Economic Performance
The Scottish Fiscal Commission conducts rigorous and independent analysis of tax and the economy in Scotland. Its most recent report outlines that Scottish National Party tax rises are costing Scottish workers £1.7 billion each year. We should have an extra £1.7 billion to spend, but we do not, because the SFC identifies what it calls an “economic performance gap” with the rest of the United Kingdom. That actually reduces the amount that is available to spend.
Does John Swinney know the size of the economic performance gap between SNP-run Scotland and the rest of the UK?
The important point to consider is that the extra revenue that is raised as a consequence of the tax decisions that we have taken in Scotland enables us to invest in public services and other interventions that support the Government’s policy agenda. Those changes and differences are well acknowledged and well understood in Scotland. For example, we have a much more significant provision of early learning and childcare in Scotland, which meets the needs of families. In addition, the Scottish child payment helps to keep children out of poverty. In Scotland, we have a falling child poverty rate, whereas child poverty rates are rising in the rest of the United Kingdom.
There are differences in policy outcomes that come from the Government’s decisions to ask people on higher incomes to pay slightly more in taxation.
That is more smoke and mirrors from John Swinney. He does not seem to know the figures, so let me help him. SNP tax rises for hard-working Scots should result in £1.7 billion more to spend, but, because the SNP-run economy lags behind the economy in the rest of the UK, the Scottish Fiscal Commission says that the Scottish Government has only £600 million more to spend. Under the SNP, there is a £1.1 billion economic performance gap—and that is just this year. Last year, it was another £1 billion.
Over the past 10 years, according to the SFC, the economic performance gap between Scotland and the rest of the UK adds up to £5.4 billion. Does John Swinney now realise that anti-business SNP policies are costing Scotland a fortune?
What is clear from the data is that the improvements in gross domestic product per capita in Scotland under the Scottish Government since we came to office have been superior to those in the rest of the United Kingdom. The data tells us that the Scottish economy in terms of GDP per capita has grown at a faster rate in Scotland than in the rest of the United Kingdom.
As a Government, we take a number of steps to invest in the economy. We are supporting investment in key sectors of the economy, such as renewable energy, and we are actively involved in investing in the skills system to support the development of the economy. We assist companies by having a competitive business rates regime in Scotland, which reduces the burden of business rates on companies, enabling them to invest in their business operations.
That is what Scotland gets from the business-friendly SNP Government. [Interruption.]
Thank you, members.
I will try to stop laughing for a minute.
John Swinney does not even seem to accept that the economic performance gap exists. It is peak SNP denial. The SFC is saying it—it is in its report, which the First Minister should try to read.
The SNP has failed to keep up with the rest of the UK. It has made the situation even worse by wasting billions of pounds of taxpayers’ money on a national care service that does not treat patients, the endless CalMac ferry scandal, a £1 billion prison with bird and bat boxes and an annual benefits bill that will soon top £9 billion.
The SNP is costing Scotland £1 billion a year in lost growth and countless billions of pounds through its sheer incompetence. Is that not exactly why John Swinney cannot bring down bills or improve public services? He is throwing all the money away.
I will be clear with Mr Findlay: under the SNP Government, since 2007, GDP per person in Scotland has grown by 10.3 per cent, compared with 6.1 per cent in the United Kingdom. That demonstrates that our economic performance has been superior to that of the rest of the United Kingdom.
Russell Findlay highlights the fact that there are choices to be made about public expenditure. When he talks about the annual benefits bill, he has to be explicit about what he is talking about. What benefits would he cut? We believe that it is important that we support children out of poverty. Is that what Russell Findlay wants to stop? [Interruption.] I think that that is what we are talking about. Russell Findlay wants to end the Scottish child payment and consign more children to poverty. [Interruption.]
Let us hear one another.
I am simply pointing out that there are implications to Mr Findlay saying things such as the annual benefits bill is too high. He has to set out where the cuts would come from. The cuts under Mr Findlay would fall on the children of Scotland. I want to lift children out of poverty; Mr Findlay wants to consign children to poverty.
