Official Report 299KB pdf
Party Leaders
13:59
The next item of business is First Minister’s question time for party leaders. The first question will be asked by Anas Sarwar.
Trust in Politics
I apologise, Presiding Officer—you caught me off guard by starting 30 seconds early.
I start by wishing the Scotland team and the tartan army the best of luck as the world cup kicks off later today. [Applause.] I am sure that the one thing that unites all of us in the chamber is our support for Steve Clarke and the Scotland team.
Speaking of unity, like many people, I was horrified and angered by the knife attack in Belfast. Justice must be done and lessons must be learned, but there is never any justification for such horror and anger to turn into violence, racism and disorder on our streets. Those who are being intimidated on our streets or in our places of worship—whether that is a mosque, a synagogue or any other faith centre—must hear loudly and clearly from us all that this is not who we are, that those who seek to divide us do not speak for us and that Scotland belongs to us all.
As we face the rising challenge of disillusionment with and mistrust of our politics and our institutions, does the First Minister agree that rebuilding and restoring such trust is the responsibility of all us who want the politics of hatred to be defeated?
I will begin on the question of the world cup—I associate myself directly with Mr Sarwar’s comments. I look forward enormously to travelling to Boston, which I will do later on, after question time, to support Scotland on Saturday evening. I extend my warmest wishes to Steve Clarke, Andy Robertson and the whole of the Scotland men’s team, who have done Scotland proud in getting to the world cup. We look forward enormously to their success.
To contribute to the occasion, I decided to wear my no Scotland, no party tie to First Minister’s question time today. I hope that that will bring some good cheer to the team at the weekend.
On the serious issue of disorder, I agree 100 per cent with what Mr Sarwar said. There is a rising tide of hateful rhetoric spreading in our society, which is inciting people to behave in a reckless, aggressive and thuggish fashion. This is a peaceful country. Scotland is a welcoming country, and I will exercise the leadership—as, I know, will Mr Sarwar—to make sure that Scotland always remains a tolerant, welcoming and inclusive country.
I thank the First Minister for that response and wish him well on his travels. I wish even more that Scotland gets the results that it needs at the world cup.
On the issue of trust, last night, the Scottish National Party voted down an inquiry into the lessons and implications of operation branchform and the conviction of Peter Murrell. The reason given was that the SNP believed that that proposal was an attempt by political rivals to investigate the inner workings of another political party. As I made clear yesterday, that is not my intention.
The crimes of Peter Murrell are for Peter Murrell, but issues have been raised that go beyond the internal workings of the SNP. There are legitimate questions for Police Scotland, the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service, the Lord Advocate, the Electoral Commission, His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs and others, including the Scottish Legal Aid Board, on why a wealthy man, who owns property abroad and says that he has the means to immediately pay back £400,000, had access to legal aid. Scots demand answers to those valid questions.
John Swinney says that he wants to avoid an inquiry into the inner workings of the SNP. I agree. So, will he work on a cross-party basis to agree the terms of reference, the scope and the remit of any parliamentary inquiry before supporting any such inquiry?
If that was an attempt by Mr Sarwar to provide some order and clarity on his position, it was absolutely necessary, because anyone who listened to the incoherent gibberish that Jackie Baillie came out with on the radio this morning in trying to defend the Labour position will know that Labour has just been trying to score grubby political points on this whole issue for weeks. Labour should be ashamed.
We have gone through a process in which my party has been the victim of an embezzlement, which has been the subject of a criminal case that has been researched by Police Scotland and put in front of the Crown, and for which a successful prosecution has been obtained. That is what has happened in this particular case. I do not believe that there is a case for an independent inquiry or a parliamentary inquiry into that issue, because that work has been done by the police, and no organisation can take forward an investigation into the issue in a more sophisticated way than the police can. Mr Sarwar should leave it at that.
