Chamber and committees

The CBI report is very welcome, because it indicates that business investment in Scotland has risen to a 20-year high, in contrast with a fall across the rest of the United Kingdom. That goes alongside the fact that unemployment in Scotland is lower than that in the rest of the United Kingdom, which is another indication of the strength of economic performance in Scotland.

Of course, we have heard the views of the credit rating agencies, which said that Scotland had a strong and diverse economy and that it benefited from prudent financial management of its public finances and from its institutional strength.

The CBI report demonstrates that Scotland is an attractive place for investment, that it is a successful and dynamic economy and that it has good stewardship of its public finances.

One of the issues of which we have been mindful is the need to ensure that the complex legal judgment of the Supreme Court is correctly and properly applied in guidance. We have published new guidance in relation to a number of areas, such as schools and workplaces within the Scottish Government.

Obviously, there are issues that we have to continue to work through, as we saw in the judgment that was announced at the beginning of the week, on Monday, in relation to the employment tribunal to which the member referred. That is a further range of complexity that has to be wrestled with.

I reassure Pam Gosal that the Government is doing the work to ensure that those issues are properly addressed, and we have already done so in relation to the documents that we have published.

Mr Leonard raises an example of the importance of addressing the issues involved in the damages legislation and the enormous suffering that individuals with mesothelioma have experienced.

I associate myself very much Mr Leonard’s comments, and I am glad that the issue has been resolved satisfactorily, but it should not have involved going to such lengths to ensure that justice could be achieved.

Flooding at Whitesands has been a long-term issue. There has been significant parliamentary and political pressure for a scheme to be put in place. A number of very well-designed flood prevention schemes have been put in place in different communities in Scotland that have provided respite for families who are affected. I simply observe that early weather information suggests that there will be very heavy rain in the south-west of Scotland over the course of this weekend, so there are challenging circumstances out there at all times.

Flood defence schemes are developed locally. They are put to wider discussion across all local authorities to determine the funding priorities, and the Government allocates funding to them accordingly. That is, essentially, the Government collaborating with a locally based approach to the design of flood prevention schemes. Mr Hoy is asking me to take that power away from local authorities and to decide on the issue in the centre. Normally, Mr Hoy rails against the Government deciding on such issues. I have had much correspondence over the years from people who do not like the scheme that is proposed at Whitesands, but it is important that we listen carefully to the expert advice about the right course of action on such issues.

That amendment relied on the appointment of a victims commissioner, who has not yet been established in office and cannot take the action that was proposed.

The Government is addressing the substance of the issue to ensure that we come to the correct conclusion on the steps that we have to take.

That is some of the work that the Government has to do to make sure that we properly respect the independent inquiry that we established by statute, which has the power to look at many of these issues.

There is a lot in what Mr Greer said that I agree with. As he knows, the Government has taken the decision, which, of course, is not warmly welcomed across Parliament, to ask people on higher incomes to pay more in taxation than they would if they lived in other parts of the United Kingdom. That is exactly the right thing to have done. We will consider other proposals, as Mr Greer knows. He is involved in discussions with the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government and the Minister for Public Finance, which I am fully across. We look forward to coming to conclusions when the Government’s budget is set out to Parliament in January.

The action that this Government is taking is making a real difference. I assure Marie McNair that the Government’s focus in Scotland will remain absolutely on eradicating child poverty, and that it is a central issue for discussion in the Government’s budget.

The UK Government’s decision to scrap the two-child limit comes after sustained and concerted pressure from the Scottish Government and charities, and it is welcome. However, other measures are needed, and the Government in Scotland will take those steps in relation to the budget. I committed that, should the UK Government remove the two-child limit, the resources that this Government was going to spend on that would be allocated for other anti-child-poverty measures, and I reaffirm that commitment to Parliament today.

I thank childhood dementia Scotland—a collaborative partnership of experts and organisations set up by Alzheimer Scotland—for its work to raise awareness of the issues that are associated with childhood dementia through its new report. There is clearly more work to be done to understand the causes and the impact of childhood dementia, but we know that it is caused by a number of rare genetic conditions.

That is why we are collaborating with NHS Education for Scotland and NHS Inform through the rare disease action plan to improve awareness and understanding of rare conditions among healthcare professionals and the public. We will, of course, carefully consider the recommendations that childhood dementia Scotland set out.

Any measure taken by the United Kingdom Government that helps us in our work to eradicate child poverty is welcome. The decision to lift the two-child limit—this Government proposed and pressed for that lifting—is welcome, but the UK Government’s strategy still fails to recognise the damaging impact of the benefit cap or the local housing allowance freeze, which only further drive families into poverty.

We will continue to engage with the UK Government on those questions and, of course, we will set out to Parliament in March the next tackling child poverty delivery plan, which is our statutory responsibility.