Official Report 247KB pdf
Good afternoon, colleagues. The first item of business is general questions. As always, to accommodate as many questions as possible, I ask for concise questions and answers.
Rothesay to Wemyss Bay Ferry Service
To ask the Scottish Government when it expects new vessels to be available to support services on the Rothesay to Wemyss Bay route. (S7O-00405)
I thank Ms Minto for her very sincere and continued interest in the matter. As she knows, the Wemyss Bay to Rothesay route is served by the sister vessels the MV Argyle and the MV Bute. They are a little bit younger than I am—they are around 20 and 21 years old. We expect the vessels to last until they are around 30 years old. As it stands, they are projected for replacement as part of phase 3 of the vessels and ports plan, which covers the period 2031 to 2036.
The two vessels are a good deal younger than I am.
As the cabinet secretary will know, the introduction of routine maintenance periods on a fortnightly basis has resulted in a reduction in current timetables. What assessment has been made of the impact of the change on people who live on Bute and those who commute to the island? Have alternatives, such as overnight maintenance or maintenance on a different day, been considered?
It is an important point for members to be cognisant of in relation to not just those vessels but all vessels. As part of the islands connectivity plan, we want regular maintenance to be undertaken. Unfortunately, as a consequence of that, vessels will be out of service for a period. I assure Ms Minto that CalMac Ferries will look at every possible opportunity to mitigate the time that vessels are out of service. There is a particular challenge around working overnight in relation to staffing availability and the resulting noise in the surrounding area, but I encourage her, as I always do, to engage proactively with CalMac on the issue.
Notwithstanding the phase 3 approach that the cabinet secretary highlighted, can he confirm that replacement of the two vessels is under consideration so that there can be a seamless transition at the relevant time?
Yes, I can. I will build on my earlier remarks. As I outlined, we are considering that as part of phase 3, which covers the period 2031 to 2036. However, the vessels are also being considered as part of the proposed intermediate vessel programme. That work is under way, and I am happy to keep Mr McMillan and Ms Minto updated accordingly.
Before we move to question 2, I remind members that they should not press their request-to-speak button unless they want to ask a supplementary to the next question on the list. They should not press it for questions that are further down the list.
Culture Portfolio (Accountability of Public Bodies)
To ask the Scottish Government how it ensures that public bodies within its culture portfolio are held accountable for their performance. (S7O-00406)
Public bodies are accountable to ministers for the delivery of their statutory functions, the effective use of public funds and their overall performance. Sponsor teams in the Scottish Government scrutinise performance, finances, risk and delivery against agreed objectives, while senior civil servants undertake annual appraisals of public body chairs.
Annual reports and audited accounts provide transparency and public accountability. Within that framework, public bodies retain operational independence and are responsible for their day-to-day decision making and the discharge of their statutory duties.
It is in an area of the cabinet secretary’s responsibility and accountability that I wish to ask my next question. Before I do so, I declare an interest as a director of WhistleblowersUK, which is a not-for-profit organisation.
The interim chief executive of Historic Environment Scotland has publicly brushed aside whistleblowers’ concerns as overblown, sought to frame their actions as unacceptable and dismissed Audit Scotland’s report of a toxic workplace in HES. Does the cabinet secretary share my concerns about such an attitude towards whistleblowers, and is she concerned about the rather dismissive approach that the interim chief executive has taken towards Audit Scotland’s report, which talked of a “toxic workplace culture” in Historic Environment Scotland?
I thank Stephen Kerr for his question and for his written correspondence to me on the matter. I have looked very carefully at his letter and have responded to him this afternoon. I appreciate and expect that Mr Kerr will not yet have had the chance to see that. However, when he receives my letter, he will find a full account in response to the questions that he put to me.
For the record today, I state my unequivocal support for whistleblowers and underline the importance that I place on their protection. Mr Kerr’s question and some of his letter were predicated on reporting in the press, and I want to put on the record that, on 20 October, the particular outlet concerned was required to issue a clarification to its 9 October article, which stated that the whistleblower was not explicitly threatened and that the article was not intended to suggest that Historic Environment Scotland had contravened the law on protected disclosures—in other words, whistleblowing.
I ask Mr Kerr to refer to the letter that I sent him today, and I am happy to answer further questions from him.
