Chamber and committees

On the question of the work rate of ministers, Neil Gray has undertaken 347 engagements since he became health secretary in February 2024. Thirty-four of those were hospital and care facility visits, and 17 were surgery visits and meetings with general practitioners. There were 43 health board meetings; 24 conferences, receptions and speaking events; 152 general meetings; 15 meetings about health service pay; 62 meetings with MSPs, members of Parliament or councillors, and media engagements; and five sporting events. That is five sporting events out of 347 engagements. I think that that rather demonstrates that the health secretary is focused on the job, as one might put it.

On the issue of the national care service, I have made it clear that the Government is listening. My Government is a listening Government—we are listening to the views of members of the public, and we listen to the fact that people from disabled people’s organisations, carers and service users are urging us to implement a national care service because they are dissatisfied—as I am—with the variation in care, and the postcode lottery, around the country. That is what the national care service proposal is about, but the Government will take its time to ensure that we get the proposals right and will bring forward proposals that can command parliamentary support.

The latest data shows that advertised average rents have increased in Scotland by 7.8 per cent in the 12 months to September 2024. It is in that context that we set out our plans for a rent cap of consumer prices index plus 1 per cent up to a maximum of 6 per cent to apply where rent control areas are in force. The maximum allowable increase of 6 per cent will ensure that more significant rent increases cannot go ahead, and basing the cap on CPI ensures that we allow for a reflection of the cost to landlords of offering a property for rent. The approach strikes a balance between increasing protections for tenants with appropriate safeguards in a way that supports continued investment in rented housing in Scotland.

I am happy to explain my position on tax to the Labour Party: I believe that those with the broadest shoulders should pay more through taxation. That is what this Government has legislated for. The Labour Party now seems to support a reduction in taxation in Scotland that would cut public expenditure by £1.5 billion, which would be wholly and completely reckless for our public services.

Claire Baker’s question was one of two halves, and I am completely in agreement with her on the issue of support for bus drivers, who deliver an essential service. Measures such as the free bus pass should not be in any way abused in relation to the experience of bus drivers. As I said to Sue Webber, I will explore those issues. The Cabinet Secretary for Transport will be happy to engage with Claire Baker and others on addressing the safety issues. We will follow up on that in the light of First Minister’s question time.

I do not think that Mr Sarwar listened to my second answer, which was quite clear. I set out the strengthened measures that we have taken to expand the capacity of the national health service—[Interruption.]

I am happy to associate myself with the remarks made by Douglas Lumsden. During his sporting career, Sir Chris Hoy demonstrated absolute and total courage and dedication to what he was doing. In facing up to what he is facing now, he is demonstrating courage and dedication to achieving all that he hopes to achieve. I commend him unreservedly for all that he has done. I wish him and his wife well with their diagnoses, and I send their family all good wishes at this challenging time.

The policy point that Sir Chris Hoy makes about prostate screening is very important. We need to do all that we can. We must constantly challenge whether the testing regime is adequate and appropriate, so the Government will take forward the priority that Mr Lumsden has put to me. I am grateful to Sir Chris Hoy for putting such impetus behind the requirement to do so.

The second point—we are on helpful clarifications here, Presiding Officer, if you will forgive me—is that most of the taxation that is imposed on business is not determined by this Parliament; most of it is determined by the United Kingdom Parliament. With regard to business rates, we have the most comprehensive business relief scheme for small businesses. That means, in our estimations, that about 50 per cent of the hospitality sector pays absolutely no business rates whatsoever in Scotland. That is where we take our action to support the sector in Scotland.

The application at Peterhead is live, and I would be breaching the ministerial code if I were to make any detailed comments about it. There will be processes of scrutiny to be undertaken, which ministers will undertake, on the basis of the information. Of course, all decisions of the Government can be subject to legal challenge because of the Parliament’s constitution.

The Government takes incredibly seriously our obligations on tackling climate change. On Tuesday, the acting Cabinet Secretary for Net Zero and Energy steered through the Parliament the final stage of the Climate Change (Emissions Reduction Targets) (Scotland) Bill, and the Government is considering all the issues in relation to the tackling of climate change in the budget priorities that we take forward. I assure Mr Harvie of our absolute determination to do so. No change of Government in the United States is going to change this Government’s attitude about the imperative of addressing the climate emergency.

What I know is that we have to be prepared to invest in economic growth. I have set out my firm view that investing in economic growth means investing in the infrastructure and the capacity of our country and investing in the public services on which a great deal of economic foundations are founded. I also understand the importance of creating, encouraging and stimulating private economic activity in our economy, which is why one of the four priorities of my Government is supporting and nurturing economic growth.

If Mr Choudhury provides me with the details, I will certainly have a look at that case. The provision of such accommodation is obviously a decision for local authorities, and I cannot intervene in decisions by local authorities on the allocation of housing: I would be acting inappropriately if I did so.

I would make two substantive points in response to Mr Choudhury’s question. First, as part of our investment programme in housing, we need to work to ensure that our housing stock reflects the needs of the population, so accommodation that is suitable for wheelchair use is important.

Secondly, I had a discussion this morning with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities about the provision of funding for adaptations in housing to make it more suitable for the needs of individuals, allowing them to be sustained in their own homes. Those issues will be considered as part of the budget process. I look forward to engaging with the Labour Party on how we might be able to take forward some of those priorities—which will happen only if there are enough votes in Parliament to support the Government’s budget.

I am very concerned at the details that Roz McCall has put to me. The whole question of support for young people with additional support needs in our schools is very clearly set out in guidance. There are no circumstances under which what Roz McCall has recounted should take place, given the guidance that is available to the school system.

I have extensive experience of such issues from my years as education secretary, during which I engaged with Beth Morrison and with one of my constituents who has done significant work in raising awareness about the issues that Roz McCall has put to me. I cannot conceive of a circumstance under which any of the detail that Roz McCall has put on the record would be justifiable under the guidance. I assure her that the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills is actively engaged on the question in relation to the formulation of further guidance, and we are engaging on some of the questions that arise in that respect in the bill that has been brought forward by Daniel Johnson.