Official Report 117KB pdf
Climate Action and Rural Affairs
Good afternoon. Our first item of business today is portfolio questions, and the first portfolio is climate action and rural affairs. I will try to accommodate as many questions as possible, but I would ask for concise questions and answers.
Woodland Purchases for Community Use
To ask the Scottish Government what support it provides to organisations seeking to purchase woodland for community use. (S7O-00259)
The Scottish Government provides support in several ways. The community right to buy and the asset transfer legislation provide the opportunity to purchase assets, including woodland. The Scottish land fund is a source of funding for acquisition. In addition, the Scottish Government provides funding for advisory services, including support for the Community Woodlands Association, which provides independent advice and support to community groups that own, are involved in or are responsible for the management of woodland across Scotland, as well as new or existing groups looking to purchase woodland.
Members of the Birdston Regeneration Group in Milton of Campsie, which is in my constituency, have knocked on more than 1,600 doors, raised more than £14,000 from local people and gained huge support for their efforts to bring Birdston woods into community ownership. The group was therefore bitterly disappointed when its application to the Scottish land fund was rejected, with insufficient evidence of need and economic returns from the project cited as the reason for that.
Does the minister agree that the substantial community work that has already been undertaken should be recognised and considered in any future funding decision, particularly because the group now faces the prospect of having to return money that was donated in good faith by local residents?
The Scottish land fund is always oversubscribed, so the group not receiving funding does not necessarily mean that its scheme was not a good one. If the member wants to write to me and have a chat about it, I will be more than happy to meet him.
Will the minister confirm whether a wider review will be conducted into the general administration of community asset transfers, given that many community groups have complained about the complicated, bureaucratic and lengthy process that is presently used?
I am not aware of the complaints that the member is talking about, but if she wants to come to me and give me specific details, I will be more than happy to take that away.
Environmental Protection Funding (Prioritisation)
To ask the Scottish Government whether, given the finite amount of funding available for environmental protection, it considers that funding should be prioritised towards measures with certain outcomes or those with uncertain outcomes. (S7O-00260)
The Scottish Government takes an evidence-based approach to policy making, as well as in its decisions on funding and regulation. Inevitably, decisions must be taken where there is more or less certainty, so we are guided by the precautionary principle to enable proportionate decision making.
The Scottish Government will set out its spending plans for 2027-28, as part of the Scottish budget, on 3 December.
It would not be unfair to describe the effect of an increasing level of atmospheric carbon dioxide on our climate as infinitesimal, and any effort to reduce it as contentious. It would not be contentious, however, to describe Scotland’s water, our proudest natural asset, as polluted.
Surface water and groundwater are contaminated by perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances—PFAS—microplastics and pharmaceuticals, among other things, and we are dumping raw sewage into the sea for probably more than 1,000 hours every day. Why not divert the thousands of millions of pounds that are currently allocated to chasing the carbon chimera in pursuit of the mythical net zero to where science says that it could make a measurable and positive environmental impact instead?
A debate is happening this afternoon that the member might want to check into. On the debate about net zero, adaptation and where the priorities should be, they are all priorities, and we have the targets for good reason. We understand that the climate is changing and we will take adaptation measures, because we have effects such as flooding, water scarcity, drought, wildfires and coastal erosion. All those things are happening before our eyes, which the member accepts. Therefore, we have to prioritise our spending in the areas that we know are making a difference at the time, as well as looking at longer-term measures.
When dealing with climate and nature, I am unclear as to how anything that is worth doing can feasibly be described as a certain or uncertain outcome, other than the fact that climate change is certainly real and that the impacts of it are being and will continue to be felt in my community, which is why climate action is essential. The Scottish Government will invest £160 million to maximise the power of our land and forests to help tackle climate change and protect nature. What does the Scottish Government expect to achieve as a result of that investment?
I whole-heartedly agree with Laura Mitchell. The crises of climate change and biodiversity loss are very real, as I just stated to the member who asked the previous question. Those crises are linked and mutually reinforcing, and we need to tackle the two together to protect our valuable natural capital, which directly supports £40 billion of economic output and underpins our health and prosperity as a nation.
