Chamber and committees

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on its plans to improve transport infrastructure in the Highlands and Islands, particularly in response to the reported request from Highland Council for additional support to run its six ferry services. (S6O-04702)

I welcome the funding for replacing the Corran ferry, which I had called for in the chamber. However, the rising costs of maintaining the ageing fleet, the Tory legacy of inflation and the Labour United Kingdom Government’s decision to increase employer national insurance contributions have put considerable pressure on the sustainability of those services. Will the cabinet secretary commit to asking Transport Scotland to boost Highland Council’s funding this year?

That was highlighted by the Scottish Human Rights Commission’s report, which was released last autumn. It is simply unacceptable that Government policy is not delivering on the most basic human rights obligations in relation to islanders’ rights to housing and food. I hope that the new islands plan, which the Cabinet Secretary for Rural Affairs, Land Reform and Islands mooted earlier, will lead to better delivery than the previous version of the plan. It is encouraging that the cabinet secretary’s motion acknowledges that more needs to be done.

How much time do I have, Presiding Officer?

Today’s debate has clearly shown the strength of passion, feeling and support for empowering our island communities that exists among members on all sides of the chamber.

Ferries and tunnels were mentioned by a number of members. Beatrice Wishart made a good case for fixed links in Shetland, but there are a number of other obvious places where fixed links make sense, and it would be good if the Scottish Government undertook work on the feasibility of such important infrastructure.

On ferries, it was good to see the Scottish Government take up the Scottish Greens’ call for free interisland ferries for young people under 22. At the moment, the scheme covers only Orkney, Shetland and the Western Isles, and it would be good if it were extended to cover islands such as the Summer Isles, or to enable young people from islands such as Islay and Tiree to travel to the mainland for free.

Kenneth Gibson talked about the need for islanders to be involved in decision making about their ferries. It is astounding that that has clearly been an ask since long before the current session of Parliament. As a candidate, I learned that, despite asking for two smaller ferries, communities in Ullapool and Stornoway ended up with one larger one, which has resulted in a lack of service and limited sailings. If islanders had been on the board, different and better decisions would certainly have been made.

Claire Baker pointed out islanders’ lack of awareness of the islands plan and its outcomes. She made the point that we need to bring services to people, rather than people to services. That picks up on what I said in my opening speech: we must start designing policy with islanders and rural communities, not for them, so that it works for them, to ensure that they thrive.

The issue of housing was raised by a number of members. Colin Beattie mentioned the rural and islands housing fund. It is clear how vital that fund is, so it is essential that we listen to communities that understand how we can make it work even better.

Clare Adamson said that the elephant in the room was Brexit and the challenges that it has brought for our island communities as a result of the loss of the EU structural fund. That is certainly the case. Wherever I go in the Highlands and Islands, the ring of EU golden stars on a blue background is ubiquitous. Brexit also created a great deal of red tape and paperwork for our small artisanal fishers.

I think that the Government’s announcement of the next phase of the carbon-neutral islands scheme is a step in the right direction when it comes to empowering islanders. It is good that existing projects will be able to look ahead and plan for the next few years, but given that the initiative is already delivering a tangible impact for communities, I urge the Government to go further faster. By the time the new road map draws to a close, it will have been seven years since the project was launched, and the other Scottish island communities will not be any clearer on how the project could help them on the road to net zero.

It is imperative that we do not reach a situation in which there is inequality of opportunity between our islands, and that all islands have an opportunity to participate with enough time, so that they can hit the carbon neutrality that we are seeking by 2045. If we can get it right on the islands, we can get it right anywhere in Scotland. As I mentioned in my opening speech, more decision making needs to take place in local communities, so that islanders feel like they have a real stake. In fact, it goes beyond their just feeling like they do—islanders must have a real stake in their communities.

We have already seen the consequences of not doing that, on Mull. Communities on the island have been badly divided over the decision to build a new school campus in Tobermory. People living in the north and south of the island have been left completely at odds on the matter, because a decision was made that did not put Mull front and centre. It has left children in the south needing to spend most of their term time in mainland hostels, completely contravening their human rights and threatening their wellbeing. We need to avoid such scenarios, in which decisions are made for, rather than by, islanders.

I call once again on the Government and the Parliament to design with islanders and our rural communities, rather than for them. Let us put islanders first.

