Official Report 1132KB pdf
The next item of business is a debate on motion S6M-14524, in the name of John Swinney, on creating a modern, diverse and dynamic Scotland. I invite members who wish to speak in the debate to press their request-to-speak buttons, and I call John Swinney to speak to and move the motion.
14:59
From my experience of taking part in every year of this Parliament since it was reconvened 25 years ago, one thing is clear—no matter where any of us sit in this chamber, we each stood for election because we care deeply about Scotland’s future. We stood for election because we know that decisions about Scotland’s future are best determined by people who live in Scotland. No matter where we sit in this chamber, we agree that it is our aspiration that Scotland maintains her place in the world as a modern, diverse and dynamic nation.
Scotland is the home of poets, painters, engineers, doctors and thinkers throughout the ages. We are a nation on the cutting edge of solving many of the 21st century’s most complex challenges. We are an outward-looking country that values our relationship with our neighbours and friends across the world, and it is in that spirit that I open the debate this afternoon.
There exists in Scotland a range of opinions and emotions that we must embrace and discuss openly and respectfully. As I am about to set out, to do so is to maintain the very health of our democracy itself—a democracy that each of us has stood for election to represent. It is a story of the pursuit of self-determination, which found new momentum when, in 1997, the people of Scotland voted overwhelmingly to reconvene the Scottish Parliament. It was clear then, and it is clear now, that Scotland is a nation with all the talent, creativity and ingenuity to chart her own course and to steer her own democratic institutions.
The positive impact of devolution is indisputable. For 25 years, devolution has improved the lives of people in Scotland, making this a better and fairer place to live, through policies such as equal marriage; free personal care for older people; minimum unit pricing for alcohol; free bus travel for more than 2 million people; a ban on smoking in public places; land reform; and—something that is very close to my heart—action on child poverty through measures such as the Scottish child payment.
Among many other achievements since 2007, this Government has used the powers of devolution to introduce the baby box, which supports every baby born and resident in Scotland to have the best start in life by providing families with essential items that are needed in the first six months of a child’s life. We have also ensured that Scotland-domiciled students continue to receive free university tuition, unlike elsewhere in the United Kingdom, given that we abolished the graduate endowment fee in 2008. We have introduced free prescriptions, which are now £9.90 per item south of the border, which is a huge cost for low-income families.
Our council tax reduction scheme reduces the tax bills of more than 450,000 people in Scotland, and free personal and nursing care has been extended to everyone who needs it, regardless of age. There is the affordable housing programme, which has delivered 128,000 affordable homes, the majority of which are for social rent. Of course, there is also the provision of 1,140 hours of funded early learning and childcare. If families were to purchase the funded childcare that is provided by the Scottish Government, it would cost more than £5,500 per eligible child per year.
None of that has been achieved by the Scottish Government in isolation, but through the strength of this Parliament and our common commitment to Scotland’s self-determination. Therefore, regardless of where members sit in this chamber, and regardless of whether members view everything that I have listed as successes, I trust that members will agree that people living in Scotland are substantially better off with a Parliament that fights their corner, leads for progress and champions the value of our unique and diverse communities, from every single corner of our country.
Each of us in the chamber is extremely fortunate, for the Parliament gives us each a voice, and whenever we enter this building, as unique as Scotland itself, it reminds us of our duty to ensure that the people of Scotland are heard, too. Our modern, diverse and dynamic democracy is our greatest asset. In many ways, 2014 was a year that proved that. The bill on equal marriage passed, which was one of the most progressive equal marriage bills in the world, and it sent out a clear message about who we are as a nation. Turnout for the independence referendum was the highest recorded at any Scotland-wide poll since the advent of universal suffrage.
That referendum was preceded by a genuine and serious national debate on the future of our nation. I wish to acknowledge that the national debate was not easy for every voter. There were certainly lively discussions, but maintaining a healthy democracy is hard, because it requires us to navigate our differences respectfully. If that were easy, we would not observe the sharp rises in populism that can emerge in times of economic hardship and uncertainty. However, when I think back to 10 years ago, I can think of no better example of modern democracy in action. Both the Scottish and the United Kingdom Governments published detailed papers of their arguments. There were vigorous campaigns and grass-roots involvement of people across the country, and the historic importance of the decision was reflected in the length of time allowed for both sides to make their cases.
