South Uist Ferry Cancellations
This week, a third of the population of South Uist turned out to protest against ferry cancellations. They are rightly furious that, this month, every ferry to the island has been scrapped. Reports today quote Christina Morrison, who runs the Croft & Cuan near Lochboisdale ferry terminal. She said:
“We don’t want compensation, we ‘need’ compensation”.
Jobs and businesses are on the line because of Scottish National Party failures, so will the First Minister’s Government compensate islanders for his mistakes?
First and foremost, I recognise what disruption has been caused by the failure of that ferry—[Interruption.]—which has been caused by the breakdown of the ferry in question. Nobody in the Government—certainly not I, as First Minister—is doubting the significant impact on the South Uist community. The former transport minister visited South Uist and, indeed, North Uist. He also spoke to the South Uist business impact group, so we understand the level and degree of disruption to the community that is taking place.
Of course, we will look at what we can do to support business. I have looked previously at the issue of compensation, which has been raised in the chamber, rightly, by a number of MSPs across the political spectrum. The reason why we have not brought forward compensation is that the money that is deducted from CalMac in terms of penalties and fines is reinvested back into the resilience of the network. [Interruption.]
Members.
One example of that, of course, would be the £9 million that has been spent to charter the MV Alfred. That is being funded—or partly funded, I should say—by those performance deductions from CalMac of around £1 million to £3 million a year.
I will continue to listen to the calls for how we can support business—as I say, compensation is not off the table—because we know that the community in South Uist is often affected when there is ferry disruption. I will continue to keep an open mind on that question, but CalMac is, of course, doing everything that it can in its gift to ensure that it bolsters the resilience of the network.
I am not sure that the First Minister grasps how critical and urgent this is. He says that he will keep an open mind and that he recognises the problems in South Uist, but his answer was almost verbatim the answer that he gave to Donald Cameron two weeks ago about the issues affecting islanders on Mull.
These endless cancellations are leaving businesses in despair and costing jobs, so let us go back to South Uist. One islander, Gary Young, said that takings in his business were down 70 per cent since the ferry service was cancelled. However, the issue is about more than the damage to the economy. The disruption goes far further than that. Mr Young said:
“The ferries are affecting me at my work and family life.”
He added that his son has allergies and they are forced to wait for medication to arrive, and he gave this stark warning:
“It has made us question how long we’ll stay on the island.”
The SNP’s failures risk driving people away from island communities, so does the First Minister recognise that it is not only businesses that need compensation, but everyone who has had their lives turned upside down by the cancellations?
As I said in my first answer, of course we recognise the disruption that is caused not just to businesses but to island communities who depend on those lifeline services. We absolutely recognise that impact and that disruption, which is why we are committed to ensuring, for example, that we have six new vessels in the network by the end of the parliamentary session, and why CalMac has invested £9 million to ensure that the MV Alfred is chartered, in order to bolster that resilience across the network where we can.
When we look at the overall statistics in relation to the scheduled sailings that have taken place, we see that only 1 per cent have been cancelled due to technical issues. However, clearly, that 1 per cent—the almost 2,000 cancellations that take place due to technical issues—has a significant impact on the communities and, in this case, on the community of South Uist.
We have made another promise and commitment. We know that, often, it is the Lochboisdale service that is impacted because of what is called the route prioritisation matrix, which CalMac uses to determine where vessel redeployment has to take place if there is a breakdown. CalMac, which I believe will visit South Uist shortly to have a discussion with the community, has recognised that, often, it is the community of South Uist that is affected. CalMac has promised to review that route prioritisation matrix, and we will of course ensure that Parliament is updated.
We recognise the impact on island communities, which is why I have said that we will look to see what more we can do to support the community, including businesses. We will continue to ensure that we invest in those six new major vessels that will serve Scotland’s ferry network by 2026.
The First Minister has said that CalMac is looking to review the matrix but, actually, its chief executive is going to the island next week to explain it to islanders—he is going to explain why their services have been cut off for an entire month.
The disruption is not just affecting South Uist—it is destroying the way of life across many of Scotland’s island and coastal communities. We spoke to Louise Cook, who is a shop owner in North Uist. She told us,
“I’m really at my wits end with all the disruption caused by our aging ferry fleet and the horrific impact this is having on my business ... When I should be increasing staff hours—I have had to cut them drastically ... It’s utterly appalling and really upsetting.”