The culture sector is—rightly—receiving greater recognition of its contribution to Scottish society, with a larger budget in 2026-27 to match that recognition. With significant commitments to increase culture funding by £100 million a year, what lessons can be learned from the recommendations in the “Independent Review of Creative Scotland” to ensure that the additional funding is utilised as effectively as possible to support Scotland’s vibrant creative sector?
I welcome the opportunity that the review provides for Creative Scotland to strengthen how it supports Scotland’s culture sector, artists, communities and audiences. Alex Kerr is absolutely right to point out that we are increasing culture funding by £100 million annually, representing the largest increase of the devolution era outwith Covid support. The review of Creative Scotland, which we are taking forward both collectively and independently, provides the right context in which to make the best possible use of that substantial investment.
Living Costs Support (Low-income Households)
I refer to my registered interest as a councillor on Glasgow City Council. To ask the Scottish Government what additional measures it is taking to support low-income households to manage rising living costs during the current financial year. (S7O-00407)
The Scottish Government recognises the continuing pressure on household budgets, which is why we are investing more than £3.5 billion in 2026-27 to tackle poverty and support people with the cost of living. That includes our five family payments, free school meals and winter heating benefits, alongside £159 million this year to mitigate the impact of United Kingdom welfare policies.
We are considering the detail of the UK Government’s budget, including the proposed £100 household energy payment, and we will ensure that households in Scotland benefit. However, households need lasting support, including an energy social tariff and an end to damaging welfare policies.
In communities across Glasgow Cathcart and Pollok, many families are having to make difficult choices between heating and eating as the cost of living continues to rise. What additional support can the Scottish Government provide to help households in areas of deprivation across Glasgow, and how will it ensure that people are made aware of the support that is available to them?
As an example of the available support, I point to the sum of more than £18 million this year for free welfare, debt and income maximisation advice services, which help people to access the support to which they are entitled. However, the job would be made much easier if the UK Government budget had not been so much of a dismal failure in relation to actually helping people with the cost of living crisis. There was no lifting of the freeze on the local housing allowance, no scrapping of the bedroom tax or the benefit cap and no energy social tariffs, so the Scottish Government will continue to get on with supporting households throughout the country, including in the member’s constituency. It is just a real shame that yesterday’s budget was a missed opportunity to add to that effort.
Yesterday, the Scottish Government revealed that it will mirror the UK Government and give people in council tax bands A to D a £100 household energy payment. Although I, of course, welcome anything that helps my constituents to deal with the cost of living, that fails to address the broken council tax system on which it is based. To actually help working-class families to manage the cost of living, can the cabinet secretary confirm whether the Government is working swiftly to abolish the regressive and punitive council tax?
The work on council tax is ongoing, led by the Deputy First Minister. There is agreement about the need for reform, and the challenge is to determine what that reform looks like. In the meantime, given that the Scottish Government was given no notice of the UK Government’s £100 council tax benefit policy, we are having to work at speed to ensure that households benefit from it this winter.
Pension-age Winter Heating Payment
To ask the Scottish Government when it anticipates that payments for the pension-age winter heating payment will commence in 2026-27. (S7O-00408)
The pension-age winter heating payments for 2026-27 will commence from November and continue throughout the winter. The vast majority of payments will be made automatically, without the need for an application, and will provide support for more than 879,000 Scottish pensioners. The Scottish Government recognises the financial pressures that many pensioners continue to face. The payment provides direct financial support to pensioners to help with their heating costs during the winter months.
Forecasts from EDF Energy this week predict an eye-watering jump of 27 per cent in energy bills in January 2027. In total, energy bills are set to be £1,275 higher than Labour promised when it came to power in Westminster. That is coming at a time when families are choosing between heating and eating—I see that through my constituency casework. Will the cabinet secretary outline the different types of Scottish Government support that are available to pensioners, low-income households and families with disabled children and young people to help with their bills this winter?
I am sure that everyone in the chamber, but particularly members from Scottish Labour, will remember that manifesto commitment to reduce people’s fuel bills by £300. As Clare Haughey mentioned in her supplementary question, Labour has far outshone itself in its ineptitude on that area, because the hit that is coming this winter to pensioners, low-income households and families with disabled people is stark.
The Scottish Government has an investment package of around £205 million in our winter heating benefits. Some of those are not available anywhere else in the United Kingdom, including our child winter heating payment, because we understand and appreciate the difficulties that people are having.
The fact that we are sitting in energy-rich Scotland means that nobody should be struggling to heat their home. We will do what we can with the powers that we have, but it is only with independence that we can solve the crisis that many people are facing.
