Official Report 860KB pdf
Grooming Gangs Inquiry
Our party—through my colleague Liam Kerr—lodged an amendment to the Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill to secure a grooming gangs inquiry in Scotland. The Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Home Affairs, Angela Constance, rejected it and said that further inquiries were not necessary. She told the Parliament that a leading expert, Professor Alexis Jay, “shares my view”—that is a direct quote.
However, Professor Jay does not share Angela Constance’s view. In an email to the justice secretary, which we forced the Government to release, Professor Jay says that her views
“had nothing to do with Mr Kerr’s amendment, or the position in Scotland”.
Professor Jay asked for her position to be “clarified”. Can John Swinney explain why, therefore, his justice secretary did not correct the parliamentary record?
The comments that the justice secretary made in the stage 3 proceedings on the Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill were, as I said to Mr Findlay last week, a reflection of the general comments that were being made about the issues at that time.
The issues that Professor Jay raised were corrected in the minutes of the national child sexual abuse and exploitation strategic group, which were published as a consequence of that meeting, and the release to the public of that information clarified the point that Professor Jay was concerned about.
I call Russell Findlay. [Interruption.] Let us hear Mr Findlay.
That answer might have held water last week, but it does not any more.
The justice secretary brazenly misrepresented a leading child abuse expert in order to block a grooming gangs inquiry in Scotland. The Scottish ministerial code requires Government ministers to correct
“any ... error at the earliest opportunity.”
It also states:
“Ministers who knowingly mislead the Parliament will be expected to offer their resignation to the First Minister”.
The justice secretary misrepresented an expert and then denied doing so when asked by journalists. She failed to correct the record and she has not even apologised. Why is it not obvious to John Swinney that she has broken the ministerial code?
For the reason that I set out in my earlier answer today and in my answers last week—that the justice secretary was making a general comment on the Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill. The issue about which Professor Jay was concerned—[Interruption.]
Let us hear the First Minister.
—has been addressed in the minutes of the national child sexual abuse and exploitation strategic group.
What the Government is doing, which is what the justice secretary was setting out to Parliament at that time and which has been set out to Parliament on numerous occasions, is taking forward the essential work that is necessary to make a judgment about whether a separate grooming gangs inquiry is required, because the view that has been expressed to us—[Interruption.]
Let us hear one another.
—is that the evidence base is not sufficient for us to take such a decision at this time.
As I pointed out to Mr Findlay previously, even if the amendment had been agreed to by Parliament on that occasion, there would have been no ability to take forward a grooming gangs inquiry, because it relied on the appointment of—[Interruption.]
Sorry, First Minister. I say to members that this session is for scrutiny, and it is difficult to have that when we cannot hear one another.
That amendment relied on the appointment of a victims commissioner, who has not yet been established in office and cannot take the action that was proposed.
The Government is addressing the substance of the issue to ensure that we come to the correct conclusion on the steps that we have to take.
I know that Angela Constance was not making a general point. Everyone in the chamber knows that Angela Constance was not making a general point. John Swinney knows that Angela Constance was not making a general point. She twisted a statement about England to deny victims an inquiry in Scotland. Professor Jay asked her to correct this falsehood on 26 September, but she did not do so, and she has still not done so. Then, on 25 November, Angela Constance doubled down. She told the media that she had not misrepresented Alexis Jay. We only know about that now, in December, because we have dragged the information out of this secretive Government.
Grooming gang victims were failed by the authorities, and they are now being failed again by the Scottish National Party Government. How can they trust John Swinney and his justice secretary to deliver the honest answers that they deserve?
One of the points that I have been trying to stress to Parliament on the handling of this important issue—I recognise its importance—is about the care that the Government has to take about decisions about a grooming gangs inquiry, given the role of the Scottish child abuse inquiry, which the Government established in 2015.
Earlier this week, Lady Smith, who chairs the Scottish child abuse inquiry, set out the basis of the phase 10 hearings of that inquiry. The inquiry’s press statement says:
“It should be noted that, where any conduct which constitutes grooming is alleged”,
the Scottish child abuse inquiry
“is able to investigate it if, overall, the circumstances in which it occurred are within its Terms of Reference”.
