Chamber and committees

Those are all perfectly reasonable and legitimate points and I will run through them one by one—more briefly, I hope, than I did in my previous answer, Presiding Officer.

Over the past few days, I have heard people say—again, not surprisingly—in relation to Glasgow, “Why are we not going door to door with testing?”, “Why do we not have drop-in vaccination clinics?” and “Why do we not have surge testing?”. All that was happening in Glasgow and has been happening in Glasgow over the past couple of weeks. We believe that that is why we are seeing the situation in Glasgow not continue with exponential rise but stabilise and now start to decline.

The lessons in Glasgow are important and it is important that they are applied elsewhere. I am going to use a different word, because it is the one that we are using in the Government. A toolkit is being prepared that is taking the lessons and learning from Glasgow and making that available to all other health boards. The Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care is meeting all health board chief executives tomorrow to talk about the importance of that, as well as the wider issue. I am sure that it is very technical in many respects, but I am certainly more than happy to look at how we can publish something that is available to the public so that they know what should be expected, not when areas become hotspots but when there is any emerging evidence that that is the direction of travel.

There are a couple of things that I know people understand about vaccination. First, we need to ensure that we have the supplies to do everything. Supply continues to be our biggest constraint, but it is even more complicated than that because we have different vaccines and they can be used differently for different age groups. Supply is tighter for the Pfizer vaccine, for example, which is being used for the younger age groups, than it is for the AstraZeneca vaccine, so we have to balance all that.

Secondly, but most importantly, we know that, although getting over-18s their first dose is important—appointments have already started in Glasgow and we will look at having drop-in clinics as supplies allow—the most vital thing that we can do is to get people who have had the first dose to have their second dose, which increases the level of protection from the vaccine substantially. That is why, over the next few weeks, there will deliberately be an emphasis on completing second doses. All of that is important, all of it is work that is under way and we continue, every single day, to do what we can.

Back at the start of the year, I was not the only one who did this, but I used the terminology of a race—the vaccine against the virus. We are going as fast as we can with the vaccine and we have to continue to look for ways to speed up. Unfortunately, though, the virus keeps learning to run faster, and that is the big challenge that we are up against right now. That is what makes the decisions still as difficult as they are.

We will, of course, do that. I undertake to look at that issue, which was raised with me earlier this week, I think.

I will be corrected if I get wrong any of the details that pertain to England, but my understanding is that the difference is, in summary, that in Scotland we require that all tests be national health service tests, whereas in England many tests are outsourced to private companies. One of the reassurances that I can give, therefore, is about quality, because we believe that the NHS provides quality assurance. To be blunt, I say that I am not sure that going down the same route on testing as England is the right thing to do, but we will review the matter and give those points consideration.

More generally, I do not want—nobody wants it—the requirements for testing and quarantine to be in place any longer than is necessary. However, those protections are important right now. Everybody knows about my frustration with what I might describe as the lack of robustness of United Kingdom border control in the past. They are important protections in trying to do everything that we can to minimise the risk of importing the virus. That is why it is important that everybody abides by the requirements for testing and quarantine, when they come into the country.

Yes, we will seek to put that issue on the agenda for the next joint ministerial committee, but those meetings do not exactly take place frequently, so it is important that we continue to take it up in other ways as well.

Patrick Harvie is right about the Smith commission. Discussions to devolve more powers to the Scottish Parliament in the area of immigration have not progressed. We have a UK Tory Government that is more interested in taking powers away from the Scottish Parliament than bringing powers to it. [Interruption.] That is the reality. I know that it is an uncomfortable reality for Mr Ross, but it is the reality nevertheless. I am sorry if it was not Mr Ross but one of his colleagues who shouted, “Rubbish.” However, it is a fact that the UK Government seems more interested in taking powers away.

These issues are important because they are about fundamental human rights and fundamental human dignity, and they bring into sharp focus why the powers should lie with the Scottish Parliament. Notwithstanding the many differences that we have across the chamber, I believe that the Scottish Parliament would take a much more humane approach to immigration and asylum and that we would respond more positively to the demographic challenges that we face and the need to attract more people to live and work in Scotland.

This is a good example of why we need to see those powers lie with the Scottish Parliament. As with many other things, the sooner we can get those powers out of the hands of a Tory Westminster Government, the better for everyone.

I welcome Meghan Gallacher to Parliament.

Our commitment is to transition to net zero by 2045. To help us to do that, building a circular economy by reducing, recycling and reusing resources is vital. With that and our climate change targets in mind, my party stood in the election on a commitment to review the role that incineration plays in Scotland’s waste system, and we will update Parliament on plans for that review as soon as possible. In their capacity as constituency members, my colleagues Christine McKelvie and Màiri McAllan have also been pushing for that.

