Official Report 138KB pdf
Party Leaders
14:01
We now move to First Minister’s question time for party leaders. Before we begin, I invite members to join me in welcoming to the gallery Her Excellency Sanja Štiglic, ambassador of the Republic of Slovenia. [Applause.]
Government Priorities
When John Swinney became First Minister in May 2024, he promised to lead a delivery-focused, unifying Government that is focused on four priorities: eradicating child poverty, growing the economy, improving the national health service and reforming public services. Why did he suddenly divert to Cardiff for a taxpayer-funded wee pretendy summit? Why has he given up on delivery and unity and instead chosen distraction and division? Which of those four priorities were advanced by his wee day trip to Wales?
One of the many elements of the Government that I have concentrated on, and on which I have given the Government leadership, is ensuring that we have a focus on four major themes: eradicating child poverty, growing the economy, making the transition to net zero and improving our public services. We are making significant progress in advancing that agenda. That might partly explain why I won the election on 7 May, which is a rather important point that I add to the mix.
The people of Scotland heard from me during the election campaign about the importance of self-determination for the people of Scotland and of Scotland being an independent country. If we had the full powers of independence, that option for Scotland—that opportunity—would help us to achieve our objectives of having a stronger economy and tackling child poverty. That is why I went to Cardiff on Monday.
Let me explain to John Swinney why he is delusional to focus on that issue at the moment. The two most recent Westminster and Holyrood elections were the worst for the Scottish National Party since 2014. Under John Swinney’s leadership, support for the separatist parties is now at an all-time low—only 1 million votes in May 2016, which is down from 1.6 million votes in indyref. [Interruption.]
Excuse me, Mr Flynn.
Mr Flynn is emitting more gas than a CalMac ferry.
In contrast, 2 million Scots voted to remain in the United Kingdom, and that was for a generation.
This so-called Celtic alliance pact is nothing but smoke and mirrors, distraction and division. Surely the First Minister must agree that he needs to focus on the day job and deal with our faltering economy, our declining education, our struggling NHS, our dysfunctional transport, our chaotic immigration and our rising welfare spending.
I have set out the Government’s programme, which covers all the key areas of domestic policy and areas of responsibility. As I said to Malcolm Offord in my first answer, the Government is making significant progress on all those issues, which is perhaps one of the reasons why we won the election.
I point out to Malcolm Offord that 58 SNP MSPs were elected and only 17 Reform MSPs, and we won the election with the biggest gap between us and our nearest rival in the history of devolution. I do not think that I need any lectures from a losing force such as Malcolm Offord, the leader of Reform.
As for the question of “a generation”, I note that, by the end of the decade, a million individuals in Scotland will not have been asked their opinion in a referendum on the question of independence. That is one of the reasons why it is so important that the people of this country have the chance to decide their own future and to opt for independence.
Based on that response, it is clear that Piddington has more chance of becoming independent than John Swinney’s Scotland. Why is that? It is because the SNP has not prepared for it. In the 12 years since 2014, the SNP could have used its devolved powers to make Scotland the most successful part of the UK. It could have spent 12 years answering the big four questions in relation to separation: currency, pensions, defence and borders.
Instead, what do we have? We have an economy with no growth; our world-famous education has been trashed; NHS Scotland is on its knees; our roads and ferries are in chaos; uncontrolled immigration is upsetting our communities; the police are starved of cash; local councils are about to be butchered; welfare is at an all-time high; taxation is at an all-time high; and we have a black hole of £5 billion, despite a record block grant of £26 billion. That is chronic mismanagement of the public finances—and I have not even quoted the Auditor General of Scotland on the missing ScotWind moneys.
All of that shame list relates to devolved matters; John Swinney cannot blame Westminster for any of that omnishambles—it is entirely home grown. This debacle was created by the SNP. How can John Swinney blame Westminster and say that Westminster is broken when Holyrood is in such a mess? Is the real reason that John Swinney went to Cardiff that he would rather grandstand to the media than face the uncomfortable truth that he is failing in his four priorities?
Scotland does not want a referendum any time soon—[Interruption.]—so will the First Minister please honour Scotland’s wish to leave this for a generation?
It is really quite remarkable that Malcolm Offord—who seems to think that he, having lost the election, knows the views of the people of Scotland better than I, who in fact won the election, do—seems to be in a very agitated state about the prospect of Scottish independence. It suggests that he knows that he has something to fear at the prospect of being able to take our own decisions on the economy, to use the energy wealth of Scotland to lower the bills for the people of our country and to make sure that our trading relationships with Europe, which Malcolm Offord and his ilk absolutely sabotaged, are good.