It adds that
“Grooming which took place outwith the establishments themselves may, depending on ... particular circumstances, be within”
the terms of reference.
The Government has already established a statutory public inquiry that has the ability, as Lady Smith has confirmed, to examine issues in relation to grooming gangs. [Interruption.]
Thank you, members.
That is some of the work that the Government has to do to make sure that we properly respect the independent inquiry that we established by statute, which has the power to look at many of these issues.
That is desperate, desperate deflection. The SNP has repeatedly closed the door to the Scottish child abuse inquiry for grooming gang victims in the past, and it will continue to do so. On Tuesday, I met a grooming gang victim known as Taylor, along with her mother. That afternoon, they then went to meet John Swinney. They, along with other victims, have lost all trust in Angela Constance.
John Swinney is continuing to defend a justice secretary who misrepresented an expert, misled the Parliament, misled the public and misled victims. Everyone in the chamber, no matter their politics, should expect honesty from Government ministers, and, if mistakes are made, they should at least be corrected. If John Swinney will not sack the justice secretary, we will give the Parliament the chance to have its say with a vote of no confidence. Will the First Minister order his MSPs to support his failing justice secretary?
It is really important that I make it clear to Parliament that the Government has no ability whatsoever to close the door of any route of inquiry of the Scottish child abuse inquiry—indeed, we would break the law if we tried to do so. [Interruption.] More to the point, Lady Smith would have none of it from the Scottish Government. [Interruption.]
I am sure that members will agree that robust scrutiny is possible without shouting from a sedentary position.
It is really important that I make it clear to Parliament and to the public that the Government has no ability to hinder the role of the Scottish child abuse inquiry in any way.
I met Taylor on Tuesday, with members of her family. I apologised to Taylor, because it was obvious from what she said to me that she had been failed, as so many young people in care have been failed by our care system. That is why we established the Scottish child abuse inquiry, to ensure that those individuals could find justice. That is why we commissioned the independent review of care. That is why we are taking forward the delivery of the Promise, to ensure that care-experienced individuals in our society are never subjected to any abuse in the future.
That is the commitment of my Government, that is my focus and that of all the members of my Cabinet, and that is exactly what we will continue to do.
Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Home Affairs
This morning I lodged a motion of no confidence in the Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Home Affairs, Angela Constance. It is clear that she misrepresented Professor Alexis Jay on the serious issue of grooming gangs and misled the Parliament. She has had repeated opportunities to apologise and correct the record, but she has failed to do so. Despite what John Swinney says, she has had repeated requests from Professor Jay to correct the record but she has failed to do so, and victims do not have confidence in her. It is now clear that she cannot stay in her position. She must resign, or John Swinney must sack her. Why is John Swinney defending the indefensible and refusing to do so?
I am setting out to Parliament the substance of the issue and the actions that the Government is taking to ensure that we improve the lives of individuals who have suffered in the past as a consequence of abuse in the care of the state. That is what we are doing, and the Government will take forward that agenda.
It is clear that victims have lost confidence in the justice secretary, and this looks like a First Minister trying to protect one of his own rather than doing the right thing by victims across the country. The rules are clear that a breach of the ministerial code is a sackable offence, but this Scottish National Party Government is addicted to cover-up and secrecy. The truth is that Angela Constance is not just a stranger to the truth; she is a stranger to competence as well.
Our justice system is in utter chaos. Violent thugs have joined the ranks of those being released early from our prisons, a sexual predator is less likely to end up in jail now than was the case five years ago, hundreds of drug dealers go unarrested, shopkeepers are left to defend themselves from professional gangs of shoplifters, and violent crime is on the rise, with more and more children falling victim.
Angela Constance and the SNP are soft on crime but experts at covering up. Will John Swinney explain to Scots why this incompetent and untrustworthy justice secretary is still in post?
Let me address what I think is the right thing to do. The right thing to do is what we did. What Angela Constance did in 2015 when she was Cabinet Secretary for Education and Lifelong Learning was to set up the Scottish child abuse inquiry. There was much resistance to that inquiry, but Angela Constance took the decision to set it up. That was absolutely the right thing to do, and I applaud her for taking that decision and for the justice that it will bring to individuals.
