Chamber and committees

I thank Alyn Smith for bringing the debate to the chamber; it is very welcome. As he outlined, the screen sector is very important for the whole of Scotland, and he rightly highlighted his own constituency’s particular assets in that respect.

The sector makes a significant contribution to the Scottish economy—it is a modern industry in a content-hungry global economy. There is huge scope for growth globally in many other sectors, but it is right to highlight some of the key assets that we have in this country, whether that be our natural physical environment or being an English-speaking nation, which allows us to export our talent around the world through digital streaming. The impact of those digital streaming platforms is significant and profound; it is driving diversity in content and disrupting the business models that were previously used by the industry.

As a result of that, there are threats as well as opportunities. Quite often, in debates in the Parliament and in other places, people talk about some of the disruptive elements of online digital streaming and social media content creation and the threats that they can bring.

However, at the same time, we have to be at the forefront of taking advantage of some of the opportunities. In doing so, it is vital that we consider the end-to-end process of creation, production and enjoyment. That all loops back into the same process, because production requires prior consumption and inspiration among young people and older people, so that they can see themselves as having a place in that industry. They have to see it to be it.

As Alyn Smith highlighted, the skills are significant, whether they are delivered through further or higher education. We should probably consider the evidence that was taken at committee in the previous session of Parliament about some of the school-level skills that might be an option for Scotland. In Northern Ireland, that is certainly the case. Production skills in Scotland are more often delivered in a partnership model between further education—our colleges—and our schools, but we know that many of those partnership arrangements with colleges are under threat or have been retracted because of the funding model. We might want to consider whether Qualifications Scotland can deliver some of those skills more directly through our schools.

In particular, I want to highlight the consumption end. I pay tribute to the Belmont cinema in Aberdeen and the campaign to restore it after its closure in late 2022. There has been a significant community campaign for that key project, which has raised £2.815 million to date. I know that members will appreciate the efforts that the volunteers have put into pulling together that money, but they still have a distance to travel to ensure that that key facility in the centre of Aberdeen is brought back to life—not just for the enjoyment of citizens and their consumption of culture, but as a key contributor to driving the tourist economy and the night-time economy. It is absolutely critical: it has been the city’s only independent cinema and it is a key cultural draw.

I would like to hear from the minister, when she is summing up, what more we can do to support not just Belmont but similar cinemas across the country.

I appreciate the minister giving way. Would he not recognise that there is a question of public money paid in Short money to the SNP? There are questions of public policy that must be addressed, where it is not just the SNP that is the victim, as the minister asserts.

I absolutely agree with Mr Melville, and he is right to highlight the cinema in Arbroath. I also point to the independent cinema in Montrose, which is supported by the local port authority on a sponsorship model; it helps to provide the facilities through the funding that it gives to the cinema. It is a critical hub for the community and for enjoyment.

I note that Dundee Contemporary Arts—DCA—has ambitious plans for redevelopment, to build sustainability into its model as part of a longer-term redevelopment plan. Its outstanding building opened as far back as 1999, but it requires further investment to make it a more sustainable business model. I hope that we can hear a little bit from the minister about what we can do to support that consumption end of the pipeline in a very important sector for Scotland.

18:13

I thank the cabinet secretary for her understanding of the issue. The time bar was set aside by NHS Tayside, which is allowing victims to have the chance of justice. Will the cabinet secretary meet me, victims and Willie Rennie MSP to discuss how we can get to the bottom of the legal culpability relating to the private patients and to ensure that we can make the case that the same should be done, with the time bar being set aside, to allow those patients who have suffered over a period of decades to access justice?

No—the tax advisory group.

I would certainly have to differ with Mr McKee on some of the analysis. The demand on our public services is recognised. It is clear from many reports by the Scottish Fiscal Commission that demand on public services and the requirements on them in meeting, for example, the cost of climate change will continue to rise, not just over the course of the current parliamentary session but in the future. Given that we have an ageing population, we know that health spending is projected to continue to grow. The issue is a result partly of the demand that exists, as well as of the policy choices that Mr McKee and his Government colleagues have taken.

The Government needs to adopt a far more serious approach. If appointing the axe-master general to the Cabinet is how the Government intends to address the remaining 99.7 per cent of the gap, that will be ruinous for our public services. Mr Rennie identified the need to set out the balance in relation to spending, taxation and, crucially, growth when it comes to tackling the key issues.

Had Scottish Labour prevailed in the election, we would have undertaken an urgent process to set all of that right. Instead, the SNP won a handsome victory in May, but it is incumbent on it to honestly appraise the budget in a manner that it has failed to do for years. In three years out of the past four, we have had an emergency budget. We cannot find ourselves in that situation again.

