Chamber and committees

Pauline McNeill knows that I come at my politics from the perspective of believing in the necessity of European co-operation and active participation in European decision making and governance. I very much welcome the summit that the Prime Minister hosted at the weekend, which, fundamentally, involved European leaders. That is an indication of really good intention on these questions.

Pauline McNeill is absolutely right. I am certain that more could be undertaken at a European level to support peacemaking in the middle east. We all watch with horror the events that continue to take place in Gaza as we speak. The level of conflict in the world is intolerable, and we must use every available device at our disposal to work to bring communities together and to avoid conflict in the way that we are experiencing it today.

Stephen Kerr is correct that matters relating to international relations are wholly reserved, but I contend that they have an impact on our way of life. If the Parliament does not confront those issues, I do not think that we will address properly the challenges that all our communities face as a consequence of the situation in which we find ourselves.

We need to have effective defence forces available to us. Part of my argument is that we have a vast coastline and a vast airspace around Scotland, which are critical to the security of western Europe and our country, and our ability to defend that would be strengthened by greater emphasis on conventional weaponry, rather than the investment that has been made in nuclear defences. That is my reflection on defence priorities.

In relation to the defence sector, a strong number of companies in Scotland are involved in defence-related activities. Those companies make a significant contribution to Scotland’s economy, and I welcome the work that they undertake. It is important that we recognise that, given the difficulties that we face at present.

Just last Monday, all of Scotland’s political leaders took part in a powerful and moving ceremony at Edinburgh castle to mark three years since the start of Russia’s illegal invasion of Ukraine. We stood together with members of the Ukrainian community living here in Scotland to commemorate the time that has passed since the start of that invasion but also to reaffirm our support for the people of Ukraine. Although we disagree on points of policy and politics in this chamber—which is right and proper in a parliamentary democracy—when it comes to upholding the values and principles of modern democracy, the Scottish Parliament stands behind Ukraine, resolute and unwavering. [Applause.]

Regardless of our political views, everyone in this chamber understands that democracy is hard fought for and must never be taken for granted. Democracy must be cherished, defended and enhanced. That is the lesson of the 20th century and it is the lesson that the people of Ukraine live, struggle and fight to teach us every day.

The courage demonstrated by President Zelenskyy and by all Ukrainians since the first day of Russia’s illegal full-scale invasion reaches far beyond the protection and preservation of their own homeland. Ukrainians struggle and fight for all of Europe and for the protection and preservation of all democratic nations. It is a struggle for the rule of law, for human rights and to uphold the international norms that once ensured that Europe knew guaranteed peace. The Ukrainian people are fighting for their homeland and their future, but for our future, too.

Three years ago, Russia expected to flatten Ukrainian resistance within days but, despite a war that has caused years of unnecessary misery in a peaceful, sovereign and democratic nation, the power of the fight for democracy and all its freedoms has given the Ukrainian people their purpose as well as their most potent advantage. Ukraine’s people are fighting to defend her independence, her territorial integrity and her security in the face of appalling, unprovoked violence—violence that has destroyed lives, separated families, wounded hundreds of thousands of citizens and razed cities to the ground—yet President Zelenskyy has not wavered in strength or dignity. His people have not laid down arms and Russia has not succeeded in reaching its war aims, despite sending hundreds of thousands of troops to their deaths, or to be wounded, on the front lines.

Now, as a result of all that unnecessary carnage, millions of Ukrainian children have never known peace, while western democracy has never been under such relentless attack from within. Misinformation, propaganda, malicious interpretations of history, arrogance, ignorance, prejudice and hate are being used to divide us. Only yesterday, after Russia launched a drone attack on a civilian building in Kharkiv, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said:

“We see that the collective West has started to become less collective. A fragmentation of the collective West has begun.”

That is precisely what Russia wants its people and the world to believe and it is precisely what Putin wants us to believe. We must be ever vigilant to the threat of disinformation, which takes the shape of the Kremlin’s talking points.

Russia was not provoked to invade Ukraine, in 2014 or in 2022. No credence should be given to deflection tactics that blame NATO expansion for Russian aggression. Each and every country in NATO is a democracy that has made its own sovereign choice to become a member, and many of the countries on NATO’s eastern flank have recent experience of living under Russian threat.

The strong international solidarity and dedication to achieving peace in Ukraine was evident for all to see at the security summit in London this weekend. The vast majority of European leaders have only one message—their unreserved condemnation of illegal Russian aggression.