The people of Scotland were able to take their decision. My firm view is that the people of Scotland should have the opportunity to take that decision again. This Parliament has confirmed its belief that it should be open to any nation of the United Kingdom to choose to withdraw from the union by democratic means. That is my view, and I believe that that view of this Parliament should be respected.
It is clear that, since the 2014 independence referendum and, sadly, since Brexit, which Scotland did not vote for, the powers and autonomy of the Scottish Parliament have been eroded. They have been eroded, on the excuse of Brexit, to enable Westminster to overrule this Parliament. The people of this country who voted for this Parliament to have the powers that it does were not asked whether they wanted the powers to be eroded.
As the First Minister is speaking about powers, will he outline how many powers he has been offered by the UK Government but has returned to it because the Scottish National Party Government was not ready to take them on?
It is clear from what I have set out so far, and from my comments earlier today, that, since the independence referendum in 2014, there has been a strengthening of some of the powers of this Parliament on tax, which we have used. Mr Ross complains about the fact that we have used our tax powers. We have used the powers on welfare, for example, with the Scottish child payment, which is helping to keep 100,000 children out of poverty. Mr Ross voted against the budget that provided for that, so he does not exactly have a strong argument to stand on.
The point that I am concerned about—
It is the powers that—
The powers that I am concerned about are the powers of this Parliament that the people of Scotland voted for in a democratic referendum in 1997. Those powers have been eroded by legislation that Mr Ross voted for in the House of Commons.
The weakening of our powers—this is the point that I make to Mr Ross—should concern every one of us here, for it is our duty to ensure that this Parliament’s powers to represent Scotland’s will and Scotland’s aspirations should be protected.
I will try a different question, then. Will the First Minister tell this Parliament one power that the UK Government has taken away from the Scottish Government?
The use of the internal market—
One power that has been taken away.
Mr Ross.
I will explain to Mr Ross exactly what has happened, if he is not familiar with what he has voted for. This Parliament had exclusive power over a range of competences devolved by the United Kingdom Parliament. That was what was put to people in the 1997 referendum, and it was supported by three to one, if my memory serves me correctly. However, the United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020 gives the UK Government the ability to legislate on and act in those areas. That is called the erosion of the powers of the Scottish Parliament.
That is before I get to the point that, between 1997 and 2019, when there were Labour, Conservative and Conservative-Liberal coalitions in Westminster, the Sewel convention was never ignored on any occasion. However, following that period, the Conservative Government ignored, superseded and countermanded that on countless occasions, legislating over the heads of this democratically elected institution. That should be a matter of the greatest concern to the Conservatives, as it is to me today.
Scotland has prospered with the use of the devolved powers that we have at our disposal. In the aftermath of the 1997 referendum, Scotland demonstrated that we had the capability to assume those powers. Since then, Scotland’s economy has outperformed the UK in growth, in gross domestic product per person, in growth in productivity, in earnings growth and in foreign direct investment. We have an impressive record on GDP per capita, which has grown faster than the UK’s since 2007. Since 2007, productivity in Scotland has grown at an average rate faster than that in the rest of the United Kingdom.
When we look at the evidence from comparable independent European states—many of which are the same size as Scotland—we can see that they perform better than the United Kingdom. For me, that poses the question, “What is the opportunity for Scotland to move forward?” The opportunity for Scotland is to ensure that we deploy the strength and capability of our country to the maximum effect for the future of our country, ensuring that decisions made in Scotland by the Scottish Parliament are respected and able to be effective across all the areas of policy that any Government would take for granted.
I believe that an independent Scotland should be able to rejoin the European Union and pursue the prospects of growth and opportunity that so many of our people and our businesses want to enjoy. I believe that an independent Scotland could deliver a fairer and more welcoming system of migration, helping the economy to grow while addressing depopulation challenges and supporting vital public services. I believe that an independent Scotland would remove, sensibly and safely, nuclear weapons from Scotland’s shores for good, and that an independent Scotland would be able to benefit from the terms of a written constitution and from investment in our public services, using our wealth to secure the future of our country.
