Chamber and committees

Will the member take an intervention?

This has been an enlightening and, at times, moving debate about an issue that everyone in Scotland will, unless they are especially lucky, have to contend with at some point. It has emerged that there is no neat solution to any of it. The approach needs to be multifaceted and systemic, and should be woven through every aspect of public policy and of our consideration of how we construct the fabric of our communities. That is very much at the core of what we have discussed today.

We have heard many amazing examples of the great work that is going on, but we have also heard about the challenges and what we need to do better, which has made listening to this afternoon’s debate so worth while.

Stuart McMillan, the member for Inverclyde, has just cited the particularly inspiring example of Ben Kane—a 16-year-old who felt the need to step up and build greater capacity where, in the light of his own tragic experience, he saw that there was need. We should all reflect on the fact that although we assume that young people are resilient and can just get on with things, many of us encounter such problems.

I was feeling really lonely on Sunday, because it was the 10th anniversary of one of my best friends being killed in Afghanistan at the age of 25. To go to his funeral at a time when I should have been attending his wedding and, later, to reflect on what he could have done with his life in those 10 years, was very sad. I could not help but feel a sense of loneliness and a longing to see someone whom I really miss. I think that all members will have encountered that feeling about a relative or a close friend.

How do we help to build resilience? Many members have spoken about how much the solution lies in developing friendship networks and finding the means to do so.

On Sunday, to take my mind off my thoughts, and also to raise funds for a useful cause, I took part in the kilt walk. I had been cajoled into it by others, but ended up doing it on my own. Even though I was with thousands of other people, it was quite a lonely experience to start with. I could see lots of people having friendly conversations while I was just stomping onwards with my headphones on.

However, I later found a friend from primary school whom I had not seen in years, and we ended up striking up a great conversation. It turned out that what had started as a lonely experience ended up being a nice one, because I met quite a few people whom I knew, along the way. That just shows that the solution is as simple as having an opportunity to interact; we do not need to overcomplicate things. What started as quite a reflective experience ended up being a good laugh. There is no substitute for having such opportunities, which many members have hinted at in their contributions.

I welcome the minister to her place on the front bench and hope that she will do the country a great service. She made an important point about bringing issues as close as possible to communities and giving them the capacity to build networks. When we talk about shared ownership we should mean that literally. In so many aspects of our public life, power, control and agency have been centralised and taken away from communities over the years. We need a serious review of that.

Many members spoke about council funding’s dependence on central funding, and about its being cut year on year. That is just not sustainable any more. Let us give back to communities the power to decide on their destiny, and the means by which they can design their locality to suit their needs. That has been very much a common theme in the debate.

This is critical; it is high-stakes stuff. Many members talked about the life-limiting impacts of loneliness and social exclusion. My colleague Paul O’Kane, who represents West Scotland, mentioned that in some cases they can result in a gap of 15 years in excess mortality. That is shocking. That is a life sentence—it is probably the average life sentence for murder in Scotland. We are seeing people losing huge parts of their lives as a result of loneliness and social exclusion, so it is critical that we address that as a public health issue.

On Saturday, I was at an event in Springburn that had been set up by the National Theatre of Scotland. One of the features running was a workshop with Karen Dunbar, whom members might remember from “Chewin’ the Fat” and various other television programmes. She ran a school of rap for five elderly women from the north of Glasgow, then there was a screening of a TV show that she did for the BBC. When I first went in, I thought that it might be a bit naff, but it turned out to be really good.

The minister makes a very important point about poverty and social exclusion and isolation. Would she agree that the community housing association movement, particularly in Scotland, shows great strength in relation to building community wealth, because such associations hold assets locally, give local control and create that rich tapestry of activity that can engage the community on an otherwise barren landscape?

I thank the member for the Highlands and Islands, Ms Burgess, for her members’ business motion today.

Community-controlled housing associations are vitally important to the prosperity of communities across Scotland. In recent years, we have seen more and more of them being swallowed up by larger, locally unaccountable housing associations, many with head offices outwith Scotland. That is a great shame, because the whole purpose of social housing in Scotland is to ensure that there is a social element to the basic commodity of housing. There is a rich history of success in the community-controlled housing sector. It is not—or, at least, it should not be—a method for wealth extraction or the stripping of assets that are currently owned and managed in the community; it should not be a corporate game of boardroom Monopoly with no get-out-of-jail-free card for tenants when the big boys fail to deliver; and it should not be a lever by which to control finance, remove democratic power and exert unwelcome external influence.

