Official Report 235KB pdf
12:00
Benefit Spending
The safety net of social security is something that we all value, but Scotland’s towering benefits bill stands at around £7 billion a year and is due to reach almost £10 billion by the end of the decade. I have said before and will say again that benefit spending is out of control. We know that it is unfair, unaffordable and unsustainable. Does John Swinney agree, or does he think that the Scottish National Party’s benefits system is fair, affordable and sustainable?
I think that the approach that the Scottish Government takes to benefits is based on the principles of fairness and dignity that this Parliament legislated for. I am proud to associate my Government with those values, which are enshrined in statute. I believe that the benefit system in Scotland is sustainable, as is demonstrated by this Government’s ability to ensure effective budget planning to meet all those commitments.
I make no apology whatsoever for being determined to protect the vulnerable in our society and to lift children out of poverty. That is what my Government is all about.
He is in a state of denial. [Interruption].
Let us hear Mr Findlay.
That is not sustainable. Just this morning, the Scottish Fiscal Commission told Parliament that the only ways to plug the benefits gap would be either by having higher taxes or by cutting money from public services. John Swinney cannot admit it, but the SNP’s benefits system is broken.
It is deeply concerning that, in some cases, the system acts as a deterrent to work. The Government’s own review of the Scottish child payment revealed that some parents turn down extra work or stop working altogether and that some even told their bosses that they did not want a pay rise, because extra pay would reduce their benefits, meaning that they would end up with less money.
We say that limiting the payment to two children per family would be a fair way to address that. [Interruption].
Colleagues, let us hear one another. Let us hear Mr Findlay.
Surely people should be better off working than being on benefits. Is John Swinney really content with a system that encourages people to turn down a pay rise?
The Government’s approach to eradicating child poverty involves a number of measures, one of which is about putting in place effective support for employability to enable parents to get into employment. The measures in the budget also support that by providing wraparound childcare and breakfast clubs so that we can ensure that more parents can get into employment.
I want to see more parents getting into employment so that their families can be lifted out of poverty, but what I will not do and what I am absolutely determined that my Government will never do is punish the vulnerable in our society. Russell Findlay’s support for the two-child cap is a demonstration that the nasty party is back good and proper in the Conservative Party.
I will read to John Swinney a line from his Government’s report, which he has probably not even read. It comes from a parent who spoke to the report’s authors.
“I even asked my line manager not to move me up my annual pay award band because it would have meant maybe a £30 or £40 a month addition on my salary for myself, but it would have cost me around £300 in benefits.”
Encouraging people not to work is absurd and harmful, but that is not the only problem with a benefit system that SNP politicians love to boast is “light touch”. That might explain the following: in the rest of the United Kingdom, an average of 8,000 people are prosecuted for benefit fraud every year, but Social Security Scotland has reported only 29 cases to prosecutors in almost three years. Most claimants are honest, but those numbers strongly suggest that fraudsters are exploiting the SNP’s light touch system and getting away with it—[Interruption.]
Let us hear one another.
Does John Swinney seriously think that there have been only 29 cases of benefit fraud in Scotland?
When we established Social Security Scotland, the Scottish Government included measures that were designed to tackle any fraud that is perpetrated within the benefits system. The development of all that activity has been pursued by Social Security Scotland, with reference to the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service when it is appropriate for individuals to be prosecuted.
I accept the importance of ensuring that payments are made only to those who are entitled to them and that fraud should be pursued where there is any evidence of fraud. However, what I will not do is get into the gutter with Mr Findlay to attack vulnerable people in our society. The Government will ensure that there is proper support to vulnerable people as part of our efforts to lift families out of poverty. That is the mission of my Government.
John Swinney can hurl all the nonsense insults that he wants, but the reality is that Scotland cannot afford to pay for the SNP’s spiralling benefits bill.
To recap, we know that the SNP’s light-touch system deters work and is wide open to fraud, and that it spends—right now—more than £1 billion more on benefits than it receives in funding for them. Incredibly, Labour and Reform are okay with that. Four months ago, Audit Scotland said that John Swinney’s Government had no plan to plug the benefits black hole. There is still no plan, unless John Swinney is keeping it a secret from us.
We do have a plan. We identify £1 billion—[Interruption.]
Let us hear Mr Findlay.