All of that is possible, based on the experience of devolution and Scottish self-determination, and on the principle that decisions taken about this country are best taken by the people who choose to live here and those who are elected to act on their behalf. That is the foundation of the argument for Scottish independence. It is the foundation of what people have experienced with devolution. It is urgent and essential that Scotland becomes independent, and the motion in my name sets out that case.
I move,
That the Parliament agrees that the Scottish Government should use all its powers to build a modern, diverse, dynamic nation, and further agrees that it is only with all the powers of a normal independent nation that Scotland would truly be enabled to take its own decisions to fully meet the needs of the people of Scotland and create their best future.
I call Douglas Ross to speak to and to move amendment S6M-14524.4.
15:11
I want to start by imagining a different decade to the one that we have had—not a different outcome on 18 September 2014, because the people of Scotland voted by a clear margin to remain part of the United Kingdom.
No—I want to imagine what would have happened if John Swinney and his fellow nationalists had been true to their word and respected the result, and if they had used the past 10 years and the powers of this Parliament to focus on improving the lives of every man, woman and child in this country. Sadly, they did not.
Even a decade on, we are not discussing what this Parliament or this Government could do to benefit our constituents. No—we are, yet again, debating independence.
Unlike the nationalists, I refuse to talk Scotland down. [Interruption.]
Let us hear Mr Ross.
I believe that Scotland is a modern, dynamic and diverse country—that is set out in my amendment. However, the SNP does not believe that; that is clear from John Swinney’s motion. What a brutal self-assessment of its 17 years in office and of how it has failed this country.
Where there are failures and challenges facing all of us in Scotland, they have been caused not by the decision of millions of Scots to remain in the United Kingdom, but by the SNP—by the nationalists in Government over the past 17 years. They have been caused by a distracted nationalist Government that has spent its time in office obsessing about the constitution rather than focusing on the real priorities for Scots.
I am a big fan of being true to your word. What would have happened if the Conservatives had been true to their word, when they said, “Vote no to stay in the EU, vote no to be an equal partner in the UK, vote no to be more prosperous”? What happened to those promises?
I am sorry, but the Deputy First Minister cannot pick and choose. “One choice” is what the nationalists told us in 2014. They said that it was a “once-in-a-generation” opportunity and a “gold-plated referendum”, which they would respect—but they have spent the past decade refusing to do so. I was speaking about the impact that that has had.
Let us look at Scotland after almost two decades of the SNP in charge. We are a country where alcohol and drugs kill thousands of people every year, and where educational standards continue to fall and violence in our classrooms continues to rise.
And, yes, Neil Gray—our NHS is in crisis. He is shaking his head—
Always speak through the chair, please.
I cannot believe that the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care does not believe that our health service is in crisis. I am happy to give way if he can tell us why it is not, when one in six of our fellow Scots is on an NHS waiting list.
I refuse to talk down the work of the incredible staff and committed workforce in our health service. The First Minister provided a list of the Government’s interventions over our time in government, but I will pick just one—free prescriptions. The Trussell Trust has assessed that 68 per cent of people on universal credit in the rest of the UK cannot afford to pick up their prescriptions. Can Douglas Ross not understand the value—from not just a social perspective but a health perspective—of our investment in free prescriptions?
Can the health secretary not understand that we have the highest number of drug deaths not just in the United Kingdom but across Europe and that one in six people are on an NHS waiting list? That is a crisis. The fact that he refuses or is unwilling to accept that will be a bitter blow to people watching this debate who are on an NHS waiting list, waiting for treatment or an appointment, and who just do not get it, because of the Government’s obsession with independence.
Far from accepting the result of the referendum, the SNP has, in every year since the vote did not go the way that it wanted, called for a rerun. It is as though the first vote did not count and was a proxy one, so the SNP could come back to the issue later. It is as though Scottish voters somehow did not understand or realise the choice that they faced. Democracy is not about asking the same question time and again until people get the result that they want. It is about putting forward arguments, trusting the people with the decision and then accepting their verdict.
Will Mr Ross give way?
Is there extra time for an intervention?
There is no extra time.
I am sorry, but I have given way twice to members on the SNP front bench.
In his motion, John Swinney claims that independence is “normal”, but a democracy in which the Government ignores the democratic vote of the people is not normal. Scotland continues to be shackled by a separatist political ideology that we did not vote for.
