Chamber and committees

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I would have voted no.

To ask the Scottish Government what assessment it has made of the potential impact of reports that HC-One plans to terminate the contract for the hospital-based complex clinical care service at Hatton Lea care home. (S6O-03382)

The termination of HC-One’s outdated contract with university health and social care North Lanarkshire has led to the closure of three of its five Hatton Lea care home units, as the physical layout is considered no longer suitable for residents with advanced dementia. Vulnerable patients and their families are left understandably distressed at the loss of their forever home. What steps is the Scottish Government taking to monitor planned closures and prevent such failures at a national level, so that any escalation in closures during this period of rising costs can be addressed at an early stage, to ensure that continuity of care is prioritised?

As a member of the Education, Children and Young People Committee, I welcome the opportunity to contribute to the stage 3 debate on the Children (Care and Justice) (Scotland) Bill. I thank the committee clerks and our witnesses for their input to the bill, and I also thank the minister for her engagement and the other committee members for keeping their focus firmly on the rights of all the children who will be impacted by the legislation. My parliamentary office backs on to the Royal Mile primary school, and hearing the pupils as they play is a lovely reminder of our duty, which is to make Scotland the best possible place for our children to grow up in.

The bill is important. It supports children’s rights in line with the principles of the UNCRC and the ethos of getting it right for every child, and it represents a step forward in the Scottish Parliament’s commitment to keeping the Promise.

The journey to stage 3 has sometimes been challenging, but the bill represents a big step in advancing children’s rights and fostering a justice system that truly serves our youth. Like others, I want to mention our committee visit to Polmont prison. It was painfully clear that such facilities are entirely unsuitable for children. These young individuals need comprehensive support for their wellbeing, not harmful environments that fail to meet their developmental and emotional needs.

I want to spend the rest of my time talking about the victims and about safeguarding their rights. It is crucial to prioritise the fulfilment of children’s rights, whether they have caused harm, whether they have been harmed, or both. Achieving that delicate balance was certainly a focal point of our committee’s scrutiny, and I think that the bill gets the balance right.

Access to information is vital for victims as it allows them to plan for their safety and helps them recover from traumatic experiences. I am grateful to Willie Rennie for working hard to reach agreement and for lodging his amendments, which will empower the principal reporter to share information that is so critical for victims. What is more, the changes will ensure that victims have on-going access to information without the need for repeated requests, which will provide them with the consistent support that they deserve. The establishment of a single point of contact will make it easier for children and young people to access the information that they need to safety plan. It will also enable them to exercise their right to recovery, allowing them to reclaim their agency and make informed decisions, and paving the way to healing and justice.

It is imperative that we hold ourselves accountable. I thank my colleague Ruth Maguire for her amendment that will place a duty on ministers to conduct thorough assessments of the services’ effectiveness in collaboration with key agencies that are involved in the children’s hearings system. By actively listening to the experiences of those who use the support services, we can genuinely ensure that we get it right for every child.

The advancement of victims’ rights could not have been achieved without the tireless efforts of stakeholders such as Victim Support Scotland, Children 1st, Scottish Women’s Aid and young people themselves. I am grateful for the engagement on and unwavering advocacy for the safeguarding of victims throughout the bill’s journey. Delivering for our children through the legislation will have its challenges. We have heard different views from across the chamber, but the dedication to placing children and young people at the forefront of our efforts has endured.

I whole-heartedly stand behind the bill.

To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to the Child Poverty Action Group’s recent analysis of official data showing that 4.3 million children were in relative poverty across the United Kingdom, up from 3.6 million in 2010-11. (S6O-03313)

I agree that child poverty remains unacceptably high, particularly among disabled children, whose families are disproportionately impacted by the cost of living crisis. Nonetheless, Scotland has reduced child poverty, helped by social security measures such as the child disability payment. What steps is the Scottish Government taking, therefore, to increase the uptake of the child disability payment in my Uddingston and Bellshill constituency and across Scotland?

I thank my colleague Ivan McKee for securing this debate to celebrate Scotland’s iconic Scotch whisky industry—an internationally renowned success story that is deeply rooted in our Scottish heritage and communities. I am proud to contribute to the debate.

The very meaning of whisky—water of life—not only encapsulates those cherished moments when we raise our whisky glasses and cheer “slàinte mhath”, marking celebrations and milestones in our life, but serves as a reminder of the authenticity and years of delicate craftsmanship that define our cherished Scotch whisky industry. With more than 500 years of production history, Scottish whisky has rightfully claimed its place as the world’s foremost internationally traded spirit, boasting an export value of more than £6 billion in 2023 alone—a statistic that is well worth repeating.