We are investing £160.1 million in woodland creation, protecting our ancient Caledonian pinewoods, restoring peatland and delivering Scotland’s biodiversity strategy. All that will lock up carbon to protect our land-based industries and increase the resilience of our communities to the growing risks resulting from climate change, including flooding and wildfire.
Climate Justice Fund
To ask the Scottish Government whether its commitment to increase the climate justice fund will match the 25 per cent increase committed for the international development fund. (S7O-00261)
In stark contrast to cuts that are being made by Governments elsewhere, the recent programme for government was clear that the Scottish Government will grow our climate justice fund up from £36 million over the course of this session of Parliament. Obviously, the level of growth will be determined by future budget and spending review settlements.
The Scottish Government remains committed to delivering programmes that support climate-vulnerable communities in the global south—which have contributed least to the climate crisis but face the severity of its effects—to build resilience to climate impacts and address loss and damage.
It sounds as though we need to continue to make that case as we go into the budget process. I encourage the cabinet secretary to make the case strongly that we align the climate justice fund increase with the wider increase in international development funding, not least because some of the people who are most strongly opposed to international development funding also talk the kind of drivel about the climate emergency that we have heard in the past few minutes.
What more can the Government do to increase public understanding of the positive impacts that the climate justice fund and wider international development funding have around the world?
I thank Patrick Harvie for that considered question. I work closely with my colleague Simita Kumar, who has international development as part of her portfolio. We are doing a lot of joint working to maximise both streams of funding and to ensure that they are joined up.
On Patrick Harvie’s question and comments about the narrative associated with the issue, we need to get an awful lot better at talking about not just our responsibility to help the global south but the impact of doing so. We are talking about people who do not want to leave their homes and who want to live in resilient communities in parts of the world that have been affected by climate change. Protecting their interests and helping them to continue to thrive in their communities has a net impact on us as a global citizen.
For example, if people are food insecure or are taken out of their homes due to flooding or drought, that impacts on the rest of us. It causes conflict, creates climate refugees and has an impact on neighbouring countries and countries in the global north. Until we take that joined-up approach, we will have to see off some of the nonsense that there is on international spend, which is mainly race baiting, in my opinion.
Following the devastating floods over the summer in Nepal, which were caused by a glacial landslide that was likely a result of the climate crisis, what engagement has the cabinet secretary had with the humanitarian emergency fund team about increasing support to countries that are affected by climate-induced emergencies, and whether any funds might be committed to supporting communities in Nepal?
We are always looking at the particular communities that we work in partnership with. Scotland has long-standing relationships with Malawi, Zambia and Rwanda. This year, we committed £7.5 million in programmes to support the most vulnerable climate communities in those countries. I recently had a meeting with Simita Kumar and our teams in which we talked about whether we should be looking at having partnership arrangements with other countries that are becoming more affected by climate change.
It is a changing picture, and what happened in Nepal was horrific. We must always be agile with regards to where we put money, and we also need to use our experience in asking other countries to do more in this space. It was particularly disappointing to see the United Kingdom Government reduce its spend in this area.
Hyperscale Artificial Intelligence Data Centres
To ask the Scottish Government what assessment it has made of the cumulative impact of hyperscale AI data centres’ energy consumption on its commitment to meet its net zero by 2045 target.(S7O-00262)
The Scottish Government is working with industry, regulators and partner agencies to understand the cumulative environmental impacts of data centre developments and to ensure that the growth of the sector is consistent with Scotland’s net zero ambitions. The Minister for Public Finance has issued a new direction that requires planning authorities to notify Scottish ministers of new data centre applications and mandates environmental impact assessments for all applications that exceed a power capacity of 50MW. Those measures will strengthen our oversight of the development pipeline and ensure that potentially significant environmental effects are considered from the outset.
Campaigners in Edinburgh in my region have highlighted that the proposed South Gyle data centre would consume enough electricity to power a quarter of a million homes—more than double the number of households in the city. How is the Scottish Government ensuring that the cumulative impact of such proposals is taken into account in its national climate action plans to reduce emissions from our homes and public buildings?
