Chamber and committees

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I would have voted no.

I appreciate being able to come in on this point. In the chamber earlier in the week, I asked the First Minister whether legislative changes might be required to get consistency. I hope that what I am hearing is that if we did need to make legislative changes, we might be able to do that. Does the cabinet secretary think that we might need to make legislative changes, and would there be a willingness in the Cabinet to do that?

Thank you. I really appreciate all of today’s discussion. I have a question for the cabinet secretary, which is about public sector reform and women in the workplace. Many lower-paid jobs are done by women, as is some of our more precarious work, where people have two or three different contracts, perhaps working in areas such as school meals provision, cleaning services or similar essential roles. There is concern that those are the kinds of posts that are most likely to be made redundant or to have contract changes. Given that most of those jobs are done by women, and women working in such areas have the highest levels of poverty, can the cabinet secretary assure us that that will not be the case?

10:45

Do we have a defined example or wording for what the Government means by “front-line staff” and “backroom staff”? Do we have that written down anywhere?

I press you, cabinet secretary, to give us a timeline for when we might be able to see in writing which roles will go. All those staff are workers, so they will be concerned about whether they could be targeted. In the context that we are talking about, women will be fearful that their jobs could go.

Sorry, I do apologise—[Laughter.] Now he will definitely mention how important the issue is.

It is about how we deliver on that marine space. Andrew Baxter made some really good contributions about that finite space and there is so much more to discuss in relation to that area.

Sometimes, in this place, we can be a wee bit guilty of not focusing on Scottish Parliament responsibilities. We are calling for proper planning and we urge the SNP Government to introduce a management plan for all those integrations between wind and sea, for example, and to ensure that our seabeds are healthy. We would appreciate that plan coming forward and hearing about some of those issues.

The future of our fishing industry is dependent on its sustainability. Without any rules to govern implementation, the impact of the marine protected areas is of limited value. We must support our marine habitats effectively. The Scottish Government needs to prioritise inshore waters for our ecosystems and the way of life of sustainable fisheries on our coasts. If too much damage is done to the natural environment, there will be no fishing—other members made that important point. If we work together, we can support Scotland’s fishing industry and have a healthy sea and environment and communities that thrive. I hope that, by working together, we can do that.

17:24

Every member who has spoken has made an important contribution, and I appreciate the minister’s remarks. I emphasise that, as I am sure she is aware, there are some difficulties with outcome rates among ethnic minority women, so it is important that firm measures in that regard are put in place in relation to any of our reviews and standards.

I thank members for what has been, on the whole, a thoughtful and considered debate, with some excellent interventions. I also thank Dawn Black and Lloyd Melville for their reminder about the dangers of the sea and the fact that lives can be lost. I really appreciate it that they brought that to the chamber.

Fishing is the cornerstone of the economy and identity of many coastal towns, and it plays a vital role in supporting our national food security. As we have heard, the importance of our fishing industry cannot be overstated. That is why we have a responsibility here in Scotland to ensure that our industry is supported to be both profitable and sustainable while operating in a healthy marine environment. The minister set that out very well in his opening remarks, so I thank him for that.

We all spoke about our regions. There was a suggestion that Labour does not care about coastal communities, but it is fair to say that Donald MacKinnon and I are here because we care about our coastal communities. My South Scotland region relies heavily on thriving and successful fishing industries. My remarks will therefore be made with their strong opinions in mind, alongside the necessity to meet sustainable targets.

In last year’s debate, I said that we should work together, and I continue to think that we should do so. We agree on so much—there were many contributions on food security, the dedication of the workers, the environment and the ability to make fisheries sustainable.

I want to make a point about what we could do to make a difference. Of course, the debate focused on UK Labour—I understand why that happened—but we could perhaps seek not to be so combative over the next year and seek to work together. My colleague Donald MacKinnon has written to the UK minister; last year, I talked about some of the work that the MP for the Western Isles had done; and I extend a hand to Karen Adam, Jenny Minto and other women in the chamber whose contributions brought real value to the debate. Let us see whether we can do some of that work over the next year when it comes to the fishing industry.

