Chamber and committees

I am pleased to contribute to the debate and thank the committee for its thorough report. The consistent message is that Scotland has an unreliable ferry service because it has an unreliable ferry fleet. Islanders repeatedly tell us that their livelihoods, and indeed the very future of life on the islands, are affected by frequent mechanical failures. Last winter, those living on Arran faced food and fuel shortages due to the unreliability of sailings and supermarket shelves were empty of vegetables and much else over the festive season.

I welcome the minister making clear that change is needed. The report considers proposals for reorganisation and I fully understand why committee members feel that the tripartite structure does not work. As someone who was involved in debates before the previous reorganisation, which cost tens of millions of pounds, and who campaigned against that reorganisation and is therefore no supporter of the current structure, I say that the Scottish Government’s history of poor decision making and its broken procurement model lie at the root of the lack of reliable ferries. I ask the minister to inform our debate by advising Parliament how much any future reorganisation might cost.

I welcome the committee’s recommendation of a direct award, which would provide certainty. I have asked various transport ministers whether they believe that they can legally make a direct award—a question that has been asked more than once today. I therefore also ask the minister to respond to that question, in order to inform our debate. I also urge the Scottish Government to look at governance structures and to put islanders and trade union representatives on the board.

Unbundling, which, to be clear, Labour believes is just privatisation by another name, would be a grave mistake and would leave operators grasping for what little profit can be made on lifeline routes.

I hope to make that clear during my contribution.

The Scottish Government’s ferry services procurement policy review concluded that an in-house operator is

“capable of delivering similar levels of operational efficiency, innovation and service improvement to those which might otherwise be obtained from tendering.”

Despite that, ministers still spent taxpayers’ money commissioning Ernst & Young to scrutinise how ferries are run. The Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee has since concluded that Ernst & Young’s project Neptune report failed to engage sufficiently with island communities or with the workforce.

I welcome the fact that the committee’s report does engage with communities and with the workforce and I also welcome the report’s references to the current, poor, procurement approach. CMAL has searched the globe for five years and examined 650 second-hand ships, but only the Alfred has been chartered, while the Chieftain is now leased by CalMac. Four projects to build ferries have been outsourced to Turkey, a country in which, according to the Trades Union Congress, workers face random arrests and unions operate in a climate of fear, which certainly makes a mockery of the Scottish Government’s supposed fair work procurement policy

The committee’s report says:

“Efforts by CMAL to purchase or lease existing vessels abroad are not working and should not be relied upon.”

If we agree that that is unsustainable and, as the minister says, that change is needed, where is the Scottish Government’s sustainable alternative? The Government’s draft islands connectivity plan contains very little detail on rebuilding shipbuilding capacity anywhere in Scotland, but rebuilding that capacity will be essential if the Scottish Government is to abide by its commitment to dramatically reduce the average age of the fleet.

As the tendering process opens for the small vessel replacement programme, I hope that the minister can provide some assurance that islanders, local communities and the workforce will be centrally involved in the decision-making process, so that vessels are commissioned that meet the service’s needs and the wider socioeconomic needs, which Alex Rowley spoke about in his speech. I have to say, as somebody who has represented island communities over many years, that islanders consistently do not feel that they have been listened to or, indeed, consulted.

Standardised vessels require standardised ports. I ask that the minister provides an update on the Ardrossan harbour redevelopment, which is essential for the Ardrossan to Brodick route.

I welcome the debate and the opportunity to consider the long-term future of Scotland’s ferries, and I urge the Scottish Government to come forward with its own proposals.

My next question is for the minister. It is estimated that funding for Scotland’s alcohol and drug partnerships has been cut by around £19 million, but that funding is essential, given the role that those partnerships play in trying to address the public health emergency of drug deaths.

I am not going to ask the minister to give an undertaking on what will be in the budget, but I will ask her to give a commitment to make the case—in the strongest terms—as to why those cuts need to be reversed and further funding needs to be devoted to those partnerships. Is that something that she feels able to commit to?

That matter is on-going and you have it under active consideration.

In the forthcoming budget or historically?

Does the minister agree that the “Firestorm” report makes alarming reading and that not providing safe systems to enable firefighters to decontaminate is a failure of the employers to fulfil their duty of care to their workforce?

Minister, you have made it clear that you have been in discussions with the Crown Office. The Lord Advocate has said that it would not be in the public interest to prosecute users of drug consumption rooms for simple possession offences and that she would be prepared to draft a prosecution policy along those lines. Have you engaged with the Lord Advocate on that point? What legal protections will be in place for staff at drug consumption facilities?

Is an adversarial system able to deliver on some of the principles that you are setting out?

You are saying that it is not just what happens in court, but what has happened all the way leading up to that.

I will try to be as brief as possible. I have two questions about trauma-informed training for key players in the courts.

My first question is to Laura Buchan and it relates to defence agents. I understand that, although trauma-informed training is available from organisations such as the Law Society of Scotland—and no doubt lots of other organisations, as well—it is not mandatory. A voluntary course is available as an option for continuous professional development. Would it be helpful if there was mandatory training for defence agents who appear in the criminal courts?

My second question is more to David Fraser and relates to judges, whether that is sheriffs or judges in the High Court. What quality of trauma-informed training is available to judges—whatever type of judge they are and whichever criminal court they are in? Does that need significant enhancement? Do more judges have a better understanding of trauma-informed practice than other people? How do we improve the overall standard? They must be the gatekeeper in the court. They are in charge of the court and are the only people who are able to insist on how courts are conducted.