The Scottish people want us to move on. If that was not crystal clear to the SNP Government before the general election, it should be now. It said that it wanted to use the election as a de facto referendum. Well, the people of Scotland, once again, said no. Now is the time for us all to really move on and use the powers of the Parliament to create a better Scotland instead of blaming others and promising unicorns in an imaginary future.
Right across our country, people want change. They can see that the services that they use every day are getting worse. Hospitals are overcrowded, schools are underperforming and our police are stretched to breaking point. They are being asked to pay more for that while getting less. People look to the Parliament for answers, but they see a chamber trapped in a time warp discussing an issue that will address none of the challenges that they face. If any members of the public are actually watching, they would be forgiven for thinking that this was a repeat and that the year was 2014, not 2024.
The SNP Government has utterly failed to move on, to commit to the new challenges and missions that need to be dealt with and to prove that it has a purpose and a reason for staying in government. Nicola Sturgeon promised that education would be her “number one priority” and that closing the attainment gap would be her Government’s “defining mission”, but Scottish school performance is at record lows and the attainment gap is as wide as it has ever been. Humza Yousaf promised to eradicate child poverty, but the rate has increased since 2010. John Swinney is making the same hollow promise now, with no credible proposition to deliver it.
Will Mr Ross give way?
I am sorry, but I am very tight for time. If there was an opportunity for me to get more time, I would give way.
Taking interventions, within members’ allocated time, is a matter for members.
I am sorry, but I have already taken two interventions from members on the Government front bench.
As historians look back over the past 10 years, they will see them as Scotland’s lost decade—years in which we divided our country and fought bitter arguments against ourselves on an issue that we had already voted on. Generations of Scots will come to see that as a national act of self-harm. They will wonder why some chose to continue to make the same arguments again and again, why the Government of the day chose to indulge in fantasy politics instead of dealing with the real issues that our country faced, and why the national interest was ignored for the SNP’s nationalist interest. They will see through the empty promises and understand that, for the past 10 years, the independence debate has been a distraction and a deflection from other issues. The SNP has wheeled out its pledge election after election to avoid having to stand on its record. It is a way of blaming Westminster for all the ills that Scotland faces and, ultimately, of avoiding taking responsibility for the grave errors that the SNP has made.
Today, on the 10th anniversary of the 2014 independence referendum, my message to John Swinney and the SNP Government is this: you lost. Get over it, and let us all move on.
I move amendment S6M-14524.4, to leave out from “the Scottish Government” to end and insert:
“Scotland is a modern, diverse, dynamic nation as part of the UK, and believes that the Scottish Government should use all its powers to improve the lives of people who live in Scotland by prioritising health, education and the other devolved functions, and accept the result of the independence referendum of 18 September 2014, when Scotland voted to remain part of the UK.”
I call Anas Sarwar to speak to and move amendment S6M-14524.5.
15:20
I start by saying that the contribution that we have just heard from the First Minister, right from the start, was focused on the past. I want to focus on Scotland today and the Scotland of the future.
I have come directly from a conference on housing in Scotland—a conference that the First Minister pulled out of in order to hold this debate. On his watch, Scotland is in the midst of a housing emergency. Rough sleeping is persistent, a record number of children are in temporary accommodation, homelessness is at unacceptable levels and the dream of home ownership is unattainable for millions of Scots. Those are clear examples not of successes but of the failures of almost two decades of SNP rule. The question has to be asked: with housing fully devolved in Scotland, what exactly has the SNP Government been doing for the past 10 years, since the independence referendum?
Will the member take an intervention?
I will just say this and then I will take the First Minister’s intervention. The First Minister said this morning that we need to move to a focus on what we can do rather than what we cannot do, so what has the SNP Government been doing for the past 10 years, since 2014?
What the Scottish Government has been doing since 2007 is building more affordable houses per head of population in Scotland than have been built in any other part of the United Kingdom. It is delivering 128,000 affordable homes. Perhaps Mr Sarwar would check his details and his facts before he poses the question to the Government of what issues we have attended to when—
What emergency?
A Labour member has shouted out to me, “What emergency?” We are focused on ensuring that we take the actions—
Briefly, First Minister.
—to improve the supply of housing. That is what this Government has done, and we are proud of the record of what we have put in place.