On the question of how the criminal justice system is operating, let me tell Mr Sarwar that, according to the latest data, the number of people who were given a custodial sentence has increased by 13 per cent from 2022-23, and there were 221 rape and attempted rape convictions, which is an all-time high. That was driven both by a high level of prosecutions and by a 10-year high in the conviction rate for rape and attempted rape. That is what the justice system is doing: it is standing on the side of victims, ensuring that the perpetrators of violence against women are brought to justice. I am proud of the Government’s record in bringing criminals to justice.
Victims do not believe you, and they do not buy it. The First Minister talks about doing the right thing in 2015. Do the right thing now and sack the justice secretary.
Speak through the chair, please.
The SNP Government is addicted to cover-up, and no issue is out of bounds for its spin.
The rules are clear that Angela Constance must go; victims are clear that Angela Constance must go; and every single person who is sitting at home watching John Swinney make these pathetic responses knows that Angela Constance must go. But John Swinney thinks he knows better.
Angela Constance misled the Parliament on the issue of grooming gangs; the Minister for Health and Social Services used public money to get chauffeured to football matches; his predecessor misappropriated public money to watch football on his iPad; and John Swinney, Nicola Sturgeon and Humza Yousaf all wiped their phones during the pandemic—[Interruption.]
Let us hear Mr Sarwar.
They do not want to hear it, Presiding Officer. They all wiped their phones during the pandemic, so we will never know what really went on. They think that the rules do not apply to them. They think that they can always get away with it. Why do John Swinney and the SNP hold the people of Scotland in such utter contempt?
I do no such thing. What I do in office is focus my Government on making sure that it delivers for the people of Scotland, and it is doing so. On health, we have the highest number of operations undertaken since the pandemic; levels of literacy and numeracy across our primary and secondary schools are at a record high; business investment has exceeded 10 per cent of gross domestic product for the first time in 20 years in Scotland; unemployment is lower in Scotland than it is in the rest of the United Kingdom; and child poverty is falling in this country when it is rising in the rest of the United Kingdom. That is all because of the focus of my Government. I serve the people of Scotland with every fibre of my body, and I intend to continue doing so.
Taxation (Funding for Local Services)
Across the country, families just cannot get the services that they need locally. Every day in schools, children with additional support needs are being failed by a near total lack of specialist staff. More than 10,000 children will spend this Christmas in temporary accommodation, and far too many elderly and disabled people and their families just cannot get the care packages that meet their needs. At the other end of the spectrum, the wealthiest people in Scotland just keep getting wealthier.
For all the mistakes that she made in her budget, the Chancellor of the Exchequer’s mansion tax plans for England will raise hundreds of millions of pounds. However, that cash will be grabbed by the Treasury, rather than going to local councils. Does the First Minister agree with the Scottish Greens that we could use a Scottish mansion tax to fund local services, such as education, housing and social care, to deliver the support that our communities so desperately need?
I recognise many of the challenges and pressures that Mr Greer puts to me with regard to additional support needs. As a consequence of the agreement that we reached in the budget last year, in dialogue with local government, we invested more money into additional support needs. We have not only restored but exceeded previous budgets for housing, to ensure that we tackle the temporary accommodation issue. The greater than real-terms support for local government delivered a stronger position to deliver care packages, although I accept the pressures.
The issues that Mr Greer raised are material to the Government’s budget, which will be settled in January. I welcome the dialogue that has taken place with the Scottish Green Party. We are open to the ideas and suggestions that are being made, and we will give them every consideration. However, from the extensive discussions that he and I have had on these issues over the years, Mr Greer knows my commitment to investing in public services to meet the needs of the public.
I appreciate the efforts that the First Minister and the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government have made to take into consideration the budget proposals that the Greens have already made, but this is an opportunity that we cannot afford to miss. The chancellor’s English mansion tax is definitely an overcomplicated and limited way of achieving a progressive outcome, but it is progressive to tax the wealthiest people in the most valuable houses fairly.
Two years ago, the Scottish Government developed proposals for far more effective changes to council tax for the higher bands. If those proposals were dusted down and those changes were made to bands F, G and H, it would put a desperately needed £126 million into local services, which is enough for thousands of additional support needs teachers or social care workers. The First Minister surely agrees with the Greens that our local services need more funding and that it is only fair to ask wealthier people to pay their fair share so that we can deliver that.
