Chamber and committees

There is an aspiration for there to be national parks. Part of my constituency is in a national park, and a lot of good work is undertaken there. The process of taking forward the proposals in relation to a Galloway national park requires engagement and consultation, and the Government stands ready to undertake that dialogue and discussion. We will listen to the points that are put forward by Mr Mundell and his constituents who are affected and the process will come to its conclusion. I simply encourage anyone who has a view to express about the proposal to take part in the consultation process.

Lorna Slater’s question gives me the opportunity to make clear that the Government is progressing with the legislation to ban conversion therapy in Scotland. However, we think it a pragmatic step to work with the United Kingdom Government to determine whether there is a UK-wide approach to that, which would enable us to avoid some of the difficulties in which we found ourselves in relation to the gender recognition legislation. That is not walking away from the commitment to end conversion therapy but is a pragmatic step to try to avoid some of the legislative difficulties in which the Parliament found itself in relation to gender recognition. I hope that that provides some degree of reassurance.

Lorna Slater asked me what my message is to people at this particular time. We can look at that in a number of ways. The Government has put in place, agreed and supported pay deals that will lift families out of poverty. Household incomes will increase substantially and poverty will be eroded because of the above-inflation pay increases that the Government is prepared to sanction. Although I understand the anguish that people feel about those choices, I cannot spend the same money twice.

The Government believes that avoiding industrial action in our public services, so that we can address the issues that Mr Sarwar has—fairly—put to me about the performance of the health service, by ensuring that we deliver pay deals that are commensurate is important. However, at the same time as delivering those pay deals in a fixed budget, I cannot afford some of the policy commitments that I would dearly love to introduce, because we are still bound by the shackles of austerity.

I was surprised by those reports, because I thought that we would be entering an era in which, after the damage that was done to the powers of the Scottish Parliament by the most recent Conservative Government in the United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020 and the Subsidy Control Act 2022—damage that was resisted by the Labour Party while it was in opposition—we would see those provisions being reversed. It would be a good thing if those provisions were to be reversed, because they directly erode the powers of this Parliament. The public were never asked. Brexit was used as an excuse for eroding the powers of this Parliament.

Where there is proper and effective devolution, this Parliament should have the responsibility to take forward work in those areas for which it has responsibility. It should not be possible for those powers to be undermined by the actions of the United Kingdom Government. I hope that the UK Government will take the lead from Mr Gibson’s question and reverse those undesirable provisions.

Sharon Dowey has put on the record some very concerning points that sound to me to be wholly unacceptable. The regulatory authorities—Scottish Water and the Scottish Environment Protection Agency—should undertake scrutiny of those issues, along with the local authority. If Sharon Dowey would like to furnish me with more information, I will certainly raise it with the relevant regulatory authorities, because her constituents should not have to endure that experience.

I recognise the enormity of the challenge that we face on child poverty; that is why it is my Government’s central mission to eradicate child poverty. The reason why child poverty levels are so high is that Scotland has suffered from 14 years of Conservative austerity and welfare cuts that have forced families into poverty. That has resulted in the Scottish Government taking steps to spend more than £400 million on measures such as the Scottish child payment, which, along with our other measures, is keeping 100,000 children out of poverty.

I respect all the organisations and individuals that Douglas Ross raised with me. Those are people who care deeply about the eradication of poverty, as do I. I think that they would accept that child poverty has been made the crisis that it is in our country today because of the actions for which Douglas Ross voted when he supported the Conservative Government in the House of Commons.

As usual, Douglas Ross, from his front-bench seat, shouts and interrupts me, and he says that it is my choices.

I echo Anas Sarwar’s words of welcome for Keir Starmer as the new Prime Minister. The Prime Minister telephoned me on the day of his election and he came to see me on the Sunday after the election. I very much welcome the efforts that the Prime Minister has made to create a better relationship between the Scottish Government and the United Kingdom Government—[Interruption.] Frankly, it couldnae have been any worse than it was before, but I acknowledge that effort. There have been a series of other engagements, and on some of the really significant issues that both Governments are wrestling with, there has been deep engagement, which I welcome. The Scottish Government will engage in all of that activity.

We face significant challenges in the NHS, as Mr Sarwar knows. The programme for government set out a range of interventions that we are making—this is where Mr Sarwar was incorrect in his question—to reduce waiting times in the NHS, expand the capacity for undertaking treatment and improve performance in a number of key areas, particularly diagnostic information. I put on the record yesterday information about cancer diagnosis, which is significant in improving the outcomes for individuals in Scotland.

We are working very hard to overcome the waiting lists that have been created as a consequence of Covid, and the health service is being resourced to enable it to do so.

First, I am sorry about the detail that Mr Sarwar puts on the record on behalf of Mark Rodgers. If Mr Sarwar wishes to pass particular details to me, I will explore the case and determine whether anything more can be done to support the treatment of Mr Rodgers.

It is important to put on record the fact that we are still dealing with the aftermath of the Covid pandemic. We are resourcing the health service to a greater degree than would have been possible had we simply replicated the financial settlement from the United Kingdom Government. That has come about as a consequence of the decisions that the Government in Scotland has taken about taxation. We have asked those on higher incomes to contribute slightly more in taxes and we have invested a large proportion of that amount in the national health service.

I give Mr Sarwar the assurance that the Government will continue to invest in the national health service to expand capacity. We are trying to deliver the treatment that individuals require as timeously as possible. There are many examples of that happening, but I accept—and Mr Sarwar has put such a case on the record—that there will be cases in which that has not happened. I will endeavour to do all that I can to resolve those issues on behalf of Mr Rodgers and patients like him.

The Scottish Government is resolute in our commitment to keep the Promise. The attainment gap between care-experienced school leavers and all children has been narrowing at all levels since 2009-10. That gap continues to narrow at the highest levels of achievement and, for lower-level qualifications, it remains narrower than it was pre-Covid.

Although overall figures indicate that there is more to be done on exclusions and attendance, with support through the care-experienced children and young people fund and the virtual headteacher network we have seen real successes in those areas in schools across Scotland. Working with Education Scotland, local government and The Promise Scotland, we must learn and build on that work to continue to improve outcomes for children and young people with care experience.

I recognise the point that Mr Whitfield makes. Some measures are contained in the work that I set out in my original answer to Roz McCall. We will try to ensure that we maintain young people’s engagement in education in all circumstances. Obviously, attendance would be desirable and ideal—