Therefore, Ukraine’s allies should all have one aim and one aim only—to support Ukraine’s independence, her territorial integrity and her security. I whole-heartedly welcome the Prime Minister’s “coalition of the willing” initiative to provide Ukraine with security guarantees after a ceasefire agreement, as well as the £1.6 billion missile deal for Ukraine. I also accept the case for peacekeeping forces to avert further conflict, subject to proper scrutiny and a vote in the House of Commons, and I understand the delicate balance of diplomacy that the Prime Minister and the United Kingdom Government must navigate in this matter.

I make clear my commitment and the commitment of my Government to a united front and to doing all that I can to support Ukraine to succeed. However—like the many European leaders who expressed their solidarity with President Zelenskyy this weekend, I am sure—I am very disturbed by how his meeting with the US President and Vice President played out last week. I agree with President Zelenskyy’s statement that Ukraine wants its partners

“to remember who the aggressor is in this war.”

We must see unwavering unity across the political spectrum in full solidarity with Ukraine on that essential point. The events at the Oval office meeting with President Zelenskyy and the announcement that was made this morning of a pause in US military aid to Ukraine can only run the risk of emboldening Russia—the aggressor. As I said this weekend, if that were to remain the posture of the US Government, a second state visit for US President Donald Trump would become unthinkable. I know that there are people in this chamber and across this country who will disagree—people who will say that we should not contemplate this stance or who will say that President Trump should not be invited under any circumstances. I understand and respect those points of view but I cannot share them.

Right now, today, as we stand here, men, women and children in Ukraine are putting their lives and their freedom on the line to defend their country and all our democracies. We say that we support them, and we do, but that means being willing to do things that are hard—things that we would rather not do. So, if a state visit could help to solidify US support for Ukraine—if that is part of what supporting Ukraine means in practice—it is a possibility. For that to be true, however, the US would have to sustain the steadfast support of Ukraine, her independence and her territorial integrity.

As we think through all these issues, the important questions are the hard-headed, clear-eyed consideration of what is best for Ukraine and for European security today. For my Government, that means standing steadfast behind Ukraine and alongside the United Kingdom Government and our European allies, and that is exactly what Scotland will do.

My hope is that US and European leaders can once again find a way to speak with one voice on the matter of this conflict. There are no grey areas when one country chooses to send troops and tanks into the peaceful territory of another. My Government supports the approach of the United Kingdom Government in committing to secure international solidarity in support of Ukraine’s long-term future. We welcome the 100-year partnership that was recently agreed by the United Kingdom and Ukraine, and Scotland will play our part, whether as part of the United Kingdom or as an independent nation in the future, in helping to deliver it.

I also welcome the approach of the Prime Minister and the proposed four-point plan to end the war and defend Ukraine from Russia. As I have already stated, Scotland accepts the case for the deployment of any peacekeeping forces to avert future conflict, subject to scrutiny and a vote by members of Parliament in the House of Commons. My Government remains committed to supporting Ukraine until a just peace is secured—not a peace at any cost, which strips Ukraine of her sovereignty in wartime.

Let me once again make clear that there can be no truly sincere or constructive peace talks about the future of Ukraine without Ukraine being present at the negotiating table and that securing the future of Ukraine is utterly vital to securing the peace that we have enjoyed in Europe for so long. Ukraine’s future and her fate is our future and our fate, so we must aspire to be as courageous as the people of Ukraine and stand by them, always, in their hour of need.

We must maintain unity with our partners across Europe and the western world—unity like that demonstrated in London this weekend and at Edinburgh castle last week—because events in Ukraine are having, and will continue to have, a direct negative impact on Scotland’s economy, security and society. Scotland’s approach internationally will continue to be led and guided by our compassion for Ukraine. I know that members in the chamber will continue to work together on these matters and to put any differences aside in respect of our common efforts to uphold justice.

Now, 25 years into the life of this modern Parliament, Scotland chooses to stand for democracy, for human rights and the rule of law, at home and among our courageous allies such as Ukraine. Those are the underpinnings of democracy, of prosperity, and of every freedom that democracy provides. That is the solidarity among allies that will deliver Ukraine from Russia’s barbaric aggression, while protecting her heritage, her culture and her social and economic future.