Does the First Minister accept and hear what Louise is saying? Does he understand how many jobs his failures are costing?
I am happy to repeat for the third time that of course I, and we as a Government, do not just understand but are doing everything that we can alongside CalMac to ensure that there is not that disruption to island communities. So, yes, I recognise what Louise and others have said; I have read many comments from businesses in South Uist that have been impacted and affected.
That is why we have taken measures across our term in government to try to bolster that ferry network: we bought and deployed an additional vessel in the MV Loch Frisa; we chartered the MV Arrow to provide additional resilience and capacity; we commissioned two new vessels for Islay and two new vessels for the Little Minch route; we progressed investment in key ports and harbours; and we confirmed additional revenue funding for the operation of local authority ferry services.
I have already mentioned the fact that CalMac spent £9 million—some of that money is coming from the deductions from CalMac—to charter the MV Alfred, which is adding to the resilience of the network.
Where there are failings—clearly, there has been a failing in this case—we know that it is often the community of South Uist that is affected, because of the prioritisation matrix. I can therefore confirm that that route prioritisation matrix will absolutely be reviewed, so that in the future, if there are those unfortunate occasions when there is a breakdown of a ferry, it is not always that community that is impacted.
The First Minister got annoyed that he had to repeat what he had said. I am getting annoyed that there are so many cases of so many businesses and so many individuals who are affected by this issue throughout our island communities, and the blame lies squarely at the door of the SNP.
The failure of Humza Yousaf’s party to build a working ferry network is causing chaos. We spoke to Eileen MacDonald of the Doune Braes hotel on Lewis. She said:
“Enough is enough. The island is in such a terrible way. Hotel bookings are down more than 50 per cent. In 40 years of living on Lewis, there is no vibrancy. We are in despair. We cannot be fobbed off with empty words any longer.”
The First Minister needs to give Eileen and everyone else in our island communities more than empty words. The SNP’s failure to deliver a working ferry network is ruining lives, damaging businesses, costing jobs and driving islanders to despair. Why should everyone who is affected not be compensated for the SNP’s mistakes?
I am not saying this out of frustration; I am doing it to re-emphasise the fact that the Scottish Government understands the concern of many of the islanders who have been affected, including the person in the example that was given by Douglas Ross in the question that he just asked. We are investing in the ferry network. I have already given examples of the action that we have taken, including the fact that we have committed investment for six new ferries and look forward to their being part of the network by 2026.
The question of compensation is a very fair question for islanders to ask and for Douglas Ross to raise. I have looked at the issue of compensation, and I am happy to re-examine it. Any such scheme would need to be carefully considered, because it would require a stark choice to be made about funding priorities. We invest the funds from those penalties—the deductions that we take from CalMac—into the resilience of the network, such as by chartering the MV Alfred.
I completely understand the impact and effect that the disruption is having on the community of South Uist. We will continue to engage with the communities of South Uist and, where we can support businesses and livelihoods, I will explore what more can be done.
NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde (Leadership)
NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde has paid a private company to spy on Louise Slorance, a grieving widow who lost her husband in the Queen Elizabeth university hospital infections scandal. Why does the First Minister have confidence in the leadership of a health board that spies on the families of dead patients?
I again give my condolences to Louise Slorance on the death of Andrew. Andrew Slorance was a colleague; I worked with him, particularly when I was Minister for Transport and the Islands, on the work that he did on resilience.
On the back of a previous question that Anas Sarwar asked, I reached out to Louise Slorance, and I believe that we will be meeting shortly. I am happy to discuss with her these issues and any others that she wishes to discuss.
I was disturbed by the reports that were in the newspapers in this regard. It is my understanding—I am sure that Anas Sarwar would expect this—that a level of media monitoring is done by a board, particularly one that is the size of NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde. However, having listened to the concerns that have been raised by Louise Slorance, I think that the board has taken the right action by removing her from the media monitoring that it does. I have already requested that the board listens compassionately and sensitively to the patients who have been impacted and affected. I understand that it is reviewing its media monitoring and communications processes. At the heart of those should be patients and, in particular, people who have been bereaved and those who have raised concerns about those issues.