I will close with a couple of comments. I apologise to Mr Lumsden, but I will not take the intervention.

The review and extension of the rural and islands housing fund is really welcome, but we need to recognise a number of things. Uptake of the fund has been low because there is a high bar to access it due to feasibility studies. We need to look at that, because if there is no housing, no one will be on the islands to tackle the climate emergency or do anything with the economy. If we are going to give communities money from the rural and islands housing fund, we need to build in a resource for the communities that do not have wind energy to support someone who can deliver the plan. We need to think about building houses at scale and creating a pipeline. Switching the rural and islands housing fund on and off leads to questions as to whether funding will happen and will break the system at a time when we need to be building at least 11 per cent more houses on Scotland’s islands.

I extend my apologies to everyone in the chamber for being late to the debate.

I am grateful that today we are discussing and debating the need to empower Scotland’s islands. During the four years and a bit that I have been in this role, I have recognised that Scotland is not an island nation, but a nation of islands. As colleagues have said, every single island in Scotland is different and unique. I have found that an incredible thing to understand, having travelled from the southern tip of the Western Isles to the northern tip in my very first summer recess, and having travelled to Orkney in that same recess. I took in a lot of islands in that time, and I really saw the differences.

I want to convey to members that it is fantastic that we have had power devolved to Scotland, and we now have that power. However, I want to see power devolved to our island communities at the most local level. If communities are going to tackle the climate and nature emergency, they must have power in their hands.

As I have just said, each island is different, and they face very different circumstances. When I went to the top of a tiny hill on Benbecula and looked down over the sunlit water, I noticed that Uist looks like fragile lace that has been laid across the Atlantic Ocean. The island may be completely overtaken by flooding in the not-too-distant future, and the local authority is having to consider how it will handle rehousing people.

I want us to get to a point where we are designing Scotland with islands and rural communities first. We need to start to think about policies for our island and rural communities that are different from those for urban parts of Scotland, because the circumstances are very different.

Having said that, I will go back to my notes.

Scotland’s inhabited islands are at a critical point in their 5,000 year history, having supported communities since at least the late stone age. In many places, the effects of climate change and depopulation could bring their long human history to an end. Rising sea levels, increasingly extreme storms and the unpredictability of our weather patterns could push island populations to the brink over the next few decades. Their resilience to handle what is likely to be significant change has been undermined by years of little recognition and support from the UK and Scottish Governments. That has already damaged the social fabric of islands and communities by drawing young people and local talent away to the central belt and beyond.

The Scottish Government has begun its journey towards rectifying that situation. I welcome the policy efforts, particularly the islands plan and the carbon-neutral islands project. I have met a number of the carbon-neutral islands project teams. The work that they are doing is fantastic, and it is great to see that the Government recognises the need for multiyear funding for the project, as that will allow us to roll out the work that it is doing to other communities. That is a good starting point when it comes to addressing the challenges that are presented by the climate emergency and depopulation, but we need more changes to be delivered more rapidly.

Today’s debate has clearly shown the strength of passion, feeling and support for empowering our island communities that exists among members on all sides of the chamber.

Ferries and tunnels were mentioned by a number of members. Beatrice Wishart made a good case for fixed links in Shetland, but there are a number of other obvious places where fixed links make sense, and it would be good if the Scottish Government undertook work on the feasibility of such important infrastructure.

On ferries, it was good to see the Scottish Government take up the Scottish Greens’ call for free interisland ferries for young people under 22. At the moment, the scheme covers only Orkney, Shetland and the Western Isles, and it would be good if it were extended to cover islands such as the Summer Isles, or to enable young people from islands such as Islay and Tiree to travel to the mainland for free.

Kenneth Gibson talked about the need for islanders to be involved in decision making about their ferries. It is astounding that that has clearly been an ask since long before the current session of Parliament. As a candidate, I learned that, despite asking for two smaller ferries, communities in Ullapool and Stornoway ended up with one larger one, which has resulted in a lack of service and limited sailings. If islanders had been on the board, different and better decisions would certainly have been made.

Claire Baker pointed out islanders’ lack of awareness of the islands plan and its outcomes. She made the point that we need to bring services to people, rather than people to services. That picks up on what I said in my opening speech: we must start designing policy with islanders and rural communities, not for them, so that it works for them, to ensure that they thrive.