There is a lot in what Mr Greer said that I agree with. As he knows, the Government has taken the decision, which, of course, is not warmly welcomed across Parliament, to ask people on higher incomes to pay more in taxation than they would if they lived in other parts of the United Kingdom. That is exactly the right thing to have done. We will consider other proposals, as Mr Greer knows. He is involved in discussions with the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government and the Minister for Public Finance, which I am fully across. We look forward to coming to conclusions when the Government’s budget is set out to Parliament in January.
United Kingdom Government Child Poverty Strategy
To ask the First Minister what assessment the Scottish Government has made of the potential implications for its work to eradicate child poverty in Scotland of the UK Government’s child poverty strategy. (S6F-04525)
Any measure taken by the United Kingdom Government that helps us in our work to eradicate child poverty is welcome. The decision to lift the two-child limit—this Government proposed and pressed for that lifting—is welcome, but the UK Government’s strategy still fails to recognise the damaging impact of the benefit cap or the local housing allowance freeze, which only further drive families into poverty.
We will continue to engage with the UK Government on those questions and, of course, we will set out to Parliament in March the next tackling child poverty delivery plan, which is our statutory responsibility.
I thank the First Minister for that answer. Thousands of children are in poverty under Labour because it has kept Tory austerity. It bungled the scrapping of the two-child policy by keeping the benefit cap. Many families with more than two children may still be capped. The child poverty strategy was an opportunity for the UK Government to deliver real change, but it has fallen short of the bold action that is needed. In fact, the United Kingdom House of Commons library found that, if Labour matched key Scottish National Party Government policies, it could lift an additional 1.1 million children out of poverty across the UK.
While Starmer struggles to get a grip on the ever-growing poverty levels across the UK, what assurances can the First Minister provide to the people of Scotland that the SNP Scottish Government will do everything that it can to reduce child poverty here even further?
The action that this Government is taking is making a real difference. I assure Marie McNair that the Government’s focus in Scotland will remain absolutely on eradicating child poverty, and that it is a central issue for discussion in the Government’s budget.
The UK Government’s decision to scrap the two-child limit comes after sustained and concerted pressure from the Scottish Government and charities, and it is welcome. However, other measures are needed, and the Government in Scotland will take those steps in relation to the budget. I committed that, should the UK Government remove the two-child limit, the resources that this Government was going to spend on that would be allocated for other anti-child-poverty measures, and I reaffirm that commitment to Parliament today.
Childhood Dementia Awareness
To ask the First Minister what assessment the Scottish Government has made of, and support it is providing to, childhood dementia awareness. (S6F-04519)
I thank childhood dementia Scotland—a collaborative partnership of experts and organisations set up by Alzheimer Scotland—for its work to raise awareness of the issues that are associated with childhood dementia through its new report. There is clearly more work to be done to understand the causes and the impact of childhood dementia, but we know that it is caused by a number of rare genetic conditions.
That is why we are collaborating with NHS Education for Scotland and NHS Inform through the rare disease action plan to improve awareness and understanding of rare conditions among healthcare professionals and the public. We will, of course, carefully consider the recommendations that childhood dementia Scotland set out.
At lunch time, I will host a round-table discussion in Parliament alongside Alzheimer Scotland to discuss the findings of the report, which was published yesterday. Most people will not be aware of the rare genetic conditions that affect almost 400 children in Scotland and cause symptoms of dementia. The report has provided important evidence on prevalence, gaps in support and the impact that that has on families across our country.
Despite the courage and resilience of families who live with childhood dementia, too many families feel isolated and have to fight for the support that they need, as childhood dementia does not fit into many of the current pathways. Will the First Minister and the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care agree to meet me and campaigners, and will the Government consider the key recommendations in the report on childhood dementia being placed in the national dementia strategy, and those on developing national standards and better research in Scotland?
I am grateful to Miles Briggs for highlighting the issue and the important research work that has been carried out. I welcome the fact that he will be meeting campaigners and experts on the subject today. Of course, with the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care, I would be happy to meet the member and representatives of the organisations to look at those questions.