It is important that I do not focus my remarks on a particular application. There are several aspects to that question, and Hannah Mary Goodlad, the Minister for Public Finance, has set out some of the environmental impacts that are associated with live and future planning applications.
One thing that has exercised me over the past few years is that the United Kingdom Government is paying renewable electricity generators to switch off their generation when they cannot get capacity in the grid or when there is reduced demand. We need to consider whether there are off-takers for that electricity—I am not talking only about data centres—so that it can be diverted elsewhere. There was a lot in that question, but I hope that my answer gives Dr Manivannan an indication of my thinking on the matter.
I will not ask the cabinet secretary about matters that are for the planning minister, but will she advise the Parliament whether the Government will consider what impact the potential hyperscale data centres could have on the commitments in the climate change plan?
The climate change plan was set out in March, before the dissolution of the Parliament. However, I have said throughout the whole process that the climate change plan is an agile document. When there are particular developments, such as technological developments, or sectors that are booming, there will always be consideration of whether the climate change plan is fit for purpose. There will also be an update of the climate change plan in five years’ time. However, the point was well made about the capacity that we have for particular burgeoning sectors and the stress that they might put on our natural resources. The climate change plan is not a static document for a moment in time that is to be adhered to; it must be agile.
Waste Discharge into Sea (East Lothian)
To ask the Scottish Government what discussions ministers are having with the Scottish Environment Protection Agency regarding the reported discharge of waste directly into the sea impacting on communities across East Lothian. (S7O-00263)
Scotland’s bathing waters are important for local communities, and 97 per cent of our bathing waters achieve the bathing water standard for water quality. I have had regular engagement with the Scottish Environment Protection Agency and Scottish Water throughout the bathing water season, including two meetings with SEPA in the past few weeks, to ensure that all the necessary actions are being taken to protect and improve bathing water quality across the whole of Scotland.
A range of actions are under way or planned by Scottish Water and other public partners to identify and address bathing water quality issues, particularly in Edinburgh and East Lothian. As part of that work, Scottish Water is undertaking a £1 million study—a study that I requested—to consider what work could further improve the bathing water in that region.
I am regularly contacted by constituents in Edinburgh and East Lothian about the impact that sewage discharge is having on our communities. Just this morning, there were two reported pollution alerts, at Wardie bay and Belhaven in East Lothian. It is totally unacceptable for such discharges to take place. What action will ministers take? More specifically, will they set legally binding targets to end untreated sewage discharges that affect bathing waters and popular recreational water use by 2030?
When it comes to the pollutants that go into our bathing waters, it is important to understand that there are a number of contributing sources. SEPA gives advice to local authorities and landowners and has discussions with Scottish Water. Over the summer, there have been instances in which there have been bathing water alerts in particular bathing waters that have not been a result of anything that has come from the sewerage system but which have been to do with factors such as litter, seagull activity and dog mess, in particular. There are a number of contributory sources. That is why I provided £1 million for the study that I mentioned, to ascertain where the pressures are coming from in East Lothian and Edinburgh. Off the back of that, we will be able to identify whether we need to take certain action in certain places, whether with Scottish Water or local communities.
In addition, there is a big piece of work to be done on communication in relation to what people flush down their toilets that can cause blockages and other issues. There are a number of sources of pollution that must be addressed.
I thank the cabinet secretary for her very full answers to Miles Briggs’s questions.
I want to move us from the east coast to the west coast. The waters around the beautiful coastline of Argyll and Bute are used by locals and visitors alike for swimming, paddling, surfing and sailing. What consideration is the Scottish Government giving to supporting communities to introduce bathing water designation for more waters around Argyll and Bute’s wonderful coastline?
I need do nothing other than agree with Jenni Minto about the beauty of the coastline of her constituency. Over the summer, I had the great privilege of being in Tiree, which must have some of the best bathing waters in the whole of Scotland.