We identify £1 billion-worth of savings that can be achieved through a series of reasonable proposals. Those savings would be used to cut taxes for hard-working Scots who are being hammered by Labour and the SNP. Is it not the case that cutting taxes for the lowest paid, rather than increasing benefits, is the best way to lift people out of poverty?
Mr Findlay comes along to First Minister’s questions and sets out his stall. We now have another chapter of that, with the hostile attitude towards vulnerable people in our society that is consistently represented by the Conservative Party. He also comes along and argues for £1 billion-worth of tax cuts for individuals in Scotland, without a scrap of evidence of being able to deliver any of those tax cuts, because they will undermine public services in our country. [Interruption.]
I am sorry, First Minister.
It would be helpful if we could hear one another. I have a lot of colleagues who would like to get in today. Let us make sure that we can hear one another.
When it comes to the sustainability of the public finances, I will pay not very much attention to what Mr Findlay says to me. I will pay more attention to what the credit ratings agencies say about my Government. What they say is that—[Interruption.]
Members! [Interruption.] If there are members who just want to come and have a good shout, perhaps they need to consider whether their behaviour is appropriate.
I will not listen to what Russell Findlay says to me about the sustainability of the public finances. I will rely on what the credit ratings agencies say, which is that this Government represents “prudent” financial management in Scotland. That is how we deliver sustainability in the public finances, and people can rely on an SNP Government to do exactly that.
Queen Elizabeth University Hospital
At the time that the Queen Elizabeth university hospital was opened, Nicola Sturgeon was the First Minister, John Swinney was the Deputy First Minister and finance secretary, who signed the cheques, and Shona Robison was the health secretary. We now know that the hospital was opened too early and when it was not ready, with devastating consequences, including avoidable infections and deaths. External pressure was applied to open the hospital. Why did Scottish National Party ministers put politics before patient safety?
That was not the case, and the reference for that is what counsel to the inquiry said on 23 January. They said:
“There is no evidence of external pressure on NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde to open the hospital early or before it was ready to be opened.”
John Swinney is about to regret saying that, because we know that the culture of this SNP Government is to avoid putting things in writing, so that there is no paper trail. However, all it takes is for the guard to slip once.
I have in my hand official Scottish Government meeting notes. These notes, written by a Scottish Government official, relate to a series of meetings that were held on 16 December 2019, 19 December 2019 and 10 January 2020. Those meetings involved a Scottish Government official appointed by the then health secretary, the health board’s director of facilities and a consultant who had been engaged by NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde to review what went wrong. In the findings, it is stated in black and white that
“Political pressure was also being felt and no consideration was given to delaying the opening of the hospital despite the issues being faced with completion and operation.”
Political pressure was also being felt.
Will John Swinney now tell members why political pressure was being applied to open a hospital that this note also makes clear was not ready, which led to people dying, or would he rather answer in the presence of his lawyer?
An inquiry that is exploring all those issues is under way, and evidence is being taken in the presence of Lord Brodie. It is a properly constituted public inquiry that is exploring all the issues that are at stake.
On 23 January, counsel to the inquiry said in the summary:
“There is no evidence of external pressure on NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde to open the hospital early or before it was ready to be opened.”
That is what counsel to the inquiry said, and Lord Brodie is considering all these issues.
He has been found out. This is a minute between a Scottish Government official appointed by the health secretary, the health board’s director of facilities and a consultant who was appointed to look at what happened. I say once again that the official Scottish Government minute of that meeting expressly states in black and white that political pressure was being felt and that no consideration was given to delaying the opening of the hospital. That is damning.
The decision to open the hospital early has resulted in a decade of lies, deceit and cover-up, bullying and gaslighting of staff, families being lied to and denied the truth, and infections that led to the deaths of children and possibly also adults, all because politics was put before patient safety.
The evidence is damning. People died. I ask John Swinney, was it was worth it?
The points that I have put on the record are what counsel to the inquiry set out. As Mr Sarwar knows from my previous answers, the Scottish Government was first made aware of water contamination issues in the hospital in 2018. The Scottish Government has commissioned a public inquiry under the leadership of Lord Brodie, which enables the full consideration of all these issues, the evidence to be assessed and considered, and Lord Brodie to report, which is exactly what he will do.
Social Care (Assessments)
I told the First Minister previously about former care worker Margaret MacGill, who has been in hospital for more than 400 nights. She has been unable to get home because the carers she needs are not available. It has now cost the national health service nearly £200,000 to keep her in hospital when she does not need or want to be there. Three weeks on, she is still in hospital in Wick.