That is perhaps an illustration of why the people of Scotland, in increasing numbers, as demonstrated by recent opinion polls, support the concept of Scottish independence and why people in Scotland want that choice. I am going to ensure that the people of Scotland have that choice in this parliamentary session.
Scottish Government Scrutiny
Before I begin my questions, I put on record my condolences and those of the Scottish Labour Party on the death of former MSP Cathie Craigie. Cathie was a much-loved colleague. She was a woman of great determination and tenacity. She was the first woman to pass a member’s bill in this Parliament, protecting mortgage holders. As the daughter of a miner, she was a fierce campaigner for miners’ welfare and wellbeing. She was committed to our Labour movement, to the Parliament and to her constituents in Cumbernauld and Kilsyth. Our thoughts are with her family at this difficult time. [Applause.]
Presiding Officer, it is another week, another court case. The Scottish Information Commissioner, the man who is tasked with holding the Government to account, is challenging the Scottish National Party in court over its refusal to release vital information. He says that the SNP Government risks undermining the public’s right to access information and would relegate him to little more than a “supervisory role”.
The SNP Government stands accused of seeking the power to decide what information the public can see and what they cannot see. The public’s right to know is on the line, so I ask the First Minister what is more important—the right of Scots to know what their Government is up to or shielding himself, his London-based former leader and his party from scrutiny?
Before I come on to the substance of Jackie Baillie’s question, although I made some remarks on Tuesday in response to the Presiding Officer’s remarks, I associate myself unreservedly with her comments about Cathie Craigie. Cathie Craigie was a very distinguished member of the Scottish Parliament. She was a generous and kind lady, but she was also a lady of good fun and good humour. We enjoyed her company, and I pay tribute to her and associate myself entirely with Jackie Baillie’s words of appreciation for Cathie Craigie. I express my condolences to her family.
On the substantive issue that Jackie Baillie raises, I am limited in what I can say, because there are live court proceedings under way in which the Scottish Government is a party. Jackie Baillie asked me what I believe is important, and what I believe is important is the rule of law. The Government believes that, in the decisions that it is taking, it is operating fully in accordance with the rule of law in relation to the freedom of information legislation and in relation to the disclosure of information on which restrictions are applied by court orders.
I would not be fulfilling my duty as First Minister if I did not ensure that the Government was operating within the law. That is the basis of the judgment that the Government has made, and, of course, that will be tested in the courts in the action that is being pursued.
I thank the First Minister for that response, but my difficulty is that I have seen how John Swinney has operated over 27 years, going from honest John to the John Swinney we now see before us, the architect of secret Scotland. This is the man who deleted WhatsApp messages to hide from scrutiny over life-and-death decisions during the pandemic. This is the man who spends the public’s money going to court to deny the people of Scotland access to the truth. This is the man who appointed a now-convicted fraudster, Peter Murrell, and this is the man who oversaw a culture of cover-up, contaminating party and Government.
Those are not isolated examples. They demonstrate a pattern of behaviour—decades of cover-up and conspiracy with John Swinney at its very heart. There is no failure too serious to be covered up by this Government. Is it not time for John Swinney to emerge from the shadows and finally put our country before his party?
It is pretty obvious that I have emerged from the shadows, because I won my own mandate in front of the electorate of Scotland on 7 May.
With the greatest of respect to Jackie Baillie, because we have rubbed shoulders for 27 years in this institution—there are only the two of us left from that first day who have been together continuously in this Parliament over those 27 years—she has been able to observe my career in government for longer than I had to observe her career in government, if I can be so indelicate. If my memory serves me right, it was 12 months for Jackie Baillie in government and it is 19 years for me in government, so we will just leave that judgment for the public to make.
My final point is this: every single thing that Jackie Baillie said there, her predecessor in that office, Anas Sarwar, said to me week after week and month after month in the run-up to the election, and the Labour Party went down to 17 seats. [Interruption.] As Mr Bibby shouts at me, having learned nothing from the failure in the election and absolutely not having learned that all that stuff does not work, the public can see the Labour Party for what it is: a party with no ideas, no hope and no direction—and that will not change at the weekend either.
The rest of this Official Report will be published progressively as soon as the text is available.
Previous
General Question Time