What the leadership of the health board is doing is disgusting. It is just the latest in a litany of shameful incidents, which has seen the leadership of the health board intimidate whistleblowers, engage in a cover-up and frustrate the efforts of grieving families who are looking for justice. However, instead of backing patients, Humza Yousaf, as the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care, decided to take the board out of special measures and empower those who were responsible.
The culture of the board is rotten. It is so rotten that its director of communications allegedly thought that it was acceptable to say, of a father who was fighting for justice for his sick daughter, that he might have
“won the battle but he won’t win the war.”
Louise Slorance, John Cuddihy and other families like theirs have been treated with contempt, so I again ask the First Minister why he has confidence in the leadership of NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde.
As I said, I take the issues that Anas Sarwar raises, and—to his credit—has raised for many years, extremely seriously. That is why a public inquiry is under way, which NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde and the Scottish Government will co-operate with fully.
On whistleblowing, I make it clear, as I did in my previous role as Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care, that we do not just value the role that our whistleblowing champions play; we believe that their role is critical. I met the whistleblowing champion of NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde—in fact, I have met the whistleblowing champions of every health board in the country. As First Minister, I reiterate and emphasise that any staff member in the NHS who has concerns should raise those issues through the appropriate processes. That should include feeling empowered to use the whistleblowing processes that exist.
Anas Sarwar will know that there is a process in place for de-escalation. Given that the overwhelming majority of the oversight recommendations were accepted, it was right to de-escalate NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde at the time. We will judge the board on the extent to which it steps up, accepts the recommendations and implements them. We will also fully co-operate with the public inquiry that is in place.
The First Minister talks about empowering patients. He is empowering the failed leadership of NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde.
Louise Slorance’s husband died at the Queen Elizabeth university hospital and she has been fighting for answers for two years. Louise is in the gallery today, listening to our exchanges. Earlier, she told me:
“We cannot wait any longer. Empty words just don’t cut it. At the end of the day, the people who were in charge when Andrew and others lost their lives are still there. The people who created the problem, who covered up and lied to families aren’t going to be the ones to fix it.”
How much more do she and other families have to go through?
The First Minister does not need to wait for an inquiry to know that spying on families of dead patients is wrong; he simply needs to look to his conscience. Why will he not finally do the right thing and sack the rotten leadership of the board so that we can get a fresh start and justice for those families?
As I said in response to Anas Sarwar’s first question, I look forward to meeting Louise Slorance and hearing directly from her in relation to the concerns that she has legitimately and rightly raised on a number of occasions. I hear the words that she has expressed to Anas Sarwar, which he has read out on her behalf, and I take them with the utmost seriousness.
In relation to the case of Andrew Slorance—again, I am happy to speak to Louise Slorance in detail about this—Anas Sarwar will be aware that we asked for an external peer review of the NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde case by NHS Lothian. A determination was made after that case.
I have said already that NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde will co-operate with the public inquiry, and we will continue to hold NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde to account. I repeat and reiterate what I have said time and again, as health secretary and, now, as First Minister: if staff have concerns, I would expect them to raise those issues, without fear or favour, not just through the appropriate processes but through whistleblowing, where appropriate, as well.
I look forward to engaging with the Scottish Labour Party in relation to our Patient Safety Commissioner for Scotland Bill, which Labour and other parties are engaged with, so that we can enhance the rights of patients, not just in greater Glasgow and Clyde but right across the country.
Cabinet (Meetings)
To ask the First Minister when the Cabinet will next meet. (S6F-02214)
On Tuesday.
This week, we learned just how bad the national health service staffing crisis has become. In anticipation of the First Minister’s answer to the question that I am about to ask, I wonder whether the First Minister realises just how angry he makes NHS workers when he blames that crisis on the pandemic. It was exploding long before anyone had heard of Covid-19.
Today, Scottish Liberal Democrats publish research that reveals that NHS workers have logged concerns about being short-staffed on more than 18,000 occasions in the past five years. Those are the red flags that are recorded by staff on the NHS official incident reporting system, and those figures have soared on the First Minister’s watch. The alarm was sounded 10,000 times during the two years when he was health secretary. Those red flags have tripled in Glasgow and in Lothian. They mean that patients are waiting in pain, wards are dangerously understaffed and NHS workers are pushed to breaking point.
