Chamber and committees

Although the report by HIS and the MWC is specific to Skye house, does the minister agree that it is important to consider any lessons for improving access to mental health services in Scotland in a wider context?

Industry experts have warned that global uncertainty could lead to increased fuel prices. With that in mind, the Labour Party must rethink its planned hikes to fuel duty, which will hit hard-working families in Scotland hard. Does the First Minister believe that, when Scotland produces far more oil and gas than we can hope to use, energy-rich Scots should not need to pay through the nose to fill their cars?

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on the child poverty practice accelerator fund and how it is supporting families in Scotland with the cost of living. (S6O-05606)

While the Labour Government continues to sit on its hands, it is encouraging to hear about the bold action that the Scottish National Party Government is taking to tackle child poverty and help families with the cost of living. Does the cabinet secretary agree that, if the United Kingdom Government is serious about tackling those issues, it must listen to the Child Poverty Action Group and finally scrap the benefit cap?

I thank every member who took the time to sign my motion in order to allow the debate to go ahead.

“For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world and forfeits his soul? Or what shall a man give in return for his soul?”

Matthew, chapter 16, verse 26.

I lodged the motion for debate after the Rev Anne Robertson got in touch with me to highlight the difficulties that charities and voluntary organisations are facing, so it feels appropriate that I open with a Bible verse. I hope that she does not mind, and I welcome her, and members of her congregation, to the public gallery.

Every member of the Parliament will know of small community groups and charities in their constituencies that go above and beyond. Some of those are out-and-out charities; others will be community councils, church groups, men’s sheds, lunch clubs or walking groups, to name just a few. Those groups are what makes a community.

Despite the huge differences that those groups make, they do not handle much money. They often operate on shoestring budgets that have been funded from small donations. In recent years, however, such groups have started to get letters from their banks to say that they will need to start paying for banking services for their community or treasurer accounts. Some banks are now charging monthly or annual fees, while others are now charging for specific transactions.

For the small groups that are affected, that is chipping away at the very humble sums of money that they work with, and volunteers’ time is taken up in changing bank accounts to try to avoid those fees, if that is even possible—I know that some banks no longer allow new accounts to be opened. All that is compounded by the closure of local banks in the communities that we represent, which particularly disadvantages elderly and disabled people, many of whom are volunteers in those community groups.

On the point about branch closures, I will share the example of the Bank of Scotland, which is planning to close its branch in the Bridge of Don area of my Aberdeen Donside constituency in June. I will take aim at that bank shortly.

One of those letters, with details of new banking charges, was sent to a group in my constituency last year, and that is what caused the Rev Anne Robertson to email me. She is involved not only in her church. I should note that she and her Danestone congregation go out and help others. In fact, at the top of Danestone congregational church’s Facebook page, it says:

“OUR MISSION IS HELPING PEOPLE IN ALL WALKS OF LIFE”.

We can see that with the warm hubs and classes that the church runs; the food collections that it organises, which go to a local food bank; and the wider role that the church plays in its community. The Rev Robertson also volunteers with local charities that have nothing to do with her religion and everything to do with helping others. Those groups are among those that are being targeted by the bank charges.

To go back to the Bible verse that I opened with, why are banks seeking to profit from these groups? Such groups hold together their local communities, and they are being hurt by the charges. Are those banks—all of which, I believe, made billions of pounds in profits last year—now struggling so much that they need to charge a residents group 50p for writing a cheque, charge a Thursday club for depositing money and charge an exercise group £50 a year to keep its account open?

We have always had community groups and local charities, but their work has become much more important over the past two decades or thereabouts. Back in 2008, there was a financial crisis and it was decided that the banks needed bailed out, so the United Kingdom Government oversaw £137 billion of loans and share purchases. Shortly after that, we had austerity, although I accept that that was a political choice. Austerity was how all of us, and the people we represent, helped to pay for that bailout.

