Chamber and committees

Gaelic and Scots are part of the historical and cultural fabric of this country. It is estimated that some form of Gaelic has been spoken in Scotland since the fourth century. Gaelic is in our songs and place names and our national bard wrote in Scots, but those languages are not confined to history and culture. They are living and are used daily across Scotland, but they must be supported if they are to thrive.

Gaelic, in particular, is in a worrying state. A study by the University of the Highlands and Islands warned that it could die as a living language within decades. Although the number of people with some understanding of Gaelic has risen, according to the most recent census, the number of people who speak it in the Western Isles, where it is used most, has fallen.

The struggle of the Gaelic language, despite Government initiatives over the years, is linked to many other issues that members have raised today. A lack of job opportunities in Gaelic-speaking areas and of suitable housing in rural and island communities means that people who grow up speaking Gaelic have no choice but to leave. Much of the housing in those areas is older and less energy efficient, which makes living there more expensive. Those issues all tie in with the wider depopulation that is taking place in rural Scotland.

We have to get this right, so the current scope of the bill is disappointing. It focuses largely on education, but the challenges that are faced by Gaelic and Scots are multifaceted. Of course, a bill cannot be everything at once, but we must recognise the issues.

Stakeholders have welcomed the proposed creation of Scots and Gaelic strategies, but we must work to ensure that ministers are able to create strategies that are genuinely consequential. Earlier this year, the First Minister said that the Scottish Government published too many strategies and that it should focus on delivery. Currently, however, Gaelic and Scots strategies will not even be delivered until 2028. We cannot afford to waste time.

Expanding access to education is undoubtedly important. Last week, my colleague Michael Marra and I met Sabhal Mòr Ostaig—a Gaelic college based in Skye. We were told that although many students receive part of their education in Gaelic, they lose out as they move on to other education providers who cannot give lessons in Gaelic. Ensuring the provision of Gaelic education in primary and secondary schools as well as in further education is key to ensuring that the language has a strong future.

However, education will mean little if young people cannot find a home or a job in areas where their language is spoken.

We recognise that this is a damning report on an organisation that should be providing a vital service to women during an incredibly difficult time. Female survivors should be treated with respect and should be able to choose what is best for them. All referrals to the service have now been stopped, which leaves survivors with no help. Where will those women be directed to now? What action is the Scottish Government taking to ensure that women and girls in Edinburgh and Lothian can access this vital service?

I will leave it for the Scottish Government to tell us where the teachers will come from, because there are shortages of teachers in every sector.

The bill also contains provisions to give local authorities the power to designate areas of linguistic significance. The proposed recognition of areas where Gaelic is spoken is welcome, but the bill is light on details of what that will entail. The financial memorandum states that there will be no costs associated with the bill. The bill proposes that ministers be given powers to create standards and requirements for education authorities in relation to Gaelic, but the responsibilities to be placed on local authorities should be clarified. We must not have another bill that gives more responsibilities to councils that are already struggling, but which does not give them the resources to meet those additional responsibilities.

Gaelic and Scots should not be reserved for train signs and tourists. They are living languages, but they face threats from many different directions. At present, the bill does not account for those threats, but we must not miss this opportunity to safeguard Scottish culture. I hope that Scottish Labour can work with other parties to amend the bill to ensure that it responds to the pressing challenges that Gaelic and Scots face.

In July, I was contacted by Andrea, who cares for her two disabled daughters. Her home requires adaptations, but it is not large enough for the daughters’ wheelchair or the specific bed that is recommended by the physiotherapist. Andrea’s housing association will not extend the house and has no suitable homes available. Another housing association refuses to fit dropped showers.

How is the Scottish Government working to ensure that housing associations and local authorities uphold their duties to provide essential adaptations, including beds?

I agree with Mr Ewing. I think that we should also ask the Government to provide local councils with ring-fenced funding for that.

In 2021, the First Minister, then Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills, said that free school meals were a landmark policy. Successive First Ministers committed and re-committed to the policy. Those empty promises are now coming home to roost. If it is not school meals, it is the pledge to give an electronic device to every child, which then became every household, being cancelled, or the pledge to give bikes to children in poverty being cancelled after only 6,800 were delivered—that is less than 3 per cent of the 250,000 children who are in poverty. The Scottish Government promised an increase in teachers and teaching assistant numbers by 3,500, but we now have 250 fewer.