Does the First Minister accept that the royal colleges are correct in their belief that, irrespective of the pandemic, neglect by Scottish ministers has left the health service in a terrible state?
I do not agree with Alex Cole-Hamilton’s characterisation of health service staffing. There is no doubt that there are vacancies in the NHS, but when I look at the Scottish National Party’s record in government, I see that we have about 29,100 more full-time equivalent staff working in the NHS than we did when we first took office.
We can look at particular staffing cohorts. For example, the number of medical and dental consultants is at a record high and is up by 66 per cent since 2006, and the number of consultants in accident and emergency departments, where we know there is a great deal of pressure, has more than tripled. There are 60 per cent more clinical radiologists, and we have higher staffing per head than in other parts of the United Kingdom. Nursing and midwifery staffing is up by 13.8 per cent since September 2006. We have a good record on staffing, not only in numbers but because staff in Scotland are the best paid in the UK.
There are, of course, challenges, which is why, as part of the pay deal that I negotiated when I was Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care, we agreed to work with our trade unions to ensure that we have a nursing task force and a midwifery task force to deal with recruitment and retention issues.
Finally, there were, of course, challenges before the pandemic, but Alex Cole-Hamilton cannot ignore that pandemic, which has been the biggest shock that the NHS has faced in its almost 75-year existence. There is no doubt that the multiple waves of the pandemic affected the NHS, not only because of the number of people who had to go to hospital due to or with Covid but because staff had to isolate or stay at home if they were infected.
We will continue to focus on ensuring not only that we have record high levels of NHS staffing but that staff continue to be the best paid anywhere in the UK.
Carers Week
To ask the First Minister, in light of it being carers week, what the Scottish Government is doing to support carers across Scotland. (S6F-02205)
I am grateful to take the opportunity during carers week to thank all those who provide care for their loved ones and to recognise the invaluable contribution that they make to our communities.
It is vital that appropriate support is available and accessible, which is why our recent national carers strategy is driving long-term change to improve support for our unpaid carers. We are investing £88 million per year in local carers support and £8 million in short breaks for those in the voluntary sector. We are also legislating to establish a right to breaks from caring as part of the National Care Service (Scotland) Bill.
Our carers allowance supplement provides around £540 of additional support per year for carers and is only available in Scotland, and our new carers support payment, which will replace carers allowance, will begin roll-out at the end of this year.
Carers hold up our society at great personal cost. Oxfam, along with another 63 organisations, is calling for a dedicated new national outcome to fully value and invest in all those who experience or provide care, and for a robust set of national indicators to track progress. Will the First Minister carefully consider the ask to “Make care count”?
I will. Forgive me—I have not seen that particular request from Oxfam and the other organisations, but I will look at that straight after First Minister’s questions and will give careful consideration to the ask to “Make care count.”
As I should have done in response to her first question, I thank Karen Adam, who has lived experience and who speaks very powerfully about caring responsibilities. We know that unpaid carers provide invaluable care for their loved ones, family and friends, that they save the national health service and social care services a lot of money and that the Government would otherwise have to pay for those care costs.
We are committed to doing everything that we can do to value our carers, not only with warm words and rhetoric, which can often be the easy bit, but by ensuring that we support them financially and with the right to breaks. I reiterate our commitment to doing all that we can do to ensure that carers can access the support that they need.
The national performance framework is Scotland’s wellbeing framework and it sets out the kind of country that we all want. A statutory review of national outcomes is on-going and the proposal for a new national outcome on care will absolutely be considered as a part of that.
In Parliament yesterday, MSPs from across the parties heard from unpaid carers just how challenging their roles can be. Many have no access to respite at all and some even compromise their own health and wellbeing and forgo medical appointments to provide that care. One of my constituents has talked about how she has had to not go for dental treatment, despite being in pain and discomfort, because it would take too much time away from her caring responsibilities.
I say to the First Minister that those insights are not new: carers tell us again and again about the challenges that they face. Although the Government backed the Feeley review recommendations in 2021, we have not had the reforms that are so sorely needed. Will the First Minister confirm today that the Government still supports the Feeley recommendations? If it does, when will he instruct the scrapping of non-residential care charges?
