Chamber and committees

Does the First Minister share my concerns about the planned withdrawal of Loganair services between Inverness and the northern isles and about the potential impact that that could have on jobs in Inverness and Nairn—both jobs that are connected to Dalcross and Highlands and Islands Airports Ltd and those of the skilled workers who must be able to travel to the inner Moray Firth to support our growing energy sector?

I was very concerned to read that a significant percentage of residents—a majority—in the north coast 500 area are negatively impacted, although, as somebody who lives near the canal in Inverness, I am of course not surprised.

While some people clearly benefit significantly from the route, many more are struggling with negative impacts. The balance between the needs of tourists and residents in the Highlands has not yet been struck. What more can the Government do to encourage and support sustainable tourism and discourage the bad behaviour that we so frequently see on the north coast 500?

To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to the BiGGAR Economics report, “Building a Sustainable Future for the North Coast 500”. (S7O-00027)

The cabinet secretary will appreciate that there is great concern among employees of Government and arm’s-length organisations in the Highlands, who often do incredibly valuable work to ensure that national policies and decisions work for us. Many comments were made during and after the election campaign by various parties regarding the size of the current workforce and budgets. Will any public service reform keep it in mind that Highlands and Islands Enterprise, the Scottish Land Commission and many other organisations that are headquartered in the Highlands add real value to our policy landscape and protect local jobs in Inverness and Nairn?

To ask the Scottish Government what assessment it will undertake of any impact of its planned public sector reform on employment in Inverness and Nairn. (S7O-00003)

Will the member give way?

I certainly look forward to never hearing Reform MSPs speak in this Parliament about reserved matters, but I am very keen that the member answers the earlier question—if this is a voluntary union, how does Scotland leave?

When I look at today’s motion, I feel a deep sense of hope, optimism for what we can do, and joy that, yet again, the people of Scotland have chosen to elect an SNP Government that uses its time and power in this place to tackle poverty and be ambitious, not just for those who are already well off and well placed to be successful, but for absolutely everybody who we represent.

I joined the SNP because I had never felt as much hope as I did during the 2014 referendum campaign. It was the first time that I, as a young person growing up in an area of deprivation and attending a school that I was advised not to mention in job applications, felt that politics was something that I had a right to have a view on, and felt that somebody was listening when I shared that view.

I was not supposed to be here—something that I was reminded of by my Facebook memories the other day, as a post from my younger self during the higher exams season came up, explaining my teachers’ reactions when I announced that I was going to take up a job in politics instead of what they had hoped I would do, which was to become a musician or an engineer, respectively.

In learning about the arguments for and against independence, I gained true hope for a country where we make our own decisions—where the people we elect to represent our communities in this place can make decisions about energy, employment, social security and many other issues on which we are currently hamstrung and where young people’s voices are heard, disabled people matter and pensioners get a deal that they really deserve.

That is the kind of hope that was illustrated by Kayleigh Kinross-O’Neill earlier, when she spoke powerfully about barriers, and it is the hope that I want to give to all those who have become eligible to vote in the past decade and to all those who voted in 2014 but have since seen Brexit, Covid and every other difference between Scotland and the UK highlighted since we last got a chance to vote on the constitution. I do not want those people to feel like I once felt—that this place, politics and having a view are not for them.

When I knocked on doors over the past year, people told me that their priorities were the cost of living, transport, the NHS and housing. Independence came up now and again but, like me, their immediate priorities were the cost of living, transport, the NHS and housing. Like most people, I have never seen independence as an end in itself. It is a means to the end of allowing us to do better in all those areas and more.

We are doing everything that we can to eradicate poverty, to support those who most need help and to create a country that is prosperous and responsible in meeting its global obligations and moral duties to tackle climate change and to uphold human rights for everyone. Over the past 12 years, I have seen far too much progress held back, far too many decisions taken on our behalf against our wishes, and far too many people struggling who do not need to struggle.

I agree with the Green amendment’s point that we have a clear majority, not just for independence-supporting parties but for progressive values. I felt very motivated today, listening to some of our new members’ first speeches, because that aspect has been shining through. The contributions of Kate and Michelle in particular—our new Campbells—really had me feeling echoes of that 2014 campaign. People have come here with purpose and a deep understanding of the why, not just the what, and an ability to convince people in the way that I was convinced in 2014, including the hundreds of thousands who—just as Craig Hoy did not get to vote for a Green candidate—have not yet had the opportunity to vote on independence.

We have to demonstrate that we can do better. I am confident that we will, but I am clear that, in order to do the best that we can on all the priorities that our constituents have and all the events and crises that will present themselves over the next five years and beyond, we need more power in this room. The suggestions in the weak unionist amendments today will not even touch the sides.

Many people have declared to me that they want to see more powers devolved to this Parliament. Not all of them are SNP, and not all are even close to being convinced about independence. Labour members in Scotland used to be among those people. Where are they now? In a similar debate last session, I pointed out to the Labour speakers who were claiming that all would be well once we had a Labour Government that Governments do not last forever and that the Tories would be back in at some point. How things change: I do not necessarily think that that is true any more, but, even worse, we have a Labour Government that has failed to devolve more powers to this place, failed to join us in tackling child poverty and failed even to meet its own campaign commitments.

It does not matter who is in power in London. Our voices are never heard strongly enough and our people are never given the attention and the respect that they deserve. All that Anas Sarwar and his colleagues can offer is that an ambitious future can and should be achieved through the devolved powers of this Parliament. Well, my ambitions are greater than that, and I think that Scotland’s should be, too.

This is not a voluntary union—if it were, Opposition members in the chamber would be able to answer the simple question of how Scotland can leave it. It will be for them, after this debate, to explain to their constituents not only why they do not believe in independence, which it is their right to oppose as much as it is my right to support, but why they believe that their constituents should not have a vote on it and that this Parliament should not have the power to put that question to the public, meaning that Scotland does not have a route by which to leave. That is what they must explain, and I do not envy them that. I am far more comfortable sitting in amongst my SNP colleagues, calling for democracy, hope and a country with ambitions that can be met.

I am grateful to the member for giving way; I have heard a few members on his side of the chamber today call for us to live in the present and not the past, so I am curious as to why he is referring to arguments lost in 2014, rather than who won the election this month. Does he recognise that that referendum was 12 years ago, and that that is as many MSPs as his party currently has? Is he really in a position, therefore, to claim that we cannot go back and ask people for their opinion again?

I make this affirmation under protest in order to sit in this Parliament, where my allegiance will be to the people of Inverness and Nairn.

I, Emma Roddick, do solemnly, sincerely and truly declare and affirm, that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to His Majesty King Charles, his heirs and successors, according to law.

Tha mise, Emma Roddick, gu sòlaimte is fìrinneach a’ cur an cèill agus ag innse gum bi mi dìleas agus fìor umhail do A Mhòrachd An Rìgh Teàrlach, a oighreachan agus a thànaistean, a rèir an lagh.