I ask the First Minister what we declared a housing emergency for. Why, in a conference of 250 housing industry leaders, did 247 of them put their hands up to say that the housing system is broken on this Government’s watch? What has it been doing for the past 10 years, since 2014?
Let us look at somewhere else where the Government has full powers—our NHS. On its watch, one in six Scots is on an NHS waiting list, accident and emergency departments are in turmoil and thousands of Scots are being forced to go private for healthcare. What has it been doing for the past 10 years, since 2014?
The SNP has full powers over education, and standards are falling in our schools. Let us not forget that it was the First Minister who tried to downgrade working-class kids during the pandemic, while he pretends that child poverty is his great number 1 mission. What has the SNP Government been doing for the past 10 years, since 2014?
It has full powers over justice, and our Scottish Prison Service is at breaking point. We have soaring court backlogs and our prisons are over capacity. What has the SNP Government been doing in the past 10 years?
When it comes to the national scandal that is drug and alcohol deaths—we have record levels of drug deaths, and alcohol deaths have gone up in the past year—what has the SNP Government been doing for the past 10 years, since the referendum?
The list of SNP failure after SNP failure goes on and on, and working Scots are paying the price for its incompetence. The truth is that the reason why we have made so little progress over the past 10 years is that the SNP Government has been leading a campaign and not a Government. It has been trying to hide its failures behind the smokescreen of the constitution.
On its watch, regardless of whether people voted yes or no, their bills are going up. Regardless of whether they voted yes or no—[Interruption]—they are stuck on an NHS waiting list. Regardless of whether they voted yes or no—[Interruption]—
Let us hear Mr Sarwar.
—education standards are falling. Regardless of whether they voted yes or no, businesses are shutting down. [Interruption.] Regardless of whether they voted yes or no—
Let us hear Mr Sarwar!
—opportunities for young people are being squandered. Regardless of whether they voted yes or no, they have a First Minister who would rather laugh at the people of Scotland than do the important work in Government. [Interruption.] It is no wonder that he wants to spend all his time focusing on the past, because he wants to ignore the here and now. [Interruption.]
Let us talk about the future of Scotland and what it means for the people of Scotland. [Interruption.] Nearly a decade—
Mr Sarwar, just a moment. Come on, colleagues. We can all agree that that is not appropriate. Let us hear Mr Sarwar.
I know that they have had lots of doom and gloom in the past two months, but there is a constitutional debate to cheer up the SNP back benchers today. Maybe that is why John Swinney is focusing on it.
Let us look at what it means for people across Scotland. There have been nearly two decades of SNP and Tory failure. Unlike those parties, I am optimistic about Scotland’s future, but hard work is required to clean up the mess that has been left behind. Because of the 17 years of this SNP Government, every single institution in Scotland is now weaker rather than stronger, and that has happened on its watch.
Scots do not want to hear hypothetical debates about powers that the Government does not have. They want to know what the Government will do with the powers that it has. The SNP used to focus on the future, but it is now firmly the party of the past—of failure, of decline, of incompetence and of being bad with our money.
It is now left to the Scottish Labour Party to lay out the positive vision for Scotland. I truly believe that there is nothing that Scotland cannot achieve if it has two Governments that are willing to work in the public interest and put people before party and campaigning. [Interruption.]
Let us hear Mr Sarwar.
That is why that important work has started, be it through GB Energy, the new deal for working people, a genuine living wage or the Scotland Office selling brand Scotland to the world. People across Scotland cannot wait for 2026, when we will have an opportunity to bring together the talents of our people, our workers and our businesses to deliver for the people of Scotland.
Ten years ago, our opponents said that we were the ones who were negative about Scotland. Today, it is they who are negative for Scotland and Labour who are positive for Scotland. While they want to talk Scotland down and point somewhere else to blame somebody else, we are getting on with building a programme that delivers change for people right across our country.
You must conclude, Mr Sarwar.
I am closing, Presiding Officer.
Our country cannot wait for change. The people on the waiting lists cannot wait for change. The young person struggling to get a job cannot wait for change—
Thank you, Mr Sarwar. You must conclude.
—so bring on 2026.