We support the Feeley review. I will come back to non-residential care charges in a moment, but I give Paul Sweeney and carers who are listening to and watching this exchange the absolute assurance that we are committed to doing everything that we can do to ensure that those with caring responsibilities know what support exists for them and for which they are eligible.
We provided £8 million for voluntary sector short breaks in 2022-23, which represented an increase of £5 million, and we are maintaining that funding at £8 million this year. We are also providing £560,000 in this financial year for local carer centres. Many of us have local carer centres in our constituencies and we know what incredible and valuable support they provide. I referenced in my response to Karen Adam that we are legislating to establish a right to breaks from caring through the National Care Service (Scotland) Bill. I hope to have Paul Sweeney’s support in that regard.
In relation to non-residential charges, we are absolutely committed to removing charges for all non-residential social care within this session of Parliament. That was absolutely our commitment.
I will comment on the Feeley review in particular, because Paul Sweeney mentioned it. It recommended that further work be undertaken to understand the impact on demand resulting from removal of charges. We are currently undertaking that work with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities and the local authorities. We will, of course, consider the value for money of various options based on that work, particularly in the current challenging financial environment.
Our commitment to removing charges for all non-residential social care within this session of Parliament absolutely exists: we will do that as soon as possible.
Tourism in Rural Scotland (Rangers)
To ask the First Minister whether extra resources will be made available to local authorities for additional rangers to help with the reported upcoming tourist influx in rural Scotland. (S6F-02211)
We value the important work that our countryside rangers do. We have already provided a package of up to £3 million to the national parks, NatureScot and Forestry and Land Scotland to support seasonal ranger activity in 2023. That includes running another round of the successful better places fund, which last year supported more than 100 local authority and community ranger posts. For this year, recruitment is either well under way or has been completed for the majority of the posts. The posts include people who are employed directly by our public bodies and others who are supported through the better places fund.
That complements our investment that is provided through our £18 million rural tourism infrastructure fund, which is helping to future proof popular countryside locations so that they can be enjoyed for generations to come.
We have also introduced a bill to give councils the power to raise funds through a visitor levy, which will enable local authorities to invest in practical visitor management solutions.
I thank the First Minister for that answer. As he has said, Scotland leads the way on outdoor access rights. Walking and tourism are worth £1.6 billion to the Scottish economy, but we have seen a reduction in the amount of money that is paid, from £3.1 million to £900,000. I believe that it must be right that we reinforce success. Will the First Minister therefore consider giving extra funds to remote areas across the Highlands that would benefit from having rangers? That would stop dirty camping, which is obviously a major problem.
I am grateful to Edward Mountain for raising the issue and for supporting the work that the Scottish Government, in partnership with local authorities, has taken forward. He will know that the fund that was introduced in 2021 was to support local authorities following the huge increase in dirty camping that resulted from lockdown and from reduced international travel opportunities. The fund was always intended to be a temporary means of support, so a reduction in funding is appropriate as we transition away from it. I take on board what Edward Mountain has said and will explore what more we can do in that regard.
Legal Minimum Age of Marriage (UNCRC)
To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government’s response is to the position set out by the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child, in its concluding observations on the combined sixth and seventh reports of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland regarding the legal minimum age of marriage in Scotland. (S6F-02208)
We recognise and pay close attention to the comments that have been made by the UN committee, as well as recognising that young people in Scotland acquire a number of important rights at the age of 16. All marriages and civil partnerships must be entered into with the full consent of both parties, and there is existing legislative provision against forced marriage. We hope that, with the Parliament’s approval, protections will also fully extend to forced civil partnerships later this year.
We would want to balance any concerns that 16 and 17-year-olds may need more protection in relation to marriage with concerns that are related to the removal of the current rights that they have. I know that Claire Baker is aware of that balance. We are gathering views from stakeholders on the minimum age of marriage and are actively considering our next steps in that area. The UN’s comments will be taken into account as part of that process.
