Chamber and committees

That was helpful.

A few weeks ago, we took evidence from some of the fuel energy charities and had a discussion about your Government’s fuel insecurity fund. I believe that the fund is in its third round, and that roughly £10 million has been allocated in each of the rounds. There is some concern—from Citizens Advice Scotland, in particular—that that money might not last the full three months this time around. Have you had any advice on how long it will last, and do you have any plans to increase the pot?

That is helpful. You also talked about the importance of political will and buy-in from senior management in local authorities. What would help to achieve that? Are you aware of any local authorities in Scotland in which there is good visibility of these issues, perhaps due to the existence of a committee on net zero? Should there be more net zero committees, such as the one that we have in the Scottish Parliament? What would help with regard to the way in which administrations organise themselves? Some of them will vote this week on who is in charge of what committee, so it would be helpful to know what would help to ensure that there is a joined-up and strategic approach in each local authority.

To ask the First Minister whether the Scottish Government will convene an emergency summit on abortion healthcare in response to anti-abortion rights action in Scotland and around the world. (S6F-01094)

I warmly welcome the First Minister’s agreement to convene an urgent summit, which more than a dozen women’s organisations have called for. I also welcome her personal commitment to chair the talks and to facilitate politicians, campaigners and healthcare experts working together. That is hugely important, and I thank her.

Does the First Minister agree that we must use the forum to actively demonstrate our solidarity with women in America, and around the world, who fear that their legal rights are slipping away, while we also take urgent action to deal with the challenges facing people who access and provide abortion healthcare in Scotland?

Although it is the case that operational policing matters are for Police Scotland, does the First Minister agree that it is important that any member of the public who experiences harassment or intimidation when seeking to access or provide such healthcare must feel confident that if they come forward to the police with complaints, those will be properly investigated?

I welcome the comments that have been made so far. In particular, I associate myself with Ariane Burgess’s comments.

My amendment 74 relates to the national good food nation plan. As we have heard, the bill requires ministers, in determining the content of the plan, to have regard to

“the scope for food-related issues to affect outcomes”

in relation to social and economic wellbeing, the environment, health and economic development.

My amendment 74 adds “child poverty” to the list. As with the point that Ariane Burgess made, I think that the phrase “social and economic wellbeing” is too wide. Given the need for a joined-up approach to tackling child poverty, it is important that the interests of children and young people are clearly placed in the bill. That will also help Scottish ministers to take a joined-up approach to meeting child poverty targets. We know that, between now and 2030, we need to lift 210,000 children in Scotland out of poverty.

My amendment 79 does a similar thing in relation to public bodies’ good food nation plans, so I will not rehearse my reasons for lodging it. I hope that the committee will support it.

Section 1 requires that

“The national good food nation plan must set out ... the main outcomes in relation to food-related issues which the Scottish Ministers want to be achieved”

as well as “indicators or other measures” for assessing the progress towards and achievement of outcomes and

“the policies which ... Ministers intend to pursue”

to achieve the outcomes.

Amendment 71, in my name, states that

“One of the main outcomes, specified under”

section 1(3)(a)

“must be the reduction of food waste in Scotland.”

As we know, every year, a third of all food that is produced globally is wasted and 8 per cent of all greenhouse gas emissions are due to food loss and waste. As a member of the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee, I can tell members that we are very concerned about food waste; indeed, it was why I was motivated to lodge the amendment. I believe that this provision should be in the bill.

Amendment 70 seeks to ensure

“the fulfilment of all children and young people’s right to high-quality, nutritious food as set out in Article 24 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child”,

specifying that that

“must include the provision of universal free school meals to all children and young people attending local authority nurseries or schools”.

Committee members might be aware that, through its food for thought campaign, the Scottish Trades Union Congress women’s committee has been campaigning for the expansion of universal free school meal provision to all nursery, primary and secondary pupils. The vision is to alleviate hunger, poverty and food insecurity and to ensure that the rights of all young people to food education and fun, as outlined in the UNCRC, are made real.

The STUC women’s committee believes that that can be achieved through implementing universal free school meal provision, and I fully agree. The campaign seeks to end the long-standing stigma and shame that are linked to free school meals so that all young people can live with dignity and respect and so that they can experience school without fear of poverty-related bullying.

Members will be aware that, since 2015, all primary 1 to 3 pupils attending local authority schools have been eligible for a free school lunch. In March last year, the Scottish Government announced a public commitment to delivering a phased expansion of free school meals to all primary pupils in Scotland by the end of August this year. Currently, all P1 to P5 pupils can receive a free school meal during term time, but the expansion has yet to be rolled out to P6 and P7 pupils. The Scottish Government’s existing commitments are most welcome, and the national good food plan presents a brilliant opportunity to build on that ambition.

