Chamber and committees

I thank Keith Brown for bringing the debate to the chamber. It is fair to say that the situation that is faced by workers up and down the UK today is quite bleak. For most people, wage increases are struggling to make up for the massive decrease in the value of the money in their bank accounts, and the role that trade unions can play is under attack. Meanwhile, practices such as unpaid work trials and exploitative zero-hours contracts remain the norm in some sectors.

Thirteen years of Tory policy making has certainly made a difference, and I do not think that anyone would claim that that difference has been for the better. Where the situation remains bleak is with the Labour Party. Keir Starmer might be the Prime Minister in waiting, but what difference does it make? The past few months have shown Labour’s hand and revealed that the party is engaged in a race to the bottom on issues such as immigration, welfare and Brexit.

I am aware that Labour makes many policy suggestions on which it regularly goes on to flip-flop and U-turn. There is still no suggestion that Labour would hold true to any of the promises that it makes on improving the lives and conditions of workers across the UK. However, the question whether Scotland should have the ability to take different decisions when it comes to employment is what we are discussing today.

I would like to bring members’ attention to one specific area in which I take a deep interest: the ability of asylum seekers to work while they are applying to remain in the UK. That cuts across the two reserved areas of employment and immigration. Flatly speaking, asylum seekers are not allowed to work in the UK while their applications are being processed. As members are likely aware, the process is long, with most applications taking more than six months. There are very limited circumstances in which the Home Office says that asylum seekers can seek employment. For example, if a person has been waiting for more than 12 months for a decision and the Home Office deems that the delay is not the applicant’s fault, they can seek employment, but only from the UK Government’s restrictive shortage occupation list. That said, the Home Office will not provide data on the number of asylum seekers who have been granted permission to work, so there is no way for us to scrutinise that. The system makes no sense.

The financial support that is given to asylum seekers by the UK Government is extremely low—less than £50 a week. If they were able to work, they would be able to pay taxes. It is easy to conclude, therefore, that the reason why the system exists must be down to ideology, not pragmatism. To be clear, it was Labour that, in 2002, restricted asylum seekers’ ability to apply for work. The ability to apply to work after 12 months was introduced in 2005, but only to comply with European Union law. Thereafter, in 2010, the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats further restricted what work asylum seekers could do by limiting it to those jobs on the shortage occupation list.

UK Governments of every hue have let down asylum seekers and the communities that they reside in. These are people from a range of backgrounds and professions, and they want to be able to contribute. Their inability to do so is to our detriment as much as it is to theirs. Sadly, we are living with a UK system that imposes a hostile environment on those who come here—a hostile environment that was actually introduced by the Labour Government under Tony Blair in 2007 and was then continued and enhanced by the Conservatives.

Asylum seekers just want to provide for their families. They just want a bit of dignity as they navigate an often demoralising and elongated application system. They deserve to do that safe in the knowledge that they will be treated equally and in compliance with fair work principles.

The Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee, which I convene, recently concluded an inquiry into the lived experience of asylum seekers in Scotland. The report will be published soon, and it would be inappropriate for me to speculate on its contents, but I hope that the committee’s work on the issue will help to inform Government policy on asylum seekers and their ability to integrate and contribute.

The current system provides a perpetual stream of missed opportunities. I have no doubt that an independent Scotland would make better choices on employment, on how we treat workers and on how we treat those who come here.

Short of independence, the UK should devolve to Scotland our ability to make policy in those areas.

My constituent Claire Shankie has been issued with a letter from the University of Edinburgh that confirms only that she has completed her degree; it does not include grading or a timescale for her final award. Like so many others, her life has been put on hold and she cannot plan for her future. Does the minister agree that that is a distressing situation for students, whose entire experience has been impacted by Covid and then strike action? What assurances can he provide that the situation can be resolved?

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on any assessment and marking backlogs at universities. (S6O-02539)

The minister will be aware that I have been working closely with my constituents in Glasgow Kelvin on this issue, and I know that residents in a number of the buildings that we are talking about find themselves facing rising factoring fees and other costs as remedial work is rolled out. Can the minister provide us with an update on recent engagement by the Scottish Government with relevant stakeholders regarding insurance and mortgage issues?

I welcome the minister’s update and the support that she is offering for the pilot of a safe consumption facility in Glasgow.