The UN’s observations make it clear that the prohibition of marriage for children under the age of 18 is part of ensuring that 16 and 17-year-olds receive protection as children in practice. It strongly recommends that the Scottish Government prohibit all marriages for those under the age of 18, without exception. I recently met Scottish Women’s Aid on this. The Scottish Government has previously stated that there would have to be a full public consultation before taking any steps to raise the minimum age for marriage, either through legislation or by supporting it. I urge the First Minister to bring that consultation forward so that we can have a public discussion about the appropriate age of marriage and can take the UN’s recommendation into serious consideration.
A consultation and discussion is under way, and I welcome Claire Baker’s comments on that. Rightly, it is often the case in this Parliament that, when considering matters such as this, we are pressed to talk to the people who are the most directly affected and impacted by them. We are making sure that we are talking to children and young people, such as members of the Scottish Youth Parliament as well as many others, to gather their views. As I have said, I would welcome Claire Baker’s thoughts on the issue in more detail.
We know that only around 0.1 per cent of marriages involve young people who are 16 and 17 years old. Records from the National Records of Scotland show that fewer than 30 people who were aged 16 and 17 entered into a registered marriage in 2019, which was pre-pandemic, and that there were fewer than that during the years of the pandemic. Nonetheless, I recognise the issues that have been raised by a number of stakeholders regarding concerns about forced marriage. We are undertaking the consultation, and, if we believe that there is a requirement to change the law, there will be a full public consultation on the issue. In the meantime, I would be more than happy to hear from Claire Baker with her thoughts.
Another of the UN committee’s observations was that the Scottish Government should
“expeditiously bring forward the amendments necessary to enact the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (Incorporation) (Scotland) Bill in Scotland”.
What does the Scottish Government understand by the word “expeditiously”?
I believe that we should bring that bill forward for reconsideration, and I have made that commitment in various public comments. Most recently, on Tuesday, we had our Cabinet takeover with children and young people, and—quite rightly—members of both the Children’s Parliament and the Scottish Youth Parliament pressed us on the matter. I do not want to bring the bill back for the reconsideration stage only for another referral to be made to the Supreme Court and for it to be back at this stage once again. It is incredibly important that we take the little bit of time that we are taking in order to continue to work with and engage the United Kingdom Government. That is important in ensuring that we have a bill that is within our devolved competence and that will not be challenged by the UK Government.
The very last point that I will make is that we have read the detail of the Supreme Court judgment and it requires us to distinguish between not only acts of the Scottish Parliament and acts of the UK Parliament, but subordinate legislation made under both acts. It does take time to make sure that we have a bill at the reconsideration stage that, I hope, not only will command support, as the previous bill did, but will not end up in a referral to the Supreme Court by the UK Government.
We move to constituency and general supplementary questions.
Tragic Death (St Kentigern’s Academy)
First Minister, a family from my constituency is facing unimaginable heartache, as a son they sent to school this week tragically died. I will not speculate on the causes while the authorities investigating are yet to report, but can the First Minister reassure me that any lessons from this will be shared? Will he also—as, I am sure, we would all want to do—extend his condolences to this grieving family, who need privacy, particularly from the media, at this painful time, and to the wider school community?
I associate myself with all the remarks of my colleague Fiona Hyslop. This is the worst tragedy. Anybody who is a parent will know that there cannot be a worse fear or nightmare for a parent than losing a child. I cannot think what the family are going through, but I know that the whole community, including the school community, has been deeply affected.
I echo Fiona Hyslop’s calls in relation to not speculating on what has happened and letting there be an appropriate investigation. Lessons should, of course, be learned—and not just by local authorities and educational institutions, as there may well be lessons for the Government to consider as well.
Fiona Hyslop’s second call is so important. As they are going through what is every parent’s worst nightmare, the family should be able to grieve in privacy and not have any further media speculation or intrusion into what is the most unimaginable tragedy.
I once again pay my personal condolences and respects, and those of the entire Government, to the family affected.
Adopted Children (Support)
The First Minister will be aware that the latest “The Adoption Barometer” published by Adoption UK makes for troubling reading, especially for Scotland. Despite the warm words of the Promise, it states that there is still little confidence among adoptive parents that healthcare and education professionals understand the needs of adopted children, with only 40 per cent—down from 50 per cent—stating their child’s teacher has
“a good understanding of the needs of care experienced and adopted children”.
How will the First Minister ensure that more training and funding is directed towards giving Scotland’s adopted children the support that they deserve?