I am not asking to get into the inner workings of the police investigation or of operation branchform; I am talking about the institutions in this country and about legitimate questions. Following the letter from the Government this morning, I have written to the Electoral Commission saying that we will support, and engage in, any review of party finances. My question is about operation branchform, its implications and the lessons to be learned from it. That was an investigation into the governing party of Scotland and it would further undermine public trust and confidence, and our democracy, if the governing party were now to block any attempt to look at the lessons and implications of that investigation and of the subsequent convictions.
Rebuilding trust is a task for us all, which is why, today, I have written to all political parties, asking them to meet and to start the work of agreeing on the terms of reference for and scope of any potential inquiry. That should be a process that the SNP and the Greens are willing to engage with in good faith. The governance of the SNP is for John Swinney and the SNP, but scrutiny of the Government and our institutions is for Parliament and parliamentarians—it is, in fact, our duty. So, I ask John Swinney whether he is prepared to confront a culture of secrecy and cover-up and to put country before party by agreeing the terms of a meaningful inquiry.
What does Mr Sarwar think we are engaged in just now? This is scrutiny. I am here to answer questions in front of Parliament, twice a week—as are all my ministers on a regular basis—so that the Government is put under scrutiny.
Mr Sarwar keeps on saying that he does not want an internal investigation into the SNP, but that is exactly what he has just made the case for and was the case that failed in Parliament yesterday. Mr Sarwar is going to have to accept that democratic outcomes must take their course. The first one he is going to have to accept is that Parliament rejected the argument that he put forward. [Interruption.]
Excuse me, First Minister. Mr Sarwar, if you are asking a question, do the First Minister and those in the chamber the courtesy of letting him answer the question that you have asked.
Mr Sarwar is setting out an argument about examining a case that Parliament democratically rejected yesterday. That was what Parliament decided.
The other democratic outcome that Mr Sarwar will have to come to terms with is the outcome of the election, when all those issues were thrown about by Mr Sarwar. He came to Parliament, week after week, issuing comments, smearing his opponents, smearing me, my Government and the SNP—and the people decided to send fewer Labour MSPs to this Parliament as a consequence of the election. I simply say to Mr Sarwar that it is time that he acknowledged the failure of his strategy to hold this Government to account and that he should come up with a better strategy than the one he is pursuing.
Immigration
I start by adding my best wishes and sending the best of luck to the Scotland team in America. Let us hope that they get to the last 16 for the first time since 1974.
At First Minister’s question time, Reform Scotland will continue to focus on the issues that matter most to voters in Scotland, which are that energy costs are too high, taxes are too high and immigration is too high. Therefore, at this, my third FMQs, I wish to focus on immigration. [Interruption.]
I remind you that immigration is a reserved matter and does not come under the First Minister’s remit.
There is a specific Scottish matter that I want to raise in relation to immigration, which I will explain now.
Thousands of the immigrants who arrive illegally in the United Kingdom come, when they are granted leave to remain, specifically to Scotland and present as homeless, because local authorities here have less discretion than those in England have about how they allocate accommodation. As a result, councils across Scotland are being forced to indefinitely pause the allocation of permanent accommodation to local Scots who have been on social housing waiting lists—in some cases, for years—in order to provide temporary accommodation to the new arrivals instead.
My question for the First Minister is whether he will now restore to Scottish local authorities the powers to put local Scots first.
I think that Mr Offord is under a misconception about the local connection rules. The change to the local connection rules by this Government in 2022 did not change the local connection rules for refugee households. The local connection rules relating to refugee households have been in place for, I would think, in excess of 20 years in the current context, so Mr Offord is fundamentally wrong in the point that he puts to me.
However, a deeper point is exposed by the question that Mr Offord puts to me. Mr Offord is trying to pursue an issue on immigration at the same time as his party is associated with the stirring up of hatred within our society, and I want to call it out for what it is. During the election campaign, I made it abundantly clear that I would not co-operate with Reform in this Parliament because of the way in which it pursues this issue, which incites racial hatred in our society. I am glad that I took that stance in the election, and I am determined to sustain it during this session of the Parliament.
On a point of order, Presiding Officer.
We take points of order only at the end of First Minister’s question time.