The Scottish Conservative Party wants to lift children and families out of poverty, not keep them trapped on benefits.
The SNP wastes money on an industrial scale, but, unbelievably, Labour looked at the SNP’s economic record and decided to copy it. It has already raised national insurance, but there is more pain to come. The spending review signals a return to tax and spend. Rachel Reeves is shafting business, workers, farmers and the oil and gas industry, but at least there is enough money now for John Swinney to give Scots a tax break. Will he commit to bringing down the burden on Scottish workers and families?
I suppose that there is one minor element of that question that I can find common ground with, and that is the damage that has been done to the economy by the decision to increase employer national insurance contributions. Statistics that were published this morning show that, in April, GDP in the United Kingdom contracted by 0.3 per cent.
That could reasonably have been predicted, given the increase in employer national insurance contributions—indeed, I warned about it. If we are to have an agenda that is focused on growth, I do not understand why the UK Labour Government decided to support a growth-reducing measure such as raising employer national insurance contributions, which the evidence now tells us is suppressing growth in the United Kingdom. That is the context in which we are operating.
I say to Mr Findlay that this Government will do what it always does. We will focus on the needs of the people of Scotland. We will focus on lifting children out of poverty, on improving our public services, on the journey to net zero and on improving the economic performance of Scotland, just as we have done in the past.
Alexander Dennis (Job Losses)
Members will be deeply concerned about the planned job losses at Alexander Dennis in Larbert. Our thoughts are with the workforce.
Alexander Dennis is an industry leader in bus manufacturing, and that news was not inevitable—it is another result of Scottish National Party failure. Under the SNP, the Scottish Government is procuring more buses from China than it is from Scotland. The Mayor of Greater Manchester, Andy Burnham, has bought almost four times as many buses from Alexander Dennis as the SNP Government has. That is shameful. Why does the SNP always put foreign businesses and manufacturers before Scotland’s workers?
Before I address Mr Sarwar’s question, I would like to take the opportunity—as it is the first opportunity that I have had since the Parliament reconvened this week—to welcome Davy Russell to the Parliament as the member of the Scottish Parliament for Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse, and to wish him well.
On the important question about Alexander Dennis that Mr Sarwar put to me, I am deeply concerned about the situation. The issue has been occupying a great deal of my, the Deputy First Minister’s and United Kingdom Government ministers’ focus and attention since we became aware of the situation that has been developing over the past few weeks and which ultimately has led to the decision that was announced yesterday.
The Scottish Government has engaged with the company. Over a series of years, we have supported Alexander Dennis in the development of its facilities in Larbert and Falkirk, and we have assisted it in its research and development activity. Since 2020, through the Scottish zero emission bus challenge fund and its predecessor the Scottish ultra-low emission bus scheme, Alexander Dennis has secured more zero-emission bus orders than any other single manufacturer. Under the existing arrangements, to the extent that is permissible, Alexander Dennis has secured more zero-emission bus orders than anybody else.
Most bus orders are procured by private organisations in Scotland that are run by commercial operators in a deregulated market. Any decisions that the Government takes must be consistent with the United Kingdom Subsidy Control Act 2022, which is a material issue in this matter.
Having said all that, I want to make it clear to the Alexander Dennis workforce and to the Parliament that the Government is engaging very closely and firmly to see what we can do to help with the situation and to avoid any of the negative implications that yesterday’s announcement suggested might occur.
That was a rather weak response from the First Minister. If the Mayor of Greater Manchester, Andy Burnham, can find a way under the existing legislation to procure more buses than Scotland has, why can the SNP Government not procure more buses? It is another example of weak leadership from John Swinney. When Scotland needs buses, the SNP Government buys from China; when Scotland needs steel for bridges, it buys from China; and when we need ferries, it buys from Poland and Turkey. All that the SNP Government wants to do is to manufacture grievance and all that it offers is waste and incompetence. It has the powers and the money, but, as always, it wants to blame someone else. That is weak, failing leadership from John Swinney. Even his own MSPs are now openly rebelling against him, with senior figures saying that he has two weeks—[Interruption.] They groan in private; let them groan in public now. Senior figures say that he has two weeks to come up with a new idea—[Interruption.]