The issue of housing was raised by a number of members. Colin Beattie mentioned the rural and islands housing fund. It is clear how vital that fund is, so it is essential that we listen to communities that understand how we can make it work even better.

Clare Adamson said that the elephant in the room was Brexit and the challenges that it has brought for our island communities as a result of the loss of the EU structural fund. That is certainly the case. Wherever I go in the Highlands and Islands, the ring of EU golden stars on a blue background is ubiquitous. Brexit also created a great deal of red tape and paperwork for our small artisanal fishers.

I think that the Government’s announcement of the next phase of the carbon-neutral islands scheme is a step in the right direction when it comes to empowering islanders. It is good that existing projects will be able to look ahead and plan for the next few years, but given that the initiative is already delivering a tangible impact for communities, I urge the Government to go further faster. By the time the new road map draws to a close, it will have been seven years since the project was launched, and the other Scottish island communities will not be any clearer on how the project could help them on the road to net zero.

It is imperative that we do not reach a situation in which there is inequality of opportunity between our islands, and that all islands have an opportunity to participate with enough time, so that they can hit the carbon neutrality that we are seeking by 2045. If we can get it right on the islands, we can get it right anywhere in Scotland. As I mentioned in my opening speech, more decision making needs to take place in local communities, so that islanders feel like they have a real stake. In fact, it goes beyond their just feeling like they do—islanders must have a real stake in their communities.

We have already seen the consequences of not doing that, on Mull. Communities on the island have been badly divided over the decision to build a new school campus in Tobermory. People living in the north and south of the island have been left completely at odds on the matter, because a decision was made that did not put Mull front and centre. It has left children in the south needing to spend most of their term time in mainland hostels, completely contravening their human rights and threatening their wellbeing. We need to avoid such scenarios, in which decisions are made for, rather than by, islanders.

I call once again on the Government and the Parliament to design with islanders and our rural communities, rather than for them. Let us put islanders first.

I, too, thank Beatrice Wishart for bringing this important and urgent debate to the chamber. I speak on behalf of my constituents in the Highlands and Islands, many of whom are deeply concerned about the looming switch-off of the radio teleswitch service and the risks that it poses to their wellbeing. It is not just a technical transition but the result of a decision that was made in Westminster with little regard for the unique challenges that rural and island communities in Scotland face. Our most vulnerable residents—older people, those in low-income households and social housing tenants—are being left to bear the brunt.

As of April this year, more than 390,000 RTS meters were still in use across Great Britain. Given the low uptake of smart meters in Scotland—particularly in the northern isles and the Western Isles, where fewer than 10 per cent of households have one—it is fair to assume that a disproportionate number of RTS meters are in my region.

One constituent of mine waited nine months for a resolution that came only after his energy supplier was forced to prove to the data communications company that all other options had failed before it was allowed to install a cellular system. Other constituents have seen action from their energy companies only after I—and my colleagues across the chamber, I am sure—contacted the companies on their behalf. That is not a system that is working for people—it is a system that is failing them.

The Scottish Federation of Housing Associations has raised urgent concerns. Many of its members report that energy suppliers simply do not have the capacity to replace all RTS meters by the 2025 deadline. Worse still, suppliers are not engaging proactively with tenants for whom a smart meter is not a viable option.

What happens after the switch? As other members have said, some tenants are being moved on to more expensive or unsuitable tariffs, often without clear information or consent. Citizens Advice Scotland has already seen cases of people falling into energy debt because their new smart meters do not work properly. That is not just inconvenient; it is pushing people into poverty. We need urgent assurances from Ofgem and the UK Government that no tenant will be penalised for the inaction or delays of energy companies, that there is a robust and fully funded plan to support those who are affected, especially those who lose heating or hot water, and that no one will be left in the cold because of a failure to consult or prepare.

This is a matter of energy justice. It is about ensuring that the transition to smart technology does not leave behind the people who need the most support. I urge colleagues from across the chamber to stand up—as they have said they will—for our rural and island communities and demand a fair, inclusive and properly resourced transition.

Scotland’s seas and the communities that rely on them are at a critical juncture, and the climate crisis has heated our oceans, and will continue to do so, destabilising and damaging the building blocks that entire ecosystems rely on, and ultimately harming the livelihoods of fishers.

