Chamber and committees

We are fully supportive of having an independent regulator. The regulators and the judiciary were fundamentally opposed to the approach of having a single independent regulator, but we believe that it is important and that the corresponding recommendation of the Roberton review should have been followed through.

In its eternal wisdom, the Scottish Government settled on a so-called workaround in the bill, which satisfied no one. It created sweeping new ministerial powers to intervene directly in the regulation of legal services, prompting widespread condemnation—from the legal profession and beyond—of what was seen as a Government assault on the rule of law. Its approach was considered to be bad law making.

I speak today on behalf of my constituents who rely on the energy sector for their livelihoods. The job losses at Harbour Energy are the tip of the iceberg. Why? Because the SNP and Labour are directly harming the industry with a presumption against new oil and gas exploration in the North Sea and a punitive fiscal environment. Hostile left-wing politicians are presiding over the industrial decline of Scotland’s oil and gas sector.

Russell Borthwick of Aberdeen and Grampian Chamber of Commerce is right: if the SNP Scottish Government and Labour UK Government do not change course, recent lay-offs will be

“just a tiny fraction of what’s to come”.

The so-called just transition risks becoming a jobless transition. It will not be fixed by gimmicks such as Great British Energy. Even its chairman, Juergen Maier, said that it would take 20 years to deliver the 1,000 jobs that have been promised. That is an utter sham.

SNP ministers tout a clean energy future, but they will not even define what “clean” means, scaring off the investment that we need for an affordable transition. The SNP Government ploughed ahead with a ScotWind gold rush, selling off vast swathes of the sea bed on the cheap with no real plan for grid infrastructure.

Meanwhile, Scottish and Southern Electricity Networks wants to puncture our prime agricultural farmland and rural landscapes with monster pylons up to 230 feet tall, leaving residents feeling betrayed and disenfranchised. Their mental health is already suffering and they are fearing the health impacts, lost livelihoods and plummeting property values from the explosion of that new energy infrastructure. The bottom has dropped out of their world.

Farmers are ringing alarm bells over serious safety concerns about overhead lines and farming machinery.

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will undertake a review of Historic Environment Scotland before the end of the current parliamentary session. (S6O-04643)

Just a few weeks ago, it emerged that Historic Environment Scotland was propagating that trans women are women. It had no policy regarding the provision of single-sex spaces and suggested that excluding people from bathrooms and changing rooms is transphobia.

When my colleague Rachael Hamilton demanded that the cabinet secretary intervene, the cabinet secretary said that it was

“an operational matter for Historic Environment Scotland.”—[Official Report, 19 March 2025; c 2-3.]

Following the Supreme Court’s judgment and the Parliament’s swift action to comply with the ruling, will the cabinet secretary stop washing his hands of the situation and ensure that the organisations that fall under his remit immediately comply with their legal obligations to women?

I am sorry, but I have only four minutes.

They are, rightly, worried about the loss of agricultural productivity and the impact on their businesses, the health and safety of their animals, the crop yield and overall food security. It is environmental vandalism, and this is just the start. It cannot be the vision of a so-called just transition. To rub salt into the wound, the SNP and Labour have been pushing to muzzle the voices of communities by removing the right to a public inquiry.

Countries such as the Netherlands and Germany are undergrounding cables to great effect and Denmark is developing energy islands to act as an offshore energy base. We undergrounded the pipes in the 1970s—why can we not do it again?

The Scottish Conservatives’ commonsense plans balance the needs of today and those of tomorrow. We recognise that we will need to use our oil and gas for years to come. We know that Scotland’s oil and gas workers and renewables ambitions can go hand in hand. That means scrapping the ban on new oil and gas production and embracing innovation in order to cut emissions while preserving jobs. It also means listening to communities and pursuing alternatives to monster pylons and huge substations.

I urge my SNP and Labour colleagues to see sense before it is too late.

To go back to the issue of employment, is there no role for the Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service Scotland?

I have one follow-up question, about domestic abuse. More than 80 per cent of those who experience domestic abuse are women. Scottish Women’s Aid said in its submission:

“Legal services should be provided free for all women, children and young people experiencing domestic abuse, with no means test and no qualification on accessing this for women.”

On the point about economic abuse, women who are on low incomes are often told by certain parties that they would be better off not working, because then they could access legal aid. However, if they have to stop working to access legal aid, they end up in a cycle in which they are never able to get out of poverty. Many women who experience domestic abuse find themselves leaving the family home and then having their partners come after them for maintenance—that is a huge situation. I have heard of absurd situations where women on low incomes have had to leave their family home, leaving their children behind, and cannot get legal advice but are being asked to pay significant sums in maintenance. Do you know of such cases? Would you also support Scottish Women’s Aid in its call for there to be no means testing at all?

Pat Thom, I know that you have also said that the eligibility criteria should be reviewed. I am feeling a sense of desperation among many women who have experienced domestic abuse and economic abuse. Would you like to speak to that?

In wrapping up, I have the last few questions for you. I will go to Pat Thom first. If you had to look at a future vision for legal aid, what action would you say needs to be taken?

That is fine. There is a bit of time pressure, so would you say, in a nutshell, that those are the key points? I note that you have a very extensive submission, which we have read.