Chamber and committees

I thank Stephen Kerr for bringing the debate to the chamber. I also thank workers, the unions and the local community for their thoughts, opinions and concerns about the announcement and the future of the site.

Having grown up in Grangemouth and having managed only a mile further up the hill, I know how important the issue is to the entire area. I am angry, on behalf of the workers and the community, that the announcement was given weeks before Christmas. The bottom line of the company—which, as we have already heard, has been questioned—has been put before the workers and the impact on the community. The timetable, which has been questioned by members across the chamber, seems arbitrary, to say the least.

There is a lot of uncertainty and worry across the community. I know that local small businesses are worried about what the announcement means for them. At the drop-in that was organised by Richard Leonard, we heard that workers who are parents are concerned about their job security and what the announcement might mean in relation to uprooting their families. The ripples of the announcement reach far and wide across Grangemouth, as well as more widely across Falkirk.

As we have heard, there has been industry on the site for nearly 100 years, and I am sure that there will be industry on the site long after any of us in the chamber are here. As well as having a conversation about how jobs can continue on the site in the short term, we need to discuss what the industry will look like in the future, how we will get there and what that means for workers and those who live close to the refinery. To do all of that, we need to save the jobs, and we need Government support in that regard. It is clear that, if we leave a just transition to the companies involved, it just will not happen. We need certainty—and quickly—to stop potentially highly skilled people leaving their jobs. We need time for those dedicated and skilled workers to transfer or change their skills to whatever comes next, and we need meaningful engagement with the community about what they would like to see on their doorstep. That has not happened on the site so far.

Unions want to engage with Petroineos and the Government to explore the reasoning behind the company’s decision and what can be done to support workers. If any member has not done so already, I encourage them to read the briefing from Unite the union that came in earlier this afternoon. I also believe that, if they have not done so already, the owners of Petroineos and PetroChina should come to the site to speak to workers and explain their decision. We need a just transition, which, according to their briefing this morning, is what the workers want—a move to the site hosting industries that are better for people and the planet, that provide well-paid jobs and that have good terms and conditions.

I am aware that there are a range of opinions across the chamber as to what form the next step should take, but I hope that the community and the workers who are watching today know that their representatives, including me, are not taking this lying down and that we are committed to saving their jobs and providing a bright future for Grangemouth.

I join others in wishing Elena Whitham well. I welcome the cabinet secretary’s announcement that the minimum unit price will be raised. Although MUP is having an effect, retailers are pocketing any profits that are generated. I welcome the inclusion of a public health levy in the budget, which, as we heard at the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee, would be a potential win-win for public health. Can the Deputy First Minister outline the timeline for work on a levy? Does she agree that there is huge potential benefit for services in recouping that money?

I thank the minister for taking the intervention. The Grangemouth site is quite unique in how close it is to the town and where people live. In some cases, the site is only across a road and down a grass verge from people’s houses. Will the minister commit to involving the community in what the site looks like, what comes next and the impact on their living environment?

Would witnesses prefer a levy to take the form of a public health supplement or for it to be a social responsibility levy? What should that revenue be put back into?

So far, in talking about a public health levy, we have focused on the big retailers and rateable values. However, in some communities, small shops might be the only ones there, and they will sell alcohol to the community around them. Given that, as you correctly identified, it is the amount that people drink that causes them harm, what is your view on a public health levy being linked to the volume of sales—and, therefore, the harm that a shop might be doing to the community around it—rather than the rateable value of premises?

Good morning to the panel. If MUP was to continue, would witnesses support the introduction of a levy to recoup the additional revenue from retailers as outlined in the Scottish budget? Justina Murray is nodding so I will go to her first.

What would be the total benefit of minimum unit pricing and bringing back the public health supplement or having a social responsibility levy? What would be the impact of the public health benefit of minimum unit pricing—we have seen that make a difference—and the additional revenue going back into treatment and preventative services? What does that whole bundle look like?

Is 16 per cent the average?

I, too, thank Ben Macpherson for bringing this debate to the chamber, and I thank the SFSA for co-ordinating and publishing a fan-led review of the game in Scotland.

