Chamber and committees

I am happy to ask the Cabinet Secretary for Health and social Care to look at that to see whether any changes require to be made. However, I repeat the point that I made earlier, and ask the member to take it in good faith: there is no blanket policy in place right now that prevents in-patients in hospital getting a vaccination if their clinician thinks that they should have it. If she can accept that that is the case, I undertake to see whether there is anything else in the wider protocols that is leading to a situation where people who could or should be getting a vaccination are not getting it. I will ask the health secretary to look into that and write to the member once he has had the opportunity to do so.

Those issues are really important; we sometimes debate them in the chamber as if they are abstract, but they have real meaning in people’s lives. Inflationary pressures will be one of the biggest issues that we deal with in the months to come and will have a severe impact on household budgets. We have to recognise, as we try to decide how best to help people, where the powers and resources lie. Right now, levers over energy costs, 85 per cent of welfare spending, the minimum wage and national insurance are all held at Westminster. Although the Scottish Parliament might want to act, it is not able to do so. We have also seen the Westminster Government take £20 a week out of the pockets of the poorest families in our country. Instead of helping, we see it do things that make life harder for those who are already struggling.

It is the case, in not an abstract but a tangible sense, that we should take more of the powers that are being misused by Westminster into the hands of the Scottish Parliament, so that we can use them in the interests of people across the country. Yes, Christine Grahame is right. We can try to do that through increased devolution—and we will always try to do that—but fundamentally, the best way of resolving the situation is for Scotland to become an independent country so that the Scottish Parliament can take the decisions that are in the interests of the country and not constantly have to hope that a Prime Minister who everybody in the chamber, I think without exception, thinks is unfit for office, will take those decisions for us.

Yes, I agree. As Kenny Gibson knows all too well, I grew up in North Ayrshire not too far from Hunterston B power station, so I know first-hand how important it has been, over many years, to the local economy.

As the station is decommissioned, it is important that we support that green transition, to which the Ayrshire Growth Deal is central. The Scottish Government and our agencies are working with regional partners to support the delivery of the Hunterston Port and Resource Centre project, the proposed subsea cable manufacturing project, to which Kenny Gibson referred, as well as multiple other projects across Ayrshire that are included in the deal. Colleagues in North Ayrshire Council lead and drive those projects on behalf of the wider deal.

It is important that we fully support that transition and I give an assurance that the Scottish Government will continue to do so.

I am happy to consider that wider point. I accept the importance of the environmental consideration for the reasons that the member has set out.

It is for the Scottish Government to set the wider policy and strategic framework, which we will do through the draft energy strategy and the just transition plan to which I have referred, both of which we will publish over the course of this year.

Beyond that, it is right that local councils and agencies drive those plans. As I said earlier, the Scottish Government is contributing more than £100 million to the Ayrshire Growth Deal. That balance between local leadership and strategic direction from the Scottish Government is always one that we need to be careful to get right. However, I will consider the wider point and revert to the member as soon as possible.

I understand that this is a really anxious time not only for patients in Lanarkshire but for patients across Scotland and, indeed, the wider public, because of the on-going challenges of Covid and the impact that it is having on the national health service, secondary care and primary care, and in many aspects of life that, pre-Covid, people would have taken for granted as normal. All of us want to get back to normal as quickly as possible, and key to that is getting and keeping Covid under control and supporting the NHS to recover as we do that and come out of Covid.

On the step that has been taken in NHS Lanarkshire, of course nobody wants any health board to be in that position, but it is about ensuring that access can be maintained to essential GP services at a time of unprecedented demand and unprecedented staff absences. People can, of course, continue to use GP services where that is essential, wider community pharmacy services or NHS Inform if they have questions or queries that they need to be answered.

The measure is a short-term one. Nobody wants or will allow it to be in place for longer than is necessary, and we will continue to take steps to support the NHS to get all services back to normal as quickly as possible for all patients across the country.

