Chamber and committees

Will additional funding go to local government to pay for the pay offer or do local authorities have to find that money themselves?

Yes. The table on that page shows that there is a cut of approximately 33 per cent to the spending on learning. Is that fair, or is that money being spent elsewhere within the budget? The committee received a lot of evidence that we have a big skills shortage in Scotland.

Is that the same with housing, for example? I think that there is a 20 per cent cut—£205 million. Has the money been allocated to another department for it to spend on housing instead?

We might look at that and think initially that it is a cut to the housing budget, but it is not really that. Money has been allocated to another department to spend on that area.

To go back to Daniel Johnson’s earlier comment about the different boundaries that exist, given that there are 14 health boards and 32 local authorities, do we have any hope of success without real structural change? Do we just have to bite the bullet and agree that we need a big overhaul of public services across the board?

My next question concerns education and skills. I refer to page 43 of the papers.

So there is no overall reduction in the amount of funding for education and skills. Is that correct?

Therefore, when we see an increase of £724 million and the proposed budget going up by only £473 million, that does not mean that the NHS has been short-changed by a quarter of a billion pounds; rather, the money is simply being spent by other departments almost on behalf of the health and social care department. Is that correct?

I refer members to my entry in the register of members’ interests, which shows that I am still a member of Aberdeen City Council.

I welcome this debate on Covid recovery, but it is important to acknowledge that those who are working in our front-line services are still under a huge amount of pressure as a result of Covid. They do not yet feel that they are in the recovery phase, nor do they feel that they are being supported or valued by this devolved Government.

We are all aware of the pressure that care workers and NHS staff are continuing to work under. Hospitals are at capacity, and three health boards have support from the British Army. NHS Grampian has requested support but is waiting for that request to be passed on by the Scottish Government. The Scottish National Party Government and the health secretary are failing our sick, vulnerable and infirm, and it is only our NHS workers’ passion and sheer commitment to public service that are keeping our hospitals and health boards afloat.

There is little in the recovery strategy on how the Government is planning to deal with the recovery in our NHS; there is little detail on waiting times, including cancer treatment waiting times; and there is nothing on A and E waiting times or on how we will tackle the crisis in our Ambulance Service. NHS boards are telling people not to come to hospital unless their problem is life threatening, and the cabinet secretary is asking Scots to think twice about calling an ambulance. What are people supposed to do, and where are they supposed to turn?

The strategy document contains some nice words, but, after reading it, I am left with more questions than answers. An example of that is on page 4, which says that the strategy will

“address the systemic inequalities made worse by Covid.”

I have been contacted by a family who has a son at school who is deaf. There are more than 3,800 deaf children in Scotland. Deafness is not classed as a learning disability, yet a significant attainment gap continues to exist for deaf learners. The latest Scottish Government data shows that, last year, 6.5 per cent of deaf learners left school with no qualifications compared with 2.4 per cent of all pupils and that 45 per cent obtained highers compared with 59 per cent of all pupils. The continued use of face masks in our schools disproportionately affects that group of learners and risks increasing the attainment gap that already exists, and I see nothing in the strategy that tells us how that inequality will be addressed. I plead with the cabinet secretary to look at ways of addressing that issue before more deaf children are left behind.

Presiding Officer, please do not laugh, but I nearly fell off my seat when I read about partnership working with local government. The SNP Government’s definition of partnership working with local government is telling councils what to do and when to do it. That is not a partnership. When this devolved Government introduced the botched vaccine passport scheme, it was left to local authorities to enforce it—there was no debate, no discussion, just, “Go and do it.” That is not partnership working.

Aberdeen City Council has been left with a £6 million hole in its finances due to the devolved Scottish Government delaying payment of money that it asked the council to distribute to businesses during the pandemic, £1 million of which has been due since the First Minister imposed an unjustified local lockdown in August 2020. That is not partnership working. It is an absolute disgrace, and the cabinet secretary should be ashamed, as it impacts directly on the council’s ability to deliver key services to its communities.

The cabinet secretary comes here today with some warm words but offers no direct action. He has some ideas but no concrete proposals—nothing that will help my constituents in Aberdeen, businesses in the north-east, the most vulnerable in our schools or our NHS. Every single group has been let down by this devolved SNP Government, despite the UK Government ploughing billions of pounds into its coffers. We need more than warm words from the cabinet secretary to tackle our recovery from the pandemic. We need direct action, and we need it now.

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. On 5 October we had a members’ business debate on the big noise programme in Wester Hailes. Unfortunately, the Cabinet Secretary for the Constitution, External Affairs and Culture, who was meant to be responding to the debate, did not turn up until the last speaker was speaking. He was then encouraged by the Deputy Presiding Officer to watch the debate back and to write to all members who took part regarding the issues raised in their speeches. I have received nothing.

Standing order 7.3.1 states:

“Members shall at all times conduct themselves in a courteous and respectful manner and shall respect the authority of the Presiding Officer.”

I ask first whether, through ignoring the advice of the Deputy Presiding Officer to write to members, Mr Robertson has breached that standing order. Secondly, what is your ruling on the disrespect shown by the cabinet secretary to members who wished to debate the issues properly but could not do so, due to the lack of his attendance?