If we go back to the original pioneering days of the Glasgow Corporation slum clearances and the first community housing association that was set up to save those tenement districts in Glasgow, we see that it was done on the basis that those taking control of the assets were management committees of committed volunteers, elected by local people, who were rooted in their communities and knew what was best for the local people who lived and worked there. That was the very genesis of community-controlled housing associations and, sadly, I fear that we are swiftly departing from that stated aim.

Let me just put on the record that not all large housing associations are bad. In some instances, they are actually very good, and there is undoubtedly a role for them to play in this sector. However, we are now seeing community-controlled housing associations that are financially robust, solvent and providing great services to their tenants being taken over at board level and railroaded into mergers, with promises of a land of milk and honey.

There is no better example of that than Reidvale Housing Association in the east end of Glasgow, as the member for Stirling pointed out earlier. It was set up in 1975 as one of the first community-run housing associations in the UK. It acquired a swathe of tenement properties in Dennistoun and prevented the evisceration of that community. Since then, it has refurbished its 900 properties and brought its community back to life through the introduction of traffic-calming measures in a densely populated part of Glasgow. Indeed, it is one of the most attractive communities to live in in the city today.

Reidvale Housing Association is financially robust, solvent and able to easily provide the services that its tenants and the wider community require. Yet, it has been earmarked for what is being dubbed as a transfer but is in reality a takeover. The housing association that is looking to acquire Reidvale’s assets and stock has named itself Places for People Scotland, yet in reality it is a massive England-based parent company called Places for People, which operates in Scotland as Castle Rock Edinvar Housing Association—some of our Edinburgh colleagues may be aware of it. They may also be aware that the parent company appoints Castle Rock Edinvar Housing Association’s board and that it can remove members at will, as well as placing its own staff on the board. Currently, the Reidvale board is elected annually at its annual general meeting by tenants and other service users, and the board members are free and able to stand for election. That is a democratic right that will be ripped away if Places for People and Castle Rock Edinvar get their way.

To entice current Reidvale residents, the company is offering a five-year rent freeze guarantee, despite the housing regulator’s website showing that Places for People’s rents elsewhere in the country are up to 26 per cent higher than the Scottish average. Let us have a quick look at its performance compared to Reidvale’s: the average rent that is charged by Reidvale for a three-bedroom flat is £69 per week; Places for People charges £98 per week. Reidvale has a current overall satisfaction rate of 95 per cent; PFP has a satisfaction rate of 81 per cent. Eighty-nine per cent of Reidvale’s stock meets the Scottish housing quality standard; quite shockingly, only 3 per cent of PFP’s stock meets those standards. Reidvale’s average response time for emergency repairs is three hours; PFP takes 14 hours on average, which is more than four times slower. For non-emergency repairs, Reidvale takes one day on average; PFP takes 17 days, which is 17 times slower.

The whole thing stinks, and it begs the question: why? Why would a housing association that is predominantly based in England with an outpost in Edinburgh want to acquire a Glasgow-based housing association? I think that the answer is quite straightforward: profit. It knows that it would be incredibly profitable in the long term, due to the area in which Reidvale sits, and it knows that it will be incredibly profitable because Reidvale is a profitable organisation with zero debt.

I am conscious of the time, but, just before I finish, I will say that the minister and the Government more generally will be wondering why this is a political issue and not something that can just be left to the regulator to sort out. The reality is that, unless we introduce legislation in the Parliament that compels the Scottish Housing Regulator to provide on-going practical support to community-controlled housing associations to ensure that they are not swallowed by poorly performing behemoths, this charade will continue unabated. Organisations that have a proven track record of bringing about regeneration, prosperity and inclusivity to neighbourhoods and communities are being lost. If we are all going to stand here and wonder why that is happening, while allowing it to happen, we are all complicit.