Austerity was how all of us, and the people we represent, helped to pay for that bailout—that was so good that I said it twice, Deputy Presiding Officer. Ironically, a number of the groups that are being affected by the banking charges were set up to meet the social need that came about because of austerity. We can say that austerity was a political choice, not a choice made by the banks, but the charges on community accounts are very much down to the banks.

The bailing out of the banks was painful for this country, and many in our communities are still feeling the effects of it. That is why the charges really frustrate me. People across the country have suffered through 15 years of austerity because the UK bailed out the banks, and those same banks have decided that their billions of pounds of profits are not enough and they need to squeeze extra pennies out of the hard-working community groups and charities that do so much, charging them to write cheques, deposit money and simply keep their accounts open.

I do not think that it is asking too much for banks to step up and support those groups, in the same way that this country stepped up and supported the banks. In fact, are these charges even supporting the banks? There is a benefit to banks of having these accounts and holding the funds that are deposited in them, in relation to keeping customers happy as well as promoting strong communities for banks to do business in. We are just asking them not to charge such groups for the same banking services that I, and other members, get for free. Our banks are failing in their social responsibilities—and they are our banks, or at least they once were.

Let us take the Bank of Scotland as an example, as it has upset me with its plans to close its Bridge of Don branch, and it is one of the banks that I often hear mentioned in relation to banking charges for community groups. The Bank of Scotland was established by the Parliament of Scotland and was able to grow as a result of the strong roots that it had across our nation. When things went badly, the people of this country bailed out the bank, including through share purchase.

Banks need to step up and work for the communities that helped them to become the multibillion-pound entities that they are today. If banks are not going to step up and start showing social responsibility, the UK Labour Government, which holds powers of banking regulation, must step in and make them do so.

17:46

I thank every member who took the time to sign my motion in order to allow the debate to go ahead.

“For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world and forfeits his soul? Or what shall a man give in return for his soul?”

Matthew, chapter 16, verse 26.

I lodged the motion for debate after the Rev Anne Robertson got in touch with me to highlight the difficulties that charities and voluntary organisations are facing, so it feels appropriate that I open with a Bible verse. I hope that she does not mind, and I welcome her, and members of her congregation, to the public gallery.

Every member of the Parliament will know of small community groups and charities in their constituencies that go above and beyond. Some of those are out-and-out charities; others will be community councils, church groups, men’s sheds, lunch clubs or walking groups, to name just a few. Those groups are what makes a community.

Despite the huge differences that those groups make, they do not handle much money. They often operate on shoestring budgets that have been funded from small donations. In recent years, however, such groups have started to get letters from their banks to say that they will need to start paying for banking services for their community or treasurer accounts. Some banks are now charging monthly or annual fees, while others are now charging for specific transactions.

For the small groups that are affected, that is chipping away at the very humble sums of money that they work with, and volunteers’ time is taken up in changing bank accounts to try to avoid those fees, if that is even possible—I know that some banks no longer allow new accounts to be opened. All that is compounded by the closure of local banks in the communities that we represent, which particularly disadvantages elderly and disabled people, many of whom are volunteers in those community groups.

On the point about branch closures, I will share the example of the Bank of Scotland, which is planning to close its branch in the Bridge of Don area of my Aberdeen Donside constituency in June. I will take aim at that bank shortly.

One of those letters, with details of new banking charges, was sent to a group in my constituency last year, and that is what caused the Rev Anne Robertson to email me. She is involved not only in her church. I should note that she and her Danestone congregation go out and help others. In fact, at the top of Danestone congregational church’s Facebook page, it says:

“OUR MISSION IS HELPING PEOPLE IN ALL WALKS OF LIFE”.

We can see that with the warm hubs and classes that the church runs; the food collections that it organises, which go to a local food bank; and the wider role that the church plays in its community. The Rev Robertson also volunteers with local charities that have nothing to do with her religion and everything to do with helping others. Those groups are among those that are being targeted by the bank charges.