Policy Decisions (Consultation)
To ask the Scottish Government what consideration it gives to responses received through public consultations when making policy decisions. (S7O-00409)
The Scottish Government values the views and evidence that are provided through public consultations. We recognise that people give their time, knowledge and expertise when responding to consultations. By analysing and understanding the perspectives of individuals, stakeholders and organisations on issues, we can understand their opinions or proposals.
Responses to formal written consultations are analysed in line with Scottish Government guidance and form part of a range of evidence that is used to take policy decisions. We consider the breadth of views that are expressed and the evidence and experience behind them, alongside research, expert advice and information that is outlined in relevant impact assessments.
We publish all consultation analysis and strive to set out how the responses have informed the decisions that we take.
The Scottish Government’s consultation saw 77 per cent of respondents disagree with extending candidacy rights to foreign nationals, yet the Government proceeded regardless. It has now introduced legislation to address a loophole and to fix its own legislation while extending candidacy rights to Commonwealth citizens. Does the minister accept that that demonstrates a disregard for public opinion? Will he explain why he believes that foreign nationals should be eligible to serve in Scotland’s Parliament, when most of Scotland does not believe that?
I go back to the point that I made: consultation is an important part of the exercise that informs the decisions that we make. Previously, this Parliament had enfranchised a range of individuals, including foreign nationals, who reside in Scotland. I think that, by and large, the franchise should reflect those who are entitled to stand for Parliament.
It is also the case that the same consultation informed a different decision that we took. We initially thought that we would enable 16 and 17-year-olds who are enfranchised to stand for election, but the feedback that we got through that process of consultation led us to conclude that that would not be an appropriate thing to do. That is a demonstration that consultation can impact the decisions that we make.
Homelessness (Local Authority Accommodation Duties)
To ask the Scottish Government what steps it is taking to ensure that local authorities are able to fulfil their statutory duties to provide accommodation to people at risk of homelessness. (S7O-00410)
Local authorities in Scotland have statutory duties to those who are assessed as being threatened with, or at risk of, homelessness. That requires them to take reasonable steps to ensure that accommodation that such people already occupy remains available or, if that is not possible, that other accommodation is made available.
Supporting people is not always about providing new accommodation. It can be about ensuring that timely support is provided to help households to sustain their tenancies. We are strengthening existing duties through the Housing (Scotland) Act 2025, which will ensure that steps need to be taken six months before someone is threatened with homelessness.
The cabinet secretary will know that, in the past year, local authorities have failed almost 22,000 times to fulfil their legal duty to provide support to homeless people. Scottish councils simply do not have the resources to house everyone, particularly with such high demand. Given that councils are already struggling to support people who are in need, does the cabinet secretary agree that suspension of the local connection rule needs to be ended so that we can focus on housing people who already live in Scotland?
This country has a proud history of having some of the strongest housing rights in Europe and, certainly, the strongest in the United Kingdom. Those housing rights are there for everyone, and the Government has absolutely no intention of changing that policy.
I am aware that the Government is working to reduce homelessness, and I thank the cabinet secretary for our candid relationship in discussing that. However, the number of individuals who are living in unsuitable or temporary accommodation is still at an unsustainable level, while just under 45,000 homes stand empty across Scotland. What action is the cabinet secretary taking to bring those homes back into use? Will she explore the use of mandatory leasing orders so that nobody ever has to sleep on our streets again?
By coincidence, I was at the Scottish Empty Homes Partnership conference this morning speaking to empty homes officers and I announced further funding to assist councils with grants to assist with repairs, for example, to get some of those empty homes back into use. A record number of empty homes was put back into use last year.
I was also pleased to hear about the compulsory purchase order hub that is being established to encourage learning across Scotland, as some local authorities use those powers more than others. I am sure that I will keep up to date with the member’s views on some of the other aspects that were mentioned in the consultation on compulsory purchase order reform, which we decided not to implement at this point. However, we are still keen to see whether there are lessons that we can learn on that matter.
Shelter Scotland has recently recorded that the number of households assessed as being, or at risk of becoming, homeless shot up to more than 35,000 this year. The charity argues that more than 15,000 new social homes need to be built to even begin to address that problem. Will the cabinet secretary consult housing developers so that the overly burdensome planning regulations can be lifted and new social housing can be built more cheaply and quickly?