The First Minister has not answered my question. Instead, he has thrown false accusations at my party.
Let me address directly the terrible riots that we have seen in Belfast. First, I condemn the brutal and unprovoked attack on Stephen Ogilvie, and, secondly, I echo his family in saying that violent protest is not the answer. Whatever the problem is, violence is not the answer, but that is not to ignore the problem. The reality is that there is a very real problem with immigration, which was created by the Tories and is now being exacerbated by Labour. Weak politicians have created this unrest in our society. If we, the politicians, do not fix it democratically, other, less savoury actors will fill that vacuum.
In Scotland, will the First Minister now take immediate action to restore the priority need for scarce housing resources to local Scots ahead of strangers?
On Malcolm Offord’s question, I simply point out to him that the problem that was created by the Conservatives, in his words, was created by a Conservative Party of which he was a member and a serving Government minister. It stretches credulity for Mr Offord to come here and present himself as some form of a solution to a problem that he allegedly, in his own words, created in the first place.
I want to explore some of the comments that Mr Offord has made on the issues around protest, because I fear that the issues around “less savoury” characters are not too far from home.
On Tuesday, there was disorder in the streets of Scotland, particularly in the city of Glasgow, which I unreservedly condemn, and I condemned it yesterday. At the same time as I was condemning it, Thomas Kerr, who is sitting beside Mr Offord, was saying to people that it was important that people went out and protested last night. At the same time, I was making it abundantly clear that, in the current context, nobody—although they have democratic rights—should be out protesting last night, given the climate that we are in. That was my advice: for people not to protest. Mr Kerr said that people should get out and protest.
What happened last night? In Greenock, which I know is a town that is very close to Mr Offord’s heart, police officers were attacked, two officers sustained minor injuries and damage was caused to police vehicles as the police were simply doing their duty of protecting the citizens of our country. Mr Offord should condemn his colleague Thomas Kerr right now. [Applause.]
Let Mr Offord speak.
I say, once again, unequivocally, that we condemn violence. Violence is not the way to protest. However, protest is a valid mechanism to make one’s views heard when in frustration. In all the interviews that Thomas Kerr gave yesterday, he was very clear that there is no line to cross into violence, but a right to protest remains valid. Thomas Kerr says that as a local Glaswegian.
Following a recent freedom of information request, The Times showed that Glasgow has become home to 20 refugees per week in the past year, with the vast majority of those being fighting-age men of undisclosed nationality. [Interruption.]
Excuse me—let him finish.
That is unsustainable. We all agree on that, sensibly. However, sadly, it is not surprising, because the First Minister wore a T-shirt that said, “I welcome refugees”, while advocating open borders. I say to the First Minister that we cannot have that. These are the consequences.
We are asking the First Minister to reapply local connection rules, which he can do, to alleviate the pressures on the big issue of social housing. That will rebalance the system, once again, to put our own people first.
The Scottish National Party and every other party in the chamber have championed mass uncontrolled immigration—
Will you wind up your question, please?
However, Reform Scotland does not do that. I ask the First Minister, one last time, whether he will immediately reintroduce the priority need and local connection rule to our housing system and finally put Scotland first.
I think that what the Parliament and the country have just heard for the first time in this parliamentary session is exactly what I was warning about during the election campaign. Language has been used about “strangers” and to create division between people who walk the same streets of our country.
On Tuesday night, Police Scotland issued a statement that indicated:
“Officers responded to disorder and violence, including incidents in Glasgow where members of the public were attacked because of the colour of their skin. Officers were also attacked.”
Members of the public will ask—they say this to me when I am out and about in the country—how on earth has Scotland become like this? Well, Scotland has become like this because people on that side of the chamber—Malcolm Offord, Thomas Kerr and various others—are inciting racial division in our society, and this Government will stand up to all of that. [Interruption.]
Okay, members. Thank you. Settle down.
Racist Demonstrations
I follow others in wishing Steve Clarke, the Scotland men’s team and the tartan army a safe and productive journey in the US.