I move amendment S6M-14524.5, to leave our from “with all the powers” to end and insert:
“through change in 2026, and governments focused on delivering through cooperation rather than conflict, that the needs of the people of Scotland will be fully met and their best future created.”
I call Ross Greer to speak to and move amendment S6M-14524.3. You have up to six minutes, please.
15:26
Ten years ago today, I thought that we would win. I worked for Yes Scotland and, at this point in the day, I was co-ordinating our get-out-the-vote operation. Around about now, we were making the decision to start knocking on the doors of undecided voters, because it was clear that yes voters were going to the polls without the prompting of our activists. Clearly, it was not to be, but the referendum was a life-changing experience for me, and I am grateful in particular to Shirley-Anne Somerville for giving me that opportunity.
The referendum was a life-changing experience for thousands of people across Scotland. For so many ordinary people, it was the first time that they felt genuinely politically powerful in their life. Politics was something that we were doing together as a nation, not something that was being done to the people by politicians.
On the final Saturday of the campaign, I was at the top of Buchanan Street in Glasgow—Glasgow, of course, was on track to vote yes—but it was not an organised yes campaign rally. People had simply come together in that shared sense of excitement and hope that something transformational was possible. It felt genuinely revolutionary.
I respect and understand that being on the defensive is not pleasant. For many no campaigners, it was a very different experience. However, so much of the political and media scorn of the yes movement was elitist. It was the self-appointed middle-class and upper-middle-class gatekeepers of public opinion who did not like the fact that so many people across this country had found their voice and demanded that it should be heard and valued.
There is a lot that I could reflect on about the referendum, such as the catastrophic failure of Yes Scotland leadership compared with the outstanding success of building a yes movement in every corner of the country, and the effect of the no campaign’s project fear on vulnerable people, some of whom were so terrified that they stocked up on tinned food, and others who were so offended that they turned up at their nearest yes campaign hub to volunteer.
One reflection that I want to focus on before looking to the future is the fact that, for the first time in 2014, 16 and 17-year-olds had the opportunity to vote. Before I worked for the yes campaign, I was proud to be the member of the Scottish Youth Parliament who led on that campaign. All the best debates that I took part in during the referendum were in high schools. I remember one in particular in which my opponent, the chair of the local Conservative Party, was railing about the fact that his children’s cousins were English and that they would become foreigners if Scotland voted yes. One girl in the audience put her hand up and said, “Hold on a minute. What is wrong with foreigners?”
The best contributions that were made in that campaign were made by Scotland’s young people. It is one of the greatest legacies of the referendum that votes at 16 was made permanent by the unanimous decision of the Parliament. All parties on both sides of the debate decided that we wanted to value the voice of young people on a permanent basis.
The past decade has only deepened my and the Scottish Greens’ support for independence and our commitment to achieving it. It has been 10 years of Tory Government, Brexit, Boris Johnson and Liz Truss, and, now, there is a Labour Government but no change from those Tory policies.
Greens believe in independence for a simple reason—namely, that we think that the best decision makers for Scotland are the people who live here. Independence is a means to an end—that end being a fairer, greener country—but it is worth it as end in and of itself, because it brings power closer to the people.
The Green amendment to today’s motion speaks to our wider vision. In the UK, Westminster Governments of both parties are prepared to spend north of £200 billion on renewing their nuclear weapons arsenal. An independent Scotland can rid itself of nuclear weapons and be a force for peace and global disarmament. Both Westminster parties are committed to Brexit, despite the immense economic harm it has caused and the lost rights and opportunities.
An independent Scotland can rejoin the EU and regain those rights and opportunities. After 14 years of viciously racist Tory Government, we now have a Labour Government that is reopening detention centres for asylum seekers and boasting of mass deportations.
I thank Ross Greer for giving way, and I very much respect his contribution. I have always respected people who have a different perspective from my own. However, is it not fair to say that even pro-yes commentators said that the failure to present an economic plan and to be clear about the currency of an independent Scotland were the reasons why independence failed in 2014? Does the member accept that, and has that question been resolved?
Even 10 years on, the yes campaign needs to reflect on the fact that the case that we need to make to persuade people in the future needs to improve, including on the economic answers. However, the no campaign should not avoid the fact that its argument was to stick with a status quo in which one in four children in Scotland lived in poverty, largely as a result of the policies of successive UK Governments—both Labour and Conservative.