Let us hear one another.
—to save his job. If he has not come up with a good idea to improve Scotland in 18 years, what chance does he have of coming up with something now?
The Alexander Dennis workforce will not be surprised that what I am doing is focusing on the situation that it faces. Let me tell Mr Sarwar what the Government has done—what it has done over many years—to support Alexander Dennis. We have provided £58 million of funding for zero-emission buses since 2020, through the Scottish ultra-low emission bus scheme. Scottish Enterprise has also supported Alexander Dennis with £30.3 million in research and development support as a contribution to its research and development activity. That has been part of the partnership between the Scottish Government and Alexander Dennis.
In his comments the other day—this is material to the answer that I just gave Mr Sarwar—Paul Davies, the president and managing director of Alexander Dennis, said this about bus orders:
“The stark reality is that current UK policy does not allow for the incentivisation or reward of local content, job retention and creation, nor does it encourage any domestic economic benefit.”
That is the implication of the 2022 act. What I and the Deputy First Minister are doing—this is what is commanding my attention and my focus—is considering how we can find a way in which we can remain legally compliant with the 2022 act and overcome these obstacles. In that endeavour, we are engaging very closely with the United Kingdom Government.
I welcome the fact that we have engaged with the UK Government. Indeed, in a joint letter to the company, the secretary of state and the Deputy First Minister say:
“Our governments continue to work closely together on a range of shared issues to support domestic industries in Scotland, and we are keen to work closely with Alexander Dennis at this challenging time.”
That is us indicating that we will do everything that we can to find a way through the 2022 act provisions so that the Government can continue to both operate within the law—as we must do—and support manufacturing in Scotland, which is my priority.
If John Swinney cannot figure out a way to order buses in Scotland, I suggest that he picks up the phone to call Andy Burnham and see how he managed to do it, because there are almost five times as many bus orders from Manchester as from Scotland.
John Swinney and the SNP are out of ideas, out of steam and out of time. Failing to support Scottish manufacturing jobs is only one example. After 18 years in charge, there are falling education standards; rising violent crime; a deepening national health service crisis; more lives lost to drug deaths; and billions of pounds of money wasted. Every day, Scots pay the price for SNP incompetence and are expected to be thankful for it, so it is no wonder that, as shown in Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse, Scots are seeing through the spin and are voting for a new direction.
However, it is not only the public who are doing that. One SNP MSP said of John Swinney that
“There is no energy, no fire, no boldness, no long-term vision.”
They are right, are they not?
Listen, Mr Sarwar can conjure up all the stuff that he wants—he can go through his press cuttings and practise them in the mirror in the morning to see how they sound—but I will be focused on delivering answers and solutions for workers who face difficulty in the country. While Mr Sarwar postures, I will deliver for the workers of Scotland.
Universal Free School Meals (Expansion)
Kids cannot learn if they are hungry. That is why the Greens campaigned for universal free school meals for primary 4 and 5 kids and for the expansion to primary 6 and 7 kids whose families receive the Scottish child payment. It is why we brought the next phase of roll-out to secondary 1, 2 and 3 kids who receive the SCP to the budget negotiations. In August, thousands more high school kids in Aberdeen, Glasgow, Fife, Moray, North Ayrshire, South Lanarkshire, Shetland and the Western Isles will now get free school meals. Does the First Minister agree that the programme must be expanded to all council areas as soon as possible to ensure that no kid goes hungry in school?
I unreservedly accept the importance of food provision in our schools and tackling the issue of children who come to school hungry. Ensuring that children have a good and solid meal during the day is addressed as part of the Government’s policy programme, so there is no disagreement between Lorna Slater and me on that question.