As we have heard, the Scottish Whisky Association has found that, on average, 43 bottles are exported every second, which means that if Ivan McKee is keeping a running total he can add another 10,000 bottles to it by the end of my speech. That figure is truly impressive in such a volatile environment.

Although my constituency of Uddingston and Bellshill may not be renowned for its prominence in the whisky industry, we harbour success stories that I am proud to share—or to brag about. For instance, we have William Grant & Sons, the largest independently owned Scotch whisky company, which originated in the Highlands and established its state-of-the-art bottling and packaging facility—which marked its 30th anniversary last year—in Bellshill’s Strathclyde business park. That is where you will find iconic Scotch whisky brands such as Glenfiddich, the Balvenie, Grant’s and Monkey Shoulder being meticulously bottled.

The bottling plant boasts significant employment opportunities, with around 750 workers on site. Furthermore, William Grant & Sons plays a key role in equipping students to be the next generation of leaders in the industry, offering an exceptional 12-week summer internship programme and a three-year graduate development programme. I was thrilled to hear about the experiences that Robyn, one of the students, had in those programmes. She said:

“I’m having the most amazing experience and I’ve been given opportunities to make a real difference in the business.”

I encourage students in my constituency who may share a passion for whisky to look out for upcoming opportunities at Grant’s Bellshill site.

As we have heard today, the whisky industry is a cornerstone of Scotland’s economy. Production on that scale comes with significant responsibility for tackling climate change. The very essence of whisky is heavily reliant on preservation of the environment, with factors such as water and peat quality influencing its distinct flavour, so it is really encouraging to see the whisky industry committing to decarbonising its operations by 2040. I hope that the minister will be able to outline how the Scottish Government is supporting the sector to successfully meet that critical target.

We are seeing bold initiatives unfold on that journey to decarbonisation. In central Scotland, Falkirk distillery has partnered with the biotechnology company MiAlgae to repurpose whisky byproducts for animal feed, which is an example of furthering the circular economy. At a local level, the Artisanal Spirits Company opened its Masterton Bond bottling plant in Uddingston in March last year. That facility has eliminated the group’s reliance on third-party bottling, substantially reducing its road miles and carbon footprint. Those local initiatives play a pivotal role in the industry’s journey to decarbonisation, which is immensely gratifying and worth celebrating.

I continue to be struck by the resilience and innovation demonstrated by our whisky industry. It is impossible to overstate the industry’s profound impact on our economy, employment and growth. I truly believe that there are absolutely no limits to what our whisky sector can achieve. After all, who disnae like a wee dram?

As a member of the Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee, I am pleased to contribute to today’s stage 1 debate on the Housing (Cladding Remediation) (Scotland) Bill. I thank everybody who provided evidence and I extend my thanks to the clerks.

The Grenfell tragedy shocked us all, and my heartfelt condolences go out to those who were impacted by that devastating event. The bill underscores the Scottish Government’s commitment to ensuring the safety of Scotland’s residents, firefighters and communities.

However, before I continue, I will emphasise the importance of putting risks into perspective, particularly in our communications with the public. During an evidence session, Jim McGonigal, from the Institution of Fire Engineers, stated:

“The fire statistics in Scotland do not highlight a problem. Fewer than 1 per cent of fires spread beyond the flat of fire origin”.

He also noted that, over the past decade, there has been a significant

“57 per cent reduction in the number of fires in flats above six storeys.”—[Official Report, Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee, 30 January 2024; c 11.]

Additional safety measures, which have already been introduced in Scotland, such as sprinkler systems and smoke alarms, have mitigated many risks. It is crucial to emphasise that point, given the potential for misguided messaging to fuel further fear and distress in our communities.

Having said that, we must not be complacent. Agreeing the bill’s aims is a critical step towards expediting the cladding remediation programme, but I wish to address specific aspects, in order to ensure that proposals in the bill effect meaningful improvements. Those include considering the experiences of affected residents and home owners, as well as reviewing the specification of the single building assessment.

The emotional toll of residing in affected properties cannot be overstated. Barratt Developments rightfully emphasised the disruption and impact that the remediation process can have on people’s livelihoods—for example, when sunlight is limited and insulation is removed from apartments. Although accelerating remediation is essential, effective communication is equally vital. It is imperative that timely and accurate progress updates reach stakeholders—especially residents in affected buildings. I appreciate that that poses a complex challenge, as it requires communicating with residents living in diverse buildings with unique communication needs. That responsibility should not fall solely on the Scottish Government. Building developers must share the responsibility of keeping home owners and residents informed. Following the single building assessment pilot project, it is promising that the Scottish Government acknowledges communication as an area for improvement and that it is actively scoping out strategies to enhance its approach.