We seek assurances from the UK Government on an on-going basis that the implications of Brexit will not cause disruption or, indeed, continued disruption, to Scottish exporters. I do not think that I could say that we have been given adequate assurances, because I am not sure that there are adequate assurances that can be given. By its very nature, all that Brexit brings in its wake causes disadvantage and disruption. For our part, the Scottish Government will seek to do everything we can to support businesses through that. That underlines again the fact that Brexit is against Scotland’s interests and that it has been done to us against our democratic wishes.

That is—not for the first time from Douglas Ross—arrant nonsense. We cannot give more money from the UK Government to Scottish businesses because we did not get more money from the UK Government—money that not just the Scottish Government but the Welsh and Northern Ireland Governments asked for.

We managed to find, within our own resources, additional money, so that we can get extra support to Scottish businesses, because we accept how important it is, in the face of this on-going challenge, to provide as much support as we can to businesses. Right now, the Scottish Government is working with local government to get that money out of the door and into the bank accounts of businesses.

I come back to a central point. That is money that will get to businesses; counterpart businesses south of the border will not get that money, even though they have suffered much the same impact as businesses here in Scotland have suffered.

Week on week, I lose track of what exactly Douglas Ross thinks we should or should not do to tackle Covid. All that I can conclude is that his approach to tackling a global pandemic is simply to oppose everything that the Scottish Government tries to do. Thank goodness he has not been responsible for these difficult decisions because, given his display in Opposition, the country would be in a sorry mess over Covid had he had anything to do with them.

We will continue to take responsible decisions, we will continue to support businesses and we will continue to lead this country, as safely as possible, through the Covid pandemic.

Given that we are still living through a global pandemic, contingencies are needed in education as in all other aspects of life right now. Should any of those contingencies be required—there are two key contingencies in education as far as exams are concerned—we would notify that as soon as possible.

I hope that that is not the case: I hope that we do not need to activate those contingencies. As has been clear since August, our firm intention this year is that exams will go ahead.

Oliver Mundell says that the contingencies that we have put in place are not the type that should be put in place, but that is probably a standard for the Conservatives: we say one thing, and they will say another.

Let me say what those contingencies are, so that people can judge for themselves. The first contingency is that, if education is further disrupted because of developments in the pandemic—and we all hope that it will not be—additional support will be provided for those who are studying for exams. I am interested to hear that Oliver Mundell does not think that that is an appropriate contingency; I think that it is, indeed, an appropriate contingency.

The second contingency is that, if public health advice says that it is not safe for young people to come together to sit exams in the traditional way, we will go back to a situation that is akin to the past two years, where teacher judgment comes to bear instead of exams. Again, I think that that is an appropriate contingency.

We do not want to have to use either of those contingencies because we want exams to go ahead, as we think that is in the interests of young people.

Oliver Mundell asks me to guarantee things. I would love to be able to guarantee all sorts of things, but we are still living through a global pandemic. As we were reflecting on in my exchange with Anas Sarwar, we have had two new variants in the past few months alone. None of us can guarantee the immediate future in the context of the pandemic, but we make plans based on what we hope will be the case. Right now, that is to allow young people to sit their exams this year as normal, but to have sensible and appropriate contingencies in place in case something happens that makes that impossible.

That is a complete misrepresentation of the position. I am sorry if Willie Rennie missed it, but the education secretary set out in a statement to the Parliament in August last year, I think, what the Scottish Government’s intention was in relation to exams this year, which was that exams would go ahead.

As she was reflecting, and as I have just reflected again, contingencies have to be in place when we are living through a global pandemic. However, the intention for exams to go ahead has not changed.

If Willie Rennie is referring to the same Twitter exchange that I saw, the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills was rightly seeking, not to make announcements on Twitter, but to deal with some of the confusion that, if I may say, the misrepresentations of Opposition politicians have added to, as we have just heard from Willie Rennie.