Chamber and committees

We are treating the issue seriously and with urgency. Sometimes, there are complex situations and issues that have to be properly considered and thought through. That is what we will do, because—to be frank—we do not progress anything if we fail to do that.

On the issue of mobile phones, it is important to remember the context. In the absence of in-person contact with loved ones over a sustained period during, in particular, the early stages of the pandemic, the provision of mobile phones has been vital in addressing the negative impact of Covid in our prisons not only for prisoners but for staff and families—in particular, children who are impacted by the imprisonment of parents.

The vast majority of the more than 10,000 phones that were issued were used entirely as intended. The breaches of the rules are taken very seriously by the Prison Service. Robust monitoring, which detected where there were breaches, detected that a small minority of handsets—around 7 per cent—had been tampered with. That is not acceptable, but the robust monitoring detected it and allowed steps to be taken to prevent it in the future.

The issues are serious, and they are often complex. I hope that all of us will treat them in that way as we face up to and address drugs deaths in society generally and in our prisons, in particular.

I, too, wish those who are celebrating across the country a very happy and peaceful Diwali.

I have been very open about this. We have a significant challenge when it comes to drugs deaths, and we are determined to make sure that we are open to ideas and suggestions and that we are genuinely doing everything reasonable that we can to turn that around.

Within that overall challenge, there is a particular challenge in our prisons. I think that we all understand the different factors that are at play. I would hope that members from across the chamber could come together to welcome the ways in which we are seeking to change past practice and to recognise where perhaps we should have done things differently in the past and should do them differently in the future. I hope that there is an appetite to build consensus on that.

To that end, as I have said to the leader of the Conservative party before, I am open to suggestions. That, of course, includes, as I have said many times in the chamber, consideration of the Conservatives’ wider proposals in their proposal for draft legislation. I continue to be open minded, and we will continue to seek to do the right things, backed by investment, to turn the situation around.

I agree with Christine Grahame about the well-known harm caused to animals and livestock by the misuse of fireworks. It is a serious issue. Misuse of fireworks also causes harm, distress and anxiety to humans in communities across the country. In recent years, parts of my own constituency have been affected by that and I have seen the distress caused. I hope that the changes will help to alleviate the situation.

We are working with trading standards officers to assess the impact of the restrictions and will engage with Police Scotland and other partners in monitoring their impact. We will also take input from animal welfare organisations such as the SSPCA and the British Veterinary Association, which played a constructive role as members of the firework review group.

The penalties for breaching the new regulations include imprisonment for up to six months and/or a fine of up to £5,000. Other offences with higher penalties may also be relevant to cases of serious misuse.

I have developed, largely because of experience in my own constituency, a bit of a zero-tolerance attitude to fireworks over the years. I have seen instances, like those that Pauline McNeill outlined, in the Pollokshields area of my constituency. I have worked on a local basis with the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service, the police and others to try to alleviate some of that impact. I think that the new restrictions that are in place will make a difference. If they do not make a sufficient difference, we will be willing to look at going further and being tougher.

I say this simply as a statement of fact, but there is a devolved/reserved split of responsibilities that means that the Scottish Government cannot necessarily go as far as we might like to go. There has been liaison and I know that my constituency MP colleague, Alison Thewliss, raised the issue in the House of Commons to try to get more collaboration between the Scottish and United Kingdom Governments in tackling it. We will be willing to look at the issue if this year’s changes do not have the desired impact.

Obviously, people want to enjoy bonfire night, which is tomorrow, but I say to people across the country to do that responsibly and to remember the impact that the misuse of fireworks can have. At best, the impact is inconvenience, anxiety and distress; at worst, it can be serious injury and even death. Therefore, it is absolutely paramount that everyone acts responsibly.

I do not think that that is true, but I would be fascinated to read the research that Stephen Kerr’s office has prepared, and I mean that genuinely. I am sure that he will send me a copy and I give a commitment to read it in full and come back to him with any comments that I feel are appropriate.

Local government has a big part to play in meeting the targets, and I have confidence in the priority that councils across the country are giving to that. I have had discussions with council members in the context of the United Nations climate change conference of the parties this week and, more generally, I have also had the privilege of meeting local government representatives from other parts of the UK. Yesterday, I met the mayors of London and Paris. All local governments are grappling with those challenges, and there is a real intent to share good and best practice.

