Chamber and committees

It was right that Ferguson Marine was brought into public ownership, because its closure would have led to the loss of hundreds of skilled jobs and further weakened Scotland’s industrial base. However, although public ownership is welcome, the Scottish Government’s mismanagement of Ferguson Marine is not.

The Government could have used public ownership of the company to drive the development of a national ferry procurement and building programme. It could have worked with trade unions and workers to transform Ferguson Marine into a vital publicly owned industrial asset. Instead, the Scottish Government has mismanaged Ferguson Marine, leaving us with continuing delays, secrecy about procurement and a lack of a long-term vision for the company.

We remain in a position where neither of the two vessels has been delivered. Their construction has been subject to repeated delays, while costs continue to increase as parts degrade, redesigns take place and items fall out of warranty. The Scottish Government’s ownership of Ferguson Marine has exacerbated those delays due to poor planning and ineffective management. However, we should reflect on the fact that it is the communities that rely on ferry services who are truly bearing the brunt of the delay. We need the Scottish Government to take urgent action to ensure that the two vessels are delivered without further delay.

The Scottish Government also has questions to answer over procurement decisions relating to Ferguson Marine. Audit Scotland’s report highlights that ministers awarded a contract to a builder that could not meet the basic contract guarantees. Ministers also signed up to a contract that committed public funds without public accountability. Warnings from Transport Scotland and CMAL to retender the contract were ignored, with ministers pressing on at a cost to the public of £250 million.

Despite their commitment to open government, ministers have failed to make public all the information relating to their decisions on that contract. That is why Labour is calling for a public inquiry into the failings in the procurement of the contract.

The experience of Ferguson Marine emphasises the need for a long-term strategy for Scotland’s shipbuilding industry. In March, Audit Scotland called for Transport Scotland to finalise the long-term plan and investment programme for ferries by the end of this year. The Scottish Government must ensure that trade unions and workers are able to input into that process so that what emerges is a truly national ferry procurement and building programme.

We must also begin to think about the long-term governance of our ferry network. The Scottish Tories have called for CMAL to be privatised but that is the wrong approach. Labour wants a new governance framework to be established—one that prioritises the needs of passengers and communities who rely on the ferry network. We need a long-term vision for Scotland’s ferry services and I look forward to tomorrow’s members’ business debate, led by Katy Clark, on that subject.

Ferguson Marine must remain publicly owned but must also receive continuing investment, because the alternative is stark. A failure to invest in Ferguson Marine will cost vital shipbuilding jobs and skills in Scotland. That would be an act of industrial vandalism that the Parliament cannot allow to happen.

To ask the Scottish Government what discussions it has had with the Department for Work and Pensions regarding proposed changes to its office estate that could result in job losses in the north-east and elsewhere in Scotland. (S6O-00953)

Last September, the First Minister announced the creation of more than 2,000 jobs in Social Security Scotland by the end of this year. The DWP staff who are at risk of redundancy have a high level of expertise in delivering social security benefits, which could prove to be useful in supporting roll-out of new devolved benefits. Therefore, will the minister commit to working with the PCS Scotland trade union and the DWP to explore redeployment of those workers to Social Security Scotland, particularly in areas where there is a high risk of redundancy.

I thank the minister for advance sight of her statement. However, given that an important statement on ferries was bumped for this one, it really ought to have contained a lot more substance. Today’s statement does nothing to address the fact that Scotland’s land market continues to be dominated by private investment and that wealthy individuals continue to own vast amounts of land.

The Scottish Government is seeking to improve transparency around land ownership through the register of persons holding a controlled interest in land, but the enforcement measures that have been announced for non-compliance with the register are weak. A £5,000 fine will not deter those wealthy landowners who can afford to pay. Can the minister confirm whether the Scottish Government will remove public subsidies from landowners who refuse to comply?

Although the Scottish Government has published the interim principles today, it is unclear how landowners will be made to comply with them. Will the principles be incorporated into the land rights and responsibilities statement? Will the Scottish Land Commission be given the powers to turn those interim principles into an enforceable code of practice for landowners?

Will the minister answer the question?

When the closure of Dundee’s Michelin factory was announced in 2018, the company committed to involving Unite the union in development of the new innovation park on the site. Michelin also committed to offering the first opportunities for re-employment to former Michelin staff, and to encouraging new companies that were coming to the site to do the same. Given that the Scottish Government has already invested £60 million in the site, can the minister confirm precisely how many former Michelin staff have been employed there? What meaningful engagement has Unite the union had in the development?

As well as the on-going shortage of social housing, there is a lack of democracy in respect of rent increases in the social rented sector. Most social landlords conduct limited consultation of tenants and present them with no choice other than to accept a rent increase. The tenants union Living Rent is calling for statutory and binding rent consultations that present a real choice to tenants and empower them to reject rent increases if they wish to do so. Will the Scottish Government stand up for tenants by making that change?

In response to my colleague, Martin Whitfield, in September, the cabinet secretary said that food should be

“processed as close as possible to the point of primary production”—[Official Report, 2 September 2021; c 46.]

She also committed the Scottish Government to working with any operators that are looking to take forward a mobile abattoir model. Now that six months have passed, can the cabinet secretary update the chamber on what steps she is taking to improve abattoir provision? Will the Scottish Government take forward the mobile abattoir model if no prospective operators come forward?

Millions of workers are facing a cost of living crisis that they did not create. The People’s Assembly has been organising mass demonstrations up and down the country to make it clear that workers cannot pay—and will not pay—for the crisis. Campaigners are calling for the introduction of a wealth tax on the richest 1 per cent, which would raise £14 billion a year for tackling the cost of living crisis and investing in public services. Does the First Minister back that call?

One of the key reasons that was used to justify the tendering of Old Aberdeen medical practice was to improve the sustainability of GP services in the city, but many of the city’s practices are now facing closure and unsustainable GP to patient ratios, which poses a threat to patient care. The last time that I asked cabinet secretary to meet those who are affected, he said that he would consider it, but when I followed up with him I was told that he did not have time. Three months have passed, so I am asking the cabinet secretary once again whether he will meet staff and patients to hear their concerns.