First Minister’s questions.
The next item of business will be a members’ business debate, in the name of Audrey Nicoll. There will now be a short suspension to allow those who are leaving the chamber and the public galleries to do so.
12:51 Meeting suspended.Previous
Remembrance Sunday