Chamber and committees

We have a minister appearing online, but here in the chamber is a cabinet secretary who has previously answered questions on grooming gangs. I am a little confused as to what the process is and who is leading on what.

The NSPCC is the leading Scottish child protection charity, and it sits on the Scottish Government’s national child sexual abuse and exploitation strategic group. Its intervention is unprecedented. The national child sexual abuse and exploitation sub-group produced a 27-page deep dive on child sexual abuse, yet there was not one mention of grooming gangs—not one single reference. That is more evidence that the national structures that the minister points to are focused on general practice, not on identifying or analysing organised group-based exploitation.

Given that that detailed report has overlooked the issue of grooming gangs entirely, does the minister still believe that the Scottish Government is truly committed to confronting the issue?

The minister talks about resources, but the report that the Scottish Government has issued does not mention grooming gangs once. The Government does not know what it is doing.

The minister will be aware of the inquiry that is taking place in England. The sheer scale of offending that has been uncovered has led to the collapse of the grooming gangs inquiry there. The task force made more than 1,000 arrests in its first year, and survivors have said that they were taken across the border to be exploited right here in Scotland. It is impossible, therefore, for anyone in the Scottish Government to argue that Scotland is immune, given the large scale of what has happened down south.

So far, the Scottish Government has rejected calls from victims to hold an inquiry here, but the NSPCC has been clear that Scotland still lacks a clear understanding of the scale and nature of child abuse. Victims deserve better than that, so will the minister take this opportunity to finally agree to our calls for a grooming gangs inquiry to be established in Scotland so that we can uncover the true scale of child abuse that has occurred across the country and provide victims with justice and closure?

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will now hold an inquiry into grooming gangs in Scotland, in light of the recent reported comments by the NSPCC that the country lacks a clear understanding of the scale and nature of child sexual abuse.

I thank the cabinet secretary for advance sight of her statement.

We must be serious about the situation that we are facing. This is a really embarrassing day for the Scottish Government. When Gillian Martin told Parliament that she was going back to the drawing board on the heat in buildings bill, she promised that any revised bill would not make Scottish households poorer, yet we have a draft bill that seems to be on the road to nowhere and still demands expensive energy efficiency upgrades from home owners without giving any detail about the standards that they would have to reach.

Given the Scottish Government’s track record on the issue, my main concern is that this is yet another attempt by the SNP to impose significant costs on home owners to reach climate targets that are simply not practical. Separately from the bill, the Scottish Government is also pressing ahead with regulations to impose minimum energy efficiency standards on the private rented sector, and that is not to mention the disastrous Housing (Scotland) Act 2025, which will push up costs for landlords and tenants.

Is it not about time that the Scottish Government stopped using the private rented sector as guinea pigs in its botched legislative experiments? Will the cabinet secretary tell us by how much the Scottish Government expects the average home owner will be left out of pocket due to these changes?

I thank the Deputy First Minister for providing advance sight of her statement. When previously asked about the procurement rules tilting the field against domestic producers, she has pointed to section 17 of the Subsidy Control Act 2022, which prohibits the giving of subsidies that are contingent on

“the use of domestic over imported goods or services”.

I also note that, throughout the Deputy First Minister’s statement, a recurring theme was pointing the finger of blame at the UK Government, as opposed to the Scottish Government taking responsibility. However, given that the Procurement Reform (Scotland) Act 2014 mandates the consideration of social value in procurement, surely the Deputy First Minister must realise that the Scottish Government has failed to create frameworks that recognise the social value of Alexander Dennis and other domestic manufacturers, as well as what they contribute and add to our economy.

This question is similar to the one that I put to the minister the last time the issue was raised: does she accept that, without progress on the underlying structural and policy barriers that have left Alexander Dennis—our flagship bus manufacturer—exposed to unfair competition, that situation will keep recurring until the Scottish Government puts measures in place to make sure that we not only bolster our economy but protect the jobs and the skill sets that we need?

To ask the Scottish Government, in light of the recent convictions of a grooming gang for sexual exploitation in Dundee, what steps it is taking to prevent similar cases across Scotland, including through the establishment of a national inquiry into grooming gangs. (S6O-05136)

Scottish victims of grooming gangs are demanding an inquiry. The Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Home Affairs said that the Scottish Government would have an inquiry if that was assessed as necessary. Given the sentencing in Dundee last week and the harrowing stories emerging from Glasgow this week, what standards or criteria would have to be met before an inquiry is assessed as necessary?

The Scottish Association of Landlords is in favour of retaining the 10-year period, arguing that increased regulation incurs costs, which can then be passed on to tenants. I am trying to gain more understanding as to why the Government has decided to reduce the validity period from 10 years to five years, and, in particular, what impact that might have on private landlords.

That is helpful. Convener, I do not have any further questions on that.

Every mother deserves to give birth feeling safe, supported and close to home. Willie Rennie made a pertinent point in his opening remarks, which is that we are talking about situations when things go wrong, and not about the vast majority of births, which are successful and go well, with mother, baby and family going home safely. However, that is the problem, because too many women in Scotland face the opposite of that—long journeys, understaffed wards, unit downgrades and a system that is stretched beyond limits.

The state of Scotland’s maternity and neonatal services is the result not of a sudden crisis or an increase in the number of births but of years of managed decline. Despite clear evidence, repeated warnings, localised campaigns and countless assurances from ministers, the Scottish Government has failed to address the serious inequalities and safety issues that new parents face in urban and rural settings.

The time for excuses has long passed. The best start plan set out an ambition to redesign maternity and neonatal services across Scotland. Its aim was to reduce separation of mothers and babies, provide care closer to home and support parental presence and involvement in neonatal care. Every single MSP in the chamber can get behind the principles of those goals, but, despite those good intentions, there have been significant failings in their delivery.

A survey that was published by Bliss Scotland found that, for every 10 babies who need overnight neonatal care, only one room is available for a parent to stay in with their newborn. That leaves parents with an impossible choice between finding accommodation close to the hospital, or leaving their baby overnight in the hospital because there is no option for them to stay with their child. That clearly contradicts the promise that is set out in the best start model, which states that parents and carers of those babies must—that is the important word—be supported to provide care alongside neonatal staff.

Last week, I raised that exact issue in the chamber, following the damning findings of the recent inspection of Edinburgh royal infirmary’s maternity unit, which many colleagues have mentioned this afternoon. I appreciate that the cabinet secretary has confirmed that he will write to me on the issue, and I welcome that approach. However, I hope that the letter that I receive will provide a detailed explanation of how the Scottish Government will make urgent changes to ensure that beds are available for parents who want to stay with their vulnerable and sick babies. If babies are in the neonatal department, their parents will want to be nearby, and they need that support. I will not accept anything less from the Scottish Government. We should all be able to support that.

It is not just about overnight accommodation. As we have heard, across NHS Highland, more than 150 pregnant women have had to endure 210-mile round trips because consultant-led maternity services have been downgraded. We have just heard from Clare Haughey that, apparently, MSPs in the chamber are saying that departments are closing. They are not closing; they are being downgraded. That is not spreading misinformation; it is a clear fact. That is the case not just for MSPs who represent rural areas but for MSPs in urban settings.