The bathing water regulations require the Scottish ministers to designate a bathing water if they expect a large number of people to bathe there, taking into account past trends, infrastructure and facilities. Any organisation or individual can suggest to the Scottish ministers that a bathing water should be designated. The relevant proposal form is available on SEPA’s website, which sets out the supporting information that can be provided. Obviously, things change and certain areas become more popular, so it is important for people to know that communities have the ability to request the designation of bathing waters.
Question 6 has been withdrawn.
Bluetongue Outbreak (Vaccine Procurement)
To ask the Scottish Government, following the previous ministerial statement outlining that it will not be providing support to farmers affected by the bluetongue outbreak in South Scotland region, whether it will reconsider its position and commit to looking at the central procurement of vaccine. (S7O-00265)
I fully understand that this is an incredibly difficult time for livestock keepers who are dealing with the impacts of the disease on their stock.
As I said to Senga Beresford during questions on the statement that I made to Parliament on 9 September on the bluetongue virus in the south-west of Scotland, the Government already provides the most comprehensive package of support to the livestock sector through direct payments and targeted grants.
We also support farmers through horizon scanning and alert systems, which forewarned us that bluetongue was coming ever closer to Scotland—not least because the restriction zone that was imposed by the United Kingdom Government covered the whole of the land base of England.
The Scottish Government also provides advice and practical guidance on the implementation and maintenance of control measures, which include the testing of suspect animals, wider surveillance and veterinary investigations.
Vaccination of stock is a commercial decision, and the Scottish Government has done its bit in licensing the vaccine in Scotland and working with other Governments, industry and manufacturers to ensure continuity of supply, but I must reiterate that demand for vaccine needs to be generated within the industry.
The minister alludes to his awareness that bluetongue was coming to Scotland. Does he feel that the Government did enough, and how can he assure farmers that, in future, the Government will be more proactive and not reactive on significant challenges for the industry?
The Government was not reactive; the Government was very proactive. We were messaging the livestock sector that the only way to protect stock was through vaccination. There was vaccine in the country but, because of the low uptake, it was directed back to the European Union, and it then had to be brought back because there was an outbreak of bluetongue. Those in the farming community will have to address the issue by ensuring that they put in their orders to buy their vaccine for the season coming.
The livestock industry has made it clear that vaccination uptake will depend on farmers and crofters receiving practical advice from organisations and individuals they already trust. Will the minister commit to funding an industry-led campaign over the winter to explain that vaccination is the only effective way to protect livestock from bluetongue, and to drive up vaccine uptake before the next high-risk season?
I do not believe that a paid campaign is required. The farming community are very well aware of what is going on. They can see it in the papers. I have spoken to farmers from the south to the very north, and everybody knows about bluetongue. They know that it is there, and they know that it has now gotten into Scotland. It is therefore in their best interests to protect their investment and ensure that they get their livestock vaccinated before the next season.
Given that achieving high vaccination rates before next year’s mid-season will be critical in protecting Scotland’s livestock sector, will the Scottish Government commit to funding the sector and running a national awareness campaign to encourage vaccine uptake, providing clear and consistent guidance to farmers to give them confidence that they are making the right decisions for their business, and will the Government consider underwriting vaccine procurement for veterinary practices, so that vets can order sufficient supplies without carrying the financial risks themselves, therefore supporting a rapid and comprehensive vaccine roll-out across Scotland?
I ask the minister to address the vets issue.
I see that we have consensus across the chamber, as both Andrew Baxter and Finlay Carson are asking exactly the same question—and the answer is exactly the same. The farming community are very well aware of the risks associated with bluetongue. We do not need a targeted, funded campaign. I am more than happy to keep talking about it. Individual members are talking to their rural constituents. We know that bluetongue is here, so farmers have a responsibility to protect their own livestock by ordering the vaccine and giving the companies that provide the vaccine plenty of notice that a demand-led programme is coming.
Rural Support Plan
To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on its rural support plan. (S7O-00266)
The rural support plan provides a period of clarity and certainty, delivering direct support for the next five years to provide the industry with reassurance and boosting confidence in long-term investment.