That uncertainty has sparked debate. Should assessments solely target cladding or should they adopt a more holistic approach to the fire safety of buildings? On that point, existing systems and legislation address broader fire safety concerns, and the primary focus of the bill relates to cladding, as has been clarified by the minister. It is important to eliminate ambiguity on the bill’s objectives.

Furthermore, the committee heard about the benefits of aligning the SBA with PAS 9980. It is essential to recognise that that alignment requires adjustments to suit Scotland’s unique context, rather than the simple adoption of a UK Government policy. With that said, in his letter to the committee, the minister stated that the Scottish Government has agreed to base the fire risk appraisal of external walls on PAS 9980, tailored to our specific circumstances.

Amid those challenges, the minister deserves credit for including developers on the SBA task and finish group, to ensure their valuable input in discussions on the SBA specifications. I look forward to the publication of the SBA specification by May, and I hope that it will support the programme to progress at pace. Further delays are unacceptable, as others have indicated.

I also acknowledge the considerable financial challenges that are experienced by home owners who are affected by combustible cladding when buying, selling, or remortgaging properties, including issues of loans and escalated insurance costs. The cladding assurance register in the bill is a welcome step, providing reassurance to lenders and insurance providers by documenting assessed and remediated buildings. Some stakeholders have suggested that adding buildings to the register before remediation is complete would quickly mitigate those financial issues. However, we cannot afford to compromise on safety; nor can we afford to risk incomplete developer commitments.

Although the committee has not reached a consensus and financial services are beyond the Scottish Government’s remit, I thank the minister for addressing those concerns with stakeholders and for seeking additional advice on early entry to the cladding assurance register prior to stage 2.

The single building assessment—the SBA—is central to the cladding remediation programme, yet evidence from the pilot project has highlighted uncertainties about the scope of the assessments and their specification, which, in turn, has hindered progress.

The bill strengthens our efforts to address the issues that are caused by dangerous cladding. I look forward to hearing from the minister and to gaining further insight into how the Scottish Government plans to address the concerns that have been raised today as we prepare for stage 2. I ask colleagues to support the general principles of the bill.

I am grateful to Stephen Kerr for securing this debate on the future of Grangemouth oil refinery. I agree with him that Grangemouth is a jewel in Scotland’s crown. Since its establishment in 1924, the refinery has been a steadfast pillar in Scotland’s energy landscape. It has been the main supplier of fuel to Scottish airports and Scottish petrol stations and, importantly, has provided a foundation to the generations of families from the Falkirk area and beyond who have worked there since its establishment.

However, today we are here to debate a new reality. The potential closure of the oil refinery is a decision that is driven by economic realities, such as growing international competition and environmental considerations, which carry weighty implications.

I want to say a little about learning from the past. The impact of Margaret Thatcher’s deindustrialisation in my Uddingston and Bellshill constituency remains profound. Once thriving with coal mines and steelworks, Lanarkshire underwent a tragic transformation, with mass unemployment plunging communities into persistent poverty, which still impacts them today. Communities were stripped of their identities and of hope, with scars that generations will never forget or forgive.

As we have heard, in Grangemouth—a town that is already burdened with high levels of social deprivation—the potential closure threatens to exacerbate existing struggles. Simply put, we cannot afford to repeat the mistakes of the past. Grangemouth needs and deserves a just transition. Although Petroineos’s decision was driven by commercial factors, we must not overlook the profound concerns regarding the workforce and the regional economy. The Fraser of Allander Institute has projected a GDP reduction of approximately 0.25 to 0.3 per cent for the Scottish economy—an announcement that is significant and worrying.

Furthermore, any jobs that are lost are not mere numbers. They represent families’ livelihoods and, as we have heard, there will undoubtedly be ripple effects across the wider community.

I would certainly agree with that.

With any decision that impacts the livelihood of communities, it is imperative that the Scottish Government steps up and facilitates a just transition at pace. That means the provision of high-quality jobs, enhancing the community’s prosperity and safeguarding the community’s wellbeing being rightfully placed at the forefront.

A just transition also brings the opportunity to chart a new course towards a fairer and greener future for all. Given its history as an industrial hub, Grangemouth is uniquely positioned to emerge as a centre for green innovation.