The Government has taken pragmatic decisions within the finances that are available to us to expand the programme to primary 6 and 7 pupils who are eligible for the Scottish child payment, and we are obviously taking forward the pilot exercises for secondary pupils, which were the subject of constructive dialogue with the Green Party during the budget negotiations.
I am committed to doing as much as we can. The Parliament will be familiar with the financial challenges that we face, which were not eased by yesterday’s spending review. We will, of course, engage constructively with other parties about how we can take forward the important commitments to enhance the educational opportunities of children and young people in Scotland.
Expanding free school meals is one way to build the fairer, greener country that we know Scotland can be. However, children in Scotland will still be forced into poverty thanks to a Labour Government that is balancing the books on the backs of the poorest while the wealthiest grow ever richer.
The United Kingdom Government could have scrapped the cruel two-child benefit cap this week, but it did not. Scotland is tired of mitigating Westminster’s mistakes. Does the First Minister agree that now is the time to demand that Keir Starmer set out exactly what conditions he believes need to be met to trigger an independence referendum for Scotland, so that we can get out of this unequal union?
I agree with Lorna Slater about the importance of Scotland becoming an independent country. I think that it is democratically unacceptable—[Interruption.]
Let us hear one another.
I think that it is democratically unacceptable for the will of the Scottish Parliament, which has demanded the power to hold a referendum on independence, to be ignored by the United Kingdom Government. I agree entirely with Lorna Slater on that point.
If anyone needs an explanation of why Scotland would benefit from being an independent country, it comes in the fact that, as was confirmed yesterday, the spending review is predicated on an attack on the poorest and the most vulnerable in our society by a Labour Government. Anyone who was thinking that attacks on the poor and the vulnerable in our society were the exclusive preserve of the Conservative Party got a rude awakening yesterday, because they are the preserve of the Labour Party into the bargain. The answer to the seesaw politics of Westminster attacking the poor and the vulnerable is for Scotland to be an independent country. The sooner that happens, the better.
Spending Review 2025
To ask the First Minister what the impact on Scotland will be of the chancellor’s spending review 2025. (S6F-04164)
The United Kingdom Government’s spending review has left Scotland facing real-terms growth of 0.8 per cent a year for our overall block grant funding, which is lower than the 1.5 per cent average for UK departments. Had our day-to-day resource funding grown in line with overall UK Government spending, we would have more than £1.1 billion more to spend on our priorities by 2028-29. That all comes on top of the additional hike in employer national insurance contributions and the planned cuts to support for disabled people. Those are the realities of the spending review that need to be understood in Scotland today.
In April, the UK economy shrank by 0.3 per cent—that is more than £712 million—following the devastating impact of Labour’s increase in employer national insurance contributions, which is a blatant jobs tax. Across the UK, 276,000 jobs have been lost since Labour’s October budget, with another 109,000 losses expected in May. Annual UK debt interest payments now stand at more than £133 billion—£2,000 for every man, woman and child in the UK. Amid that economic mismanagement, what will be the impact on Scotland’s economy of lower-than-average funding over the next three years relative to UK departments, with Scotland being short-changed by £1,100 million over that period?
The implications of the spending review are that the real-terms growth in the Scottish block grant will be 0.8 per cent a year, which is lower than the 1.5 per cent average for UK departments. That demonstrates the scale of the financial challenge that we face in Scotland. The Government will have to respond to that, and we will have to address those issues as part of the medium-term financial strategy, the spending review and the budget for successive years. It demonstrates that the United Kingdom is not providing the sustained investment in public services that is required as a consequence of the years of austerity. We need to invest to grow, and that was not delivered by the spending review yesterday.
Home Leave for Prisoners
To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government’s position is on whether the home leave for prisoners system is operating appropriately and as intended. (S6F-04167)
The management of decisions relating to home leave is an operational matter for the Scottish Prison Service. All decisions are subject to robust risk assessment and risk management planning. If released, individuals are subject to licence conditions and can be recalled to custody if those are breached. The use of home leave and temporary release is a well-established and necessary part of preparing an individual for eventual release and reintegration to the community.
