Chamber and committees

I begin by congratulating Clare Adamson on securing the debate. Five years have passed since we left the EU. In a more uncertain world, our closest geographical neighbours must remain friends and collaborators. The motion and the members who have spoken so far have highlighted the on-going effects of Boris Johnson’s Brexit deal.

In November, I joined members including Clare Adamson in discussing the UK trade and co-operation agreement. During that debate, members largely agreed that the deal was not delivering. Issues faced by businesses in trading with Europe were raised, including inadequate support from the previous UK Government in the transition to new rules and the additional time and cost burden of export health certificates. Some businesses reported ceasing trade with Europe entirely. That is clearly not a welcome situation, and Governments should be taking steps to address it.

While those challenges are known, what is not known is the process for rejoining the European Union. The Brexit years were defined by their uncertainty. We should be looking forward and improving the deals that we have now, not reopening the Brexit debate and causing further turmoil. The Labour Government in Westminster was elected on a manifesto to renegotiate the Brexit deal and to make improvements for our businesses.

For example, the UK Government is committed to seeking a veterinary agreement with Europe, which, if adopted, could improve agricultural exports by 20 per cent, according to Aston University. An improvement in conditions for touring artists, who have suffered as a result of Brexit, could also be achieved. Scotland and Edinburgh in particular benefit from cultural exchanges, yet the Conservative Brexit deal made touring more complicated for artists. I am pleased that Lisa Nandy has recently reaffirmed her commitment to making touring easier; work is on-going with Europe on that front.

Devolved Governments also have a role to play. The Scottish Government has completed two test and learn exercises that involved international student exchanges, while the Welsh Government has introduced its Taith scheme, which has sent thousands of students abroad and deepened cultural ties. I return to my point that action can be taken today where Brexit has put up barriers.

The five years since Brexit have been globally challenging and uncertain. Our relationship with Europe remains one of our most important relationships. I am pleased that the UK Labour Government is looking to build a positive relationship with Europe and to renegotiate the Brexit deal so that it delivers for businesses and people. That will demonstrate that, rather than looking back and rehashing old debates, we can move forward.

To ask the Scottish Government, regarding any implications for its provision of funding for humanitarian aid in Gaza, whether it will provide an update on what discussions it has had with the United Kingdom Government regarding recent developments in Gaza. (S6O-04239)

The ceasefire between Israel and Hamas and the returning of hostages should be welcome, but they will not undo the suffering that has been inflicted on the people of Gaza or the actions that Amnesty International said broke the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. Does the minister agree that the ceasefire is not the end of the conflict and that diplomatic pressure on all parties is needed to deliver a free Palestine and regional peace, particularly following recent violence in the West Bank? Will the Scottish Government consider actions to prevent public money from going to organisations that have profited from the war?

I want to draw the committee’s attention to the fact that the very first time that I had to face the committee was to support a petition about swimming and to talk about why swimming is important. I had to face you all at that time and I raised quite a lot of points about why it is so important. It is also a health issue.

Sadly, that petition was closed. I can get in touch with the campaign group that lodged it and ask if it has any other suggestions. At the same time, I agree that it is important to hear from Scottish Swimming on what Neil Bibby and Fulton MacGregor said, as well as on the Scottish Government’s responses. I fully support the petition.

I congratulate David Torrance on securing this members’ business debate, and I recognise his long-standing interest in the subject as the convener of the Scottish Showmen’s Guild cross-party group. I join members in welcoming the delegates from the European Showmen’s Union who are attending the debate and the reception today.

The European Showmen’s Union was formed in 1954 and recently celebrated its 70th anniversary, but fairgrounds and showpeople have been part of European history for far longer. In December, Belgian and French fairground culture was designated by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization as intangible cultural heritage, in recognition of the enduring tradition of funfairs and the important role that they play in our culture and economy. I welcome the European Showmen’s Union choosing to hold its congress in the United Kingdom for the first time—specifically in Edinburgh, a city that has enjoyed fairgrounds for generations. Members may share memories of going to fairgrounds in the Meadows or Leith Links and enjoying rides and games with friends or family. More recently, they may have seen the star flyer at Edinburgh’s winter wonderland, which has become a fixture of the skyline at Christmas and scares thousands of tourists.

Scotland’s love of fairgrounds and the work of showpeople will be showcased in an upcoming BBC Scotland programme, “Showpeople: Licensed to Thrill”, which will document the unique lifestyle of showpeople and the challenges that they face to entertain the public. Many of those challenges will, I am sure, be discussed during the upcoming congress; they include repairing rides, safety and the impact of bad weather.

The culture of showpeople has endured for generations, and some families are able to trace their heritage in the industry back over hundreds of years. In recent years, showpeople across Europe have shown great resilience, whether during Covid, when restrictions either closed or greatly limited fairgrounds, or more recently, in the face of rising costs and inflation. Council licensing in Scotland also remains a challenge, as charges are inconsistent and vary hugely, which means that fairs are not as viable in certain areas. I understand that David Torrance has raised that issue previously. Nevertheless, regardless of those challenges, showpeople have continued to entertain us and to bring joy to children and families.

I again welcome the European Showmen’s Union congress to Edinburgh. The debate underlines the history of showpeople and fairgrounds and the cultural value that we place on them. I understand that the Showmen’s Guild of Great Britain is seeking UNESCO recognition as representing intangible cultural heritage. I hope that it is successful in its campaign, and I wish everyone who is attending the congress a productive and pleasant time.

As all my colleagues have, I thank Laura Hansler for bringing the petition to Parliament. I joined the Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee in 2023. Shortly after the petition was first considered, I joined members in thanking the clerks and many stakeholders who gave evidence to the inquiry.