However, it is worth noting that, in 2019, the whole-life carbon impact of Scotland’s household waste reached its lowest level since official recording began. We are fully committed to further accelerating progress by ending the practice of sending biodegradable municipal waste to landfill by 2025.

In the past year, teachers have done an extraordinary job in the most challenging of circumstances, and they have refocused their work to support pupils in a range of different ways.

We recognise the pressure on schools and on all teachers at all times to work in a safe, positive, respectful and supportive environment. We have already committed more than £400 million to education recovery, and we have introduced a support package for schools that includes a very important focus on mental health support for staff. That is in addition to existing guidance for local authorities and schools on managing behaviour.

We will continue to put the health and wellbeing of pupils and staff at the forefront of our recovery plans. We look forward to continuing to work constructively with stakeholders to ensure that everybody nurtures an environment in our schools that has at its core the highest quality of learning and teaching.

Education spending has risen in every single one of the past four years, and significant additional resource has been provided to local authorities in the face of Covid, supporting a range of activities including the provision of additional teachers in our schools.

Of course, I recognise the concerns of teachers and so many others after what has been the most difficult, challenging and bruising of years, when we have all had to cope with the implications of Covid in different ways. It is really important that we listen to and understand those concerns and that we respond in a variety of ways.

No teacher should have to suffer verbal or physical abuse in school, and nobody should ever accept violence becoming normalised in our schools. I am sure that the education secretary will be more than happy to discuss those concerns in more detail with the trade union concerned.

It is important that we support teachers in a range of different ways. We are doing that, and we will continue to talk to teaching unions about what more can be done to support teachers, as they do a very important job on behalf of us all.

When Murdo Fraser says that

“concerns have already been raised”,

he really means that he is desperately trying to stir up concerns of that description. He should know by now that the two things are not the same. This Government’s commitment to upgrading the A9 is clear; that commitment continues.

I take the opportunity to welcome Jim Fairlie to Parliament. Seeing him in his place in the chamber makes that afternoon in the torrential rain in Letham all the more worth it.

The Cabinet Secretary for Rural Affairs and Islands and the Minister for Business, Trade, Tourism and Enterprise met UK Government ministers on 25 and 26 May to reiterate our concerns about the devastating impact that the UK Government-proposed deal could have on our farming communities. That followed an earlier letter from the rural affairs secretary to the UK Secretary of State for International Trade, on 19 May. However, the UK Government seems determined to shut the Scottish Government out of that decision-making process, just as it has ignored our interests throughout the Brexit process.

We are extremely concerned that, yet again, a crucial decision that affects Scotland’s future is being taken by the Tory Government not just against the wishes of people who live here but fundamentally against their interests.

For some reason that is best known to him, Douglas Ross seems intent on telling Jim Fairlie that he is a lamb, not a calf. However, the general point that no Tory member seems willing to stand up for the interests of Scottish farmers stands. The Tory party has, of course, already betrayed Scotland’s fishing communities, and it now seems to be about to betray Scotland’s farming communities.

We must see that any imports of Australian agri-food will be produced to equivalent standards of Scottish production, and imports must be controlled by tariff rates and quotas. Anything short of that, which would be short of what the Tories promised, will be a betrayal of our farmers and deeply damaging to the Scottish economy.

We hear a lot of rhetoric from the Conservatives about standing up for Scottish business; we have heard that again today. Perhaps it is about time that they actually stood up for our farming community and told their bosses in the UK Government that what is proposed is simply not acceptable.

This is a matter of the utmost seriousness and, because of that, it is really important to be clear. A case note review was undertaken, which looked at 118 episodes of serious bacterial infection in 84 children. All the families of those children, with one exception, have been contacted and the information from the case note review has been shared with them, and I am sure that a number of questions have been asked. There is one family whom, despite various attempts—serious attempts—having been made to contact them, it has not proved possible to contact. I think that that is deeply regrettable, but in a situation in which 83 out of 84 families have been contacted, I simply say to Anas Sarwar that it is reasonable to conclude that that is the case not because the health board does not want to contact the family in question, but because, despite its attempts, it has not so far proved possible for it to do so. Therefore, to characterise matters as me simply handing out an email address is unfair. We are talking about an inability to make contact with a family.

I will certainly seek to provide further information about the number of attempts that have been made to contact the family and when the first attempt was made, and I will certainly ensure that the health board is doing everything that is reasonably possible to locate the family. However, as I understand it, this is a case of attempts having been made, but it having proved impossible to locate the family. I think that everybody who is involved wants the family to be located so that information can be shared and any questions can be answered.

I repeat that all the families, with one exception, have been contacted, and it is important that further reasonable attempts to contact the remaining family continue.