Essentially, Mr Briggs makes an argument that I accept entirely, which is that the way through is not to try to fit individuals into services, but to ensure that services meet the needs of individuals, who in this case are vulnerable children with acute health requirements. That is what I would call person-centred care, which must be at the heart of our health service. If we embark on our discussions considering how best we can deliver that proposition, I think that we can make progress. I am very happy to take forward those discussions.
I thank the First Minister for his words on the matter. In Scotland, there is no framework, consistent referral pathway or single approach to the care of children with dementia. Sadly, 50 per cent of children with dementia die by the age of 10. Does the Scottish Government recognise that it is an urgent issue? Will it provide an official response to Alzheimer Scotland’s recently published report on childhood dementia?
Yes, we will provide a response. My answer to Miles Briggs will be how I will advise the Government to respond, which is that it should be in the frame of pursuing person-centred care. Carol Mochan makes the point that, sadly, many of the children who are affected by childhood dementia have a relatively short life expectancy. Maximising their life expectancy so that every precious moment is available for their families to be with them is absolutely vital. I will ensure that those issues are reflected in the Government’s response to the research that is being carried out.
NHS Scotland
To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government’s response is to the independent investigation into NHS Scotland by the retired consultant surgeon and former president of the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Glasgow, Mr Mike McKirdy. (S6F-04529)
The Government carefully considers all reports on the performance of the national health service.
Mike McKirdy’s comprehensive report lays bare the consequences of the lack of delivery in our NHS after almost two decades of Scottish National Party spin. Despite what the First Minister says, very little has improved under the SNP.
Let us take the longest waits: the former First Minister, Humza Yousaf, said that he would end waits of more than two years by September 2022. Three years on, thousands of people are still waiting. Now, the First Minister is promising to end all waits of more than a year in just four months’ time but, last month, we learned that 11,246 people are still waiting for more than two years.
I ask the First Minister: who should the public trust—the SNP, which overpromises and always underdelivers, or Mike McKirdy, a respected consultant who says that more of the same will not be enough? Is that not why Scots cannot afford another five years of the First Minister’s failing SNP Government?
Before I come to the substance of Jackie Baillie’s question, one of the issues that will affect the performance of the national health service is the upsurge in conditions that put it under incredible pressure. Today, the national medical director of NHS England, Professor Pandit, has issued a statement, which I shall read:
“This unprecedented wave of super flu is leaving the NHS facing a worst-case scenario for this time of year.”
I am simply saying that the health service will undoubtedly face enormous pressures when waves of cases come our way—[Interruption.]
Let us hear one another.
That is exactly what is happening with performance in accident and emergency departments, because of flu pressures. If it is happening in England, it is likely to be happening in Scotland—which it is.
On Monday, Mr McKirdy said that his strongest advice to the Scottish Government should be a relentless focus on delivery. I reassure Jackie Baillie that that is exactly what is going on, which is why, in the period since April, new out-patient waits of more than a year reduced by 17.9 per cent. In the same period, the waiting list size for new in-patient and day-case procedures over 52 weeks has reduced by 26.1 per cent. It is why the number of general practitioners is increasing. That is all happening because this Government is relentlessly focused on delivery.
There is nothing for Jackie Baillie to worry about, because, as we saw from the opinion poll yesterday, nobody trusts the Labour Party on the national health service, and more people trust me and the SNP.
The evidence is clear that Scotland’s NHS is turning a corner, with downward trends across nearly all waiting list indicators. To suggest otherwise does a huge disservice to our fantastic NHS staff. I suggest that Jackie Baillie and her colleagues think twice about the impact of their scaremongering about our health and social care system in Scotland and the effect that that is having on the wider population—and perhaps also reflect on the dismal record of their colleagues in Wales and England before turning to our record. [Interruption.]
Let us hear Ms Harper’s question.
Can the First Minister advise how the Scottish National Party Government is working to deliver our health service in Scotland, continue to drive down waiting times, and invest in a well-funded and well-supported NHS for those who need it?