Much has changed since the original petition was lodged with the committee in 2022, but one thing continues to be the case: the A9 has not been dualled. Sadly, death on the A9 remains too common. During the debate, we must not forget that that is why the dualling project is necessary.

We have heard in both written and in-person evidence that the 2025 target was not considered by the officials or ministers to be unachievable. Alex Neil, who had responsibility for the project in 2011, said the target was “perfectly feasible” and other ministers said that the project remained a priority for the Scottish Government, so where did it go wrong?

The committee found that a number of factors played a role in the 2025 target being missed. I want to focus my remarks on the funding model of the project, its management and proposals for a memorial to the people who have lost their lives on the A9.

Regarding the model of funding, we heard from both the late Alex Salmond and Màiri McAllan that there was always the expectation of a mixture of public and private financing. However, following reclassification of the non-profit distributing model in 2014 as public financing, it was not clear how financing the project would be achieved. Transport Scotland warned ministers in 2017 of a “diminishing window” for a procurement strategy to be agreed, but the new funding model would not be established until 2019. A discussion paper from December 2021 shows that a decision on financing was still to be made then. Instead of deciding on funding and making clear that the 2025 deadline would be missed, ministers failed to decide at all. Uncertainty seems to have contributed to the delays that we have seen and is a consistent theme of the inquiry.

My next point involves the management of the project. Unlike the Aberdeen peripheral route or the Queensferry crossing, which had project directors, no one person had sole responsibility for dualling the A9. Given that other capital projects and ministerial churn will continue to be factors regardless of the timescale, having one person to drive the project forward could be greatly beneficial and allow challenges to be resolved more quickly—challenges which, as we have seen, have previously slowed progress. Although dualling the A9 is a very large project, that solution is something that should be considered, moving forward.

The petition that sparked the inquiry called for a national memorial to be created for those who have lost their lives on the A9. That petition closed with over 4,000 signatures. In the committee’s call for views, we heard that dualling the A9 should come first and that that would be the best memorial—but we also heard that bereaved families should be listened to. The petitioner told the committee that the proposal came from communities and people who had interacted with the A9 dualling campaign. A memorial to A9 deaths, or to road deaths in general, could provide great comfort to those who have lost family or friends. In recognition of the pain that has been caused, the committee recommended that a memorial be considered and consulted on by the Scottish Government.

Looking to the future, the committee’s report makes a number of recommendations. They all come down to ensuring transparency. If trust is to be rebuilt, the Scottish Government must be up front about the challenges that are faced and the progress that is being made. I hope that the Scottish Government considers the recommendations from the inquiry so that, 10 years from now, we are not sitting here, having the same debate.

Last week, I led a members’ business debate on diabetes technology, in which I highlighted that Scottish intercollegiate guidelines network guideline 170, which gives people with type 1 diabetes a choice in technology to manage their condition, is not being fully followed in all health boards. In her speech, the Minister for Public Health and Women’s Health stated that children are being given a choice, but she failed to mention adults. Does the First Minister agree that health guidelines should be followed, including for adults with type 1 diabetes?

To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to ScotRail ticket offices scoring one out of five in the most recent service quality inspection regime data. (S6O-04212)

I thank the cabinet secretary for that response. Transport Scotland stated that the low scores for ticket offices were due to the pending outcome of the station opening hours staff consultation, but the issue is long standing: ticket offices scored one out of five in almost every inspection since 2023. What action has the Scottish Government sought from ScotRail to resolve the issues? Can the ongoing consultation be considered a fair assessment of the service if it is not currently being delivered?

I always welcome the opportunity to discuss our arts and culture sector in the chamber. The benefits of arts and culture to Scotland are numerous, including employment; economic growth and tourism; and, most important, wellbeing.

In recent years, the Scottish Government has failed to recognise the importance of culture and, while facing a perfect storm of crises, the sector has been forced to mount campaign after campaign due to the actions of the Scottish Government. John Swinney announced cuts that were later only partially reversed; there was the closure and then the reopening of the open fund for artists; and organisations were left in the dark over long-term funding settlements.

Therefore, although I welcome the uplift in funding for the culture sector, which has been made possible by the UK Labour Government’s record funding settlement for the Scottish Government, the SNP should not be patting itself on the back for no longer adding to the problem. One budget will not reverse years of mistrust and mismanagement.

This is not just about money; to thrive, culture needs the necessary infrastructure, such as grass-roots music venues, without which many of our greatest artists would never have succeeded. However, unlike the UK Government, the Scottish Government will not pass on full rates relief to venues with a capacity of under 1,500. It is limiting the relief to properties with a rateable value of under £51,000, which means that venues in high-value areas, even those with a small capacity, will miss out. That means that, for many, 2025 remains incredibly challenging.

The situation in our local authorities, which have been forced to cut culture spending due to Scottish Government underfunding, also remains challenging. If we want to close the 25 per cent gap in attendance at cultural events between the most and least deprived areas, councils must be given the tools to ensure access to culture for all.

Local authority venues Motherwell concert hall and the Brunton theatre in Musselburgh, which play a massive role in increasing local access to culture, were marked for demolition last year due to the presence of reinforced autoclaved aerated concrete. Sarah Boyack and I met the chair of the Brunton Theatre Trust last week, and he told us how important the theatre is to the community, hosting shows, school groups and weddings. The importance of such venues to our communities should not be understated. The Scottish Government should step up to protect local culture.

The SNP cannot congratulate itself merely on stemming the bleeding in our culture sector. The sector needs to move on from fighting for its survival. It needs to see growth and it needs support to thrive. It cannot afford another perfect storm that is made worse by the SNP Government.