Margaret is not alone. This week, we learned that the number of people who are waiting for a care assessment or a care package has gone up by 20 per cent in the past year. Does the First Minister really think that his draft budget will fix the crisis in social care and get people such as Margaret home?
In addressing the issues around social care, it is vital that we provide the care that people require. We are investing £2 billion in social care integration, and that investment has increased over the lifetime of the Government. The Government’s budget includes substantial increases in the resources that are available to local authorities and health boards as part of the measures that are required to deliver effective social care support.
The matter relating to Mrs MacGill, which Mr Cole-Hamilton has raised with me previously, rests on the availability of personnel to deliver that care. As I set out to Mr Cole-Hamilton the last time that we had exchanges on the matter, the issue is significantly affected by the availability of people of working age in areas such as Caithness to deliver such services. We work closely with the local authority and NHS Highland to do all that we can to support the availability of care staff. The measures that I have taken on access to workers from other countries will help in that respect.
The First Minister knows that we are prepared to vote for his budget if the measures in it are right. We are here to get things done. The Scottish Liberal Democrats have already secured some big wins through our negotiations on the budget—money for backing young entrepreneurs, for colleges, for the removal of peak ferry fares from the northern isles and for faster assessments for autism and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. However, that is not yet enough to win our support. We will squeeze every penny that we can out of the budget process for business rates, for hospices and, for the sake of people such as Margaret MacGill, for social care. Is his Government prepared to go further to win our support?
I am aware that discussions about the budget process are still going on with the Liberal Democrats and other parties. The budget has not yet come to Parliament for stage 1 consideration, but I welcome the support of other parties for it. It has always been a priority of mine to attract the support of other parties for the Government’s budget proposals, and we did that successfully last year.
Mr Cole-Hamilton has given a long list of the many reasons to vote for the Scottish Government’s budget, and I confirm that those discussions are still under way.
More Homes Scotland (Affordable Homes)
To ask the First Minister how the Scottish Government’s new national housing agency will support its work to deliver more affordable homes. (S6F-04631)
More homes Scotland’s mission is to bring simplicity, scale and speed to Scotland’s housing emergency response. It will deliver for a generation of Scots new homes more quickly, more affordably and in more liveable, climate-friendly communities.
The 2026 draft budget includes the single largest funding allocation to affordable housing since records began in 1989. We have committed to invest up to £4.9 billion over the next four years, backed by a record £4.1 billion of public investment, helping to deliver 36,000 affordable homes and providing a place to live for around 24,000 children.
At a time when the cost of living is spiralling under the Labour Party, it is great to hear that the Scottish National Party Government is taking the action that is needed to deliver warm, affordable housing for families right across Scotland. Will the First Minister tell us a little bit more about how the new agency will support first-time buyers?
The initiative that we are taking with more homes Scotland will streamline and accelerate the delivery of high-quality, affordable homes. It will ensure that more homes will be available across Scotland, including for first-time buyers. Detailed objectives will be set out in due course.
We continue to support home ownership for first-time buyers through a range of interventions. Our low-cost initiative for first-time buyers scheme is helping people on low to moderate incomes to buy a home. Last year, 210 homes were purchased through the scheme, and an estimated 300 homes will be purchased in this financial year.
I live in hope that the new agency will help to deliver the increase in house building that Scotland desperately needs. However, history tells us that SNP quangos rarely deliver for Scotland.
Almost two years ago, this Parliament declared a national housing emergency, and ministers in this chamber promised urgent action. Creating a new housing agency that will not even be operational until 2028 is not decisive action—it is kicking the can down the road.
What will the Scottish Government do right now—not in two years’ time—to support the building of more homes by supporting the private sector and to tackle the appalling backlog in social housing?
The first thing that I would say to Meghan Gallacher is that Scotland has built more affordable homes per capita than England or Wales has in recent years—substantially more. Indeed, since 2007, we have helped deliver more than 141,000 affordable homes. That is 45 per cent more per head of population than in England and 69 per cent more than in Wales. We have a strong track record, but more needs to be done.