To go back to the Bible verse that I opened with, why are banks seeking to profit from these groups? Such groups hold together their local communities, and they are being hurt by the charges. Are those banks—all of which, I believe, made billions of pounds in profits last year—now struggling so much that they need to charge a residents group 50p for writing a cheque, charge a Thursday club for depositing money and charge an exercise group £50 a year to keep its account open?

We have always had community groups and local charities, but their work has become much more important over the past two decades or thereabouts. Back in 2008, there was a financial crisis and it was decided that the banks needed bailed out, so the United Kingdom Government oversaw £137 billion of loans and share purchases. Shortly after that, we had austerity, although I accept that that was a political choice. Austerity was how all of us, and the people we represent, helped to pay for that bailout.

Austerity was how all of us, and the people we represent, helped to pay for that bailout—that was so good that I said it twice, Deputy Presiding Officer. Ironically, a number of the groups that are being affected by the banking charges were set up to meet the social need that came about because of austerity. We can say that austerity was a political choice, not a choice made by the banks, but the charges on community accounts are very much down to the banks.

The bailing out of the banks was painful for this country, and many in our communities are still feeling the effects of it. That is why the charges really frustrate me. People across the country have suffered through 15 years of austerity because the UK bailed out the banks, and those same banks have decided that their billions of pounds of profits are not enough and they need to squeeze extra pennies out of the hard-working community groups and charities that do so much, charging them to write cheques, deposit money and simply keep their accounts open.

I do not think that it is asking too much for banks to step up and support those groups, in the same way that this country stepped up and supported the banks. In fact, are these charges even supporting the banks? There is a benefit to banks of having these accounts and holding the funds that are deposited in them, in relation to keeping customers happy as well as promoting strong communities for banks to do business in. We are just asking them not to charge such groups for the same banking services that I, and other members, get for free. Our banks are failing in their social responsibilities—and they are our banks, or at least they once were.

Let us take the Bank of Scotland as an example, as it has upset me with its plans to close its Bridge of Don branch, and it is one of the banks that I often hear mentioned in relation to banking charges for community groups. The Bank of Scotland was established by the Parliament of Scotland and was able to grow as a result of the strong roots that it had across our nation. When things went badly, the people of this country bailed out the bank, including through share purchase.

Banks need to step up and work for the communities that helped them to become the multibillion-pound entities that they are today. If banks are not going to step up and start showing social responsibility, the UK Labour Government, which holds powers of banking regulation, must step in and make them do so.

17:46

I thank every member who took the time to sign my motion in order to allow the debate to go ahead.

“For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world and forfeits his soul? Or what shall a man give in return for his soul?”

Matthew, chapter 16, verse 26.

I lodged the motion for debate after the Rev Anne Robertson got in touch with me to highlight the difficulties that charities and voluntary organisations are facing, so it feels appropriate that I open with a Bible verse. I hope that she does not mind, and I welcome her, and members of her congregation, to the public gallery.

Every member of the Parliament will know of small community groups and charities in their constituencies that go above and beyond. Some of those are out-and-out charities; others will be community councils, church groups, men’s sheds, lunch clubs or walking groups, to name just a few. Those groups are what makes a community.

Despite the huge differences that those groups make, they do not handle much money. They often operate on shoestring budgets that have been funded from small donations. In recent years, however, such groups have started to get letters from their banks to say that they will need to start paying for banking services for their community or treasurer accounts. Some banks are now charging monthly or annual fees, while others are now charging for specific transactions.

For the small groups that are affected, that is chipping away at the very humble sums of money that they work with, and volunteers’ time is taken up in changing bank accounts to try to avoid those fees, if that is even possible—I know that some banks no longer allow new accounts to be opened. All that is compounded by the closure of local banks in the communities that we represent, which particularly disadvantages elderly and disabled people, many of whom are volunteers in those community groups.

On the point about branch closures, I will share the example of the Bank of Scotland, which is planning to close its branch in the Bridge of Don area of my Aberdeen Donside constituency in June. I will take aim at that bank shortly.