I have to point out that certainty does not mean no change. Agriculture reform will follow an evolving continuous-improvement approach designed and delivered in partnership with our rural communities and valued stakeholders and supported by a monitoring and evaluation framework.
The plan will be amended to reflect that evolving reform journey, and I look forward to discussing it further when providing closing evidence to the Rural Affairs Committee inquiry next month.
My apologies, Presiding Officer. I should have declared an interest: I am a small farmer, and I am in receipt of payments under the basic payment scheme.
The minister just said “clarity and certainty”. Let me give him some quotes from the Rural Affairs Committee. We have heard that lots of things are “missing from the plan”, and that
“we are all a bit frustrated by there being no change at all.”—[Official Report, Rural Affairs Committee, 2 September 2026; c 30.]
I even have a quote to say that
“the rural support plan is a manifest failure of policy making.”—[Official Report, Rural Affairs Committee, 16 September 2026; c 3.]
That, according to the Scottish National Party, is “clarity and certainty”. How many times must we remind the Government that farmers need action? Perhaps, for example, it could give the underspend from the less favoured area support scheme—LFASS—back to the farmers who need it. Has the minister actually been listening to what the experts have been saying to the Rural Affairs Committee? What are his real takeaways from that?
I have certainly been listening to the takeaways from the Rural Affairs Committee and I will give my full responses when I am in front of it. There is absolutely no doubt that we have given clarity and certainty to the farming community. Between now and 2030, farmers know what they have coming, what their payments will be, and what the system is. I point out to Mr Eagle that his party introduced the sustainable farming investment scheme in England, which ran out in six hours, so thousands of farmers across the country had no chance of getting anywhere near that money. The stability and certainty that the Government has provided is exactly what farmers need. They know that they are getting a good deal.
If we have concise supplementaries, we could fit more in, so I ask for succinct questions.
I draw attention to my entry in the members’ register of interests, which shows that I run a crofting business.
After introducing the calving interval condition to the suckler beef support scheme, the Scottish Government correctly had to amend the scheme’s rules to make it workable for small herds. What lessons has the Government learned from that experience? How will the rural support plan ensure that future schemes get it right first time for small producers?
Donald MacKinnon has just pointed out the absolute beauty of how we are approaching the system. We constantly speak to the stakeholders—
He could change it!
If we are going to keep hearing chirping from the sidelines, the member will not hear my answer.
It is nonsense!
Enough, Mr Carson.
Mr MacKinnon has just pointed out the flexibility of the scheme that we have brought into play. We are speaking to the people who are directly affected. When we have seen things that we can change to make them better, that is exactly what we have done and will continue to do through the evolution of the rural support plan.
The rural economy and its associated industries are some of Scotland’s most important and make up a vast amount of my constituency. Therefore, how will the rural support plan ensure that the SNP Government continues to develop and articulate the future of Scottish agriculture, in close consultation and collaboration with the industry during the period of the plan and beyond?
The rural support plan is an iterative process that will continue to evolve and develop. Dawn Black is absolutely correct that the system needs to work with and for the farming community. We have done that and have worked with the agriculture reform implementation oversight board for five years to develop the plan. This parliamentary session is entirely about delivery, which is what I have committed to doing.
Climate Action Policies (Integrated Public Transport and Active Travel Networks)
To ask the Scottish Government what discussions the climate action secretary has had with the transport secretary regarding how climate action policies are supporting the development of integrated public transport and active travel networks that connect rural communities with major urban centres, including Glasgow. (S7O-00267)
I last met the transport secretary on 10 September about the climate action policies that he has responsibility for delivering in his portfolio. In addition, I have established a ministerial delivery group on climate change; I chair the group, and Mr Flynn is a member of it. The group will strengthen delivery monitoring across Government.
This financial year, we are investing more than £2.7 billion to support public transport and a modal shift from car use. We have also delivered our 100-day commitment to a £2 bus fare cap across the Strathclyde area and have frozen all ScotRail fares this financial year. With my responsibility for rural affairs, I am pleased that those measures will improve connectivity for low-income communities and people in rural and urban communities.