In the immediate sense, we are investing money to tackle void properties, and we have thousands of void properties coming back into use. We are putting money in place to acquire properties from the private sector so that more can be used in the affordable housing sector. The investment programme that the Government is setting out in the budget indicates long-term, stable funding for investment in housing for the years to come, and more homes Scotland will accelerate the pace of delivery. That is what my Government is prepared to do. We are prepared to put the resources and measures in place. I wonder whether Meghan Gallacher will support our budget to deliver that expenditure for housing in Scotland.
Given the recent publication of Shelter’s Dundee housing emergency action plan and the city’s well-rehearsed issues with reinforced autoclaved aerated concrete in residential properties, will the First Minister comment on the fact that Dundee is yet to declare a housing emergency, which would allow us to all act together on the challenges that Dundee faces in relation to housing and homelessness?
We work very closely with Dundee City Council and with housing associations in the locality that deliver significantly in relation to the affordable housing agenda. A decision about declaring a housing emergency in the city of Dundee is obviously a matter for Dundee City Council. It is not for me to dictate to the council, but I can assure Maggie Chapman of the resources and the support of the Scottish Government to advance on those issues, which will continue.
National Health Service Boards (Transparency and Accountability Improvements)
To ask the First Minister what action the Scottish Government is taking to improve transparency and accountability within NHS boards. (S6F-04616)
Transparency and accountability in our national health service is essential to maintaining public trust. We have strengthened expectations around leadership, information governance, record keeping and decision making across NHS boards. We have also reinforced assurance and escalation arrangements. There are very clear examples of this Government taking action when concerns arise, and Liz Smith will be aware that we have escalated boards through those frameworks for a variety of different issues. Those measures demonstrate our commitment to strong governance, transparency and accountability.
Not only are we witnessing the most appalling scandal in NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, but in NHS Tayside, we have the destruction of 40 clinical logbooks in the Eljamel case, despite the issuing of do-not-destroy notices, plus more revelations about serious blunders in jaw surgery. In NHS Forth Valley and NHS Grampian, we have on-going patient complaints about missing documents and non-compliance with statutory complaint procedures.
Those are all examples of the most serious failings of management in different health boards that are the direct responsibility of the Scottish Government. Will the First Minister finally accept that the cultural problem that he has identified in NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde is the exact same cultural problem that has existed in this Government for years and that it is preventing patients from getting to the truth?
The issues in relation to the conduct of healthcare are vital for individuals in our society. The Government intervenes to ensure that, on an on-going basis, NHS health boards are aware of their obligations to be candid and open with members of the public about their treatment. When that is unacceptable, the issues are pursued and addressed by the escalation of individual health boards for greater degrees of scrutiny, which health secretaries are prepared to undertake and apply.
In certain circumstances, such as in the Eljamel case, we refer those issues to independent inquiries. That is an indication of the fact that the Government believes that there must be openness and transparency in the handling of these issues, and that the assurance of the public about the safety and effectiveness of public services must be pursued at all times.
Walk-in General Practitioner Clinics
I remind members of my entry in the register of interests. To ask the First Minister how the Scottish Government's launch of walk-in GP clinics will support its work to bring down waiting times and ensure everyone gets the care they need. (S6F-04626)
Our new walk-in GP clinics will make it easier for people to access GP services without an appointment. We have listened to frustrations about the 8 am rush, and our £36 million investment in the initial 15 clinics will help more people to get the right care when they need it. The clinics will sit alongside the historic GP deal that was agreed last year, which delivers record investment in primary care and will complement existing GP services, NHS 24, community pharmacies and hospitals. Together, those actions reflect my clear focus on improving our national health service and delivering for the people of Scotland.
Although Labour talks about privatisation and Reform wants to charge people for using the NHS, only the Scottish National Party is committed to defending Scotland’s NHS. It is investing to improve it through bold new initiatives such as the GP walk-in centres. [Interruption.]
Let us hear Ms Haughey.
Under the SNP Government, we are clearly seeing progress in our NHS—[Interruption.]
Colleagues, let us be courteous.
I, for one, want to thank our hard-working NHS staff for all that they are doing—unlike our Tory colleagues, it seems. Given that Labour cannot bring itself to do the same, will the First Minister remind our Labour colleagues what improvement we have seen under his leadership in the past year?
I join Clare Haughey in paying tribute to the hard-working staff of our national health service, whose dedication has made possible the improvements that we are seeing in Scotland’s national health service—[Interruption.]
