Chamber and committees

First, let me make it clear that I believe that there is an absolute necessity and there is an imperative for us to take climate action. That was the subject of a speech that I made last week, in which I addressed the understandable unease that Mr Matheson has expressed to me about voices that say that we no longer need to take climate action. All the evidence demonstrates that we have to do so urgently. The report helps us to win the argument that there is economic opportunity to be had from the transition to net zero and—again—that is very welcome.

On Mr Matheson’s local point about his constituents who are affected by what is happening at Grangemouth, I set out in a statement to Parliament last week the investment of £25 million of additional resources that the Scottish Government is making available. I welcome the Prime Minister’s announcement on Sunday of the opening up of £200 million from the National Wealth Fund. I assure Mr Matheson that we will work closely with the workforce in Grangemouth to advance on all those issues.

On bluetongue, we already undertake routine testing for it before and after movements of susceptible imported animals in order to ensure that they do not introduce disease into this country. I hope that that provides Christine Grahame with some reassurance that cross-border co-operation exists, in that respect.

On vaccine provision, we do not allow vaccination for bluetongue serotype 3 in Scotland, which is a position that is supported by key Scottish industry organisations. As I put on the record in response to Mr Whittle, we encourage farmers to advise their vets of any issues. The chief veterinary officer engages on those questions, and the Cabinet Secretary for Rural Affairs, Land Reform and Islands updated the Cabinet on those questions on Tuesday and will continue to do so.

I am aware of the developments in Wales. I am happy for officials and ministers to engage in dialogue with Mr Ruskell on those questions, and we are happy to engage with our Welsh counterparts to explore the decisions that it has taken. I understand the importance of the point that Mr Ruskell puts to me and will happily engage with him on that question.

I understand the significance of the issue, but it is exclusively a matter for the local authority.

I do not know why I am being shouted at by the member, who is saying that it is not. Perhaps I have to explain it, but education provision in Scotland is delivered by local authorities, and Argyll and Bute Council is the authority that is consulting on the school. Tim Eagle and his colleagues regularly accuse the Government of centralising power in this country. I am simply pointing out that the issue that he is complaining about is a matter for Argyll and Bute Council to consult on.

On the question of consultation, I think that there should, of course, be adequate community consultation—[Interruption.] I am not quite sure why I am being shouted at by Rachael Hamilton. I am simply saying that I would advise and encourage Argyll and Bute Council to engage in consultation with the community to come to an agreed position. These are, of course, difficult issues and councils should engage properly with their communities.

I am and always have been a great supporter of the Borders railway, but I do not remember that always being the position of the Conservatives—or, perhaps, not that of all the Conservatives. I will again defer to my dear friend Christine Grahame, but I seem to remember that chap John Lamont not being that supportive of the Borders railway.

On a serious note, the Borders railway has been an absolutely unparalleled success. It has improved connectivity and is a great addition to the Borders. I totally understand the aspiration to extend the railway to cover other communities in the Borders and I am glad that that funding has been released to enable that to be explored.

This issue is the subject of a consultation that closed on 26 January. There are a wide range of views on the topic, and ministers will consider them and decide on the way forward. We will consider all the responses to the consultation and will publish an analysis in due course. At that point, we will set out the steps that we will take to address the issues that are the subject of the consultation.

I take those issues very seriously. Throughout my time as finance minister, I was regularly attacked in this Parliament for setting exacting efficiency standards on public sector budgets on an annual basis. The result of that was that we released significant value for investment in the public finances.

I am struggling to remember about the Police Scotland reforms. I might be wrong about this—if I am wrong, I will correct it, or Russell Findlay can correct the record—but I think that the Conservatives opposed us on Police Scotland reforms.

I am always prepared to listen to reports from the Auditor General and to consider the implications for the Government and for local authorities, which are responsible for the delivery of education in our country. We take those issues seriously and will respond accordingly.

It is important that I reassure members of the public about the progress that has been made on closing the attainment gap. Under this Government, the overall poverty-related attainment gap has reduced by 60 per cent since 2009-10. In relation to meeting literacy standards in primary schools, the poverty-related attainment gap between young people from the most-deprived areas and those from the least-deprived areas is 20.1 percentage points, which is a record low. In relation to achieving the third level in literacy and numeracy in secondary schools, the attainment gap between those pupils has reached record lows of 12.7 percentage points and 12 percentage points respectively.

In relation to additional support for learning—I accept the absolute necessity to ensure that good outcomes are achieved for those young people—the attainment gap between school pupils with additional support needs and those without has reduced by almost half since 2009-10, from 45.3 percentage points to 23.1 percentage points.

I accept that more needs to be done, but important and substantial progress is being made on closing the attainment gap, and that is good for children and young people in our country.

Mr Sarwar might have conjured up that script before he asked me any questions, but I have refuted the detail that he has put on the record, because, as I recounted to him a second ago, we are making progress on closing the attainment gap.

Under this Government, the attainment gap has reduced by 60 per cent since 2009-10, and I am absolutely determined to improve outcomes for young people. Why are we doing that? We are doing that because this Government put in investment, through the expansion of early learning and childcare, to give children the best start in life. This Government has put money in place to support improvement in the lives of young people living in poverty through the Scottish child payment—originally, it was set at £5 for every eligible child; now, it is £26.70—which is helping to lift hundreds of thousands of children out of poverty. [John Swinney has corrected this contribution. See end of report.] That is why Scotland is the only part of the United Kingdom where it is projected that poverty among children will fall, whereas it will rise in every other part of the United Kingdom under the stewardship in England and Wales of the Labour Party.

People in Scotland should look at what the SNP has delivered to improve the opportunities and the life chances of the children and young people of Scotland, and they should then look at what a Labour Government does: it went into office promising to reduce fuel bills for individuals in our country, which then went up. Labour delivers broken promises to the people of Scotland, and Mr Sarwar will be no different.