However, our responsibility is to meet our targets. We are halfway there, but the next part of the journey will be more difficult, so we cannot afford to be undermined on any of the key strands of our work. In return for my commitment to read the research that his office prepared, I wonder whether Stephen Kerr would join me today in writing to the Prime Minister to ask for the short-sighted decision on the Acorn project and the Scottish cluster to be overturned, so that we can get back on track with carbon capture and not allow his Tory colleagues to take the feet from under us on that. Perhaps he will give consideration to that.

I absolutely agree with Jackie Dunbar about the importance of the issue. We know that women and girls across the world are disproportionately impacted by climate change, but we also know that they must be more involved in the solutions to it. I have been delighted to work in recent times with UN Women to put forward the Glasgow women’s leadership statement, which we launched at COP26 earlier this week. I did that alongside women leaders from both large and small nations, and I have been very encouraged by the response, with more and more signatures representing Governments and civil society that have come forward to join the initiative.

I am also looking forward to taking part in gender day at COP next Tuesday, when I hope that we will see many more countries come forward with very strong commitments on gender-responsive climate action.

No, I do not think that that is remotely acceptable. I am not able to comment on the individual case, although if Brian Whittle wants to write to me or to the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care, we will look into it and liaise with the health board. I absolutely understand the distress and added anxiety that will have been caused by waiting that length of time for appropriate intervention.

More generally, we are investing heavily in CAMHS and we are redesigning how mental health support is provided to children and adolescents. We are investing more in early intervention and support—for example, counsellors in schools and the wellbeing service that is being rolled out—in order to ensure that young people get help earlier and that specialist services are there for those who need them most. That is a significant priority area, so that we can get to a position in which every young person who needs the support of mental health services gets the right support timeously. I would be happy to look into the individual case in question.

Those are important issues. Any member who hears reports about people in their constituencies or regions finding it difficult to access either the Covid booster jag or the flu vaccination should raise those with the health secretary so that they can be looked into.

Both vaccination programmes, which are being delivered on an integrated basis, are generally going extremely well. More than 850,000 people aged over 12 have received a third dose or a booster vaccination. Last week, more than 500,000 combined flu and Covid doses were delivered. We are ahead of some other parts of the United Kingdom on delivering that.

The programme is going extremely well overall, thanks to the dedication of those working on it across the country. As I have said before, there will be instances of individuals experiencing difficulty and it is important that those are raised so that they can be addressed as quickly as possible.

First, it is right that we are ambitious. The target of a 75 per cent reduction by 2030 was a decision of Parliament, and I would rather that this Parliament was said to be overambitious than underambitious, because that charge could be levelled at too many Governments around the negotiating table at COP. If memory serves me correctly, the Committee on Climate Change expressed its reservations about the 75 per cent target when Parliament was considering it, but Parliament took a decision to be that ambitious, and I think that it was right to do so. It is now incumbent on the Government to lead by example, and all of us must do everything necessary to meet that target.

With regard to the missed targets, again, to be open, our targets are stretching and, in the past three years, we have fallen short of quite meeting them. To hit our targets, we should have cut emissions by 55 per cent. We have not done that, but we have cut them by 51.5 per cent. That is halfway to net zero, and we have decarbonised faster than any G20 country.

Scotland is leading by example, but we must do more. We set out details of what we are doing differently in our climate change update plan, and the catch-up plan was published last week. The most recent target was for 2019, so much of what we are doing to catch up on that, which we are legally bound to do, has already been set out in the Parliament. The plans and targets are ambitious, but we all have a responsibility to step up and make sure that we are meeting that challenge head on.

Yes, I think that we are, but I do not think that it will be easy and I do not think that we can take success for granted. We will have to work hard to achieve it. The scale of the challenge to bridge the global emissions gap is immense. In Scotland right now, we are over halfway to net zero and we have decarbonised faster than any G20 country, but we have much more to do. Through our updated climate change plan and associated commitments, we have set out a comprehensive credible package of policies for reducing emissions over the next decade, putting us on track—I believe—for a just transition to net zero by 2045. Our priority is obviously to deliver on those policies.

Of course, the recent United Kingdom Government decision not to support the Scottish carbon capture and storage cluster does not make that easier and is a serious mistake. I am therefore today writing to the Prime Minister calling on him to reverse that decision and accelerate the Scottish cluster to full track 1 status without delay.