I am keen for everyone who is gathered in the chamber to be able to hear what is going on.
Let me set out what improvements have been delivered in the national health service. Operation numbers are up; GP numbers are up; the number of nurses, midwives and dental consultants are up; long waits are down and have been down for six months in a row; out-patient waits are down; in-patient and day-case waits are down; and the risk of dying from cancer in Scotland is at its lowest rate on record. That is a record of delivery from the Scottish Government for the national health service, and we intend to continue delivering for the people of Scotland.
The reality is that the SNP is busted. Today, we have seen that it keeps important information from the public and pretends that it is cleaner than clean. The Scottish Government promised 800 more GPs, but it has failed to reach its target. Despite that promise, there are fewer whole-time equivalent GPs than there were a decade ago. Those GPs are seeing more patients. They now see 1,700 patients, compared with 1,500 in 2013. Primary care is under incredible strain, and both the British Medical Association and the Royal College of General Practitioners have been critical of the walk-in centres, calling instead for the money to go to existing GP services. How will the First Minister ensure that the walk-in centres are adequately staffed when that is not currently the case in local GP practices?
I reassure Jackie Baillie that GP numbers are going up under the Scottish Government’s watch to make sure that we have in place the services that are required in our communities. The Government is going further with GP walk-in centres to make sure that there is even more access for members of the public. That is this Government listening to the people and delivering on the national health service.
We move to constituency and general supplementary questions.
Mossmorran
This is an incredibly worrying time for the workforce at Mossmorran, and urgent action is required. It is welcome that the Scottish National Party Government’s budget includes £9 million over three years to help staff and communities who are affected by the plant’s closure. Will the First Minister say more about how his funding will be deployed, and about whether he agrees that Anas Sarwar and Scottish Labour should be joining us in pressing their United Kingdom Government colleagues to support our energy sector, rather than letting their support for industry stop at the border?
I am committed to ensuring that we do all that we can to support the workforce at Mossmorran. It is an incredibly difficult time for them.
We have engaged extensively with stakeholders to ensure that the funding that is available from the Scottish Government is prioritised to initially support the workers to transition to other employment opportunities and, then, to support efforts to secure a new future for the site. The Deputy First Minister is providing the necessary leadership to drive this crucial work, and Scottish Enterprise has begun work to secure new investment and a future for the site.
We are taking forward all those measures, an essential component of which is ensuring that the Government’s budget is supported. I look forward to those colleagues who have an interest in supporting Mossmorran supporting the Government’s budget when it comes to the Parliament for approval.
Court System Error (Domestic Abuse)
Will the First Minister address the case of my constituent, a mother of four and a survivor of domestic abuse, whose confidential refuge address was disclosed to her abuser due to an admitted failure by the courts during the imposition of a non-harassment order? As a direct consequence of the disclosure, my constituent and her children are required to leave their women’s aid accommodation under safeguarding protocols, despite having done nothing wrong and the court formally acknowledging fault. Given that that harm arose solely due to an error by the justice system, what action will the Scottish Government take to ensure that my constituent and her children are provided with immediate, safe and suitable housing? What steps will be taken to ensure that no survivor of domestic abuse is ever again placed at risk due to such a safeguarding failure?
I am very concerned to hear the details that Annie Wells has shared with the Parliament. The importance of protecting the privacy, safety and security of the victims of domestic abuse is central to the justice system. I acknowledge the point that Annie Wells has made, which is that the court system has acknowledged the error that it has made. I apologise to Annie Wells and her constituent for the error. It should not have happened. Obviously, there are many protocols and procedures in place to make sure that that does not happen—and it should not have happened.
I understand that Annie Wells has written to the Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Home Affairs. We will ensure that that is given prompt attention to ensure that there is support and assistance in place to address what is an unacceptable incident.
Wemyss Estate Evictions
Last year, the Wemyss estate sold tenanted properties in West Wemyss and Denbeath to Torah Capital, which has now issued 30 households with eviction notices, with some being asked to vacate their properties by 22 March. That includes people who have been tenants of the estate for some 40 years. It is an extremely worrying and stressful time for all the tenants. What discussions has the Scottish Government had with Fife Council, which is working at pace to try to find a solution, including the possibility of bringing some 30 properties into public sector ownership? What financial support would it be able to offer, if required?
