Chamber and committees

I will make a short contribution to the debate. I recognise the fundamental importance of buses as a mode of transport and as a social and economic lifeline for many people, including many in my constituency. I recognise that, as members have mentioned and as the Labour amendment refers to, there has been a decline in the number of bus services and bus routes over the past period. That is undeniably true, and I have seen it in my area. I have had cause to raise that issue with the relevant parties, and, if time allows, I will come back to that point.

In the context of the challenges that the bus sector faces, we must do all that we can. It is clear that the concessionary travel scheme has been important in supporting individuals, but its contribution has also been important in helping to sustain and support the bus sector.

I return to the benefit to individuals. For a long time, people over the age of 60, people with eligible conditions and people with a disability have seen the benefit from being able to access the scheme and from being able to remain mobile and active in social and economic terms. I readily agree that the expansion of eligibility to under-22s has been a significant success, with more than 250 million journeys taken, which speaks to its story of success. I declare—although I do not need to declare it as an interest—that, like Mark Ruskell, I have two young people at home who qualify for free bus travel under the terms of eligibility.

Looking at the issue through a local lens—a little wider than my household but still local—I note that the scheme has been enormously supportive to many young people in my constituency in the light of a decision by North Lanarkshire Council to end school transport entitlement for a great number of young people. I absolutely recognise, and it is important to say, that the concessionary scheme should not be used to supplement or replace any removal of bus travel. As an aside, I point out that the Scottish National Party group of councillors on North Lanarkshire Council identified funding to continue school buses, but Labour and Conservative councillors still voted the cuts through. Nonetheless, it is the case that young people travelling to and from school have been able to use their free bus travel entitlement to access school.

I take Mark Ruskell’s point that young people are less likely to have disposable income; they could have just left school, they could be at the outset of their working lives on an apprenticeship or they could be continuing with their education. I spoke with a constituent who told me that her daughter used under-22 transport to get to and from university in Glasgow every day and noted how essential that is. We know that the scheme is an essential support for many young people. It is welcome that more than 80 per cent of eligible young people now access the scheme through a national entitlement card or a Young Scot national entitlement card. The Child Poverty Action Group says that it could save a child in Scotland up to £2,836 a year.

The scheme has a significant impact, and we should be doing everything that we can to nudge that 80 per cent take-up closer to 100 per cent. We should be open to further expansion of the scheme. Mark Ruskell makes a reasonable case on that, but we need to be cognisant of the circumstances that we find ourselves in. The amendment in the name of the minister makes it clear that the scheme already costs £200.5 million. We are about to head into a budget process, and we are hearing, although it is not yet confirmed, that some changes that the UK Government is making to tax could lead to a £1 billion cut to our budget. That is the reality, so, although we need to accept that case, we must look at it realistically.

I will support the amendment in the name of the minister.

The cabinet secretary has been engaging with Cumbernauld Theatre Trust in relation to support when its transition funding from Creative Scotland runs out. Can he provide an update and state his confidence in Cumbernauld theatre and its ability to successfully resolve the matter to enable it to continue the good work that it has been doing for the past 60 years?

In April this year, there was a significant wildfire at Palacerigg country park in my constituency—a reminder that wildfire is not just a phenomenon of the summer months. How is the Scottish Government engaging with local authorities such as North Lanarkshire Council to consider preventative measures that are perhaps akin to the new byelaws that have been put in place in the Cairngorms?

I thank Nicola Sturgeon for securing this debate and very much endorse the terms of her motion, to which I added my name in support.

I welcome the debate because there has been a growing tendency of late for some in the chamber to scoff at or eschew the notion that this Parliament should discuss how we support the global south. It is of the utmost importance that we debate those matters. Nicola Sturgeon mentioned the First Minister’s recent visit to Malawi and Zambia, and the Oxfam Scotland briefing for this debate speaks positively of that visit and explains why it is important for Scotland to engage in such international activity. There has long been a consensus that we should support such activity which, we should remind ourselves, goes back to before the SNP’s time in Government and was, in many ways, begun by Jack McConnell. I hope that we can once again reach a consensus that it is important for the Scottish Government to engage in such activity and for Parliament to deliberate on it.

The context for this debate is COP30, which begins next week and is a reminder of the need for collective global action. I very much share Nicola Sturgeon’s concerns about the anti-science rhetoric that is creeping into our political discourse and should be tackled head on. I am sorry to say that we are hearing some of that even in this place, so we should raise our voices against it whenever we hear it.

The other context speaks more widely to our ability as a country to contribute to meeting those challenges. It is important to look back to COP26, when the world looked to Glasgow and Nicola Sturgeon provided real leadership for the Scottish Government. I was at the margins of COP26 and was pleased to be able to represent the Government at a few events. That £2 million contribution to the historic loss and damage fund was a clear demonstration of Scotland, and the Scottish Government’s, commitment to recognising our historic obligations. There is a moral imperative for us to contribute in that way. As Nicola Sturgeon referred to, it is about reparations; it is also in our own enlightened self-interest.