Free bus travel is a key policy driver in the climate change plan. As getting more people on to buses will help to reduce Scotland’s transport emissions, will the cabinet secretary discuss with the transport secretary how the Bus Services Act 2025 will support local transport authorities and regional transport partnerships to franchise bus services or set up publicly owned bus companies? Will they discuss how the 2025 act will help to ensure that bus services meet the needs of all people across Scotland, instead of cutting routes and hiking fares in regions that are outwith the £2 bus fare cap?
In his previous role, Mr Fairlie had responsibility for buses. He spoke about the Transport (Scotland) Act 2019, which gives local authorities the powers that they require.
However, relating the question to the responsibilities of the current Cabinet Secretary for Economy, Tourism and Transport, I note that there was a round-table event on 26 August at which there were opportunities for stakeholder involvement to inform the better buses legislation. That was the first stage of the consultation process and I believe that it was a productive meeting. There will be further opportunities for engagement and discussion as the proposals develop, and I will of course keep a keen eye on how they impact on the climate change plan.
Net Zero Policies (Local Economic Development)
To ask the Scottish Government what its position is on whether its net zero policies are compatible with stimulating local economic development. (S7O-00268)
Policies contained in the climate change plan are compatible with economic growth.
I thank the minister for that short answer. Reliable infrastructure is crucial to economic development in the Highlands and Islands. I have mentioned the A96 in the chamber before. When I last did so, I received a contemptuous answer from the Cabinet Secretary for Economy, Tourism and Transport, so I will try again with the minister. In 2021, the dualling of that major trunk road was put on hold for a climate compatibility assessment—the price of Green support for the then Sturgeon Government. Five years on and £6 million later, no bypass for Elgin and Keith is in sight. Can the minister guarantee that net zero ideology will never again be used to hold up vital improvements to the A96?
“Net zero nonsense” sums up the way that Reform is tackling the very serious issues that we have in this country with climate change. I find it really disappointing that we cannot get at least some understanding that the fires and floods and the changes that we are seeing with coastal erosion are very much part of the climate change issue that we are dealing with. We will continue with our net zero journey.
Education, Culture and Gaelic
The next portfolio is education, culture and Gaelic.
Scottish Attainment Challenge Funding
I refer members to my entry in the register of members’ interests, which shows that I am a sitting councillor in Falkirk Council.
To ask the Scottish Government what discussions it is having with local authorities regarding the Scottish attainment challenge funding beyond 2026-27. (S7O-00269)
Over the past decade, we have invested £1.75 billion in the Scottish attainment challenge. Further investment this year, including £130 million of pupil equity funding, is helping to empower headteachers to best support the needs of their pupils.
In recent weeks, I have made clear to Parliament my intention to continue supporting the fund. As Mr Bouse highlights, local authorities are an important partner in the work to develop it. Discussions are ongoing, and just yesterday I chaired a meeting of the education and childcare assurance board, which includes members of the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities and the Association of Directors of Education in Scotland. My officials are meeting further representatives today, and I will update Parliament when I can.
The Scottish Government has provided significant funding to schools and councils that is aimed at closing the poverty-related attainment gap. Although the gap will remain until we eradicate poverty, the funding has proved positive in places such as the Falkirk Council area, where recent figures have confirmed a closing of the gap in literacy and numeracy at various stages, leading to record numbers of school leavers going to positive destinations—some 97.2 per cent in the previous academic year.
Can the cabinet secretary outline what plans the Government has to continue sustainable funding to schools and local authorities to further support closing the poverty-related attainment gap? Can she outline a timescale for when announcements on that funding will be made?
I have to ask for more succinct questions.
I very much welcome the positive progress in Falkirk, which the member noted. He is also right to highlight the figure on positive destinations.
I repeat what I said in my first answer. No decisions have been made on budgets, which are yet to be decided, but I am committed to continuance of the Scottish attainment challenge and I will update Parliament with more detail when I can.
