Chamber and committees

To ask the Scottish Government what assessment it has made of the potential impact of United Kingdom Government migration policy on Scotland’s economy and workforce. (S6O-02742)

Will the member take an intervention?

Our approach to migration and refugees should have dignity, fairness and respect at its core, as opposed to the United Kingdom Government’s hostile environment approach, which we currently have to endure.

Yesterday, the UK Government’s plan to send asylum seekers to Rwanda was ruled to be illegal by the Supreme Court. Can the First Minister provide information on any assessment of those plans by the Scottish Government? Will he confirm that more than £140 million of taxpayers’ money, including Scottish taxpayers’ money, has been squandered on that illegal scheme? Has he heard a single word of criticism from any Tory MSP of the huge waste of taxpayers’ money on that unworkable, scandalous and illegal scheme?

It is very interesting to hear your comments. I spent a year in Canada at the University of Prince Edward Island and I worked for quite a time on the Committee of the Regions, which is mentioned in our papers.

I am particularly interested in Professor Cornago’s comments about progress and regress in relation to how this thing works. We have a quote from President Biden, which says that the foreign policy of Canada in peacetime is to be at war with Quebec. It feels a bit like that in the UK just now, in my view. We have an increasingly insecure and paranoid UK Government that is now saying that, when a Scottish minister tries to be active internationally, they first have to speak to the UK ambassador or ambassadorial staff. Also, like other parts of the UK, Scotland was completely cut out of the discussions on Brexit and the trade discussions afterwards. It feels a bit like a curtain is coming down.

Professor Cornago, I think that you said that the progress and regress often depends on the political imperatives. For example, if the Basque representatives could provide the balance in the Spanish Parliament, that would empower them. I wonder whether, in either of your experiences, there is any pragmatic way to get a basis on which the Governments might be better able to work together, other than a sort of political force majeure.

On trade and industry, our position is pretty much the same as Quebec’s. We have Scottish Development International, which is the most successful body of its type in any part of the UK, apart from the south-east of England, at getting foreign direct investment. Generally, however, outwith trade and investment, how best could the two interests—the UK Government and the Scottish Government, in what is obviously a very centralised unitary state, unlike the confederation that you have in Canada—rub along to get to a more productive relationship, outwith the political ins and outs of representation in the UK Parliament, if that makes sense?

Thank you for your answers. Unlike in the Canadian example that was given, there are cases where the UK Government is obliged to consult the Scottish Parliament, but it has become increasingly normalised for it to ignore what is said. It is able to do that. In fact, the UK Government describes it as a self-denying ordinance as to whether it will take any notice of what is said.

To what extent do the international activities of Quebec reflect and build on any discretion that it has on immigration? I understand that you have a slightly decentralised immigration system. In Scotland we are suffering depopulation, so the extent to which we should have freedom of action on immigration is a matter of interest. We used to have that under something called the fresh talent initiative. To what extent does Quebec make use of such discretion?

The member will be aware of the cross-border nature of much of that crime, including the supply of drugs to Scotland by road and rail from England. Given that, does she agree that, if the United Kingdom Government were to take the same approach as the Scottish Government and apply the cashback for communities approach to some of the proceeds of crime in England, that could benefit the people of Scotland? If she does agree, will she agree to write with me to the UK Government to propose such a change?

I thank Siobhian Brown—who is no relation—for bringing the motion to the chamber for debate. I commend the work of cashback for communities, which uses money collected from the proceeds of crime to fund projects to support young people. The motion rightly recognises the positive work of the organisation, as have many of the speeches in the debate, but I will address the underlying rationale behind the creation of cashback for communities. It is one of a raft of Scottish Government measures that take a preventative approach to crime by seeking to address its root causes—in this case, issues such as social isolation, loneliness and peer pressure among young people.