On my point about asylum seekers, independence would give us the opportunity to treat asylum seekers with dignity and to recognise the huge privilege of being a country that can offer people safety and sanctuary.
In the UK, the richest 50 families own more wealth than half of the population—34 million people. An independent Scotland can fairly tax the unbelievable wealth that is hoarded by a tiny number of people, fund climate action, end child poverty and deliver good-quality public services. Independence offers us the opportunity to ask fundamental questions about our constitution. Do we want to continue with the unelected privilege of monarchy or become a modern democratic republic in which the people choose their national leaders?
The Scottish Greens believe that this is not as good as it gets for Scotland. We can be a fairer, greener nation, with the powers of a normal independent country. The challenge for our movement—the independence movement—is to sell the why of independence, not the how and the process.
The challenge for our opponents is a simpler one, which is to be honest about the fact that they are denying the people of Scotland their democratic wishes through successive elections—or to be clear about how they believe that we can collectively exercise our right to self-determination.
It is useful to look back, but, today, it is more important to look forward, and I look forward to the day that this country puts its future in its own hands, which the Scottish Parliament will vote for this afternoon.
I move amendment S6M-14524.3, to insert at end
“, for example, by establishing a constitutional convention to allow the people of Scotland to decide matters such as whether they wish to retain the monarchy or adopt an elected head of state, by becoming a voice for peace and rejecting nuclear weapons, by re-joining the EU, by treating asylum seekers with humanity, and by committing to fairly tax wealth and rejecting ‘trickle-down’ economics to invest in a rapid and just transition to net zero.”
I call Alex Cole-Hamilton to speak to and move amendment S6M-14524.2. You have up to six minutes.
15:33
I remember my early days as an MSP in this chamber when speeches, debates and events such as this would, in effect, be big marquee events. The chamber would be full, the Government benches would certainly be full, the public gallery would be full and, yes, the columnists, scribblers and broadcast journalists would be packing out the press gallery. Not even the hard-bitten columnists from The National are here today, such is the level of deep freeze to which this issue has been plunged. That is evidence of the end to our rhetorical wars of independence, and I am glad of it, because there are better things that we can be doing with our time in this chamber.
Winston Churchill once said that the definition of a fanatic is someone who cannot change their mind and is unwilling to change the subject. In the tenor of the debate from members on the Government and Green benches today, we see the measure of the fanaticism in those parties. I wish that they would change the subject, because there are so many topics that are crying out for this Parliament’s attention and for parliamentary time, which is a rare thing.
I wish that the Government would make time available for things such as the crisis in accessing primary care and general practitioner appointments at the first time of asking; the lack of dentists who provide NHS care in our constituencies; the sewage flowing into our rivers from the Government-owned water company; the mental health crisis, which sees young people with suspected attention deficit and hyperactivity disorder on a waiting list for seven years; the missed climate targets; the drug death emergencies; and the 170,000 Scots currently battling long Covid. Presiding Officer, you will remember that the Government made twice as much money available for a referendum on the topic that we are debating today, which did not happen, than for all the sufferers of long Covid in this country—it is a national outrage.
That is how Liberal Democrats would choose to influence Government time. There is every sign and indication that, if we are going to be part of what is next, we will have more influence. I am glad of that.
The SNP has spent the past 10 years picking at the scab of its defeat. It colours everything that we do in this place. Warning lights are blinking across the dashboard of public policy, crying out for ministerial attention, which is going wanting.
It explains why there are now eight times as many Liberals on the green benches of the House of Commons in Westminster as there are nationalists, and why we, in this party, came within touching distance of the number of Scottish Nationalist Party MPs returned to Westminster. I came back from Brighton yesterday, where a buoyant conference took place with 72 new Lib Dem MPs, who were focused on the people’s priorities. That is what we should be discussing in this place.
I go back to the general election, because that was an important line in the sand. For the first time in a while, the SNP was humbled; it could no longer defy the laws of political gravity. The general election was far from being the de facto referendum that the SNP had initially set out to make it. The people rendered their judgment: they were not interested in having that discussion.
