Chamber and committees

Patrick Harvie makes some very important points. The situation is, of course, sub-optimal and would not be our first choice. We have sought to engage constructively on an area of mutual interest, but the points that Patrick Harvie makes nonetheless stand.

As I set out in my letter to the convener of the Economy, Tourism and Energy Committee, it is regrettable that, due to the expedited process for the UK Government’s bill, which does not align with the timetable of our Parliament finishing for summer recess and the post-election period, we have found ourselves in a position whereby the bill could not have gone through the usual scrutiny process of this Parliament. I am, however, grateful to members who are joining this debate today to discuss the bill, and I look forward to hearing members’ views on the matter.

I know that points around the process were discussed last week in Parliament. I fully recognise—and I repeat what I stated in responding to the intervention from Mr Harvie—that the situation is clearly sub-optimal. It is a reflection of the period of time in which we are operating; the UK Government’s decision to progress the bill through an expedited process; and the election cycle, the formation of a Government and our reconvening after the election in this place. I fully recognise that this is not a model way in which to go about the process of seeking legislative consent.

I hope that the member understands that we have sought to act in good faith by keeping the Economy, Tourism and Energy Committee informed and by ensuring that Parliament has the opportunity to consider, at the very least, the matter of legislative consent through the debate that we are having this afternoon. However, she is absolutely right to highlight the significant powers that are conferred on UK ministers through this legislation. As I sought to indicate in my letter to the committee’s convener, assuming that the legislation receives royal assent, the Scottish Government and ministers are happy to continue to engage with the committee and, of course, with the Parliament in relation to any utilisation of the legislation that may have effect in Scotland. These matters are contingent on the progress of the legislation at Westminster, but I would be happy to keep Parliament up to date, particularly when we return from recess.

The steel sector remains a foundational industry within the UK economy, underpinning key supply chains in construction, manufacturing, energy and defence while sustaining tens of thousands of skilled jobs across industrial communities, including in Scotland. The sector continues to play a critical role in enabling economic growth and is central to the transition to net zero, given its importance to low-carbon infrastructure, clean energy technologies and the wider industrial base.

Of course, the Scottish Government wants to see a sustainable future for the steel sector, building on the long and proud heritage of steelwork in Scotland, and that is reflected in our green industrial strategy. We welcome the UK Government’s action and we recognise that this needs to happen at a scale and with an intensity that reflects the uncertainty that is being felt by businesses, workers, and families across the UK. Potential interventions demand a co-ordinated response from Governments and our economic development agencies, which do so much to attract investment, develop talent and secure jobs.

Last year, we were supportive of the UK Government’s decision to introduce the Steel Industry (Special Measures) Act 2025, which protected the British Steel operation in Scunthorpe, providing some hope that the UK Government is prepared to act when vital national interests are at stake. We said at the time that we hoped that it would form part of a comprehensive future strategy, and that is, indeed, the case.

Members will have seen in UK minister Chris McDonald’s recent written statement that the UK Government

“is strongly minded to use the powers in the Bill to bring British Steel into public ownership in the future, subject to the public interest being satisfied and taking into account all the relevant facts at that time.”

I suggest that this is an important point for members to reflect on, given the clearly implied policy intent of the legislation and where it could be applied.

Scottish ministers remain committed to constructive engagement with the UK Government and to supporting measures that could lead to increased economic activity in Scotland. We will continue to work with the UK Government on this bill, as well as on the future of the steel industry in Scotland. Our commitment to the industry is clear through ministers’ ongoing involvement in the UK steel council, as well as our role in and input to the development and publication of the recent UK steel strategy.

This has always been—and will continue to be—a Government that takes action. We have shown, over many years, that we are prepared to step in to support vital national assets to survive and prosper, that we will take action to protect jobs and communities and that we are prepared to take a strategic view of the importance of critical skills to long-term economic success. This is the right approach when the international economic outlook continues to be an uncertain one. I therefore ask Parliament to agree to the motion for legislative consent in relation to this bill.

I move,

That the Parliament, noting that the Steel Industry (Nationalisation) Bill, introduced in the House of Commons on 14 May 2026, makes provision that falls within the legislative competence of the Parliament, agrees to give consent to such provision as is made by clauses 1-7, 9-23, 25-43, 45-59 and 61-64.

17:53

It would appear that the member is poised to intervene.

The member’s question illustrates that there are a range of views on the issue. I want to provide assurance to Parliament that no decisions have been taken. There has been an initial public consultation, and there will be detailed consideration of that before any further consultation. The Government is committed to fully engaging throughout the process, ensuring that all voices have the opportunity to make representations—including on the points that Mr Harvie has articulated.

Although regulation of financial services is reserved, Scottish Government ministers and officials regularly engage with the sector and the regulator on the issue. Officials have raised Scottish-specific concerns with the Financial Conduct Authority, including Scotland’s rural and remote geography, topography and demographics, as well as the methodology used by Link to assess communities and make decisions about banking hubs. We await the upcoming reviews by the FCA on access to cash and HM Treasury on access to banking services, which we will use to represent Scotland’s interests. We continue to urge all financial services providers to hear and address customer concerns.

I thank the member for highlighting the positive impact of the example that she cited in her area. Although, as I said, I recognise the reserved nature of the issue, I want to work constructively on it. I am happy to engage with members to identify any opportunities where the Scottish Government can work constructively with local authorities, community organisations, the regulators and, indeed, the UK Government to ensure that we maximise access to banking services across Scotland, recognising the vital role that they play.

The member is bringing information to my attention for the first time, and I appreciate his doing so. I will certainly follow that up with my officials following this debate.

We recognise the sustained interest in the site, and we collectively want it to be a success. The legislation, as it relates to British steel and the broader strategic picture of the steel industry across the United Kingdom, provides an opportunity to contribute to a sustainable future for the Dalzell site.

I can feel the Minister for Parliamentary Business and Veterans’ eyes boring into the back of my head. It would not be for me to do that, and it would be for Parliament to decide that.

The member has registered his point, and his party is free to raise the matter through the usual procedures at the Parliamentary Bureau. I am happy to engage with the member on these matters.

I think that I have covered most of the points that were raised during the debate. I welcome members’ engagement. I recognise that, ideally, we would have had the opportunity to consider the issue at committee. Should the committee wish to explore the matter in more detail following summer recess, my officials and I would be more than happy to engage with it to do so.

I ask Parliament to support the motion that is before it this evening.

Although the Scottish Government is supportive of direct ferry services to Europe, decisions on the introduction of an international ferry service and the timing of that introduction are considerations for the commercial ferry operator and relevant port authorities. The Scottish Government has received an application for funding through the waterborne freight grant scheme, which is currently being assessed.

The Scottish Government also amended the minimum requirements for the location of a border control post through the Official Controls (Location of Border Control Posts) (Scotland) Regulations 2026. That amendment provides flexibility for border control post requirements within green freeport zones.

I want to assure the member that we greatly value the interest shown from business in the Government’s commitment to support the funding of ferry services from Scotland to Europe. That is particularly timely as we approach the 10th anniversary of the Brexit referendum, which has led to significant economic harm for Scotland and the wider UK. It is my hope that, by strengthening our connectivity with European neighbours, we will be able to renew our relationships again.

As for the question posed, I confirm to the member that work is continuing to assess the various options that are available to deliver that funding. We will work constructively with all interested parties regarding the introduction of an international ferry service.