I agree with the underlying premise of Roz McCall’s question—that we have further to go and that we can and should be doing more to keep our promise to Scotland’s care-experienced young people. We know that care experience is a lifelong experience for people right across the entirety of their lifetime.
I will, of course, engage with “The Adoption Barometer”. We will continue to engage with care-experienced people directly, and we will continue to invest. I have made a commitment that we will continue to invest to meet our commitments as per the Promise.
I am happy to write to Roz McCall in more detail and to get the Minister for Children, Young People and Keeping the Promise, Natalie Don, to write to her with more detail on how we intend to take further action to keep that promise.
Bracken Control (Asulam)
With the clear links to animal welfare, environmental damage and human health concerns of rampant bracken control, the only safe method for my constituents to control it in some areas is aerial spraying of Asulam. In light of the urgency of the situation—the time for application to use the product is running out—and with no clear indication from the Health and Safety Executive as to what its four-nations approach will be, will the First Minister personally intervene now and allow NatureScot to issue the licences required to use Asulox to control bracken, given that there has been no change in the scientific advice since last year, when licences were granted?
The Scottish Government’s position on the authorisation of pesticide products is based very much on the regulation and scientific evidence—which was where Jim Fairlie rightly put the emphasis in his question—provided by the Health and Safety Executive and the independent UK Expert Committee on Pesticides. As the United Kingdom’s regulator of pesticide products, the HSE is responsible for assessing emergency authorisation applications on behalf of Governments across the UK, including the Scottish Government.
We have considered, and we have promptly responded to, the HSE’s recommendations on the application for the use of Asulox during the 2023 season. As the application is for use across the entirety of the UK, it will be for the Health and Safety Executive to communicate its decision to the applicant, which it will do once the other Governments across the UK have responded. That is an established process for the determination of emergency applications, and it is important that we continue to respect that process. NatureScot therefore cannot act until the applicant has been informed of the decision.
However, I take seriously what Jim Fairlie has said, and I will examine whether we can do anything further. I place on the record that, if other Governments across the UK could respond to the Health and Safety Executive, that might allow it to come to a prompt decision.
Ellon Health Centre
Plans to build a much-needed new health centre in Ellon have been thrown into doubt as the Scottish Government has advised national health service boards across the country to halt projects that need Holyrood cash. Will the First Minister clarify how long the delay will last? What message does he have for the residents of Ellon, who currently have a facility that is full to the brim and not fit for purpose?
What has not helped public finances in Scotland is the rampant inflation that has been caused by the actions of Mr Lumsden’s party at Westminster. That is why the cuts that have been made to capital budgets over the years are having an impact on the ground here in Scotland.
We will maintain our excellent record on investing in the NHS estate in communities up and down the country—[Interruption.]
Members!
—including in our excellent health centres and national treatment centres, and in our hospital refurbishment and maintenance programme. If Douglas Lumsden has any influence whatsoever, it would be helpful if he could tell his United Kingdom Government colleagues to stop cutting our capital budget.
Radiology Services (Staffing)
The Royal College of Radiologists has painted a bleak picture of staffing pressures that affect cancer treatment services in Scotland. In every cancer centre, treatment has been delayed by staff shortages. The quality of patient care has been compromised. Only 10 per cent of clinical directors think that they have enough staff. The Scottish National Party’s sticking-plaster solution is to outsource services to the private sector. It is spending £14 million to meet the demand for imaging—money that, instead, could have employed 139 full-time consultants—and £10 million on scans. The president of the Royal College of Radiologists has said:
“There is no luxury of time: doctors are stretched, stressed, and scared for their patients.”
Having such vacancies causes harm to cancer patients. What exactly will the First Minister do to stop that?
We are taking a range of actions primarily to ensure that we have more oncologists and more members of the medical workforce who are able to provide those important services. For example, as I referenced in an earlier answer, since 2006 there has been a 60 per cent increase in the number of clinical radiology consultants. We now have 97 per cent more consultant oncologists as well.
However, I recognise that there are vacancies in some parts of the country where there are shortages of oncology staff. For example, we know about the situation in the breast cancer treatment service in Tayside. That is why we have set up a national oncology co-ordination group that consists of clinical leads and managers from each centre to collaborate so that they can support one another in addressing the service pressures that Jackie Baillie and other members have mentioned.