The issues of means testing and eligibility criteria, which are well rehearsed, are real barriers to the uptake of free school meals, and I hope that amendment 70, in my name, which has been developed in collaboration with the STUC women’s committee in support of its food for thought campaign, can be supported by committee members. The STUC women’s committee’s call for universal free school meals is backed by the Scottish Youth Parliament, the Children’s Parliament, Children 1st, the Child Poverty Action Group, the Poverty Alliance, the Trussell Trust, One Parent Families Scotland and many others. It emphasises the importance of consulting children and young people. The STUC women’s committee is also pleased to have secured the support of the Scottish Labour Party and the Scottish Green Party during last year’s parliamentary elections as well as the support of Scotland’s independent Poverty and Inequality Commission.

Amendment 72 seeks to amend section 1 by adding that

“The national good food nation plan must set out how the Scottish Ministers will ensure the free supply of school milk to children in pre-school, nurseries and primary schools.”

The intention is that children will have access to the benefits of drinking milk in a school or early-years setting, which include ensuring that a growing child gets essential nutrients and opportunities to develop social skills and encouraging lifelong healthy living habits.

Earlier this year, I met the School and Nursery Milk Alliance—as did many members from across the Parliament—to discuss the benefits of school milk. Given my earlier remarks about placing the rights and interests of children and young people at the heart of good food nation planning, I believe that it is appropriate to include in the bill the important role of milk in schools.

Amendment 77 would have a similar effect on good food nation plans produced by public bodies to the effect that amendment 70 would have on the national good food nation plan. It states:

“To secure the achievement of the outcome specified in (4A), the policies specified under subsection (4)(c) must include the provision of universal free school meals for all children and young people attending local authority nurseries or schools”.

Amendment 77 states that those meals should

“consist of high-quality ingredients,”

be

“nutritious,”

be

“fully inclusive of … health, religious or cultural”

circumstances, be procured locally and

“meet any minimum standard set out in guidance by the Scottish Ministers.”

Any good food nation plan by a relevant authority must set out how it will ensure a

“high uptake of universal free school meals”

and how

“the views of children and young people are taken into account”

on

“the design of school meal menus,”

how the scheme should operate, and

“how uptake … can be encouraged.”

I will not repeat the points that I made earlier, but we all know of good work in different local authorities across Scotland. In my region, North Lanarkshire’s club 365 is one example that ensures that young people get a breakfast even outwith school term time.

The impact of the cost of living crisis and of Covid-19 will be with us for a long time, so it is even more pressing that the Scottish Government and the Parliament use the legislative process to get the best possible outcomes for the people of Scotland.

I thank the STUC women’s committee for all its work and the support that it has garnered.

Perhaps the Government needs to listen more closely to what firms are saying. A couple of weeks ago, Shell went on the record saying that it is quite comfortable about a windfall tax and that more can certainly be done.

You talked about killing off investment, but we are hearing from charities, trade unions in Scotland and local volunteers at food banks that the cost of living crisis is killing off people. With respect, we need to hear more about what will be done by both your Government and the Scottish Government, which will be at next week’s meeting.

Further afield, you also have responsibility for climate change, and we are looking at longer-term solutions there as well. In your view, should the proposed Jackdaw oilfield go ahead? Is that the kind of investment that you want to support?

Thank you, minister. In the interest of time, I will hand back to the convener, but I note that we are dealing with a cost of living crisis and a climate crisis and it seems that you have a business-as-usual approach.

I thank committee members for their work on the bill so far. Amendment 75 would ensure that, during the preparation of the national good food nation plan, children and young people were consulted on the provision of free school meals. Successive Governments in Scotland have established good practice in engaging with children and young people, and that should be at the heart of our ambition and plan to become a good food nation.

Section 3 states that

“the Scottish Ministers must have regard to the international instruments listed in subsection (2)”,

and it goes on to reference the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. Including consultation with children and young people in the bill would provide clarity, and I hope that members agree that amendment 75 is important and helpful.

Section 7 covers requirements on public bodies—including health boards and local authorities, as members know—to publish good food nation plans. Section 8 deals with the consultation arrangements for such bodies, and my amendment 80 replicates my amendment 75 in proposing to put consultation with children and young people in the bill. That could include current schemes in education and any plans that the Government has on free school meals policy or legislation. That is all that I want to say on those amendments.

Thank you, convener. That is kind of you.

Good morning, minister, and welcome to the committee. We all listened with interest to the Queen’s speech to find out the UK Government’s plans, because a couple of weeks ago, the committee was warned by a fuel poverty charity that, unless the UK and Scottish Governments take more action, there will be

“a catastrophic loss of life”—[Official Report, Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee, 26 April 2022; c 23.]

this winter. The situation is very serious, but what many of us heard in the Queen’s speech was, to say the least, underwhelming. For example, there was no windfall tax on the unique profits of big companies and no suspension of VAT on ordinary people’s energy bills.

Are you going to take such issues forward? Is there going to be an emergency budget? With regard to phrases such as “catastrophic loss of life”, can you tell us whether the Government has seen any modelling on that? What are your worst fears about this winter?