That point is particularly pertinent given the scenes of irresponsible firework use that we saw across Scotland over the past week. I urge all members, when we address such incidents, to think about not only the rules and regulations on the sale of fireworks—many of which lie with Westminster—but the underlying social factors that cause such behaviour in the first place. I do not disagree with some of the points that Maggie Chapman made, but the greater harms that she talked about have to be addressed in the context of the austerity years that we are going through.

Cashback for communities has spent £130 million supporting around 1.3 million young people across Scotland since its creation, 15 years ago—not least in my constituency, where the funding has supported organisations such as Play Alloa and Lornshill academy’s school of football. It has also worked closely with local groups such as Connect Alloa and Ochil Youths Community Improvement to deliver homelessness awareness projects, art sessions, sessions on alcohol and drugs awareness and anti-vandalism projects over that 15-year period. Last year, I opened one of cashback for communities’ outreach events at Hawkhill Community Association in Alloa, which was an opportunity to celebrate what the programme offers our young people: an opportunity to come together and learn from each other in a young person-led environment.

Of course, as the chief officer of Clackmannanshire Third Sector Interface, Anthea Coulter, often states, Clackmannanshire could always benefit from further support from the programme to address local challenges that arise, as could Dunblane and Bridge of Allan. I know that she would welcome the opportunity to meet the minister along with me to discuss our local context. I will write to the minister about that.

It would be wrong to highlight the success that cashback for communities has had in achieving its dual goals of financial investment in our communities and preventing crime before it happens without highlighting the significant challenges that both of those goals face. I refer again to the 14 years of Westminster austerity, which has changed our communities beyond all recognition. I suggest that that austerity has been a significant contributor to the loneliness, isolation and peer pressure among young people, despite the immense work of the organisations that cashback for communities supports, which work hard to support our charities, social enterprises and voluntary groups as they support our young people. Although cashback for communities has made a significant difference to our society—not least in my constituency—much of that hard work, from the viewpoint of financial investment and of addressing the root causes of crime, is under threat by the unwanted Westminster austerity that is being forced on Scotland.

I am grateful to Katy Clark for agreeing to write to the UK Government with me on this point. The scope of cashback for communities could be substantially expanded, as could its effect on families and communities in Scotland if Westminster were to follow the same approach by bringing back some of the proceeds of crime to help communities, including those in Scotland that are affected by, for example, the drug trade coming through road and rail routes from England and the rest of the UK to Scotland.

Notwithstanding that point, I agree that there should be a review and that people should satisfy themselves that the right criteria are being used for the awards. I am well aware that there is limited scope for ministers to direct the awards, but there is no harm in having a review.

I support the motion in the name of Siobhian Brown.

Given what Sharon Dowey has said about trying to increase the amount of money that is taken in from the proceeds of crime, would she be willing to write, along with me and Katy Clark, to the UK Government to say that, for crimes that are perpetrated down south but have an impact in Scotland, it could usefully introduce the same cashback for communities initiative? That would raise money for communities in Scotland. Would she support such a letter?

As well as being as vigilant as ever for any rising incidence of antisemitism or anti-Islamic sentiment, we should acknowledge the fact that, by and large, people in Scotland have not gone down that route. We should be quick to condemn, but we should also praise.

Even from a distance, though, to see the Hamas attack in which more than 1,000 people were killed in the first week of October, and then to see that more than 8,000 people in Gaza were killed, was horrifying. I recall, in particular, the incident about which it was reported that although one Hamas commander was killed so were 400 ordinary people and many others, including children, are still lying under rubble. My concern now is Hezbollah’s threat to start attacking tomorrow if there is not a ceasefire—I think that it tried to lay down those terms overnight. I do not know the extent to which the Scottish Government will have any information or a view on that. With the largest American naval fleet since the second world war being stationed in the middle east, the real worry is that situation will become a genuinely geopolitical conflagration that goes off in different directions. Does the Scottish Government have any line of sight on the thinking around that or what is being done to prevent it from happening?

To ask the Scottish Government when it last received an update from the traffic commissioner for Scotland on any complaints regarding local bus services. (S6O-02665)