Chamber and committees

Brilliant.

This one is probably for Colin Bell. On the back of the previous question, I recall that in your response you indicated that it is not clear how complaints against legal entities will work, because the procedures are based on those for alternative business structures in the Legal Services (Scotland) Act 2010 and they have yet to be tested as no alternative business structures are in operation. Will you expand on that, please?

You have about five minutes.

Can you give an example of such a power?

I start by declaring a personal interest in the topic. As a first-generation migrant to this country, who came to the UK from Pakistan as a wee girl, I look at how the UK immigration system treats people now with a deep sense of sadness. That is largely due to the treatment of those who come here either searching for a better life or new opportunities, or, as in my case, just to join their families. Like many members, I feel a sense of sadness at the loss of opportunities in an immigration system that has been taglined as a “hostile environment”, for heaven’s sake.

I am relieved that Suella Braverman no longer serves as UK Home Secretary. Although I am already disappointed in some of her successor’s rhetoric, I have never known a more intentionally and dangerously divisive person to hold such high office. The fact that the Prime Minister allowed her to hold on to the office for so long means that the damage that has been done is on him.

Immigrants are woven into the rich tartan that makes our country what it is. Our early history was a melting pot of Britons, Picts, Angles, Gaels and Norse. More recently, Scotland has been enriched by substantial migration from Ireland in the 1800s, from Pakistan and south Asia from the 1960s and from the EU more recently. Those are just examples. People from all over the world live in and contribute to our communities. We are a cultural mosaic and rightly proud of it.

However, that attitude is not reflected in the UK Government’s immigration policy agenda, and, bitterly, I see no space for that to change under the current system. Indeed, Labour’s invention of the “hostile environment” immigration system has simply been carried on by the Tories. Keir Starmer has not indicated any substantial break from what the Tories have inflicted or what they threaten to do.

I know that many members are deeply anxious about tomorrow’s Supreme Court verdict on Rwanda deportations. It is such a callous and cruel policy—it is truly the worst of our politics—but the paper published by the Scottish Government at the beginning of this month clearly demonstrates that there is a different way. We have a problem in Scotland. Inward migration is the sole contributor to population growth. Short of rather archaic drives to get families producing more children, the only way that we will have population growth, which we know is a major influence on economic growth, is to have more people from around the world come here and call this place home.

The Tory amendment to the Government motion attempts to distract from the issues that the paper raises. However, it is fair to talk about Scotland being competitive in attracting migrants. Although the detail must be fine tuned, commitments to visa routes through the live in Scotland route, the Scottish connections visa, the work in Scotland visa and the family visa would certainly show that our nation is welcoming and not hostile. If we had the power to do that, I suspect that Scotland would be taking more than our population share of migrants compared with the UK.

The committee that I convene, the Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee, last month published its report on the experience of asylum seekers in Scotland. As members will be aware, we spoke extensively to many organisations, including Refugees for Justice, which has published a paper on creating a new asylum system for Scotland. I also commend the work of Professor Alison Phipps, Sabir Zazai and many others for their involvement in that. Most important, however, are the voices of asylum seekers and refugees. The treatment of people who come here through necessity, not choice—they are among the most vulnerable people—is harrowing to hear.

They are thrust into a place of hopelessness, despondency and fear. There is no legal route outside very limited nation-specific schemes for refugees seeking asylum in the UK. That only heightens the threat of the Tory Rwanda deportation plan. Let us be clear: Rwanda has a poor record on human rights. Three months ago, a woman was charged in Kigali for wearing shameful dress. Two years ago, a journalist was arrested and remains in unlawful detention. In the same year, a YouTuber was jailed and is serving 15 years for criticising the President. There appears to be an endless list of human rights violations, unlawful detentions and disappearances of people who have dared to criticise the Government. Sending vulnerable asylum seekers to Rwanda is not the deed of a caring and compassionate nation.

I am pleased that the blueprint that was set out for an independent Scotland makes it clear that there would be safe legal routes for people to claim asylum in our country. I also commend the mention of those who are displaced due to climate change, which is a growing issue around the world. A humanitarian visa would play a significant role in the Scottish Government’s commitment to climate justice and demonstrate a clear gap between the UK’s agenda and that of Scotland.

Our strength is in our diversity. We must never stop weaving the tartan that makes our communities survive and thrive. I commend the Scottish Government’s work on that, and I hope to see much of it come to fruition in the near future.

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on its plans to support community gardens. (S6O-02680)

The Greyfriars biophilic community garden, in my constituency, has been shortlisted for the Evening Times community garden champion team awards later this year, with the winners being announced on 5 December. With projects involving the local community and improving primary schools, the community garden has been a force for good in the local community. Does the minister agree that community gardens provide significant improvements and wellbeing benefits and that Greyfriars is a shining example of what can be achieved by involving the community?

Cabinet secretary, would you like to bring in Rachel Nicholson at this point? She has indicated that she might wish to speak, but it is up to you.

Thank you. I will move on to Karen Adam.

In an earlier answer you referred to the consequences of the referral of the bill to the Supreme Court. Apologies for taking you back a little bit, but I wanted to ensure that you had every opportunity to put any other consequences on the record.

We have talked about coverage and the delay, but we also heard last week from young people who understand somewhat the delay in getting it right. They have waited this long, so they are generally supportive. Are there frustrations that you would like to share with us just now? How have those frustrations been mitigated with regard to the amendments?

We move to questions from my colleague Meghan Gallacher.