We also know the impact that the pandemic had, particularly when we had to take the incredibly difficult decision to pause cancer screening for a number of months. We have therefore seen significant pressure on the system. In the latest quarter, more patients were treated on both the 62-day and 31-day pathways than were treated in the same quarter in the previous year.
We will continue to invest in our workforce and aim to see as many patients as we can, but I do not take away at all from the premise of Jackie Baillie’s question, which is right: we need to do even more to ensure that we are plugging those vacancies and giving patients absolutely the best support and treatment, which is what they need and deserve.
Greyhound Racing
Today, a group of nine animal welfare organisations have teamed up to call for a phase-out of greyhound racing in Scotland. The industry is on its last legs, with just one racetrack left in Scotland. No dog deserves to be forced into a gambling-led industry with an unacceptable risk of injury and death. Does the First Minister agree that it is now time that Scotland phased out greyhound racing once and for all?
Yes, I agree that animal welfare should be at the heart of the Government’s agenda. I have made that clear in the first 10 weeks in which I have been in position. I know that that was a commitment that was made by my predecessor, as well. I am, of course, more than happy to look at how we can give further effect to Mark Ruskell’s ask. We have a good record when it comes to animal welfare, but I agree that there is further for us to go. I will look at the detail of Mark Ruskell’s request and write to him in due course about our plans moving forward.
City of Glasgow College (Redundancies)
Can the First Minister make any comment about the situation at the City of Glasgow College, which is proposing compulsory redundancies among staff while the staff feel that the senior management is top heavy and overly paid?
The Minister for Higher and Further Education; and Minister for Veterans wrote to college principals just yesterday to reiterate the importance that the Scottish Government places on the use of fair work practices in the college sector. He made it clear that our absolute expectation is that every effort should be made, in consultation with campus trade unions, to protect jobs. I expect that to include a very carefully considered and appropriate standard of notice period to enable full consultation with staff and trade unions, and to create the time and space to exhaust all options of redeployment. Ultimately, it is, of course, for each individual college to make those decisions, but the Scottish Government is clear that fair work must be their guiding light.
Asulox (Authorisation)
It is in the gift of the Scottish Government to grant urgent authorisation for emergency use of Asulox for the sake of rural livelihoods and public health—or is the First Minister content to treat rural workers as second-class citizens?
The reason why there has not been that authorisation from the Health and Safety Executive, of course, is that other Governments in the United Kingdom have not responded promptly in the way that the Scottish Government has. [Interruption.]
Members.
I advise the UK Government to ensure that it responds appropriately to the Health and Safety Executive. As the application is for use across the UK, it is for the Health and Safety Executive to communicate the decision to the applicant. As I have said, it will do so once the other Governments across the UK have responded. That is an established procedure that has been used over many years for the determination of emergency applications, and it is important that we continue to respect that process.
Ambulance Workers (Attacks)
This week, the GMB union has highlighted the fact that almost 800 Scottish ambulance workers have been attacked over the past five years while at work. The figures have reached the highest level since 2017. That is, of course, concerning. Our ambulance staff work tirelessly in difficult conditions to save lives and provide care, and it is wholly unacceptable that they are subject to such attacks. Does the First Minister agree that safe staffing is integral to patient care? If he does, what actions will he take to reverse that worrying trend?
I agree, and Carol Mochan, the GMB and other trade unions are, of course, absolutely right to raise that issue. We have a proud track record of protecting our emergency workers, and I put on record my thanks to each and every single one of them. Attacks on anybody are disgraceful, of course, but attacks on our emergency workers—in the case of paramedics and ambulance staff, they are there literally to save people’s lives—are simply disgraceful and unacceptable. I am more than happy for the Cabinet Secretary for NHS Recovery, Health and Social Care to meet the trade unions, as he regularly does, and particularly the GMB on the issue to see whether there is anything further that the Scottish Government can do.
We have already brought forward legislation over the years to protect our emergency workers. If there is more that we can do, Carol Mochan and anybody else should be in no doubt whatsoever that we will take the appropriate action to protect our emergency workers, who do a fantastic job on behalf of all of us.
Previous
General Question TimeNext
Point of Order