A year into a four-year sentence for repeatedly subjecting Demi Hannaway to appalling mental and physical abuse, even while she was pregnant, violent thug Andrew Brown will get home leave, with one week a month out of prison. Demi’s mum, Helen, said:
“We had not been consulted or warned ... The very thought that we could have walked right into him ... has left us sickened to our stomachs.”
A violent monster such as Brown should not be walking the streets just a year after being sentenced to almost four years. Is the First Minister seriously telling Helen that home leave is working as intended? If not, how will he change it?
As I indicated in my answer to Mr Kerr’s first question, management and decisions relating to home leave are an operational matter for the Scottish Prison Service, which has to make careful judgments about each individual case.
Mr Kerr has put information into the parliamentary discussion just now. I understand that the individual in question has not been granted home leave; he has had unescorted day release, which is a different concept in the process.
As I have indicated before in the Parliament, Demi Hannaway’s case is tragic, and I express my sympathies to her family. I will explore the details of the issues that Mr Kerr has put on the record today to determine whether any further action or intervention can be taken, subject to respecting the operational independence of the Scottish Prison Service to arrive at its judgments. I note that the Lord Advocate has instructed an investigation into the circumstances of Demi’s death, and that is under way.
As the First Minister is aware, I have raised the case of Demi Hannaway in the chamber before. As he recognises, the Lord Advocate has instructed a fresh investigation into Demi’s death, which includes the role that Andrew Brown possibly played in it. Does the First Minister share my concerns about the decision on home leave? How can we maintain the integrity of the new investigation if Andrew Brown is allowed home leave and is looking at a release date for February?
The processes are distinct; the examination and exploration that the Lord Advocate has requested will be undertaken independently of any other processes. I cannot prejudge where the investigation and scrutiny might lead, and Claire Baker will understand that I cannot intervene in the actions of the Lord Advocate in that respect.
I will take away the issue that Claire Baker raises with me about any connection between the two different processes, one of which is undertaken by the Scottish Prison Service and one of which is undertaken independently of ministers under the supervision of the Lord Advocate.
I acknowledge Claire Baker’s long-standing interest in the case and, if there is anything further that I can advise Claire Baker about, I will do so. The most that I can say at the moment is that these are two independent processes that are being undertaken. If there is any appropriate connection to be established, I will make sure that that happens.
National Health Service (Treatment Waiting Times)
To ask the First Minister how the Scottish Government is working to ensure that patients are accurately informed of waiting times for NHS treatments following referrals to a specialist. (S6F-04173)
We recognise the importance of transparent and regular communication with patients, which is why we have in place a standard package of communications that all health boards should be providing. Our revised waiting times guidance, which was published in December 2023, ensures that patients are provided with clear communications throughout their care journey, setting out what they should expect while they are waiting for their appointment, test or treatment.
To assist patients in accessing waiting time information prior to treatment, Public Health Scotland offers an online platform that sets out initial planned care waiting times, indicating typical wait durations over the past quarter.
It has been more than a year since my constituent was referred to a dermatologist. He does not know when he will be seen, and his skin condition and mental health are getting worse. In NHS Lothian, the number of people who are waiting for more than 52 weeks to see a dermatologist has doubled in the past year. Will the First Minister admit that his Government has lost control of waiting times for specialist care, and will he apologise to my constituent?
As I have made clear on a number of occasions, there are individuals who are waiting too long for treatment. There are many people who are treated timeously in the NHS, but there are also many people who are waiting too long. I regret and apologise for the fact that people are waiting too long.
We are trying to recover services as quickly as possible following the Covid pandemic—that work has the focus of the Government.