The first thing to say is that we put in place record financial settlements for the national health service, which the Labour Party could not bring itself to vote for. We have also put in place the investment to make sure that we are increasing GP numbers and that operations are performing at levels that we have not seen since January 2020, before the pandemic. We have also seen an increase in the number of diagnostic tests performed, and, as I have just repeated to Jackie Baillie, long waits of more than a year have been down for five months in a row.
What this Government is doing is focusing on the people’s priorities. We are tackling the issues in the national health service, and we are delivering for the people of Scotland.
We move to constituency and general supplementary questions.
Baird Family Hospital
My question relates to an issue that cannot be blamed on the super-flu.
Aberdeen’s new maternity hospital is facing further delays, more than a decade after it was first given the go-ahead. The Baird family hospital was originally planned to open in 2020, but more setbacks have meant that it might not be finished until 2027 at the earliest—that is seven years late. Millions of pounds of taxpayers’ money has been spent on rectifying design flaws. Local women are paying the price for that incompetence, while staff are struggling to cope with rising waiting times for maternity services, gynaecology, breast screening and breast surgery. First Minister, will you engage with NHS Grampian and visit the site to see for yourself the problems that are causing the delays?
Always speak through the chair.
I understand the significance of the points that Tess White raises. Obviously, the safety of national health facilities is absolutely essential. During the design phase of the Baird, issues have been raised about hospital construction projects that have been completed in other parts of Scotland, and those issues are the subject of inquiries. We have to be mindful of the safety issues, which explains a lot of the issues at play.
The Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care engages in detail with NHS Grampian to press for the earliest possible progress. I totally accept the importance of those services being available for Tess White’s constituents, and I assure her that there is relentless focus on those issues. However, we have to be mindful of the safety considerations that must be applied in all cases.
Voluntary Sector (Financial Pressures)
The First Minister will be aware of the significant financial pressures in the voluntary sector, with inflationary energy and food costs and, of course, increased national insurance payments. That increase in national insurance will cost the Scottish Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals an extra £400,000 a year, which has led to it having to look for voluntary redundancies. Does the First Minister share my concern that the Scottish SPCA will have to cut its services at the very time—after the festive season—when there will be an upsurge in demand as unwanted pets, given as Christmas presents, are rejected and abandoned when the novelty wears off?
I declare an interest as convener of the cross-party group on animal welfare.
Christine Grahame raises a serious issue. We are all concerned about the sustainability of the third sector in light of the additional costs that it has to meet due to the increase in employer national insurance contributions. That increase has been a significant factor for all sectors, and in particular the voluntary sector, to deal with.
I am happy for the Government to co-operate with the Scottish SPCA in any way that we can to ensure that its important advisory and support services are available at all times during the year.
University Funding (Job Losses)
The First Minister will be aware that, over recent months, the University of Edinburgh has been embarking on cost-cutting measures, including 350 voluntary redundancies, salary freezes and reductions in hours.
Constituents of mine have highlighted a communication that the university has circulated, which outlines the possibility of compulsory redundancies. The University and College Union estimates that one in eight jobs could be lost. However, it is not just about Edinburgh university. Yesterday, the University of Strathclyde announced plans for 70 job cuts.
Does the First Minister accept that that is the result of long-term underfunding of Scottish universities by the Scottish Government? More important, what does he say to university workers who are contemplating a Christmas when they do not know whether they will have a job in the new year?
The issues in the university sector are complex. For example, the United Kingdom Government’s stance on migration does not help the university sector, because it does not help with the attraction of international students, which is one of the very significant factors that have affected the resources of the university community.
Of course, I accept that the Government publicly funds a proportion of university income, and these issues will be the subject of debate in the budget process. However, last year, Mr Johnson never supported the budget. The universities would have got nothing, according to Mr Johnson, because he was not prepared to support the budget.
I simply encourage Mr Johnson to engage with the Government, so that we can all make progress in supporting the universities and, into the bargain, their employees.
Business Investment (Confederation of British Industry Report)
A new report from the Confederation of British Industry shows that business investment in Scotland has risen to a 20-year high, in contrast with a fall across the United Kingdom. This success for Scotland’s economy comes despite the UK Government’s tax on jobs and its low-growth model. How does the Scottish Government plan to build on that momentum and continue to deliver economic growth, even within the limits of devolution?