The racist violence that we have seen on the streets of Belfast, as well as in Glasgow and elsewhere in Scotland this week, has been utterly shameful. People were trapped inside Glasgow central mosque and the St Enoch centre, sheltering for their own safety. Others were attacked in the street because of the colour of their skin, while mobs shouted “Send them home” at children because they were not white.
Nobody should be made to feel unsafe on our streets, and it is horrific that that has happened to so many people. No so-called legitimate concerns can justify that kind of hateful action. What will the First Minister do to provide reassurances to people and communities who are worried about their safety and that of their loved ones?
One of the fundamental duties—if not the fundamental duty—of ministers is to ensure that people are safe in their own country. The Government takes that approach in all its communications. Prior to Christmas, we set out the merits of the we are Scotland campaign, which communicates and supports the advantages of multiculturalism in our society. In the light of recent events, I intend to revisit the campaign, to ensure that its messages are heard. They were heard loudly and clearly in the run-up to Christmas, but I want to make sure that that is still the case.
I also note that Police Scotland is active in supporting individual communities. I know that that is the case, because I have heard from the Jewish and Muslim communities about the degree to which they feel that they have good and strong connections with Police Scotland. They feel that Police Scotland is responsive to their concerns—and they must always feel that.
I assure Gillian Mackay that the police force, which has the advantage of being a single force, has the capacity to deploy formidable resources to ensure that members of the public are kept safe when such actions take place—Police Scotland demonstrated that on Tuesday evening. We must at all times remain vigilant to make sure that we have in place the resources to ensure community safety.
This is a time when our Parliament must stand together to condemn racists and fascists who seek to divide our communities, and I am heartened by most of the response that we have had so far this afternoon.
However, today, The National has revealed that an active member of Reform UK, who attended the election count in Glasgow alongside the party’s deputy leader in Scotland, not only took part in the racist scenes on Buchanan Street but also boasted that he would do so again. Last year, that man, who is clearly a friend of Reform UK’s leadership, wrote:
“Jews are forcing us to swallow hordes of migrants, flooding land with the dregs of the world to dilute our Protestant stock and shatter the Union.”
Just quoting that makes me feel sick.
As we have seen this afternoon, this is a party that has consistently branded new Scots as strangers, attacked Glaswegian schoolchildren who speak more than one language, and scapegoated and demonised our migrant communities. What does the First Minister have to say to those on the Reform benches who have fanned the flames of hate and actively welcomed racist and antisemitic members?
I have seen the comments to which Gillian Mackay refers, and I am horrified by their content. They represent the worst of communication in our society, demonising individuals.
As I made clear in my response to Malcolm Offord, I deplore the way in which Reform is stirring up division in our society, as well as its association with individuals who are creating that division and who—based on what I have read in the newspapers today—appear to be involved in the disorder that we have seen on our streets. There is no place for democratic politicians to be associated with that. I say to Reform that it should establish the strongest possible distance from that rhetoric and the behaviour of those individuals, or its members will forever be known as the people who incited racial tension in our society in Scotland.
The violence this week has been stirred up by an online landscape that is designed to promote hate and by social media algorithms that deliver fascist propaganda into people’s news feeds 24 hours a day. The world’s richest man, Elon Musk, used his personally owned social media platform to share abhorrent content, including quotes that call for millions and millions to be deported from the United Kingdom, along with adverts for those protests. That is a direct threat to the safety of communities across our country, and it cannot go unchallenged.
Online regulation is largely reserved to Westminster, but there is one area that this Parliament has control over. Will the First Minister work with the Scottish Greens to class social media platforms as publishers, since the content that they show people is the result of their algorithm instead of people’s choices as users? That way, we can finally start to take action on hateful and misleading online content.
I am very happy to co-operate with the Scottish Green Party and other colleagues in Parliament who wish to tackle some of the online harm that is propagated to individuals in our society. I have seen some of the messages that Elon Musk has communicated, promoting messages that Tommy Robinson has circulated and encouraging people to take part in demonstrations in our country. That is absolutely abhorrent.