The Scottish attainment challenge fund is used in a diverse number of ways to suit the needs of local areas. The success story in Falkirk has been mentioned. However, just because a problem is local does not make it unique. Will the Scottish Government commit to analysing how the funding is being used in order that schools facing similar circumstances can learn from one another and that best practice guidelines can be created so that every school can make the best use of the funding?
Katherine Sangster is absolutely right. We need to strike a balance between what makes pupil equity funding so excellent, which is that it is directed by schools and school leaders, and involving local authorities and the Scottish Government in understanding what exactly the funding is being used for and the difference that it is making. We commit to ongoing oversight of the programme. Equally, the number of staff who are supported by PEF, which is specific to a school’s needs, speaks to its value, and, as I say, I am committed to its continuance.
Young Learners with Additional Support Needs (Informal Exclusion from Education)
To ask the Scottish Government how informal exclusion from education among young learners with additional support needs is being recorded and addressed, for example, those neurodivergent young people who are unable to attend school regularly or are on part-time timetables. (S7O-00270)
All pupils are entitled to a full-time education, and schools should provide personalised support that maximises the attendance and engagement of pupils, including those with additional support needs. Temporary reductions in learning hours should be used only in exceptional circumstances and always as part of a wider package of support around a child.
Education authorities are required to have robust arrangements to record, monitor and review attendance, including through the use of specific coding for part-time timetables. That is all done with a view to planning well and supporting a return to full-time education as soon as possible for a child.
I thank the cabinet secretary for that answer and commitment. We will not see truly inclusive education without a serious investment in training for educators and provision for young people with additional support needs. More than £500 million has come into the Scottish budget as a consequence of increased special educational needs provision in England. Will the cabinet secretary indicate how much of that money will be committed to additional support needs provision in Scotland?
We are entering into a period of budget negotiations for the coming financial year, but, in respect of the current financial year, I will reflect on a couple of things.
There has been a significant increase in the spend from us to education authorities to invest in additional support for learning. If we look at the difference between the years 2024-25 and 2012-13, we can see that it has gone from £540 million of investment to almost £1.1 billion. There has been an increase in investment to reflect the increase in requirements and needs.
In this financial year, we also made an additional £29 million available for additional support needs, with £28 million of that going to councils and £1 million being held back nationally to, for example, provide support for professional learning.
When it comes to the coming financial year, I will shortly be entering into discussions with the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government.
I appreciate the cabinet secretary’s response to Joe Long’s question, but, with the refusal of the Scottish Government to take forward the highly anticipated learning disabilities, autism and neurodivergence bill, many of our disabled and neurodivergent constituents are rightfully afraid that institutional failure and discrimination will continue.
Will the cabinet secretary detail what work has been done to ensure that the refusal to take forward the bill will not continue to disadvantage disabled and neurodivergent young people in our education system?
The Scottish Government is absolutely committed to improving outcomes for people with learning disabilities, autistic people and neurodivergent people. Iris Duane referred to the LDAN bill. Our view is that practical action, investment and change now will be of greater practical assistance to those who need it than a long primary legislation process would be.
I assure Iris Duane and those who are listening of two things. First, practical action is under way, not least through the national staged intervention model in the education space. My health colleagues are also taking forward a lot of work.
Secondly, the work that was done in preparation for the bill is informing the action that we will take now. We remain open-minded to the question of a bill, but that would be down the line, once greater practical support has been put in place and action has been taken.
Efforts to support learners to achieve and succeed must account for the varying needs of our young people, including those with additional support needs. Can the cabinet secretary provide an update on how the Scottish Government is working to deliver the recommendations set out in the McManus review?
I confirmed to the Parliament in a recent statement that we accept the recommendations of the McManus review and will spend the parliamentary session implementing them.
One of the most impactful changes, perhaps, will be the national staged intervention model that I mentioned. A lot of local authorities are currently using a staged intervention model, but this one will take a national approach so that there is simplicity and consistency, and so that young people and their families know what support to expect for additional learning support needs.
I published a route map to that national staged intervention model in August, and we are working very closely with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities and education authorities on its implementation.
The rest of this Official Report will be published progressively as soon as the text is available.