Chamber and committees

It is now two weeks since the Russian war against Ukraine began. Yesterday, the tragic events hit a new low, with a children’s hospital being reduced to rubble. The Russians bombed a hospital and targeted children. Young, innocent lives have been lost in the most despicable and atrocious way. It is hard to express the anger and grief that we all feel at that appalling act.

I had the honour of being in the United Kingdom Parliament on Monday, to hear President Zelensky address the chamber. He spoke then of 50 children already having died in this war. Following yesterday’s bombing, more young lives have been lost because of the actions of Putin and his forces. The people of Ukraine are all in our thoughts and prayers just now.

I know that we all agree that more needs to be done to help refugees who are escaping war, and that needs to happen now. The situation has to be urgently addressed, because those who are fleeing for their lives need safety and security here in the United Kingdom, and we have to do everything that we can to support them.

In the light of Russia’s actions, will the Scottish Government update its energy strategy to outline how it plans to protect our energy security?

The First Minister started her answer by saying that she and her Government would look at all the issues and all the options, but she refused to say whether she agrees with me and the Scottish Conservatives that we have to maximise oil and gas production in Scotland at the moment to help with the current crisis and the crisis going forward.

The First Minister has said previously that no new oil fields should be developed. That is just not a realistic solution. It will simply lead to more imports from other countries. Right now, we purchase £3 billion of oil and gas every year from other countries, including Russia. If the First Minister is not prepared to move on domestic oil and gas supply, what are her alternatives? Scottish Conservatives support the increased use of nuclear energy. It is low carbon and it is safe. Should not nuclear be in Scotland’s energy mix, if we want to stop relying on Russian oil and gas and move to net zero?

All week, I have been working with colleagues in the UK Government to see what more can be done on refugees. I welcome the steps that the Home Secretary took this morning, but I agree that much more needs to be done to protect people who are fleeing for their lives.

The First Minister mentioned the updated energy strategy, but Russia’s appalling actions have put a renewed focus on energy security. In Scotland, we have the natural resources to protect our own supply and the resources to export to other countries, to reduce Europe’s dependence on Russian gas. Last night, a former SNP energy minister said:

“In principle, we do need more oil and gas.”

He continued:

“we need all the oil and gas production we can get”.

I agree with Fergus Ewing—[Interruption.] Patrick Harvie laughs, but we can protect Scottish jobs and secure our energy supply.

First Minister, surely, now is the time to maximise oil and gas production in Scotland, using the energy on our own doorstep.

It has not gone away, which is why I mentioned the drive towards net zero in my questions. However, we also have to see that the situation has changed fundamentally, not just in months and years but in recent weeks. The First Minister’s position does not seem to recognise the new reality: Russia’s war has changed the situation and we must accept that.

Scotland could deal a blow to Vladimir Putin by increasing domestic oil and gas production. We could increase that production now and end the need to import foreign oil and gas and could export more to reduce international reliance on Russian energy. Now is not the time to be ideological; now is the time to be practical and realistic. We have heard that from SNP voices—Fergus Ewing and Ian Blackford—so why do we not hear it from the First Minister?

It is questions about the leadership of the bank that are not being answered by the First Minister. She is telling us a lot about the bank and its importance to Scotland, Scotland’s economy and the Parliament but, like her ministers, she is refusing to give any detail on why the chief executive resigned. That is extremely unfortunate, as we come to the Parliament to get answers from the First Minister and her Government.

The timing of the matter is all very suspicious. The chief executive of the Scottish National Investment Bank resigned just days before the Scottish National Party launched its economic strategy, which is wafer thin, underwhelming and watered down by the Greens. It sums up a Government that is out of ideas and out of any vision for creating Scottish jobs and growing our economy. The plan is more of the same; it even recycles productivity clubs from Derek Mackay’s economic plan.

The strategy has been criticised by business leaders including Sir Tom Hunter, who described it as

“a long wish list with no magic wand to deliver it”.