The CBI report is very welcome, because it indicates that business investment in Scotland has risen to a 20-year high, in contrast with a fall across the rest of the United Kingdom. That goes alongside the fact that unemployment in Scotland is lower than that in the rest of the United Kingdom, which is another indication of the strength of economic performance in Scotland.
Of course, we have heard the views of the credit rating agencies, which said that Scotland had a strong and diverse economy and that it benefited from prudent financial management of its public finances and from its institutional strength.
The CBI report demonstrates that Scotland is an attractive place for investment, that it is a successful and dynamic economy and that it has good stewardship of its public finances.
Supreme Court Judgment
On Tuesday, I had a constructive meeting with Chief Constable Jo Farrell. She assured me that Police Scotland is complying with the Supreme Court judgment on the definition of the word “woman”. The chief constable told me that Police Scotland did not wait for any guidance from the Equality and Human Rights Commission, but instead produced its own interim guidance, which is based on biological sex. I ask the First Minister again—especially bearing in mind the Sandie Peggie judgment—why it has taken almost eight months for other public bodies to follow the law.
One of the issues of which we have been mindful is the need to ensure that the complex legal judgment of the Supreme Court is correctly and properly applied in guidance. We have published new guidance in relation to a number of areas, such as schools and workplaces within the Scottish Government.
Obviously, there are issues that we have to continue to work through, as we saw in the judgment that was announced at the beginning of the week, on Monday, in relation to the employment tribunal to which the member referred. That is a further range of complexity that has to be wrestled with.
I reassure Pam Gosal that the Government is doing the work to ensure that those issues are properly addressed, and we have already done so in relation to the documents that we have published.
Crozier v Scottish Power UK plc
I hope that the First Minister will join me in welcoming yesterday’s Supreme Court decision in the case of Crozier v Scottish Power and commend Elaine Veale, whose father, Robert Crozier, died from mesothelioma in 2018, for her unrelenting struggle in an eight-year battle with his former employer, Scottish Power UK plc, to win the case.
Will the First Minister join me in condemning the actions of Scottish Power in resisting and obstructing the claim? Will he welcome the fact that, on this occasion at least, the Supreme Court has understood the clear intention of this Parliament in passing the Damages (Asbestos-related Conditions) (Scotland) Act 2009?
Mr Leonard raises an example of the importance of addressing the issues involved in the damages legislation and the enormous suffering that individuals with mesothelioma have experienced.
I associate myself very much Mr Leonard’s comments, and I am glad that the issue has been resolved satisfactorily, but it should not have involved going to such lengths to ensure that justice could be achieved.
Energy Costs (Support)
Scotland is an energy-rich country, but people are struggling with sky-high bills to heat their homes. For too many years, Westminster has squandered Scotland’s energy, while failing to provide any meaningful support to people in Scotland to raise living standards.
While Westminster is sitting on its hands, can the First Minister advise what steps the Scottish National Party Scottish Government is taking to support people on low incomes with their fuel bills this winter? Can he say any more about what we could do differently with full powers over Scotland’s energy from the fresh start of independence?
Over this winter, the Government will invest more than £196 million in our winter heating benefits, providing vital support towards the cost of energy to those with a greater need for heat, including low-income households, families with disabled children and young people, and pensioners. In addition, low-income Scots, including pensioners, will continue to receive our winter heating payments, which are worth £59.75, this winter. Those payments are available only in Scotland. Those are some of the measures that the Government is taking within its existing powers.
Of course, people in Scotland are attracted by the very clear argument that it is vital that the enormous energy potential of our country benefits the people of Scotland. With all of the generation capability that we have, it is absurd that we have such high levels of fuel poverty. It is only the fresh start of independence that will address that issue.
Non-domestic Rates Revaluation
Hospitality and self-catering businesses across the country, which are already suffering from rising costs, are reeling this week from a rates revaluation that sees, in some cases, a threefold increase in the bills that they are likely to face, which they simply cannot afford.
I know, and the First Minister knows, that the assessors are independent of Government, but ministers set the statutory framework—the rules, the assumptions, the timetables and the methodology—under which the assessors operate. Will the First Minister take urgent action to address the issue before yet more hospitality businesses have to close their doors?