The Cabinet Secretary for Housing is engaging with Fife Council on that question to try to find a solution for the individuals who are involved. This will be a very anxious time for those individuals, given the uncertainty about their housing arrangements. That work is under way and dialogue is proceeding. I give Claire Baker the assurance that that will be pursued by the housing secretary.
As I said in my answer to Meghan Gallacher earlier, we are actively engaged in the acquisition of properties to bring them into the public sector housing stock so that we have measures in place to support families to obtain the correct and appropriate form of accommodation. There are opportunities for us to engage constructively with Fife Council on that question, and I give Claire Baker the assurance that we will do so. The housing secretary will keep her updated.
Illegal Puppy Trade
The recent successful prosecution case against the Hamiltons, who are part of the cruel puppy farm trade, concluded after a five-year investigation by the Scottish Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. Thirty-three puppies were found in dreadful conditions.
The case was taken as a summary action. Although I fully respect the independence of the prosecution service and the courts, I am concerned that that approach may not be sufficient for such cases—the source of which are often serious organised crime—and that they should be brought under solemn procedure. All that happened in this case was that the Hamiltons got community service and were banned from having more than one dog for five years, which are minor penalties in my book.
I associate myself with the concerns that Christine Grahame sets out about the illegal puppy trade and the harm that is caused to the welfare of dogs as a consequence.
Decisions about prosecution matters are undertaken independently of the Government by the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service. Christine Grahame is an experienced solicitor and parliamentarian; she is familiar with that separation of responsibilities. It would be wrong for me to comment on the decisions that are made that are of a prosecutorial nature. It is important that all those cases are fully and properly investigated and that the Crown can come to its conclusions on those matters.
Forth Valley Royal Hospital Adult Mental Health Unit
An inspection at Forth Valley royal hospital’s adult mental health unit has caused significant concerns. Issues have been raised about patient support and protection at the hospital. Individuals who should have been under continuous observation were allowed to gain access to open spaces and even to the roof. What measures can be put in place to ensure the safety of those vulnerable individuals?
The issues described in that inspection report raised serious concerns. For that reason, yesterday, the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care and the Minister for Social Care and Mental Wellbeing saw the leadership of NHS Forth Valley at my request, to make it abundantly clear that we expect the recommendations to be addressed and the performance to be improved. Ministers will hold the national health service board to account on all those issues.
Co-codamol Shortage (Lanarkshire)
I have been contacted by local general practitioners who are concerned about the sudden, unexpected shortage of co-codamol in Lanarkshire. The First Minister should be aware that some 40,000 people are addicted to that medication and that shortages will have consequences for everyone else who is in need of pain relief. Can he advise whether that is a short-term supply problem in Lanarkshire or a problem across the country? What action will he take to ensure that there is a continuing supply?
I am not aware of a widespread issue with that. We will explore the details of the situation in Lanarkshire and act to address any shortages. There is a well-established system for ensuring that pharmaceutical interventions are available across the country. From time to time, there may well be individual locality challenges. However, we will take away the issues that Mr Russell has raised and explore what can be done to address it.
Energy Profits Levy (Effects on Energy Sector)
The shadow of the United Kingdom energy profits levy looms large over my area. Thanks to the Labour UK Government’s tax on energy, reports this week have shown a slump in business confidence in the north-east and have warned that thousands of jobs in the energy sector are at risk, including in my constituency of Aberdeen Central.
There is a reason that the energy sector, academics, trade unions and charities are speaking with one voice on the issue, but the Labour UK Government continues to bury its head in the sand. In the face of that Westminster economic mismanagement, can the First Minister advise what steps his Scottish National Party Government is taking to support our energy sector? Does he agree that the impact of sustained Westminster mismanagement clearly makes a case for why we need a fresh start with independence?
The issues that Kevin Stewart raises relate to the balance that has to be struck between reductions in capacity in the oil and gas sector, which are the product of the North Sea being a mature basin, and the rise of alternatives in renewables. A key factor in regulating that is the ability to invest in the North Sea oil and gas sector. As I have said to the Parliament before, that ability is being hampered by the energy profits levy, which undermines investment decisions. I assure Mr Stewart that the Scottish Government has made every effort to persuade the United Kingdom Government to change its stance on the energy profits levy, because it is harming investment and the sustainability of the economy in the north-east of Scotland.
In the budget, we are implementing support for businesses, workers and communities, with more than £120 million already invested in the north-east through our just transition fund and the energy transition fund. Further resources are pledged in the budget that is before the Parliament for approval.
