Chamber and committees

Thank you both for coming along this morning. I appreciate that this issue has been arriving at the equalities committee over a number of years—2024 was the last time that it was discussed—but I think that now, more than ever, we are conscious of the differences between our rural and urban areas and there is more of a conscious acknowledgement from politicians right across the political divide that we need to make sure that rural communities are not disadvantaged by the decisions that we take.

I understand that you are arguing that the additional 3 per cent is proportionate, but I am concerned that it is not proportionate if the costs are passed down, because it comes down to geography—there is no other reason apart from geography. Is there any further reassurance that you can give on that particular issue for rural communities?

That is helpful. I will be brief because I know that we are up against time, but it would be helpful if the Government could look through legislation that has been passed in the Parliament. If we are going to introduce bills, they must answer the questions of what the issue is and how are we going to resolve it. My concern is that there could already be legislation that has not been implemented that could answer that question, but we will not know that unless there is a deep dive of relevant legislation.

The paper that we received last night is quite a lengthy document, but the pieces that I pulled out from it gave a justification as to why the Government is following this particular process.

The review is important in this debate. As members have said, the issue is complex, but I hope that the review will lead to better outcomes, including through the work that the committee undertakes on civil justice and how particular decisions impact the people we represent. Fundamentally, that is what we are here to do.

I am still a little concerned about the rurality issue. I understand the responses that were given and the justification for what we are being asked to vote on, but my outstanding concerns regarding rurality will be reflected in my vote.

That answers my question for now. I appreciate that, given that we do not have the bill in front of us, there are a lot of areas that you are unable to cover this morning. The broader point that I am making is that this Parliament has a bad habit of passing legislation without implementing the provisions that should follow. If the misogyny bill is introduced, will there be a full-scale cross-portfolio review of previous legislation relating to domestic abuse and violence against women and girls with provisions that have not been enacted? We came across that issue in the last session of Parliament, and I do not want history to repeat itself in this session of Parliament, because it could be that we are pursuing something that might already exist and could be implemented.

I have a quick question about power of attorney waiting times, which have been discussed. It would be helpful if the minister could provide an overview of what the Government is doing to drive down those waiting times.

On a different issue, potential human trafficking was reported in the news this morning. In one of Police Scotland’s biggest operations, it targeted an organised crime group. I understand that the issue covers various portfolios, but, given that the case spans Aberdeen, Dundee, Falkirk, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Ayrshire, Lanarkshire, Midlothian and the Borders, it would be good to hear what cross-portfolio work is being done to tackle organised crime. That feeds into the community cohesion work, too.

The discussion that we have been having is important, but I would like to move to the proposed human rights legislation that will be introduced in year 2. The Equality and Human Rights Commission has warned the Scottish Government not to “replace or duplicate” the legal protections that are already in place for sex-based rights. How does the minister see that integrating with the future human rights bill that will be travelling through Parliament? Is she concerned that a bill of that nature could stray into reserved matters?

I appreciate that. There has already been discussion of how the bill might conflict with sex and gender. You will be aware of the round-table discussions at which questions were asked in relation to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women—CEDAW. What is your interpretation of CEDAW?

We know that the number of children who are now presenting with additional support needs is increasing, but we also know that there are challenges in our early learning facilities. Can the cabinet secretary update Parliament on ASN training in the workforce, and say whether she is looking specifically at ASN provision as part of any childcare expansion, bearing in mind the current challenges that the sector faces in the private, voluntary and independent sector in particular? We know that if those processes are embedded at the early stages, there is a better transition for children throughout their time in school.

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on what measures it will introduce as part of the programme for government to improve additional support needs provision in schools. (S7O-00275)

I bet that the words

“Judge me on my record in education”

haunt the SNP, because after nearly two decades of this Government, Scotland’s education system is going backwards.

The SNP likes to point out that the attainment gap is narrowing, but that is because the top is falling, not because the bottom is rising. The SNP is failing our young people, no matter their background.

Yet, what is this Government’s priority? Another referendum. While other countries are focused on raising standards, the SNP is still fighting yesterday’s battles. Scotland is in a never-ending situation, because this Government simply cannot move on.

When it comes to tackling child poverty, children get free laptops, free bikes—never delivered—and now, apparently, the free school bag. If the school bag is the SNP’s answer to child poverty, we are in trouble. Our young people deserve higher standards, better opportunities and a Government that is focused on their future, not one that is stuck in the past.

16:23