At the same time, Government is failing to adjust to this new reality and to deliver a viable future for the industry. We are already seeing the consequences of that situation. According to recent official statistics, 326 jobs on Scottish fishing vessels were lost between 2022 and 2023, and that came on top of the loss of almost 200 vessels in the North East and Highlands and Islands regions between 2008 and 2022. The loss of just one vessel is enough to impact an entire community, so the human cost of the loss of 200 in little more than a decade is devastating for Scotland, not just in a social sense but economically.

That situation should concern us all and it tells us something about the status quo: it simply is not working—not for fishers, not for communities and not for our precious seas. Neither today’s motion nor the amendments to it address that adequately. We urgently need to move from an extraction-based economy to a sustainable and regenerative one. The motion and amendments all still back extraction at all costs, but that offers a boom-and-bust scenario in which we fish, fish and fish until there is nothing left.

I share the concern in the Conservative motion that the UK Government plans to give the EU multiyear access to our fish stocks. Although the current annual system of negotiations is onerous, it allows a near constant assessment of fish stocks. Those stocks could be under serious strain and could face decimation if there is no on-going process of evaluation.

However, where I cannot support Tim Eagle’s motion is where it gets into the weeds of Brexit. The Conservatives seemingly want to blame the common fisheries policy for all the ills of the fishing industry, yet they conveniently forget that a Conservative UK Prime Minister, Boris Johnson, largely based the UK Fisheries Act 2020 on the very same policy that they are trashing today. It would be more helpful to fishers if we focused on the delivery of the duties that are contained in that act, which is where I turn to the Scottish Government.

Although I agree that Parliament should have an annual debate on the issue and that Scotland needs a seat at the fisheries table, I do not accept that the blame for the damage to our fishing sector sits entirely with the UK Government. For years, we have had a series of ministers tell this Parliament that fisheries management is complex. That is being used as an excuse not to do the hard yards required to deliver the change that is needed. The Scottish Government spends £80 million a year on the marine space and fisheries. Where is the money going if it is not being used to overcome the complexities that stand in the way of change?

The Scottish Greens want a clear-cut policy that delivers for fishers and for the environment that they operate in, which is why we want science to lead policy and a quota system that promotes low-impact fishing techniques and benefits Scotland’s communities, and why we want the EU, the UK and Scotland to come together to properly address overfishing. In that way, we can deliver for coastal communities, the environment and the economy.

We have heard many useful and colourful contributions today. I am pleased to note the widespread agreement that the annual fisheries debate needs to be restored.

I will refer to a couple of points that we heard in the debate. I particularly appreciate Karen Adam’s impassioned point about the effect of Brexit on our coastal communities, the broken promises and the devastating impact that Brexit has had on many people’s lives. Colin Smyth talked about how too many coastal communities are in areas of multiple deprivation. In the light of those points, I urge the Scottish Government to act: to use its devolved powers to protect our seas and fishers, and to press the UK Government and the EU to be more responsible in how they approach negotiations.

Scotland already has the powers to do a fair bit to change the status quo. At present, it puts quota in the hands of a small number of businesses that have to meet only a small number of obligations. The Government needs to learn from the agricultural sector and to make sure that we use public assets to incentivise the changes that we want to see—using them not just for pockets but for people and planet.

We need to put an end to bycatch. Every day, large volumes of fish and other marine wildlife are killed and then chucked back into the sea. That damaging system needs to end. We can solve the problem by promoting low-impact fishing systems and introducing tighter regulations and harsher penalties. It is the Government’s legal duty to end bycatch; failing to act is simply not an option.

We also need the Scottish Government to deliver on its legal duty to protect marine habitats. I have lost track of the number of commitments made by SNP ministers to protect marine protected areas and the habitats outside them. Their promises, and the law, are crystal clear on this: action is needed to reduce the harms caused by certain fishing practices—namely, scallop dredging and bottom trawling.

The time for promises is over. Now it is time for long-overdue action. Scotland’s seas are an asset that can provide Scotland with huge social and economic benefits, but years of inaction and legislative failure have resulted in severe harm and a drastic decline in our marine environment. That is holding us back from meeting our nature and climate targets. It is costing fishers jobs and ripping communities apart. A well-managed marine environment would reverse all those trends and guarantee a sustainable future for Scotland’s marine environment and for all the communities that depend on it.