Make no mistake, our children are suffering because of these failures. While we have had this SNP Government, education standards have undoubtedly fallen. The programme for international student assessment results from last year made it clear as day. Our science and maths scores in 2006 were 515 and 506, and they have now fallen to 483 and 471. The poverty-related attainment gap grew in the most recent exam results. For a Government that seemingly sees the issue as a priority, that should be a mark of shame.

Another broken promise on increasing non-contact time by 90 minutes is placing teachers under more pressure. A WPI Economics report found that that would be possible only by raising teacher numbers, but they are now falling. Twenty per cent of teachers are leaving during their probation year, with many reporting stress as a factor. Children will experience the consequences of those broken promises, with large classes and overworked teachers. That will serve only to entrench inequalities and increase the attainment gap that the SNP says it wants to eliminate.

The social attitudes survey this year showed trust in the Scottish Government at the lowest it has ever been, and U-turns such as this are fuelling that perception. The public wants the Scottish Government to succeed and to improve people’s lives, but announcing policies and then going back on them is eroding trust. When politicians make promises and fail to deliver, it reflects badly not only on the Government but on us all. We must understand that headlines are not a replacement for good governance. Governments should do what they say they will do; they should not over-promise and then cry foul when they are unable to deliver.

We need tangible action to give children the best start in life. We need a real living wage to ensure that parents have money to put food on the table, an end to zero-hour contracts to allow stable work, and lower energy bills that are not at the mercy of the global market. That is how we can truly deliver.

I congratulate Sue Webber on bringing this important issue to the chamber. I am grateful to see members from across the parties who feel strongly about the issue. I hope that we can continue to campaign and deliver for the people of Winchburgh.

Since I first raised the issue of Winchburgh in the chamber in 2022, some progress has been made. I have engaged with the council and developers and I have questioned three successive transport ministers, highlighting the need for improved transport links for Winchburgh. However, my requests to meet the ministers have been denied, and the Scottish Government, until recently, has failed to meaningfully engage. The reformation of the Winchburgh railway station steering group is welcome, but it must be met with clear action. Above all, stakeholders, including MSPs, must work together to achieve that.

Winchburgh is a fast-growing town and it needs improved public transport options. Since 2012, 1,000 houses have been built, with 4,000 more planned. By 2031, its population is predicted to rise to more than 13,000—similar to Linlithgow, which has its own train station. It is estimated that the catchment area of a train station in Winchburgh would benefit 26,000 people, and the proposal is popular.

Earlier this year, I joined Winchburgh residents in delivering a petition, signed by more than 2,000 people, to the Scottish Government, calling for a date to be set for the opening of the station. It is not only those in Winchburgh who would benefit—more than 400,000 cars would be taken off the road every year, there would be millions of pounds of savings for passengers and in transport costs, and millions would be saved in decongestion benefits. It makes economic and environmental sense.

Sue Webber is right to mention the £50 million that has already been invested by Winchburgh Development in infrastructure, including a new primary school. We should be encouraging and rewarding developers that proactively create well-connected communities.

A key issue that must be addressed is the lack of a promoter for the project. The Scottish Government insists that it is a developer-led project. Winchburgh Developments has committed to partially funding the station, and then there is the possibility of funding from the city region deal. We need clarity on the funding and business case for the station. I will be meeting Winchburgh Developments later this month and hope to hear that further progress is being made.

If we are to see a station in the coming years, we must see collaboration between stakeholders, including MSPs. The Scottish Government should look at the enthusiasm that is evident today, and in Winchburgh, and step up to deliver on this incredible opportunity.

Can you also include, for the Government, the letters from the Law Society of Scotland and Thompsons Solicitors, as evidence?

During the most recent meeting of the cross-party group on challenging racial and religious prejudice, the Minister for Victims and Community Safety stated that the Scottish Government was looking to overhaul the reporting of hate crime. Will the minister provide an update on what measures the Scottish Government is planning to make it easier to report hate crimes?

A constituent in Lothian has a son who was entitled to extra time during an exam due to his attention deficit hyperactivity disorder but had his eligibility for assessment arrangements repeatedly questioned and missed his extra time, which my constituent believes caused stress for his son and impacted his ability to complete his exam. How is the Scottish Government working to ensure that every person with additional support needs is supported during their exams? Will the cabinet secretary look at that case?