Planning does not sit within my portfolio, but the Minister for Public Finance is doing a great deal of work with developers to determine what can be done to make the system simpler, easier to use and, therefore, speedier. However, I met housing developers last Friday, and we discussed how more homes Scotland could help the developments that they wish to take place happen at greater speed. I thank them for that constructive conversation.
National Performing Companies (Meetings)
To ask the Scottish Government when the Cabinet Secretary for Education, Culture and Gaelic last met with representatives of the national performing companies and what issues were discussed. (S7O-00411)
Scotland’s five world-class national performing companies play a central role in our cultural infrastructure. I have met individual representatives at recent meetings, including representatives of Scottish Opera and of the National Theatre of Scotland at a performance in August. My office is arranging a date to meet all five national performing companies together. I intend to do that before the end of the year. As discussed with the Europe, External Affairs and Culture Committee on Tuesday, my senior Scottish Government officials meet the national performing companies on an ongoing basis to discuss future sustainability, and I await advice in that regard.
I welcome the fact that the cabinet secretary intends to meet all the national performing companies in due course. There will be a lot to discuss.
I agree with the cabinet secretary about the importance of our national performing companies, but they have warned that they are reaching breaking point. The National Theatre of Scotland projects a deficit of £423,000. The Royal Scottish National Orchestra says that it faces its most serious challenge in a generation. Angus Robertson, the previous Cabinet Secretary for Constitution, External Affairs and Culture, said earlier this year, during the budget process, that the national companies were at the top of his list for future priorities. Are they at the top of the current cabinet secretary’s priority list, or is something else? When will we see evidence of that?
In recognition of the importance of our national performing companies, we provided an uplift of £1 million of funding across all five companies in 2025-26. That came on top of £700,000 of funding in 2024-25. Both our budget for this financial year and the spending review set out that, as well as protecting funding for the NPCs in the coming financial year, we will seek to provide them with additional funding in future financial years, as part of the commitment towards that additional £100 million for the culture sector by 2028-29. I absolutely stand by that.
The Scottish National Party Government’s commitment to establishing a new national performing company is an important step in recognising the immense value of Scotland’s traditional music sector. Can the cabinet secretary provide an update on progress following the round table that she hosted with trad music stakeholders?
I am very pleased that we have committed to establishing a national performing company for traditional music. It is an exciting and timely opportunity to recognise that traditional music is an absolutely vital part of our cultural identity and, indeed, our international reputation. Following my expert round table on 27 August, which Mr Day referred to, we also ran a survey, which closed on 30 September. It received more than 300 responses, and I thank everybody who engaged with it. We will analyse those responses and confirm next steps shortly.
Bus Fare Cap (Engagement)
To ask the Scottish Government what engagement it has had with bus operators to boost services following its implementation of the £2 fare cap. (S7O-00412)
I thank Patricia Gibson for her question, because it allows me the opportunity to share the good news with the Parliament once again that this Scottish National Party Government promised to deliver a £2 fare cap in the Strathclyde Partnership for Transport—SPT—area within the first 100 days of the Government, and we delivered on that promise. We now want to see increased patronage of our buses, and it is my hope that the £2 bus fare will encourage customers to take up the opportunity that we have given to them. I hope that that will help to ensure that more people across Scotland travel by bus.
On that very point, following the introduction of the £2 fare cap, the Scottish Government has funded, via Strathclyde Partnership for Transport, bus service extensions from Glasgow on a pilot basis. Given that Irvine, in my constituency, has a population of more than 39,000, will the Scottish ministers work with SPT and bus companies to explore the reintroduction of an Irvine-to-Glasgow bus service, which would enable my constituents to benefit from the fare cap when travelling for work and leisure opportunities?
Patricia Gibson goes to the very heart of one of the problems that we have. Each and every time I come to the chamber, my colleagues on the SNP benches and members across the chamber outline where there is a shortage of services and where people are not able to get to where they want to go by bus. That is exactly why this Government will take forward proposals to ensure that our buses are back in public control. I look forward to working with Patricia Gibson and with partners across Scotland to make sure that that happens.
One of the temporary reinstatements is of the X36 service between Ardrossan and Glasgow until March, and that is very welcome. The service was first withdrawn in 2022, and extensive representations were made for its reinstatement. That direct bus route to Glasgow benefits the three towns, as well as Kilwinning and the Garnock valley, so will the Scottish Government look at what funding can be made available to permanently reinstate the X36—that is, the Irvine service—and, indeed, to boost such services?