Before I get into the detail of the “Rebuilding Scottish Football” report and the much-needed steps that I believe we could and should take to enhance Scottish football, it is vital, as others have said, to highlight the fantastic work that football clubs and their supporters across Scotland are already carrying out, and to celebrate the positive impact that football has had on this country in recent years.

As others have highlighted, we should welcome the brilliant work of our senior teams. Steve Clarke and his team have managed to lift the mood of the nation and bring us a sense of hope in the game that was missing for many years. I wish the national team all the best in Germany this summer, and I am sure that we will all be cheering it on with every kick of the ball.

Our women’s game continues to go from strength to strength. In the Scottish Women’s Premier League last season, the title race went down to the very last game of the season, with three teams within touching distance of the trophy. Glasgow City Football Club came out on top, much to the disappointment of Celtic and Rangers. We witnessed record crowds at various grounds, and we saw the first women’s ties played at Celtic Park and Ibrox. Long may that continue.

However, we need to tackle the on-going issues that women’s football faces. In recent months, we have seen a sustained amount of abuse towards women commentators and pundits. That has to stop, and there is a duty on all of us to call that out where and when we see it. Alex Scott is one of those who has had such behaviour targeted at her. I hope that what she said in the wake of the abuse will resonate with many in respect of how far we still have to go in changing culture and how important representation is. She said:

“To all the women in football, in front of the camera or behind it, to the players on the pitch, to everyone that attends games—keep being the role models that you continue to be to all those young girls that are told ‘no, you can’t’.

Football is a better place with us all in it.”

In my Central Scotland region, clubs such as Motherwell, Falkirk and Stenhousemuir are leading the way in their local communities, delivering classes that bring health, wellbeing and social benefits. I am constantly impressed by the phenomenal work that those clubs do through their community foundations and trusts.

The Scottish Greens believe that our national team is for all of us, but—particularly during this cost of living crisis—far too many people are being priced out of our beautiful game. If we want children to look up to our athletes or to be inspired by them, they must be able to see both the men’s and women’s teams in action. I have been calling on the Scottish Football Association to work with broadcasters to ensure that Scotland’s international fixtures appear on free-to-view television channels. The team has done the nation proud, but the games were shown only on subscription services, so not everyone was able to experience them live. That must change.

Scottish football needs fundamental change. We must look at a fairer distribution of resources and marketing our game better to attract further ethical investment that does not come from health-harming products or from gambling. The game must also be more accessible, especially to those who can least afford it, with a particular emphasis on tackling the inequalities that can be barriers to participation.

We have a passionate supporter base in Scotland and it is vital to recognise that fans are the lifeblood of our game and a key source of revenue. We must ensure that fans can have an ownership stake and a strong voice in how their clubs are run, as happens at Motherwell and Falkirk, which are in my region, and that those same fans have a strong input in how the game is structured and governed.

I echo the views of supporters’ organisations, which have said that the transparency, good governance and oversight that this culturally important industry needs depend on having an independent regulator:

“Drawing on lessons from the new Independent Regulator for English Football, new owners’ and directors’ tests for clubs should be established by replacing the existing procedures and ensuring that only good ‘potential custodians’ and qualified directors can run these vital assets.”

We must also look at the process for appointing of the president of the SFA, which I believe should be replaced with a fair voting structure whereby both clubs and season ticket holders can vote for nominated candidates from both inside and outside football.

Fans contribute more than 50 per cent of the game’s revenue. That should be recognised in order to support a positive culture change across the game and to bring an additional focus on football as Scotland’s national sport, showcasing it to the world as being progressive, democratic, attractive and not afraid to do things differently.

I place on record my thanks to the campaigners and organisations involved, and to the Daily Record for working with me and other MSPs in campaigning for the ban. The proposals are a huge victory for them, and I thank the Government for the positive conversations that I have had with it throughout the campaign.

As we move forward, other tactics might emerge in the evolution of vapes. What conversations is the minister having with colleagues across the UK on how we can anticipate some of the changes and ensure that any legislation that we introduce appropriately tackles any measures that we might see?