Is it really a coincidence that the chief executive of the Scottish National Investment Bank has resigned instead of trying to deliver the new economic strategy?

I have to wonder, when the First Minister reads out those quotes, whether there were similar supportive quotes when Derek Mackay issued many of the same points in his economic plan or for previous economic plans. The fact is that the strategy is a retread of many of the issues and ideas that were put forward by the Scottish National Party before.

The first part of the First Minister’s answer was telling. She has confirmed to the Parliament that there was no direct link between the Government’s economic strategy launch and the resignation of the chief executive of the Scottish National Investment Bank. Therefore, she knows why the chief executive did resign—if she knows that the strategy launch is not the reason why she resigned. We are just asking questions because we need answers. [Interruption.] It may be uncomfortable, and the groans from SNP members may be because they do not want these questions to be asked, but it is the job of the Opposition in this country to raise serious concerns when they come in.

The First Minister mentioned the economy. For the 15 years that her Government has been in charge, Scotland’s economy has been stuck. The Scottish Government has created more problems than it has ever created jobs. We have seen one major failure after another, from Prestwick airport to Ferguson’s shipyard to Burntisland Fabrications Ltd. Now, for the new strategy, the SNP is literally diagnosing problems that it either created or made worse.

The First Minister cannot even rely on support from those on the benches behind her. In response to the launch of her Government’s economic strategy, Maggie Chapman said:

“the Scottish Greens believe the focus on growth is outdated.”

The focus on growth is outdated? Those are the same Greens that Nicola Sturgeon personally invited into her Government, a party whose policy is actually to make Scotland poorer. Is it any wonder that the First Minister’s Government’s economic plan is a shambles?

The First Minister has used the opportunity to explain how well the bank is doing in the vital work that it is undertaking. It is therefore important that the Parliament and the public in Scotland know why the chief executive resigned so abruptly earlier this week. We have heard from the First Minister that she was given advance warning of that last month, so I have to ask why we are not finding that out in the Parliament. This week, Scottish Conservative MSPs have repeatedly asked why the chief executive, Eilidh Mactaggart, resigned, but not once have we got an answer. The First Minister has refused to give an answer again today.

The Scottish National Investment Bank will eventually be in charge of £2 billion of public money, so we are entitled to know about its leadership. The secrecy and shutting down of scrutiny are completely unacceptable. How can the First Minister and her Government have nothing to say about why the person who was running that organisation has left?

The ministerial code states:

“Information should not be withheld from the public unless there are clear and lawful reasons for so doing.”

Are there clear legal reasons for hiding that information from the public, or will the First Minister now tell us why the chief executive stood down?

In discussing the issues that have not had prominence because of Covid and other matters, the business minister will know that the Scottish Conservatives have asked on a weekly basis for a statement about maternity services in Moray. I have also tried to get urgent questions on that. It was in the Scottish National Party’s manifesto to restore a full consultant-led maternity service in Moray. Can we have a statement or will the Scottish Government lead a debate on its response to the independent inquiry into and report on maternity services? We have now had a case of a Moray mum, Alexandra Naylor, giving birth in a lay-by. Can we have time in the chamber to debate this crucial issue so that no more Moray mums have to give birth, or fear giving birth, in a lay-by?

The Audit Scotland report lays bare that Scotland’s NHS is on an emergency footing. New evidence, which was submitted this morning to the Parliament’s COVID-19 Recovery Committee, spells out the true cost of this Government’s failure. The Royal College of Emergency Medicine has said that delayed accident and emergency admissions in Scotland led to

“over 500 excess deaths in 2021”.

Its evidence to the committee this morning states that those avoidable deaths are

“entirely attributable to the delay to admission these patients experienced.”

Five hundred lives were lost because the Government did not act early enough, despite receiving warning after warning that Scotland’s NHS is in crisis. If the Audit Scotland report is not a wake-up call for the First Minister and her Government, surely those deaths must be.

Does the First Minister have full confidence in her Government’s national health service recovery plan?