Chamber and committees

My final point is about the barriers to the just transition that we are trying to achieve. Aberdeen and Grampian Chamber of Commerce, the Scottish National Investment Bank, Scottish Renewables and the SSE Group all highlighted grid connection issues as a barrier to developing offshore wind. What needs to change in that respect?

Thanks very much.

I want to look at some of the other barriers. One that you did not touch on is finance. The same RGU report said that we

“will require over £17 billion in new regional investments between 2022 and 2030 in manufacturing and operational capabilities for the renewables sector.”

Crown Estate Scotland noted a recent fDi Intelligence report that said that, although $54.8 billion has been pledged to wind power in Scotland, it requires the creation of a low-risk and attractive business environment. Can you say anything about the challenges facing the financial situation?

I want to continue the conversation about the job situation. You rightly touched on the RGU “Making the Switch” report, which highlights that

“90% of the North-East of Scotland’s existing oil and gas workforce has medium/high skills transferability to adjacent energy sectors.”

It also suggests that, if we get this right, we could have 54,000 jobs by 2030, and the Government’s figure is 77,000 jobs by 2050. Other than skills, what challenges are facing the north-east in becoming the global energy hub that can look after installed offshore wind, hydrogen generation and carbon capture and storage? What challenges are we facing in getting those 77,000 jobs?

To ask the Scottish Government how its budget for 2024-25 will support Police Scotland. (S6O-02939)

I welcome the real-terms budget increase for Police Scotland. However, with the continued squeeze on Barnett consequentials and the disappointing autumn statement, will the cabinet secretary outline the impact that that will have on delivering a fit-for-purpose Police Scotland service in the long term?

Presiding Officer,

“I cannot see a rationale or justification for an approach to asylum determination that takes years, costs the taxpayer extraordinary amounts and that prevents the individual from contributing to the economy and society”.

Those are not my words but those of Helena Kennedy KC, as chair of the Independent Commission of Inquiry into Asylum Provision in Scotland.

We should at this point remind ourselves that the UK is a signatory to the 1951 UN Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and its 1967 protocol, which serve to protect refugees. The convention defines a refugee as someone who has a

“well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion”

and

“is outside the country of”

their nationality.

The latest figures that have been published for the 12 months to September 2023 state that 75,340 asylum applications, relating to 93,296 people, were made to the Home Office. In number of asylum applications per head of population, the UK ranks 20th highest in Europe. That is very far behind other countries including Cyprus, which topped the table for asylum applications per head of population.

The Refugee Council identified that the top five countries of origin of people seeking asylum in the UK are Afghanistan, Iran, Albania, India and Iraq. Two of those countries are where British troops engaged in armed conflict for many years and one is where human rights abuses, in particular against women and girls, have been well documented. The others are on the list as a result of crackdowns on independence movements or sectarian violence. That is why 75 per cent of people who apply for asylum in the UK are granted protection on their initial application.

As of September 2023, 124,000 people were waiting for the conclusion of their asylum applications. Meanwhile, the same people who are seeking asylum are banned from working and, in many cases, are provided with only £9 a week from the UK Government to cover the cost of their basic necessities. That is at a time when, across the UK, 949,000 vacancies need to be filled to help the Scottish and UK economies to grow. Why are we not allowing individuals who have been granted protection in this country to work to support themselves?

The National Institute of Economic and Social Research, in its discussion paper “The Economic and Social Impacts of Lifting Work Restrictions on People Seeking Asylum”, highlights that

“The UK is one of six European nations who grant asylum applicants the right to work after they have been waiting for an outcome of their application for longer than a year”,

unlike most other countries, which have a restriction of six months. However, the UK

“is the only country to impose further restrictions on what jobs a person seeking asylum can apply for once the right to work has been granted, by allowing people to take up jobs only on a ‘shortage occupations’ list.”

The report found that the annual impacts of allowing people who are seeking asylum the right to work in the UK would be to increase tax revenue by £1.3 billion, to reduce Government expenditure by £6.7 billion and to increase the UK’s gross domestic product by £1.6 billion. As Helena Kennedy stated in the final report of the commission,

“What an utter waste of human potential and of resources. Particularly in a country that has an urgent growth agenda and massive skills shortages.”