I move to our amendment. We are very keen to talk about community infrastructure. The minister and others in the chamber will know that I often talk about cross-portfolio working, which I think is relevant in this debate. Ensuring that our fishing industry remains sustainable includes supporting the coastal communities with the necessary infrastructure, skills, housing, other job opportunities, nurseries and availability for our young people. That will help to support the growth of the community and the industry, which is why we highlighted that aspect in our amendment. If we do not have those things, we chip away at the industry itself. I thank Ariane Burgess for bringing up the community quotas, which link quite nicely with community wealth building and community infrastructure. I do not know a great deal about those things, so I would appreciate if we could discuss them further in the Parliament.

There are definitely pressures on Scotland’s marine space—we have heard about spatial squeeze from several members. I ask whether the minister could speak to us in his closing remarks about what the Scottish Government is doing about the issue because, as Ariane Burgess and others have mentioned, we are not delivering on it—[Interruption.] Sorry?

It is important that we debate how we allocate funding to Scotland. Is the member in favour of Barnett consequentials across the board, or does he have suggestions for another method?

I thank Clare Haughey for bringing the debate to the chamber. I was recently asked to join the cross-party group on Malawi, so I have already been looking at the relationship between Scotland and Malawi. As Clare Haughey pointed out in her contribution, it is a long-term, wonderful and interesting relationship—the word that she used was “remarkable”. It started with the unique Scotland-Malawi friendship, rooted in the 1859 journey of explorer David Livingstone—as other members have mentioned—and, as the motion highlights, the founding of Blantyre in Malawi. The friendship dates back to the explorer’s travels across Malawi in 1859. That was followed by decades of church, educational and community links and, as others have mentioned, civic relationships.

The origins of the modern relationship are easily recalled to the mind of anyone who was interested in the Scottish Parliament from its early years. As an outsider to the Parliament at that time, I remember that the former First Minister Jack McConnell established the official intergovernmental co-operation agreement between Scotland and Malawi in 2005. I think that it is fair to say that he understood that the agreement’s civic roots were key to its success. As other members have said, it was not simply about the intergovernmental links; it was important to build on the deep historical ties that we had with Malawi, rather than just signing a formal agreement between Governments.

I am glad that the relationship was renewed and updated in 2018. At that point, we were looking at things that mattered to people such as co-operation on health, education and skills, sustainable economic development and renewables and energy—the things that we talk about in the Parliament every day—and the links between people, communities, schools, universities, churches and charities. My understanding, from speaking to many people once I knew that I would be joining the cross-party group, is that the agreement provides for wonderful co-operation between the two countries and sees them operating on an equal level. That may be unique in terms of the ways that other international development funds work.

The Scotland Malawi Partnership, as Clare Haughey mentioned, has sent members a briefing, which has included, for me, a wonderful report about the projects in my region. For example, it highlights that, 15 years ago, the St Andrews Charitable Trust built a school, which has grown from 96 children to more than 1,000. It has five school buildings, along with teachers’ houses and solar panels, and the trust provides things such as mosquito nets, food, school books and equipment. There is a close relationship that is tangible in what it provides. I was also interested to read about the Fair Trade Electives medical elective partnership work. It looks like an amazing partnership, in which both groups gain so much from working together.

I want to highlight some of the work that is done to support women and girls. Scotland and Malawi have worked together on a number of initiatives that are focused on improving outcomes for women and girls in key areas such as education, including access to education, reproductive health, empowering women and leadership. Those are all important elements.

I also pay tribute in particular to the work that has been done by Susan Dalgety, who was an adviser to Jack McConnell at the time of the original Scotland-Malawi agreement. It shows how important that agreement was to the Scottish Parliament that someone who was working at that stage still shows such a commitment to the project, and in particular to women and girls. That work has certainly sparked my interest—I have read many articles and followed what is happening on social media. In fact, I noticed from social media today that Susan Dalgety is on her way to Malawi, so I will be interested in hearing about the exciting work that may come from that visit.

If the Presiding Officer will give me a moment, I will just add one point, given that I have been speaking about women. I have been doing some work about the humanitarian situation in Cuba, in particular around women. We know that the embargo is causing problems with electricity and the supply of flour and bread, and the impact on women in Cuba has been enormous. As this debate is about international collaboration, I wonder whether members might also take a look at some of the humanitarian needs in Cuba.

However, given the time, Presiding Officer, I will stop now. I simply say that I really appreciate the debate coming to the chamber, and I hope that our friendship with Malawi continues well into the future.

18:01