The toughest regulatory regime needs to be in place. As Gillian Mackay said, the overwhelming majority of that policy is reserved to the United Kingdom Government. We have had ongoing productive discussions with the UK Government as it wrestles with how to handle the expansion of social media and how to have in place the correct regulatory environment. If we can take measures in this Parliament, I assure Gillian Mackay of the Scottish Government’s appetite and enthusiasm to take whatever steps are available to us to do exactly that.
Parliamentary Inquiry
Before I ask my question, I want to say, come on, Scotland—let us at least get into the next round and out of the group stages.
I also on behalf of my party whole-heartedly condemn the ugly scenes that we saw in the streets of my home city of Glasgow.
John Swinney has blocked a parliamentary inquiry into the Scottish National Party crime scandal. He does not want to know whether Peter Murrell stole taxpayers’ money, the terms of his plea deal or why Nicola Sturgeon was not prosecuted.
A lady called Margaret Killah joined the SNP in the 1950s and donated money to the party for years. When she died, aged 84, she left the SNP £20,000. Peter Murrell told Margaret’s solicitor to deal only with him, not the party treasurer. Margaret’s executor told me this morning that she would have backed an inquiry in Parliament. She said:
“Margaret truly believed in the SNP and would have been so upset and so angry. We will never know if Peter Murrell stole her money.”
Why is John Swinney so scared of doing the right thing?
First, I welcome the comments that Russell Findlay made about the disorder in Glasgow. It says something very significant that the Conservative leader, along with other leaders in Parliament, has reinforced the comments that have been made, and I unreservedly welcome that support from the Conservative benches today.
On the points about the embezzlement case that has affected my party and my party alone, I appreciate and value the contributions that are made to my party by its members, and that has been at the heart of my response to this incredibly distressing experience. That is why I am taking action—I hope that you will forgive me, Presiding Officer, as this is outwith my responsibilities as First Minister, but they are part of my responsibilities as the principal trustee of the Scottish National Party—to make sure that the losses that we have experienced are repaid. I have taken the action that I have taken, in concert with, and with the approval of, my national executive committee, in order to secure the return of that money at the earliest possible opportunity, because of the commitment and devotion of individuals who have given us money and who will feel injured by the situation.
Of course, I am one of those people as well; I donate to the Scottish National Party and I want that money to be used to take forward the activities of the SNP and the cause of Scottish independence. That is why I have acted as the principal trustee of the party—to make sure that that money is returned to where it rightfully belongs, which in the funds of the Scottish National Party.
Margaret Killah lived in Aberdeen South, where people will choose a new MP next week. Many of the residents who I have been speaking with are dismayed by the SNP’s desperate Peter Murrell and Nicola Sturgeon cover-up, but they are even more angry at the SNP’s duplicity over oil and gas. Thousands of jobs are being lost because of Ed Miliband’s idiotic opposition to new drilling. The SNP pretends to back oil and gas, but it still has a presumption against new drilling in the North Sea, so will John Swinney get off the fence and back our candidate Douglas Lumsden’s clear call to get Britain drilling again?
Even Mr Findlay smiled at that one.
About the only moment of significance that I have heard about Douglas Lumsden is the fact that he lodged thousands of artificial intelligence-generated questions in the Parliament—he could not even think them up for himself. That tells us how useless Douglas Lumsden is. Nobody should think about voting for a useless candidate who cannot make up his own questions.
Teacher Shortages
On behalf of the Scottish Liberal Democrats, I echo the remarks about the Scotland world cup side and wish Steve Clarke and his squad all the best in the Americas.
On the violence that we have seen on Scottish streets in recent days, the heat and hate that are stoked by bad actors online and amplified by voices in this chamber do not reflect the welcoming and internationalist country that I recognise. If they seek to gain advantage by trying to divide the people of Scotland, they underestimate the people of Scotland, and they will fail.