I associate myself strongly with Mr Stewart’s point that Scotland needs to be able to benefit from our energy wealth. That is not happening at present, and the fresh start of independence will deliver that for the people of Scotland.
Oil and Gas Sector
This week, the Jobs Foundation released its report entitled, “Cliff Edge: Jobs in Aberdeen, the epicentre of the UK’s energy transition”. The report is a bleak read that reinforces what the Scottish Conservatives have been saying all along: we need to support the oil and gas sector until the transition to renewables has been further developed.
In the north-east, there is a jobs emergency. At Westminster, we have the extremist red Ed Miliband, who is doing all that he can to close the industry down. At Holyrood, we have a First Minister who offers no support to the oil and gas sector and, in jet-set Gillian Martin, an energy minister who is too busy racking up the air miles to release the much-awaited energy strategy.
When will the First Minister get off the fence, show some support to oil and gas workers, stop demonising the industry and finally back Cambo, Rosebank and Jackdaw?
I thought that it was customary to listen to what is said in Parliament and to perhaps adjust one’s question to take account of that. I have just confirmed to Mr Stewart that the Government believes that the energy profits levy is a real obstacle to the sustainability of the oil and gas sector in Scotland. I raised that issue directly with the Prime Minister at the British-Irish Council in December, as I have done on previous occasions.
In our budget, we have previously committed to support the transition by supporting workers in the training centres and the various other initiatives in the north-east of Scotland. There is more planned in the Government’s budget, but what is Mr Lumsden going to do in relation to that? He is going to vote against it, because he does not want to do the hard yards of supporting the workers in the oil and gas sector. [Interruption.]
While Mr Lumsden postures and fails to adjust his questions to take account of what I have said, I will carry on delivering for the north-east of Scotland. [Interruption.]
Let us hear one another, colleagues.
Whole-family Support
Children First has said that the announcement on whole-family support in the Scottish budget will provide
“a lifeline to families who need help most”,
and Oxfam has said that it will give families a better chance of making ends meet. Can the First Minister tell us more about the Scottish Government’s plans to expand access to free after-school activities? How will that support its national mission of tackling poverty?
As I have set out in some of my other answers, the Government is expanding the support that is available to help with the cost of living and to help with lifting families out of poverty. The investment in the budget in the extra time programme, which complements our work on breakfast clubs, is designed to ensure that families are supported with the assistance that they require to move out of poverty.
Through our budget, we will invest £2.5 million to expand the extra time programme. In partnership with the Scottish Football Association, we will work to assist families and ensure that provision is in place to enable individuals to sustain their participation and engagement in employment. That is part of a programme of wraparound support that the Government is putting in place to deal with the cost of living challenges that families face.
Community Organisations (Funding Arrangements)
Given the immediate and severe impact of the ending of the investing in communities fund, could the First Minister tell members when community organisations will be informed about the transitional funding or bridging arrangements that will be provided to prevent the collapse of vital local services?
I have been made aware that Dr Bell’s community centre in Leith, which supports more than 600 families every year, will have to close its doors because of the abrupt withdrawal of that vital funding, which will leave families without the essential support that the community centre provides. Will the First Minister make a commitment to listen to those organisations across Scotland that are facing collapse, to give clarity and to act now?
I am not sure whether Sarah Boyack was in the chamber earlier, but Richard Lochhead, the Minister for Business and Employment, confirmed that an extension for 2026-27 is being delivered. That was confirmed to the Parliament earlier this afternoon.
Women Against State Pension Inequality
In the past hour, it has been revealed that the United Kingdom Government will not compensate WASPI women. Does the First Minister agree that Labour’s U-turn on a U-turn in betraying those women is a new low, even for it?
Please answer to the extent of devolved responsibility.
I am grateful to Mr Gibson for advising Parliament of the decision of the United Kingdom Government. It is deeply regrettable that there will be no compensation for the WASPI women. Those women were promised, in good faith, that the Labour Party would address that historic injustice when it got into Government. It is just another example of the betrayal of individuals in this country by this Labour Government.
That concludes First Minister’s question time. Before the next item of business there will be a short suspension to allow those who are leaving the chamber and the public gallery to do so.
12:45
Meeting suspended.
12:46
On resuming—
Previous
General Question Time