One of those letters, with details of new banking charges, was sent to a group in my constituency last year, and that is what caused the Rev Anne Robertson to email me. She is involved not only in her church. I should note that she and her Danestone congregation go out and help others. In fact, at the top of Danestone congregational church’s Facebook page, it says:

“OUR MISSION IS HELPING PEOPLE IN ALL WALKS OF LIFE”.

We can see that with the warm hubs and classes that the church runs; the food collections that it organises, which go to a local food bank; and the wider role that the church plays in its community. The Rev Robertson also volunteers with local charities that have nothing to do with her religion and everything to do with helping others. Those groups are among those that are being targeted by the bank charges.

To go back to the Bible verse that I opened with, why are banks seeking to profit from these groups? Such groups hold together their local communities, and they are being hurt by the charges. Are those banks—all of which, I believe, made billions of pounds in profits last year—now struggling so much that they need to charge a residents group 50p for writing a cheque, charge a Thursday club for depositing money and charge an exercise group £50 a year to keep its account open?

We have always had community groups and local charities, but their work has become much more important over the past two decades or thereabouts. Back in 2008, there was a financial crisis and it was decided that the banks needed bailed out, so the United Kingdom Government oversaw £137 billion of loans and share purchases. Shortly after that, we had austerity, although I accept that that was a political choice. Austerity was how all of us, and the people we represent, helped to pay for that bailout.

Austerity was how all of us, and the people we represent, helped to pay for that bailout—that was so good that I said it twice, Deputy Presiding Officer. Ironically, a number of the groups that are being affected by the banking charges were set up to meet the social need that came about because of austerity. We can say that austerity was a political choice, not a choice made by the banks, but the charges on community accounts are very much down to the banks.

The bailing out of the banks was painful for this country, and many in our communities are still feeling the effects of it. That is why the charges really frustrate me. People across the country have suffered through 15 years of austerity because the UK bailed out the banks, and those same banks have decided that their billions of pounds of profits are not enough and they need to squeeze extra pennies out of the hard-working community groups and charities that do so much, charging them to write cheques, deposit money and simply keep their accounts open.

I do not think that it is asking too much for banks to step up and support those groups, in the same way that this country stepped up and supported the banks. In fact, are these charges even supporting the banks? There is a benefit to banks of having these accounts and holding the funds that are deposited in them, in relation to keeping customers happy as well as promoting strong communities for banks to do business in. We are just asking them not to charge such groups for the same banking services that I, and other members, get for free. Our banks are failing in their social responsibilities—and they are our banks, or at least they once were.

Let us take the Bank of Scotland as an example, as it has upset me with its plans to close its Bridge of Don branch, and it is one of the banks that I often hear mentioned in relation to banking charges for community groups. The Bank of Scotland was established by the Parliament of Scotland and was able to grow as a result of the strong roots that it had across our nation. When things went badly, the people of this country bailed out the bank, including through share purchase.

Banks need to step up and work for the communities that helped them to become the multibillion-pound entities that they are today. If banks are not going to step up and start showing social responsibility, the UK Labour Government, which holds powers of banking regulation, must step in and make them do so.

17:46

Can the Deputy First Minister say any more about the choice of the four vessels and why they are ideal candidates for the development and success of the yard?

::The national review that is being carried out by the inspectorates is vital—particularly its third phase, which is on improvement. Will the cabinet secretary assure me that that work will continue alongside the inquiry and that, if changes in practices or processes are identified as necessary, they will be made?

::Scotland’s economy is being hammered by a UK Government that is out of touch with Scotland’s needs. Rising employer national insurance contributions, the lack of support for Scotland’s industries and the energy profits levy are costing jobs and investment and are putting the security of a just transition and Scotland’s future at risk. Does the minister agree that strategic delivery for Scotland’s economy requires an end to the reckless economic decisions that have been taken south of the border?