Contents
- Time for Reflection
- Topical Question Time
- Autumn Statement: Scottish Government Priorities
- Situation in the Middle East
- Decision Time
- Holodomor Memorial Day
Topical Question Time
The next item of business is topical question time. As ever, if a member wishes to ask a supplementary question, they should press their request-to-speak button during the relevant question.
Ferguson Marine (Chief Executive Bonus)
To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to reports that the chief executive of Ferguson Marine is still entitled to a bonus despite the First Minister saying that he thought the practice should end. (S6T-01642)
Despite every effort being made to ensure that no bonuses were paid to Ferguson Marine Port Glasgow senior management in 2022-23, that, as members will be aware, proved unavoidable due to historical contracts at the yard. The chief executive officer’s contract entitles him to some bonus elements only if stringent key performance indicators are met. The Scottish Government has been clear that those should not involve a bonus being paid directly for vessels 801 and 802. Contracts for new FMPG employees do not include bonus elements.
Parliament will be updated with full details of a revised remuneration scheme once it is finalised.
What that shows is that no one pays any attention to what the First Minister wants. Today, which is the sixth anniversary of the fake launch of the Glen Sannox, we should be clear that nobody at the yard should be getting a bonus.
In April, Humza Yousaf said:
“There should not be bonuses”—[Official Report, 27 April 2023; c 12.]
paid—but there were. Audit Scotland said:
“While Scottish Government approval was sought, FMPG did not have explicit approval prior to payment.”
Who sanctioned the latest bonuses? Why is David Tydeman in line for any more?
As Graham Simpson will be aware, the bonus that was in the accounts related to 2022-23. As the First Minister said, because of the cost overruns and delays, any bonuses would be unacceptable and should not be paid. That is what the Scottish Government is currently working on.
There is now an arrangement whereby the Ferguson Marine board has to consult the Scottish Government—those discussions are on-going—over the future remuneration packages. As I have said, the cabinet secretary will bring final details of that package to Parliament in due course. However, the Scottish Government has made clear its view that there should be no bonus elements in relation to the two vessels. That is what we expect, and I think that that is in line with public expectations.
I am not sure that we found out anything from that.
It could possibly be argued at a stretch that Mr Tydeman should get some credit if he turns the yard into a viable business. However, we have learned this week that it has stopped work on a project for the Royal Navy because the Scottish Government—Neil Gray—refused the request for £25 million of investment for a new plating line, burning tables and better computer software. How much extra is the Government prepared to invest in the yard in order to turn it around?
The Cabinet Secretary for Wellbeing Economy, Fair Work and Energy laid out the current position in an oral statement to Parliament just last week. I think that Graham Simpson was present in the chamber for that statement, so he should be up to date on the current situation. In that statement, the cabinet secretary said that the discussions with the yard are on-going and that its business proposition was being discussed, but any proposition, of course, has to be in line with subsidy control regulations and value for money. Those discussions are on-going and, as I have said, the cabinet secretary, Neil Gray, wants to be open and transparent, and he will keep the Parliament up to date as soon as there are any steps forward.
There are a number of supplementary questions. I will try to get in as many as possible, but they will need to be brief, as will the responses.
I am led to believe that the contracts of new employees do not include bonus elements. I agree with Mr Simpson that the bonuses should not have been paid, but does the minister agree that the people who should be most angry are those in the workforce on the tools, who have been attempting to build the vessels for some time, have taken the political flak and have been used as a political football while management, which has changed regularly, has received unwarranted bonuses?
From the First Minister downwards in the Scottish Government, we agree with the sentiments that Stuart McMillan has outlined in terms of his support for employees at the yard.
As the cabinet secretary reiterated in the chamber just last week, there should be no doubt that the Government remains committed to shipbuilding on the Clyde and to the dedicated men and women at Ferguson Marine, who are, we know, doing their utmost to deliver the vessels. We continue to stand behind the workforce, and we are working with Ferguson Marine’s management and board to secure a prosperous future for the business.
These bonuses have been paid without Scottish Government approval. It has been reported that, at Scottish Water, three executives have received nearly £1 million in bonuses in the past five years. Will any review extend to executive bonuses in all publicly owned bodies?
We expect all such payments to be in line with Scottish Government pay policy. Terms and conditions that significantly deviate from that policy cause ministers a great deal of concern. I cannot comment directly on the situation at Scottish Water, but I am happy for the relevant minister to follow up on that in a note to the member.