The modus operandi of the big, unaccountable housing associations is to build new soulless schemes. We do not need that, especially not in Glasgow. We need strong, locally-run community controlled housing associations that are rooted in our local areas and are determined to grow and develop, with quality and inclusivity at the forefront of their minds, alongside providing a real influencing role for tenants and volunteers. Let us be clear that, like every other sector in this country, the big players and corporates do not do this out of the goodness of their hearts: they do it because it makes them very rich. They can dress it up all they like with promises that they will not keep, but I can assure them that we and the local community will fight them every step of the way.

I ask colleagues across all parties to seek to agree to the need for legislative and regulatory change urgently in order to preserve and further develop a community-controlled housing model that will continue to serve Scotland’s people well and deliver the real and measurable outcomes for its communities that we sorely need.

The Glasgow and West of Scotland Forum of Housing Associations has been very strident in its concerns about the behaviour of the regulator as well as about the culture of consultancy that has crept in around it. That is a very insidious and potentially corrupt practice that needs to be urgently investigated, and I urge the minister to look into it.

The member makes a point about polar orbital launch being a huge opportunity for Scotland, yet industry has raised concerns about the Civil Aviation Authority regulation regime being onerous and way too expensive and uncompetitive. Will the member take steps to address that with his UK Government colleagues?

The member makes an important point about the need for greater collaboration to drive critical mass into the sector and all parts of engineering in Scotland. Does she agree that the current landscape is way too cluttered and that there is way too much confusion about what is out there? We need to rationalise that and have a focused approach through a body such as Scottish Enterprise to make everything join up a bit better.

Another commitment that was made in the Bute house agreement was to raise awareness and understanding of mental health issues in schools and colleges. However, the National Union of Students Scotland, Colleges Scotland and Universities Scotland have said that student counsellors across Scotland are facing imminent redundancy due to funding ambiguity beyond this academic year.

Will the cabinet secretary commit to providing absolute clarity to the higher education sector today on funding for student counselling services in order to prevent those redundancies and reassure students that they can access the mental health support that they need?

I am very pleased to have the opportunity to engage in the debate and to close on behalf of Labour in what has been a vital discussion about one of Scotland’s most successful and vibrant sectors.

Like Christine Grahame, I had the pleasure of visiting Skyrora in Edinburgh and Loanhead in 2019, during my time as an MP and shadow under-secretary of state for Scotland, and I am thrilled that the company is still thriving—it now has more than 60 headquarters staff and more than 100 research and development staff, who are based in Cumbernauld.

It is exciting to see the scale and potential of the space sector in Scotland, from Skyrora—which I already mentioned—to Alba Orbital in my Glasgow region, to SaxaVord spaceport on Unst in Shetland, to name but three of many players in the sector. The industry is innovating nationwide.

I commend the minister for using Government time to hold the debate, and my fellow members from across the chamber for their engaging contributions. I trust that we will all, in our own way, continue to carry forward our passion and hard work on behalf of the space sector. It is clear that we are all anxious to ensure that we do not deny or miss opportunities for it to be successful. We must work intensively, rigorously and urgently to ensure that we achieve our potential in the best way that we can in what is a competitive global sector.

My colleague Daniel Johnson has hit the nail on the head with the Labour amendment. It is key for the space sector and beyond that the Scottish Government grasps the bull by the horns and engages much more intensively, rigorously and formally with industry to ensure that the sustainability of advanced manufacturing jobs in Scotland is secured. As has been mentioned extensively, the two most critical aspects in ensuring that jobs and work programmes can be supported in Scotland are skills—especially of people who are at the start or in the middle of their careers—and infrastructure.

Those of us who regularly meet the industry—including Colin Beattie, who set up the cross-party group on space—recognise that the industry is desperate to make a long-lasting impact in Scotland. We know that there is enormous interest in creating jobs and establishing long-term work programmes here, but people in the industry tell us that they need workers and the necessary training so that our schools, colleges and universities can provide excellent outputs and an appropriately qualified labour force. That is critical. They also say that the Scottish Government must help them in securing the facilities in which they can do their work well.

I see parallels with the advanced manufacturing sector, which needs the right facilities to do what it does best. That is particularly the case in the shipbuilding and maritime sector, which, at meetings of the cross-party group on maritime and shipbuilding, tells MSPs time and again that if Scotland would invest in shipyard infrastructure to build ships, companies would bend over backwards to make vessels in this country. There is a similar issue in the space sector. I hope that the minister hears me when I say that industry leaders have been loud and clear in making the point to members in cross-party groups that if we build it, they will come. They need the Government to respond in a mission-focused way. That will involve the Government taking on risk, where necessary, to ensure that companies can crowd in wealth and take root here in Scotland.