I understand the concerns that Mr Fraser raises with me. As he correctly says, the assessors act independently on this question. However, I am concerned by the detail that I am hearing about some of the decisions that have been arrived at, which is why the Minister for Public Finance has already engaged in considering the implications of the issues and what is driving the changes in the methodologies that are producing those results.
I assure Mr Fraser that the issue is already being addressed by the Government. It is an important issue, because it will affect the sustainability of many businesses as a consequence of the proposed changes. The matter is being pursued by ministers at this time.
Prisoners (Palestine Action)
Seven prisoners who are in their second month on hunger strike are now at risk of death due to their deteriorating health. They are part of a larger group of political prisoners who are being held under special terrorism conditions due to alleged association with the proscribed group Palestine Action. I oppose the ban on Palestine Action, I support those who have protested against the ban and I add my voice to the call for their immediate bail while awaiting trial.
On behalf of my constituents in the North East Scotland region who care deeply about the issue, will the First Minister join me in opposing any curtailing of human rights and the intimidation, discrimination and victimisation of those who oppose genocide?
I am a very strong supporter of human rights. I have deep anxieties with regard to what I am hearing about the consideration that is being given to curtailing the application and scope of the European convention on human rights in the United Kingdom. The obligation to observe the ECHR is one of the great developments during my lifetime. It has strengthened individual rights, and we are the better for it. I am concerned by the direction of travel on that question, and I assure Mercedes Villalba of my support on it. This evening, I will attend a Scottish Human Rights Commission event in the Parliament.
Mercedes Villalba will appreciate that custodial decisions are arrived at by the application of law in the United Kingdom and that it would be inappropriate for me, as First Minister, who has to observe the rule of law, to make any comment about independent decisions that are arrived at by prosecutorial or judicial authorities.
NHS Waiting Lists (Automatic Removal)
A constituent of mine who is on a national health service waiting list recently received correspondence from NHS Lothian informing them that, if they did not confirm within 21 days whether they wanted to remain on the list, they would automatically be taken off it. Although I understand that that policy is in line with Government guidance, I am concerned that it might result in a vulnerable patient, such as one who is elderly or who has special educational needs, missing out on essential treatment without their consent. Will the First Minister agree to instruct ministers and officials to review the policy to ensure that vulnerable patients are not struck off waiting lists unfairly?
Any individual who requires healthcare treatment should get that healthcare treatment. That is the simple premise behind the national health service, and it is applied in all circumstances. It is important that we have up-to-date information on the medical conditions of individuals to enable us to plan their treatment, and that is exactly what the national health service ensures.
Whitesands Flood Defence Scheme
Scottish National Party-run Dumfries and Galloway Council is set to vote today on the controversial £68.6 million Whitesands flood defence scheme, which is opposed by many residents and businesses. The Scottish Government is expected to fund 80 per cent of that project, despite serious questions remaining about its impact and effectiveness. Given that the Scottish Government faces a massive budget black hole and that Dumfries and Galloway Council could potentially be closing rural schools to deal with its financial crisis, will the First Minister withdraw his Government’s financial support for the Whitesands flood defence scheme project, which is likely to do more harm than good for residents, businesses and the local economy?
Flooding at Whitesands has been a long-term issue. There has been significant parliamentary and political pressure for a scheme to be put in place. A number of very well-designed flood prevention schemes have been put in place in different communities in Scotland that have provided respite for families who are affected. I simply observe that early weather information suggests that there will be very heavy rain in the south-west of Scotland over the course of this weekend, so there are challenging circumstances out there at all times.
Flood defence schemes are developed locally. They are put to wider discussion across all local authorities to determine the funding priorities, and the Government allocates funding to them accordingly. That is, essentially, the Government collaborating with a locally based approach to the design of flood prevention schemes. Mr Hoy is asking me to take that power away from local authorities and to decide on the issue in the centre. Normally, Mr Hoy rails against the Government deciding on such issues. I have had much correspondence over the years from people who do not like the scheme that is proposed at Whitesands, but it is important that we listen carefully to the expert advice about the right course of action on such issues.
That concludes First Minister’s question time. There will be a short suspension to allow people to leave the public gallery and the chamber.
12:49 Meeting suspended.Previous
General Question Time