This issue reveals that the Government is completely impotent when it comes to dealing with bonuses at Ferguson Marine and at Scottish Water. Today, the unions said that the workers deserve certainty, but the only certain thing is that the bosses at Ferguson Marine will get bonuses that they do not deserve. Why is the Government incapable of providing any leadership for the future of the yard?
As Willie Rennie rightly points out, this is an extremely tough time for workforces, be they in Scottish Water, Ferguson Marine or anywhere in the public or private sectors. We urge all management to first and foremost take into account the needs of their workforce.
We pay close attention to the pay and conditions and bonus regimes of those sectors, and at the same time, we must have regard for contractual obligations and market conditions to attract staff to our public bodies. We will pay close attention to all those issues.
Obscene amounts of money have been paid to well-paid executives, directors and management consultancy firms, but the workers in the Ferguson Marine yard want to know what the future of the yard will look like. Is the minister, or anyone in the Scottish Government, aware of any future contracts that the yard has secured beyond hulls 801 and 802, and, if so, what do those contracts look like?
I will not take any lectures from Conservative members when it comes to awarding undue financial reward to certain people in our society, given that the United Kingdom Government lifted the cap on bankers’ bonuses.
The member mentions Ferguson Marine. I assure him that the Scottish Government is working with the yard to examine options to deliver its initial investment proposals, so that it is compliant with subsidy control rules and aligned with current and potential future commercial opportunities for the yard. Those intense discussions between the Scottish Government and Ferguson Marine are on-going.
Midwifery Services (Workforce Numbers)
To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to reports that stagnating workforce numbers, amongst other factors, are contributing to increased pressure on midwifery services. (S6T-01639)
We hugely value our midwifery workforce and the high-quality care that it offers across Scotland. Balancing our declining birth rate in Scotland with increased training and recruitment means that we have a significantly increased qualified midwife to birth ratio.
We constantly look at ways to enhance staffing levels and support workforce wellbeing for all parts of our national health service, including midwifery, and our nursing and midwifery task force is a key part of that. The task force will recommend action improving workplace culture and supporting longer-term workforce sustainability, practice flexibility, recruitment and retention and diversification of training pathways.
An article in the Scotland on Sunday newspaper highlighted key extracts from the recently published Royal College of Nursing Scotland’s “State of Maternity Service 2023” report. It states:
“we do not see these ever-larger surges in midwives coming out of the universities making a difference to overall numbers.”
The report goes on to state:
“The big risk is that rather than sustainably building up a strong workforce, the effect of these new midwives just seems to fizzle out as staff leave.”
Why do workforce numbers in midwifery continue to stagnate, and when will the profession see a truly comprehensive and, importantly, measurable plan from the Government that highlights how those challenges will be overcome?
In June this year, we had 2,509 whole-time equivalent qualified midwives. That is 8.3 qualified nurses and midwives per 1,000 of the population, compared with 6.3 in England. That means that nursing and midwifery levels are 32 per cent higher per head of population in Scotland than in England. However, we recognise that we need to work harder on that, and we will publish the nursing and midwifery workforce plan in 2024.
I have met midwives from my region and from across the country. Their stories are consistent. They love the job and are passionate about the services, but they know that they are overworked. In my local health board, midwives are currently handling caseloads that are almost 30 per cent bigger than set out in the “Best Start” plan.
The reality is that the Scottish Government has not delivered a successful plan to support our midwives; has not implemented the safe staffing legislation that was passed in the Parliament in 2018; and has not ensured that all health boards are signed up to the equally safe at work programme. Do midwives have the right to feel badly let down by the Government?
Midwives in Scotland do a fantastic job. I accept that there is pressure in the circumstances that they work in. However, we are working closely with midwives and the centre for workforce supply to develop resources and a strategy to ensure that, in Scotland, we give them the best conditions that they can work in.
It is clear that ensuring a strong pipeline of students will play an important role in increasing the workforce, especially given the need to recruit midwives in Dumfries and Galloway. Will the minister provide further information about what the Scottish Government is doing to support midwifery students to train?
We are taking a range of actions to support midwifery students. In 2020, we increased the non-means-tested, non-repayable student bursary to £10,000, which is the highest in the United Kingdom. In addition, free tuition is provided for eligible undergraduate students, to help with expenses.
However, I understand the financial challenges that are faced by all students, which is why we have established a short-life working group to review the placement expenses guidance and to consider what more can be done.