Mr Choudhury specifically raises the issue of dermatology services. The Government is rolling out a digital dermatology service, which involves all general practices in the country. As part of the reforms that we are undertaking, the service aims to reduce the times for which individuals are waiting for dermatology processes by improving the flow and handling of cases. I assure Mr Choudhury that those measures are being progressed by the Government with the aim of addressing the issue that he puts to me.
The issue that Mr Choudhury raises is really important. Can the First Minister say more about what the Scottish Government is doing to reduce waiting times for my constituents in Dundee and people across the country? Specifically, can he give us an update on recent targeted investment and how that is supporting delivery?
In the past financial year, we invested an additional £30 million to drive action to address the longest waits. We expected that that would deliver 64,000 appointments and procedures; in fact, it delivered 105,500 appointments and procedures.
For the year ahead, more than £106 million of additional funding has been assigned to speciality services, where it can have the greatest impact on the longest waits. That will enable us to deliver more than 150,000 extra appointments and procedures in the coming year, which will ensure that people receive the care that they need as quickly as possible.
I declare an interest as a practising NHS general practitioner.
I was contacted by John, who had already waited 40 weeks for orthopaedic surgery. He had had no updates from the health board. He looked himself and found that his wait had increased—it had been 52 weeks in September and is now 67 weeks. The uncertainty is a major source of frustration and pain.
After the First Minister has just read out what is not happening, and at a time when we can track our online shopping orders to the minute, why is there no transparency about waiting times for hospital appointments?
The information about the length of waits is available. Mr Choudhury put a question to me about the visibility of that information and Dr Gulhane has just done likewise. That information is available.
I have indicated to the Parliament that the long waits are unacceptable. That is why the focus of our intervention is on addressing those long waits and ensuring that people do not wait as long as the person has done in the case that Dr Gulhane has put to me. The Government is absolutely focused on reducing those long waits, and I want to see more progress being made.
The issue is the subject of regular dialogue between me, the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care and the leadership of the national health service. All health boards are seized of the importance of the issue, which I reiterate today.
There is a particularly high level of interest in supplementary questions across the chamber. I would be grateful for concise questions and responses.
Alexander Dennis (Job Losses)
The First Minister will be aware of the deep concern in my constituency at the announcement that Alexander Dennis made yesterday. Given the risk that is posed to more than 400 jobs in my constituency, and having listened to the earlier exchange in the chamber, I would say that the last thing that the workforce and my constituents need is for their future employment to be turned into a political football. Indeed, they deserve much better. Now more than ever, the workforce needs the Scottish and United Kingdom Governments to work together to prevent the closure of the Camelon and Larbert sites. Those jobs are not lost yet, and everything should be done to secure them for the future.
Bus manufacturing has taken place in Camelon for more than a hundred years; it is part of the local community’s DNA. I have listened to the exchanges so far and I ask the First Minister to commit to taking forward two points with the UK Government. First, will he commit to look at maximising the potential for new orders from across the UK for Alexander Dennis in the weeks and months ahead? Secondly, will he address the fundamental point that the company has highlighted, which is the uneven playing field that it faces in competing with overseas manufacturers as a result of the Subsidy Control Act 2022? That needs to be addressed—
Thank you, Mr Matheson.
—if we are to secure those jobs, and I ask the First Minister to do so.
I entirely understand Mr Matheson’s deep concern about the implications of the situation at Alexander Dennis for his constituency. Throughout all his time in the Parliament, he has been assiduous in supporting the company and enabling and supporting its development.
As I indicated in my earlier answers, we have had a number of programmes of investment in Alexander Dennis. I hope that that gives Mr Matheson an assurance of the Government’s commitment. Although bus orders have been undertaken with and delivered by Alexander Dennis, the company has highlighted to us the significant restrictions that exist in the current competitive climate because of the implications of the Subsidy Control Act 2022 for the ability of public sector procurement to take account of local content, job retention and job creation.
We are exploring those issues with the United Kingdom Government, and I give Mr Matheson an absolute assurance that the Scottish Government will enter the consultation determined to safeguard the future of employment in his constituency.