Earlier today, at the Criminal Justice Committee, the chief constable spoke to us about some of the challenges in Scotland that arise from global geopolitical events. One of the contributors to global instability is our lack of interaction to try to find improvements for the global south. So, we should think about it not only as a moral imperative but as something that it is in our own direct self-interest to act on.

As with all such things, this debate is short, so I will not go into great detail. The Oxfam briefing lays out some of the areas of concern in the great claims that rich countries have made about their contributions. They claim to have been able to mobilise

“US$116bn in climate finance for 2022, but the real value ... is only US$28-35bn”,

less than a third of the pledged amount.

As a result of the fact that nearly two thirds of climate finance has been made as loans, often at standard rates of interest without concessions, climate finance is adding more each year to developing countries’ debt, which now stands at $3.3 trillion. Those are not sustainable solutions to sustainability challenges.

That is something that COP30 must tackle head on. Not only must the world respond collectively, but Scotland must play its part too.

I do not think that I have time, Mr Carson. I have to close and I want to make this point. Banking hubs can provide an opportunity to replace the retail banking on our high streets that we have lost. However, I agree with Murdo Fraser that some of the regulation around them is too strict. It focuses on access to cash, but retail banks offer much more than that. I would very much like community banking hubs to be established in both Kilsyth and Cumbernauld, and that is something that I will continue to call for.

I thank Craig Hoy for lodging the motion. I very much agree with its premise. The notion of a branch promise, as he states in his motion, is very much worthy of consideration.

Thankfully, the Bank of Scotland branch in Cumbernauld is not one of the 13 that is set to close. However, my area has been hit hard by bank closures over a number of years—I will come back to that. Indeed, there will be very few of us, at best, who have not been impacted by those challenges.

To set the overall context, on 29 September, Which? magazine laid out the scale of the change that we have seen over the past decade, since January 2015. Across the United Kingdom, banks and building societies have closed 6,561 branches at a rate of around 53 a month. That represents 66 per cent of the branches that were open at the start of 2015.

In Scotland, the issue has been particularly acute. Scotland was the first area of the UK to experience the loss of more than half of its retail banks in that period. Of its 1,041 branches, 719 are now gone, and another 21 are set to go. That is 740 branches—or 71 per cent of the total number of retail banks that were in place in January 2015.

I do not want to overly politicise my comments today, because the debate is primarily an opportunity to set out a constituency concern, but it is also about how banks are regulated. Regulation remains in the hands of the UK Government. I observe that Mr Hoy’s party was in government for almost the entirety of the previous decade, although we see the trend continuing under the Labour Government.

I will talk about the local angle, as I think most members will do today. In 2017, we saw the closure of the Royal Bank of Scotland branch in Kilsyth. I should declare an interest as an account holder with the Royal Bank of Scotland. In 2020, we saw the closure of TSB in Kilsyth, which left Kilsyth, a town of more than 10,000 people, without a single retail bank.

In 2022, Clydesdale Bank—I am sentimental, Presiding Officer; I will call it Clydesdale Bank rather than Virgin Money—closed its branch in Cumbernauld. Again, I should declare an interest as an account holder there. In 2024, we saw the closure of the Royal Bank of Scotland branch in Cumbernauld town centre, which followed an earlier closure of another branch in the town. Most recently, in 2025, we saw the closure of Santander in Cumbernauld. I was recently in discussion with a constituent who talked about having moved their account from Clydesdale, because it closed in the area, to Santander, only then to face the loss of their local bank again.

As Mr Hoy said, the challenge is particularly acute in rural areas, but it impacts urban Scotland as well.

I will now focus on what might be an opportunity. It is not often that I agree with Murdo Fraser, who has now left the chamber, but I support the notion of banking hubs. I think that they could serve as an opportunity to pick up where we have lost some of the—

In relation to the sentencing and penal policy commission that the cabinet secretary mentioned, does she agree that it is incumbent on all parties and the Parliament as a whole to give proper consideration to its report, when it is available? Does she also agree that we should have a grown-up, measured and informed discussion on any recommendations that the commission produces, so that we can properly consider how we can have a safe prison environment that focuses on rehabilitation and reducing reoffending while also ensuring that justice is served?

What steps are being taken to ensure equality of access to services across different health board areas, so that young people can benefit from high-quality services irrespective of where they live in the country?

Many constituents are contacting me about the decline in services that are offered by the main commercial bus operators in Cumbernauld and Kilsyth, which can mean that people need to travel for more than two hours to ensure that they are at their work in Glasgow by 9 am. What opportunities are presented by the new powers for local authorities that SPT can utilise to return to a more comprehensive bus network and promote public transport use?

Will the minister set out how Scottish Government schemes, such as the preference waiver payment, assist in overcoming any challenges in education associated with geographical location?