I am pleased that the minister has high ambition for the sector. The Government has set out the

“aim to grow the workforce in the space sector by 26% year on year”

and the stronger

“commitment to grow the sector by 2030”.

I will be looking carefully to see whether the Government’s cuts in education budgets and the proposed cut of £10 million in Skills Development Scotland’s budget will hamper those efforts. I fear that they will do exactly that.

Only this week, I was contacted by constituents of mine, who stated their concern about the fact that their children cannot take advanced higher maths, chemistry and physics in Glasgow schools because Glasgow City Council has cut the advanced higher hub at Glasgow Caledonian University and their schools do not provide those courses. That means that children at state secondary schools in Glasgow cannot access undergraduate engineering courses at the universities of Strathclyde or Glasgow. I think that that is a shameful situation and one that needs to be urgently addressed.

More can be done to protect the Scottish Government’s ambitions and the development of the space industry here and in the rest of the UK.

Despite the challenges, we can, with assets such as the National Manufacturing Institute Scotland, be a powerhouse for innovation and advancement. That is why Labour is passionately advocating for the Scottish Government to celebrate organisations whole-heartedly and to work closely with industry and the UK Government to ensure the best possible environment for the industry to thrive in.

The member for Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale mentioned additive manufacturing. I recall that, during my visit, Skyrora said that that was exactly the sort of thing that could be done at the National Manufacturing Institute, so that all companies in the sector could buy time for that particularly specialised form of advanced manufacturing. Many small and medium-sized enterprises would be unable to finance that on their own, but they could do it collaboratively.

I beg the minister to do all that is in his power to prevent the branch-plant effect that was discussed in his opening speech, and to ensure that our innovative space sector is maintained by wealth that is controlled in Scotland, and not sapped by global corporations.

I worked with Clyde Space during my previous career at Scottish Enterprise and was saddened in 2019 when the Swedish company ÅAC Microtec bought it over. Both companies—Clyde Space and ÅAC Microtec—were founded in 2005. Why was it that the Swedish company acquired the Scottish company and not vice versa? Although they are doing great work, we need to understand why that happened. Scottish companies should be acquiring overseas businesses, not the other way around, and we should see more of that happening. Scottish headquartered companies will be key to our future, so we cannot allow them to go into overseas control.

I could refer to numerous members’ comments about that, and about the regulatory issue that was also brought up. We must ensure that the Civil Aviation Authority adopts reforms so that the sector can achieve first-to-market launch into polar orbits, because if we are not careful Iceland and northern European countries will steal a march on us. That is absolutely critical.

I was particularly taken by the comments from the member for Glasgow Provan about the need for a national space mission. That is critical. It will require the state to take risks, although many previous Scottish Administrations have taken a risk-averse approach. We look need to look at the idea of talent acquisition and skills, as was mentioned by the member for Aberdeen South and North Kincardine. We should look at international engagement and driving export markets, and at critical infrastructure and shared facilities such as the NMIS in Inchinnan.

My colleague Ms Mochan mentioned the huge potential of Prestwick airport because of the opportunity for clustering with Spirit Aerosystems. We should also look at opportunities to contributions to our achievement of net zero—for example, using the heat from data centres to drive district heat networks. There are huge adjacencies and many opportunities for clustering. We should work rigorously across the sector to seize all those opportunities.

I thank the minister again for the opportunity to debate a sector that is vital for Scotland. I hope that members from across the chamber will support the amendment that was lodged by my Labour colleague, the member for Edinburgh Southern.

The minister will be aware that this week is multiple sclerosis awareness week. I commend the work of the MS specialist physio service that is based at the Queen Elizabeth university hospital, which works hard to support neurology patients across NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde. However, research by the MS Society has found that there is extreme pressure on physiotherapy services in Glasgow, with patients waiting for an average of 17 weeks for an appointment and 107 of 931 full-time-equivalent physio posts lying vacant. Will the minister please set out how she plans to fill those vacancies and cut the backlog of physiotherapy appointments for neurology patients so that they can access that vital support?