She continued:

“The UK needs care workers, HGV drivers, butchers and other technically and professionally skilled workers. We need to honour our commitments to protect people and we need people who want to play a role in our economy and society. Canada’s recently announced 2023-25 Immigration Levels Plan embraces a strategy of immigration to manage future social and economic challenges. They are seeing immigration as an opportunity not a threat; in contrast the UK seems short-sighted on multiple fronts.”

Many refugees are highly skilled and want to contribute to their new country and to give thanks for the opportunity to rebuild their lives. Instead, the UK Government has left more than 56,000 of them languishing in hotel rooms, which is resulting in increased mental health issues, on-going trauma and a loss of wellbeing, which has resulted in their requiring more support from our already stretched NHS.

Under the Scottish Government’s recently published immigration proposals in the “Building a New Scotland” series, we would welcome asylum seekers and provide support so that they could more easily integrate into communities. People who are seeking asylum would be given the right to work and would therefore pay taxes, which in turn would allow access to public services, including employability support. The result would be increased tax revenue for the Scottish Government, lower expenditure on asylum support and increased productivity.

The UK Government’s repugnant policies on asylum and immigration in no way reflect Scotland’s values of compassion, humanity and upholding international law, nor do they take into account the fact that migration benefits Scotland’s economy and our public services. An independent Scotland would be able to establish a humane approach to supporting refugees and people who are fleeing conflict and persecution, who deserve our compassion and aid, and it would be aware of the need for equity for the global south in our approach to migration. We would be able to do that with the values of dignity, fairness and respect at the heart of all aspects of immigration policy.

I, too, thank Bob Doris for bringing the motion to Parliament for debate and Marie Curie for its 75 years of providing palliative care across Scotland and the UK.

The first Marie Curie home in the UK was opened in 1952 at the Hill of Tarvit in Cupar, Fife. Since then, its UK hospice network has grown, with nine hospices now offering in-patient and out-patient care and a broad range of day therapies to meet the needs of individual patients.

As others have said, the two Scottish hospices are in Glasgow and in my constituency of Edinburgh Pentlands, at Fairmilehead. I have visited that hospice on many occasions, the most recent time being only two weeks ago, when I took part in the lights to remember event.

In the past year, the Marie Curie Edinburgh hospice and the West Lothian care-at-home team supported a total of 1,690 patients through their in-patient, out-patient, community and day therapy services. I should point out that my wife is a district nurse who provides palliative care to patients in West Lothian and works alongside the Marie Curie care-at-home team, which provides support to those individuals.

Demand for the service is increasing as Scotland’s population is ageing, with the census highlighting that, between 2001 and 2021, the over-65s had increased from 16 per cent of Scotland’s population to 20 per cent, which is an increase of nearly 267,000 people in that age category. Although, compared with previous decades, life expectancy for men and women is increasing, there is a downside in that those who are over 65 have more health problems and the amount of time that is spent in ill health is also rising. That puts pressure on our health service, including those who are working to improve end-of-life care.

The Marie Curie report “How many people need palliative care?” provides basic estimates of the future need and indicates that there will be a significantly higher need for palliative care in the future. The report states:

“The methods used in this report can provide a headcount of how many people in the population need palliative care, but they do not indicate what the service implications are for meeting this need, what the gap is between need and the current provision of care and services, or which groups or individuals are most likely to miss out. More research is needed to model population need for different types of services, alongside improved data on service access, outcomes, and patient and carer experiences.”

I totally agree with that, and I will come to that point in two seconds.

I welcome the announcement in the report that Marie Curie will commission research to help answer the questions of population need for different types of services, alongside improved data on service access outcomes and patient and carer experiences.

It is important that we better understand what support people require as they reach the last few months of life. Therefore, I welcome the Scottish Government’s creation of a strategy steering group to oversee the development and delivery of a new palliative and end-of-life care strategy. The aim is to ensure that everyone in Scotland receives

“well-coordinated, timely and high-quality palliative care, care around death and bereavement support based on their needs and preferences including support for families and carers.”

The strategy will also aim to understand and respond to issues of financial insecurity, housing and employment, and it will provide information in accessible formats for everyone who requires end-of-life care, and their families.

I thank the dedicated staff at Fairmilehead Marie Curie hospice, who will be working over Christmas and new year, for all that they do to support those people who are reaching the end of their lives.

Good morning. I want to continue the discussion on the background to the decision to move towards closure, whether it be in May 2025 or later. You talked about macroeconomic challenges. Are there economic challenges that are impacting only the Grangemouth refinery, or are the same issues impacting the other five refineries in the UK and, indeed, those across Europe?