Bus Funds
The Scottish Government has had various funds to help bus companies to buy electric buses. One of those funds was launched by Michael Matheson. That money—our money—has been used to buy Chinese buses. Years ago, some of us warned that that would end in tears, and that is where we have got to.
The First Minister says that there is a problem with the Subsidy Control Act 2022. Yes, there is, but we have known about that for years. Why does he want to do something about that only now?
As my answers today have shown, I am trying to handle the issue without making any party-political remarks. However, I must point out to Mr Simpson that the Subsidy Control Act 2022 was legislated for by the Conservative United Kingdom Government. It is UK legislation that we are obliged by law to follow. I cannot act in a fashion that is outwith the provisions of the law, because I will not be enabled to do so—I will not have a legal basis for acting in such a fashion.
There are ways in which we can work with the UK Government to address the issue. That is the spirit in which we have entered discussions on the issue. The Deputy First Minister has discussed it with the Secretary of State for Scotland, and I have discussed it with the company. We will do everything that we can to address the situation.
Marionville Fire Station (Proposed Closure)
Will the Scottish Government request that the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service reconsider its plans to close Marionville fire station, in the light of the recent fire at Cables Wynd house in Leith, the community petition, which now has more than 3,500 signatures, and reports that such plans would weaken fire services in Edinburgh and the Lothians, while our fire services are under increasing pressure, for example from wildfires, as we saw in West Lothian last month?
The issue that Sarah Boyack raises is one that falls within the responsibility of the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service. I am not clear in my mind about what stage the Marionville proposal is at, but, in general terms, the SRFS’s delivery review includes 23 options for change, which will be the subject of a full public consultation that will commence at the end of this month. I imagine that the proposal that Sarah Boyack has asked me about is part of that process, so it will be the subject of dialogue as part of the consultation.
As I said in response to a question a few weeks ago, which I think was from Rachael Hamilton, the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service must, in coming to any operational decisions, be mindful of the demand for intervention and the pattern of activity that places demands on its services. There will be a full opportunity for the points that Sarah Boyack has made to be considered by the SFRS.
Work Visas (Ukrainian Nationals)
A constituent of mine is a displaced Ukrainian national as a consequence of Putin’s illegal war. She is a researcher at the University of Glasgow whose post will end shortly. Her efforts to secure a new post are being hampered by the fact that her work visa expires in October next year. Although an extension has been applied for, she is currently losing out on job opportunities. She wishes certainty for her and her daughter, who is excelling at Cleveden secondary school.
Will the First Minister get the Scottish Government to contact the Home Office to ensure that my constituent and other displaced Ukrainian nationals in Scotland can obtain the certainty that they need to continue to live and work here?
The point that Mr Doris has put to me is an important one. I will ask the Minister for Equalities to discuss the specific case with Mr Doris so that she can obtain the details and make the necessary representations to the United Kingdom Government.
The point that Mr Doris raises will have wider application in Scotland. Many individuals are here on temporary arrangements as a consequence of the illegal invasion of Ukraine. Scotland has welcomed those individuals, who make a huge contribution to our society. There is a general issue, and the affected individuals would benefit from clarity. I will ensure that the minister gets in touch with Mr Doris, and we will make representations about that case and the wider issue to the UK Government.
Clydebank Women’s Aid (Closure)
After more than four decades of tireless work, Clydebank Women’s Aid in West Dunbartonshire, which is in my region, will be shutting down. West Dunbartonshire has the second highest rate of domestic abuse in Scotland, with 153 incidents per 10,000 people. We must not underestimate the excellent work that those organisations do by acting as lifelines for many survivors. I have been contacted by many organisations and constituents, who have told me that the decision will have an enormous and devastating impact on the local community.
What support will the Scottish Government provide to organisations that help domestic abuse survivors, so that they can continue the good work that they do, especially when the number of domestic abuse cases in Scotland is rising?