I welcome the cabinet secretary’s commitment to report back on the status of the tax advisory group that was advising her predecessor in the Government. We must get the right balance between the taxing of income and the taxing of wealth, because there is a trade-off and tax cannot always be viewed as additional, despite the broad challenges that we face. What consideration will the Scottish Government give to the behavioural effects of the taxation policies that we are talking about today? It is crucial that the Government and the Parliament get the right advice on that.

In the spirit of collective endeavour, because we all have to put our shoulders to the wheel and get on with it, the Labour amendment asks the Government to be true to its word today. I believe that it will do so, which is welcome. The First Minister has committed to looking at business rates and addressing what business leaders know to be a broken system. He met Sir Tom Hunter on 14 May and personally promised him reform. This week, the First Minister further pledged to act on the fresh start campaign that is being mounted by The Courier, The Press and Journal and The Sunday Post to introduce rates relief from day 1 for those who take over a vacant property. That measure is proposed to discourage properties being left empty and to encourage business growth on high streets in towns and cities, and I think that we all agree that we need action in those areas.

However, Labour believes that that must be seen in the round as part of a comprehensive review of business rates, so that we use them to encourage growth, not as a punitive measure. All of our inboxes are already beginning to groan with messages from people who are suffering as a result of rates revaluation. I sincerely hope that the Parliament as a whole can back Labour’s call to get that under way.

Scottish Labour also wants to see immediate action on council tax reform. If that is ever to be done, it surely has to happen now, at the start of this parliamentary session, given that political constraints always seem to present themselves later. I was elected in 2021 and, in my five years in the Parliament, I have become tired of obfuscation and excuses, of reports being commissioned and then shelved and of the dancing on the heads of pins with the language of consensus when what is required is good leadership and a solid majority in the Parliament. The Government must step up. If it does, we will be partners in trying to find a solution.

The SNP’s 20-year failure to reform council tax is a big part of why our local communities are shadows of their former selves, why our streets are so dirty, why young teachers are flying off to Australia to look for work for want of permanent contracts and why councils are wracked with conflict between workers who are being asked to deliver the impossible and managers who are being asked to pretend that the impossible has been achieved. Let us start this session with an openness to finding a solution.

It is on that basis that we lodged our amendment, and I hope that the whole Parliament will vote for it. I move amendment S7M-00249.4, to insert at end:

“; notes that the Scottish Government’s Medium Term Financial Strategy, published in June 2025, projected a funding gap of over £4.7 billion by 2029-30; considers that developing a sustainable plan to close this gap is essential to Scotland’s public services and that it is incumbent on all parties in the Parliament to work towards this goal; believes that, to this end, the Scottish Government should take a strategic approach across all devolved taxation in Scotland to include an immediate and comprehensive review of business rates, including consideration of measures such as widening the scope of Fresh Start relief to include businesses that occupy an empty unit within six months of the unit becoming vacant, and further believes that the Scottish Government should convene cross-party talks on council tax reform immediately.”

15:07

I appreciate that the Deputy First Minister has given way. In these matters, she and her predecessors have taken advice from a tax advisory group. Can she update us on the status of that group? Will it be maintained, and when will it next meet?

To ask the Scottish Government what its position is on whether there should be parity of access to justice for all former patients affected by the actions of Sam Eljamel, regardless of whether treatment was received through NHS Tayside or privately. (S7O-00018)

Labour welcomes the early opportunity to debate the scale of the fiscal challenge that the SNP has created for Scotland. The £4.7 billion gap between the spending trajectory that has been set by the Government and the income that the Scottish Fiscal Commission has projected will be generated is vast. How that gap is tackled will be the defining issue of this session of the Parliament, and it will affect everything else that we do.

We might all wish that that process will involve arresting the decline in standards when it comes to the ability of our schools to best equip our nation’s children for their futures. Perhaps we could start by understanding why pupils in Scotland are a year behind those in England in mathematics. Such outcomes have long-term economic consequences.

No, thank you. I am just getting started.

We might all wish that the process would involve addressing the drug deaths crisis, which is the worst in the developed world and is more than three times worse than it is in other parts of the UK, where the same drug laws apply. We might wish to deal with social care, national health service reform, online crime and much more. Those are the many issues that hang off the back of the fiscal choices that we make as a Parliament.

Instead, we must deal with the overarching fiscal malaise that was forewarned, in response to which the Government has yet to present a coherent answer. The assessment that the Institute for Fiscal Studies provided of the SNP’s spending plans during the election was absolutely brutal. The £1.4 billion increase in spending commitments, for which no credible funding has been identified, could increase the fiscal gap to some £6.1 billion.

Unfortunately, the big answers will not be found in the scope of the measures that the Government has identified in its motion. It has failed to quantify how much those measures would raise. By my calculations, the proposed mansion and jet taxes would account for up to about 0.33 per cent of the gap. I have rounded that figure up and, frankly, I have been rather generous in my assessment. I do not believe that the Government believes that those measures are commensurate with the scale of the challenge.