A leading education expert warned this week of a persistent and worsening shortage of specialist teachers in Scottish schools. This is not just an education crisis; it is an economic one. Today, the Scottish Liberal Democrats are publishing new research that shows that more than 500 teaching jobs had to be readvertised due to shortages. Posts have been left unfilled for as long as two years. In Kirkwall, the maths teacher post was readvertised 14 times. Subjects such as science, computing and technology are the industries of the future. Why on earth are they being taught by history teachers or being dropped entirely?
I welcome Mr Cole-Hamilton’s comments on division and disorder and I am not surprised by them.
In relation to teacher numbers and specialist teachers in schools, there are acute challenges—particularly in rural Scotland—with filling teaching vacancies in general, which becomes more acute with specialist teaching posts. The Government has mechanisms in place to try to encourage those teaching posts to be taken up, which is part of our active workforce planning arrangements.
We also have available other educational mechanisms, particularly e-Sgoil, which is a digital-based platform that enables live teaching on subjects around the country. It is designed to address some of the shortages that Mr Cole-Hamilton referred to when we are unable to fill all the vacancies.
The Government works with local authorities to take forward workforce planning activity to ensure that we have a full and comprehensive network of teaching personnel in every part of the country.
The First Minister is quick to lean into the likes of e-Sgoil, but that requires far more support than the Government is currently providing.
I am not sure that the First Minister fully understands just how depressing it is for new teachers to come out of training and to have to head to the likes of Dubai or Darwin for a job because they cannot find one here. It makes no sense. On the one hand, we have teachers who cannot find jobs and, on the other, subjects are being cut due to a lack of teachers.
One practical way in which we can fill those vacancies is to make it much easier for primary school teachers to requalify to work in our secondary schools. Indeed, the General Teaching Council for Scotland said that that was a
“practical solution for … employers to address specific recruitment issues.”
Scotland’s young people deserve the right to study whatever they want, wherever they are. Will the First Minister instruct his Government to sit down with the Liberal Democrats and teaching bodies to deliver sensible solutions such as that?
As I understand it, work is already under way with the General Teaching Council on exactly the point that Mr Cole-Hamilton raises. If additional input is to come from the Liberal Democrats, the Cabinet Secretary for Education will be happy to engage on that question, because we have to explore all the practical steps.
Mr Cole-Hamilton said that teachers were leaving the country to go to teach in Dubai or other locations and could not find jobs in Scotland, but he was pressing me about teaching vacancies in Scotland. There is a slight contradiction in that argument; there are plenty of teaching opportunities available, and we will work with individuals to ensure that that is the case. [Interruption.] I am not quite sure what point Mr Cole-Hamilton is making to me when I spell out the illogicality at the heart of his question, but I will leave it for Mr Cole-Hamilton to study the record and work out where we are going.
I am keen to ensure that every available teacher is able to be deployed in Scottish education, and the education secretary will happily work with others to ensure that that is the case.
That concludes First Minister’s question time. I have to say that I was disappointed by the lack of ambition for Scotland’s world cup campaign—last 16, last 32. Come on, everyone.
On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I am learning. The last time I learned that I need to know the standing order and this time I have learned that I need to wait to the end of First Minister’s questions.
I refer to rule 7.3 of standing orders, which states that members
“shall not conduct themselves in a manner which would constitute a criminal offence”.
The First Minister believes that saying the word “strangers” incites violence. What does he think the word “racist”, aimed at me, does to my risk? I think that it increases the risk to me as a public figure. I ask the Presiding Officer to rule on the use of the word “racist” in this Parliament, or to ask the First Minister, who has known me for 20 years, to say to my face that he thinks that I am a racist.
I am not aware of the First Minister addressing his comments specifically to any individual, but that is a point of argument, not a point of order. Members are responsible for their own contributions in the chamber—
He was—
Excuse me, do not interrupt when I am speaking—do not heckle.
It is not actually a point of procedure, which is what a point of order should be. It is a point of argument, not a point of procedure.
As I have already said, that concludes First Minister’s question time.
Previous
General Question TimeNext
Maternity Services