Chamber and committees

I rise in support of the Scottish Government’s motion and in opposition to the UK Government’s Illegal Migration Bill.

My party has been steadfast in its opposition to the bill, voting against it in the House of Commons, and in April when we debated the bill in this Parliament, articulating clearly our opposition to it. Let us make no mistake: the Illegal Migration Bill is brutal, pernicious and totally ill considered. It challenges the fundamental human right to seek asylum, which is enshrined in the United Nations Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, which was adopted in 1951.

In conducting its legislative scrutiny of the bill, the Joint Committee on Human Rights, which comprises cross-party politicians from the House of Commons and the House of Lords, has, as we have heard, concluded that the bill breaches the UK’s international human rights obligations, including those under the European convention on human rights. Indeed, even the Home Secretary has acknowledged that there is a more than 50 per cent chance that the legislation will break international human rights law.

Even today, we have seen that the UK Government does not even know how much its absurd and cruel plans will cost. It is clear that the legislation will, despite repeated warnings, remove the safeguards for victims of modern slavery and human trafficking, exposing people to a greater threat of harm or, as is too often the case, death.

Presiding Officer,

“The Modern Slavery Act gave hope to victims, but this Bill removes that hope. I genuinely believe that if enacted as it is currently proposed, it will leave more people—more men, women and children—in slavery in the UK.”—[Official Report, House of Commons, 26 April 2023; Vol 731, c 809].

Those are not my words; they are the words of former Conservative Prime Minister Theresa May. That is emblematic of how far and how quickly the Conservative Party has lurched to the right on those issues.

I urge Conservative members in this chamber and its front-bench spokesperson—I believe him to be a man of integrity and to be a good man—to use their voices to oppose this immoral piece of legislation, even at this late stage as it concludes its parliamentary process at Westminster. How can they justify supporting a bill so lacking in such basic compassion, empathy and humanity?

Of course, as we have heard already, this debate is focused on the impact of the legislation in a devolved context, so I will turn to that issue in my remaining time.

The Government motion highlights that the bill will have a profound impact on devolved legislation, amending the Human Trafficking and Exploitation (Scotland) Act 2015, which was agreed by all parties in this Parliament. I accept that the Scottish Government cannot rewrite that legislation or, indeed, opt out of the worst clauses of the UK legislation. However, we have a responsibility to those who will be most impacted by the legislation to do everything in our power to find solutions to mitigate its worst aspects. I strongly urge the Government—and offer to work with it—in that vein to explore every avenue and to ensure that we are maximising our legislative competence to provide support for trafficking survivors and unaccompanied children.

There are ways in which that could be done. A greater focus could be placed on exploring how we enhance the monitoring, inspection and regulation of accommodation that is used in the asylum system to ensure that provision is of a good standard. We can work with various partners that have been briefing us and supplying us with important information throughout this process, not least the Scottish Refugee Council.

The legislation will also result in more people being destitute in Scotland, so it is imperative that the Scottish Government explores how it can provide additional resources to local authorities to ensure that we have the necessary resilience to cope with increased demand for support services.

In considering the various policy initiatives that could be explored further to mitigate aspects of the bill, we are calling on the Scottish Government to publish a comprehensive Scotland-wide mitigation plan by the autumn, and, as I have said, we would work with the Government on that. The plan should outline how Scotland will continue to remain compliant with international human rights law, including the European convention on human rights and the Council of Europe’s convention on action against trafficking.

As legislators, elected representatives and human beings, we all have a responsibility to do everything that we can within our powers to defend, protect and enhance the rights of the most marginalised people in our society and our world, including those who come to our country. I am clear that the bill is cruel, inhumane and unjustifiable, and the reality is that it will not work in terms of what it seeks to do. It cannot be used as a cover or as an excuse for the UK Government’s bigger agenda.

I urge the Scottish Government to work with partners to ensure that we do all that we can to mitigate the effects of the bill. For now, I add my support to the voices of those who are calling the bill out for what it is and opposing it clearly in Scotland.

The cabinet secretary speaks about concerted action in order to speed things up, and it is clear that that is what must happen. In recent months, a range of issues have been exposed relating to the ability of Social Security Scotland to deliver its core functions, including the soaring cost of the information technology budget, people waiting for more than an hour to have their call answered, people being cut off on the phone and people being unable to access the website. We were promised a better and fairer social security system by the Government through the creation of Social Security Scotland, five years ago, but people are still in need and should not have to wait so long. Will the cabinet secretary outline for members what direct action she will take to get a grip of the problem and bring the waiting times down? Will she commit to bringing a clear plan to the chamber to ensure that the processing times are sped up?

I am grateful, convener. I have a quick question for Andrea on the place of lifelong learning in trade unions. What more can we do in that space so that trade unions have the resource that they need to support workers to learn in the workplace and have protected time to do that, essentially?

Good morning, members of the panel. We are particularly interested in what is happening just now, what types of flexibilities are required and to what extent those flexibilities are available to low-income parents. As the convener has asked us to be specific, I direct the question to Jane van Zyl first. What is currently happening, and where are the flexibilities?

The key part of the question is how available are the flexibilities for parents, particularly parents who are on low incomes? Are there practical examples that you can share of where things work well?

Will you expand on what the effective ways of introducing flexibility are, particularly where there are significant challenges on the ground? I am keen to bring in other members of the panel. Nikki Slowey might want to comment on how we grow flexibility.

We know that the Government has spent almost £280 million on an information technology system for the agency, with no end in sight, and that significant challenges exist for people to get a response on the phone or online. What action is being taken immediately to ensure that people can get through and get an answer on those issues?

To ask the Scottish Government how many nursing and midwifery staff have left the national health service in the last 12 months. (S6O-02405)

I thank the cabinet secretary for that answer. New statistics have revealed that the use of agency staff increased dramatically in that period, rising to the equivalent of 1,741 whole-time equivalent nursing and midwifery staff in 2022-23. That is an increase of 1,018, or more than 70 per cent, on 2021-22. We know that nurses and midwives continue to leave the profession in droves due to stress and burn-out, and we know that, even though there is an astronomical use of agency staff, people cannot even access them, and wards are being left in perilous positions.

The cabinet secretary has not been in post for all that long, but he must accept that those are clear failures in workforce planning and he must take responsibility for addressing the issue. When is he going to prioritise the work of the new nursing and midwifery task force in order to ensure that it delivers a plan for providing the nursing workforce that Scotland needs?

We certainly recognise much of what you have said, and I echo your comments about the excellent support provided by organisations, especially in the charitable sector, whose representatives felt, sometimes, that there were barriers to accessing hotels, because of many of the issues that you have mentioned.

I have a question about the use of hotels making people more identifiable, with reference to the risk of human trafficking and exploitation. Do you feel that use of hotels has created such a risk? Because we know where people are, they become more of a target, in a sense.