The UK Home Affairs Committee recently found that drug laws are outdated and in need of reform in order to support greater use of public health-based drug interventions. Does the minister agree that the UK Government needs to give proper consideration to the Scottish Government’s progressive proposals for reform and to start treating problematic drug use as a public health issue, rather than one of criminalisation?

Ensuring that Glasgow’s communities are better connected is a perennial discussion that I have with my stakeholders in the constituency. The pedestrian bridge that will connect Partick, which is in my constituency, and Govan across the river will go a long way towards achieving connection between communities that are cut off from each other.

What further projects does the Government foresee to better connect communities and improve the lives of those who live in them?

Before I focus on some of the equality measures that are set out in the programme for government, I put on the record how pleased I was yesterday to hear the commitment to bring forward legislation to tackle dangerous cladding on residential buildings, which is an issue that I have been working on very closely with hundreds of residents in my constituency. I met the housing minister a number of times and have even raised the issue during First Minister’s question time. That commitment is a hallmark of a Government that has engaged and responded.

If Scots were ever in any doubt about the massive gap between the priorities of the Edinburgh and London Governments, the programme for government that was announced yesterday demonstrated it very clearly. The Tory UK Government is guilty of negligence and responsible for economic disaster, and it was the incompetent and uncaring architect of the cost of living crisis. All the while, a Labour so-called Opposition sits back and supports the status quo.

Here, in Scotland, meanwhile, we have a First Minister and a Scottish Government with an agenda for change that will empower women, lift children out of poverty and protect our minority groups while promoting growth. Let us be clear that no community can reach its full potential unless all its constituent parts have equal opportunities to contribute. The programme for government and the proposed human rights bill show a true understanding of that, and I look forward to scrutinising the bill with colleagues as it progresses through the Parliament.

The Scottish Government’s record on LGBT+ equality can be measured on the streets. In July, I joined thousands of marchers going through Glasgow city centre for Mardi Gla. That minority group feels supported by Government in ways that it perhaps did not 15 or 20 years ago. In response to an Equality, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee report on banning LGBT+ conversion therapy practices, the Scottish Government said in March 2022 that it was committed to bringing forward legislation, as far as practical within the powers available to it, by the end of 2023. I welcome the update from the Cabinet Secretary for Justice on the timescales. I ask that that be done in a sensitive way so as to avoid retraumatising the people whom we have to listen to.

I am encouraged that such a significant proportion of the Scottish Government’s priorities focus heavily on building a society where women are safer and can contribute better. That includes support for Gillian Mackay’s work to introduce safe buffer zones and the legislation that is to be introduced on misogyny. However, I would welcome any update that the cabinet secretary may have on the progress of the public sector equality duty review, because equal treatment, protection and opportunity in our public services is the gold standard that we all have a right to expect.

Along with many colleagues, I welcome the expansion in childcare, which will be a significant boost for women and their households. In the previous session, Parliament passed its ratification of the UNCRC. I am encouraged that the Scottish Government is working with the Supreme Court ruling on that, and I would welcome an update on when we can expect the amended bill’s return.

We must recognise, as colleagues have done, the significance of the Scottish child payment to families with lower incomes. That benefit does not exist elsewhere in the UK. I met the Child Poverty Action Group during the summer recess and, having called the introduction of the Scottish child payment a game changer, I am pleased that the First Minister committed yesterday to assessing how much further the benefit can go in supporting children from lower-income households, although there are clear constraints on the Parliament’s spending ability and, sadly, it comes down to the money.

However, let us not forget that, while the Scottish Government gives with one hand, the Tory Government takes away with cruel policies such as the two-child limit on benefits and the rape clause. That policy penalises one in 10 children and costs families an estimated £3,235 per year, yet it is—shamefully—supported by Keir Starmer and the Labour Party. Yet again, Labour offers no alternative to the Tories. I note that the Scottish Labour leader has still not responded to my letter to him calling on him to reconsider his position on reversing the two-child cap and the rape clause, which he considers not to be a priority.

Labour might want to stand by while folk all over the country struggle—that is their prerogative—but the people of Scotland can see that the alternative is here. The people of Scotland can see that, as far as possible, this devolved Government has announced a programme for government that will be a game changer, continuing to lift more and more people out of poverty and increasing their opportunities. It is a positive blueprint for change and a vote of confidence in the potential of a country and its people. I welcome the programme for government.

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on the Clyde mission regeneration programme. (S6O-02461)