I am sorry to hear that information from Pam Gosal about Clydebank Women’s Aid. The Government has taken a number of steps to legislate for action on domestic abuse, not least of which is the Domestic Abuse (Scotland) Act 2018, which created a specific offence of domestic abuse that incorporates coercive and controlling behaviour.
This year, the delivering equally safe fund will provide £21.6 million to 115 projects that focus on preventing and eradicating violence against women and girls. Those projects will be available to ensure that there is support in communities the length and breadth of Scotland to assist women who are facing domestic abuse. I will take the opportunity after this question time to ensure that there is support under that funding scheme to provide relevant and appropriate access in the Clydebank area.
Care Workers’ Pay (Enable)
Care workers who are employed by Enable are on strike and have been demonstrating outside Parliament today. This year, Scottish care worker pay is being raised to £12.60 an hour. Does the First Minister agree that Enable care workers deserve a minimum wage of £15 per hour now?
The Government and I greatly value the vital role that social care workers play in delivering high-quality care services across Scotland. Pay negotiations are a matter for trade unions and employers, so I would urge both parties to work together to reach an agreement that is fair for the workforce and affordable for Enable. I would encourage that to be the case.
Fife College (Funding)
What assessment has the Scottish Government made of the impact that recent changes by the Scottish Funding Council to funding allocations will have on the ability of Fife College to deliver high-quality education and training opportunities?
Colleges play a vital role in our communities, which is why the budget for this year sees a 2.1 per cent uplift to the college resource allocation. It is important to be clear that the Scottish Funding Council has ensured that no college will see a reduction in teaching funding during this financial year compared with the previous one.
Fife College will receive a 1.26 per cent increase in teaching funding and a 4.9 per cent increase in capital maintenance funding in the final allocations. Of course, next year, the college will be moving into new facilities in the Dunfermline learning campus, which have been supported by tens of millions of pounds of Scottish Government investment. Operational decisions, including those regarding course provision and staffing, are, of course, a matter for individual colleges.
I hope that that answer provides Mr Torrance with some context about the final decisions that have been made.
Scotbeef (Closure)
The First Minister will know that Scotbeef has closed its doors in Inverurie, causing the loss of 90 jobs. That is a devastating blow to the families affected and to farming in general in the north-east. Will the First Minister join me in meeting members of the farming community in the north-east to hear their concerns about how that latest closure will affect them?
I am concerned to hear about that decision. The Government will make support available, through partnership action for continuing employment, to the employees who may well face the impact of redundancy.
I would be very happy for the Minister for Agriculture and Connectivity, Jim Fairlie, to meet Mr Lumsden and his constituents to discuss the issue.
Carers (Support)
This week marks carers week. This afternoon, I will host a round table in Parliament to discuss the Family Fund’s new report “The Cost of Caring 2025” and the urgent challenges that it highlights for families who are raising disabled and seriously ill children. With that in mind, what action is the First Minister’s Government taking to better support carers across Scotland?
We take a number of actions to support the invaluable role of carers in our society. We are investing more than £88 million a year in local carers support through funding for local authorities under the Carers (Scotland) Act 2016. By the end of 2025, unpaid carers will be up to £4,400 better off due to the introduction of carers allowance supplement in 2018—a payment that is only available here in Scotland—with more than £330 million in payments to date.
Through the Care Reform (Scotland) Bill, which was passed this week, we will establish a right to breaks from caring to support carers’ health and wellbeing. Ahead of that being introduced, we have increased funding for voluntary sector short breaks to £13 million, which includes £2.2 million for the Family Fund’s take a break Scotland programme for parent carers. That is alongside £2.9 million this year for the Family Fund’s Scotland grant programme for families on a low income who are raising a disabled child.
I hope that that gives Karen Adam some confidence that the Government is standing with carers and recognising the invaluable contribution that they make to our society today.
That concludes First Minister’s question time. There will be a short suspension to allow the gallery and the chamber to clear.
12:46 Meeting suspended.Previous
General Question TimeNext
Fornethy Survivors