Chamber and committees

Presiding Officer, will I get the time back?

Thank you.

The minister says that it is an important part of the role of Government to use interventions, but what about the fact that a quarter of the working-age population in Scotland is inactive because of ill health?

Before I begin, I would just like to say thank you to Jackson Carlaw, Richard Leonard and Christine Grahame for their interesting and engaging speeches.

The migration system is important to a thriving economy. I think that we are all in agreement on that. I echo the positive words that we have heard in this debate about the contributions of those who have made Scotland their home. Ben Macpherson used the word “enriching”, and I definitely agree with him. As a human resources leader in the international energy and renewables sector for three decades, I understand the importance of positive migration and, like Jackson Carlaw, I am on the side of having a migration system. It is absolutely fundamental to who we are.

However, as my colleague Foysol Choudhury said, the migration system is not a cure-all for Scotland’s economy. It will not fix the demographic challenges that we face. I find it really disappointing that the SNP’s motion does not address the drivers of depopulation. My colleague Craig Hoy spent quite some time in his speech raising the importance of that. The motion fails to acknowledge Scotland’s rising levels of economic inactivity due to ill health and it fails to address how we can harness the existing potential labour force in Scotland. It ignores the housing shortages, the income tax burden, our creaking NHS, our crumbling transport infrastructure, our failing education system and the sky-high cost of childcare, which is pushing too many women out of work.

As my colleague Liz Smith emphasised earlier this week, the SNP keeps trying to address serious policy issues by using short-term fixes. When it comes to Scotland’s demography, sticking plasters are not the solution, as we have heard today.

The SNP has spent years agitating for independence, but as Scotland is part of the UK, the Scottish Government’s budget is protected from population decline. That point was not made by me; it was made by the Institute for Fiscal Studies. It is no surprise that, instead of using existing levers to tackle the population challenges that Scotland faces, the SNP reverts to form and calls for more powers. That is the same SNP that took years to set up the Scottish social security system, following the passing of the Scotland Act 2016. It is the same SNP that still has not floated new ferries for our island communities, prompting a grovelling apology from the First Minister this week.

As a north-east MSP, I represent areas of remote and rural Scotland, and I know the unique population challenges that communities in those areas face, and I have raised them with Scottish ministers. However, when it comes to solutions, we should look first at the causes of depopulation. Almost half of council wards in the Borders and in the Highlands have experienced population decline—as my colleagues highlighted.

Richard Leonard will be pleased to know that human rights are very important to me. The Scottish Human Rights Commission published alarming findings that show that food and housing in the Highlands do not meet minimum core human rights obligations, whereas health only partially meets obligations.

Jeremy Balfour stated a stark fact, which is that Scotland receives 6 per cent of net migration to the UK, which is lower than its 8.4 per cent population share. The Scottish Government likes to downplay the significance of that, but it is extremely important. The reality is that, after 17 years of SNP mismanagement, Scotland is often not an attractive prospect for people who are looking to relocate. The SNP-controlled NHS is performing worse than the health service in England. If the SNP wants to support Scotland’s economy, public services and communities, it should show some more common sense and focus on using the powers that it has to make Scotland a more attractive place to move to.

If my memory serves me correctly, Alex Cole-Hamilton talked a year or so ago about how a Ukrainian daughter had to go to Ukraine to have dental treatment because the dental services in this country were so poor. Would the member like to comment on that?

Will the minister take an intervention?

My understanding of what Craig Hoy said is that he was talking about £140 million of efficiency savings. I do not think that there is anything wrong with efficiency savings. If the SNP Government would focus on that, maybe we would have money to fund other important infrastructure projects.

Rhoda Grant rightly said that workforce planning should never be dependent on inward migration, and Christine Grahame talked about workforce availability. The two things are quite different. Workforce planning is very, very important. As we know from the NHS system, there is a lack of proper workforce planning in the Scottish Government, particularly in relation to the NHS. Scotland is the only nation in the UK where both the overall population and the working-age population are forecast to decline.

Christine Grahame is harping back to Brexit, but that ship is gone. When you were making your speech, I started to think that you were making some interesting points, but you dashed it all when you talked about grabbing employment law. If the Scottish Government could control and manage the things that it had the levers to manage, maybe the Scottish population would trust the Scottish Government and the SNP to deliver.

I will give a quick response to that question. Yes, the council could do that but, as my colleague will know, motorists do not want to feel badly let down by having to pay millions of pounds in parking fines and such things. They feel extremely concerned about the matter, so a balance needs to be struck. Yes, councils need to find funds, but I would say that they need support. There is a pothole fund, but they need more support from the Scottish Government.

Local government has been chronically underfunded by the SNP Government. My colleague mentioned Aberdeen City Council. Aberdeenshire Council manages and maintains a whopping 3,467 miles of road, and it is forking out huge sums for bridge maintenance, including for the Aboyne, Dinnet and Banff bridges. I have been told that the repair costs are in the millions of pounds, which is just not sustainable. Scottish and Southern Electricity Networks has proposed a megapylon pathway in the north-east, which will also affect our roads. Heavy machinery and lorries will do enormous damage to ageing road assets. Who is going to cover the bill? Who is actually thinking about that?

Storms and heavy rainfall will only make matters worse, and will lead to further deterioration in the condition of the roads. The road at Marykirk completely fell away in storm Babet, and that took several months to fix. The road between Marykirk and Montrose and the bridge between St Cyrus and Montrose were out for months.

The SNP Government says that it is up to local authorities to decide how to spend their budgets, but they cannot be expected to do more with less. How far can we stretch an elastic band? The massive backlog in road repairs could cost billions to remedy, and motorists, motorcyclists and cyclists are paying the price of the SNP’s contempt for drivers.

Although funding is a huge problem, we also need to look at the process for repairing potholes. A quick patch might be cost effective, but it is not long lasting.

Finally, response times after a pothole is reported are also key. It can take days, months and sometimes years for the necessary repairs to be completed, which means that drivers must swerve or go slow to avoid them. Such changes in driver behaviour cause accidents. With lives at risk, councils must have the resources to properly repair roads.