We have, across Scotland, been honoured that thousands of Ukrainians have made their home in our country. My message to people from Ukraine who are living here in Scotland, is that you are, and always will be, very welcome here. Providing support and sanctuary for Ukrainian people who have been displaced by Russia’s brutal war continues to be a priority for the Scottish Government. I want Ukrainians everywhere to know that they also have Scotland’s fullest support; I know that many of them will be deeply concerned by what has unfolded over the past few days. It is for those brave Ukrainians, and every person who is protected by democracy, that Scotland will never be silent. Here in Scotland, we will, forever, stand with Ukraine. [Applause.]

What I said at the weekend on this question is that we have to have an honest and open discussion about the public expenditure priorities of the United Kingdom. I tried to have that discussion during the general election campaign, when I pointed out that our public services were under enormous fiscal pressure and that we had to improve the finance that is available for our public services. The issues that we are now confronting affect our defence and security and they merit a response in that respect. We have to have an honest discussion about our priorities. I do not view the question as an either/or—it is not the case that either we can afford defence expenditure or we can afford public services.

Equally, I take the view that John Mason is marshalling today that reductions in overseas aid expenditure can be short-sighted, because we have to change the nature of inequality and address the inequalities in our world, and overseas aid is fundamental to doing that. That has been a shared priority of many Governments for many years, and it is important that we address such priorities. However, we can do so only with an honest discussion about public finances and the choices that are available in relation to taxation. We need to have that discussion.

My good and dear friend Christine Grahame is, not for the first time in my life, coming to my rescue. The Conservatives opposed the formation of Police Scotland, which was one of the biggest reforms of the public sector landscape and delivered £200 million in savings. What we have been treated to today is the usual hypocrisy from Russell Findlay.

In the course of its time in office, the SNP Government has reduced the number of public bodies that we inherited. We also adopt an agenda that ensures that we adequately consult wider Scotland on the policy questions that we take forward. The Government maintains a stringent approach to the management of public expenditure, to ensure that we are constantly challenging issues to maximise value. Those considerations underpin the budget that I am glad that the Parliament passed on Tuesday.

On 1 December 2024, 131 public bodies in Scotland were under our control. In 2007, when the SNP Government came to office, there were 199. Those are the answers that Mr Findlay is looking for. By the way, as a point of information, I thought that the Parliament was here to hold the Government to account.

Peace is not gifted to us. It has to be nurtured and sometimes, regrettably, it has to be hard fought for. While Russia repeats the worst mistakes of the past, years into an unnecessary war, Ukraine calls on Europe to defend her interests and to support her fight for democracy and the rule of international law. That is why Scotland supports Ukrainian independence, that is why Scotland supports Ukrainian sovereignty and territorial integrity, and that is why Scotland will always work with Ukraine towards the goal of absolute peace in Europe.

At this moment of great uncertainty, let me be clear: Ukraine must sit at the table of any peace agreement. That is the only way to achieve a peace that not only delivers Ukraine from barbaric aggression but protects Ukraine’s heritage, her culture and her social and economic future.

We have extended a warm welcome to Ukrainians who have sought refuge in our country. That is the very least that we should be able to do. Today, as ever, Scotland stands with Ukraine. [Applause.]

We have just passed a budget that funds the front line. Russell Findlay did not vote for it, so I do not know what on earth he is complaining about.

I gave one example of a public service reform that we have delivered, which has leveraged out £200 million in savings, but Russell Findlay and the Conservatives opposed that reform. It is all talk and no action from the Conservatives. The programmes that have been taken forward by my Minister for Public Finance, Ivan McKee, are securing savings that are expected to reach up to £280 million over a two-year period by the end of 2024-25, with further projected savings of nearly £300 million over the following two financial years to the end of 2026-27.

I take deadly seriously the management of public expenditure, because I want to make sure that as much money as possible is available to support front-line services. The difference between me and Russell Findlay is that I am prepared to vote for a budget to support the front line but he is not.

I indicated in my previous answer that Scotland’s net zero economy supports 100,700 full-time equivalent jobs. The number has grown by 19.5 per cent since 2022, while the UK’s growth has been 15.2 per cent. Based on the data that I have in front of me, Scotland’s job growth in net zero has been faster than that of the rest of the United Kingdom.

I am all for encouraging employment growth in net zero. We are taking decisions. A few weeks ago, I was up at Sumitomo, in Nigg. I have more visits to the north of Scotland next week, when I will be looking at other renewable energy developments. I am all for it. In the budget on Tuesday, the Government put in place £150 million of additional resources for renewables development. Unfortunately, that was just one of the many things that Sarah Boyack was not able to bring herself to vote for on Tuesday.