The example that Katy Clark posits builds on the point that my colleague Ms Gibson made. It is the reality that, across Scotland, bus service provision as it stands does not meet the expectations of the public. Therefore, the public rightly come to our door to ask for investment. That is why we will not just continue to invest but take definitive policy action to ensure that buses are back under public control.
I am intrigued by what the cabinet secretary means by “public control”. Does he mean that there will be franchising in every part of the country? Is that a certainty?
As convener of the Transport Committee, Mr Rennie will know that the Transport (Scotland) Act 2019 affords local authorities the ability to franchise, to run a municipal service or to run a bus service improvement partnership with operators. I am keen to build on the current legislation to ensure that we achieve the objective that, I think, we share: public control of Scotland’s buses.
Although I welcome the implementation of the £2 bus fare cap, I find it frustrating that it represents an additional subsidy for Scotland’s private bus companies. There is universal agreement in the Parliament that bus franchising in Scotland needs to be implemented as quickly as possible, starting in Strathclyde after years of delays, so will the cabinet secretary commit to working with Opposition parties to expedite the proposed better buses bill in order that we get the publicly controlled bus system that we desperately need?
Yes.
Children with Additional Support Needs (Learning Services Support)
To ask the Scottish Government what support it provides for online learning and interrupted learner services for children with additional support needs. (S7O-00413)
The Scottish Government is committed to helping all children and young people, including those with additional support needs, to continue their education when they cannot attend school. We provide advice and resources to help all pupils to participate in learning, and we fund e-Sgoil’s online service for interrupted learners. That builds on the support that is already provided by schools and local authorities, and we continue to explore how online learning and technology can help children and young people who are struggling to stay connected to education. All that is done with a view to achieving excellence and equity for every pupil in Scotland.
One example of a young person who is struggling at the moment is Rowan Simpson, my young and very bright constituent from Baillieston, who suffers from anxiety and autistic burnout. She is on a two-year waiting list for e-Sgoil, but she gets two hours of support a week from Glasgow City Council’s interrupted learner services. What action will the Government take to ensure access to education outside the school environment for children with additional support needs?
I appreciate David Linden raising what is clearly a very difficult situation for Rowan and her family. I reiterate that every child should be able to access education that meets their needs, particularly when health issues or other factors make attending school difficult.
The Scottish Government funds i-Sgoil, which is part of e-Sgoil’s national online learning offer for interrupted learners. Personally, I know the difference that that can make to young people’s lives. No child should be without appropriate education support. While young people are awaiting access to a specific service, local authorities and schools must fulfil their duty to make suitable alternative arrangements if attendance at school is not possible.
Bus Network (Public Control)
To ask the Scottish Government, in light of the First Minister’s recent commitment to bringing the bus network back into public control by the end of the current parliamentary session, what assessment it has made of the legislation required to implement this policy and when it plans to introduce it. (S7O-00414)
It is important to reiterate, building on the answers that I gave a minute ago, that the Transport (Scotland) Act 2019 allows local authorities to move forward with municipal ownership, franchising and bus service improvement partnerships with operators. As Mr Harvie will know, the First Minister has been clear—as have I—about our intention to bring buses in Scotland back under public control. We will do that through better buses legislation. I look forward to working with him and colleagues across the chamber to ensure that that happens.
Last month, the cabinet secretary was completely unclear on whether the better buses legislation would involve one bill, multiple bills or no bill at all, and on when anything would happen. Three weeks ago today, I was told:
“Over the coming months, we will undertake further engagement and discussion regarding potential options before decisions on next steps are taken.”—[Official Report, 8 October 2026; c 11.]
Barely a week later, the First Minister told the Scottish National Party conference what the policy actually was—franchising everywhere, with the whole bus network brought back under public control. I am glad that someone has finally told the cabinet secretary what he is supposed to be trying to achieve. Is it not clear that, if any of that is going to happen, he needs to introduce an ambitious bill in the Parliament soon?
Yes.
Is the cabinet secretary seriously telling us that he will impose franchising on areas of Scotland that do not want it?
Is Mr Simpson seriously coming to the chamber and sitting among his colleagues—who regularly ask me direct questions about the removal of bus routes in their areas, the lack of service in their areas or the cost of running services in their areas—and opposing our intention to bring buses back under public control? Is that seriously the policy of the supposed party of working people, or is it the policy of those with very deep pockets?
On that consensual note, we come to the end of general question time for this week. I apologise to members whose questions I was unable to take due to time constraints.