The polls—any given poll that you look at, Presiding Officer, from this week, last week or any week in the past 10 years—show that the public that we represent is, largely, evenly divided, or as divided as it was on the topic of independence as it was in 2014. However, the salience has fallen away to almost nothing. If we ask people what motivates their vote, they will tell us that it is about health, the cost of living, heating their home or the standard of their children’s education, which has fallen under this Government. Those matters take far greater priority. It is a bit like saying, “Do you believe in God?” Everyone has a view about that, but it does not motivate how one votes, nor does the constitution.
Thank goodness that this 10-year anniversary will bookend a topic that has stifled our democracy and under which every election up until the most recent general election has been wrapped in a flag based on a reductive calculation of whether it is the best way to have a referendum or the only means of stopping one. I am glad of that.
We will hear a lot about Brexit. We have already heard a lot about it, but the SNP was a late convert to the cause of European unity. In fact, the SNP spent more on losing the Shetland by-election to the Liberal Democrats in 2019 than it did on the entirety of the remain campaign.
The Acting Minister for Climate Action (Alasdair Allan) rose—
Will the member take an intervention?
I will make some progress, and I will come back to you later—[Interruption.]
Let us hear Mr Cole-Hamilton.
Remain voters will find it out.
From the recent history of that divisive referendum, we know what happens when people are offered a proposition in the blind. We were told the sum total of the Brexit campaign on the back end of a bus, and the white paper did not have a great deal more to it. When that meets the reality and connects with real life—
Will the member give way?
I will take an intervention from Alasdair Allan.
Can the member clarify whether, any time soon when in Government, the Lib Dems are planning to rejoin the European Union?
We are not in Government right now, but we certainly have a clearer road map back towards European integration than the SNP does. Remain voters know that, and the SNP knows that trying to join the European Union as an independent country would take years—and “austerity on stilts”. Those are not my words—it was the SNP’s economic growth commission that pointed that out. When we have that reality, as we did with Brexit, there are sacrifices and barriers. Remainers understand that, too.
For too long, we have talked about independence while matters of great importance to the people in this country idle. Lib Dems believe in togetherness, internationalism and Scotland’s place in a reformed and federal United Kingdom. I am glad that, 10 years ago, we voted to remain in this family of nations.
Let this afternoon be the very last time that we, in this chamber, indulge the failing Government in its obsession and fanaticism.
I move amendment S6M-14524.2, to leave out from “, and further agrees” to end and insert:
“by focusing on what really matters to the people of Scotland, including fixing the NHS to ensure fast access to treatment, GPs, dentists and world-class mental health services, lifting up Scottish education, delivering a fair deal for carers, stopping sewage being dumped in rivers and growing Scotland’s economy.”
15:39
It is 10 years since the momentous day when real power shifted to the people of Scotland. On 18 September 2014, for 15 hours, Scotland’s future was truly in Scotland’s hands. That event energised Scotland, but, since the polls closed and the results fell short, what has happened to the energy that brought 84 per cent of Scotland out to vote?
Since then, we have had four UK general elections, one of which even sent 56 SNP MPs to settle up. We have had two Scottish Parliament and two Scottish council elections, a European election, an EU referendum and countless by-elections. We have endured six UK Prime Ministers, four Scottish First Ministers and 11 leaders of the Scottish Labour Party.
Time really has passed, because one of the two ferries that was ordered in 2014 is now actually floating. We have had more SNP manifesto promises with matching mandates than you can shake a stick at, yet here we still are, wringing our hands in despair at the inevitable mismanaged decline of a UK that is trying to convince itself that it still functions. My point is that a generation has unquestionably passed.
The people of Scotland who are watching at home must be wondering what work has been done to enable us to answer some of those big questions—not just those from 2014, but those about Scotland’s future from 2024 and beyond, such as on currency, pensions, borders, immigration, the economy and so on. However, once the people gifted this Government the power, it largely forgot about independence. Aside from a brief paper exercise, independence was irrelevant to it, and running a devolved ship took its attention and became its priority. It was too focused on playing whack-a-mole with what it would describe as the big issues of the day, and for 10 years it was nearly impossible for this Government to answer the most basic questions, such as “What is a woman?” We have now answered that question for the Government in this chamber; self-identification is not the law, and a woman is, and always will be, an adult human female.
Why has the Scottish Government been missing in action? It has declared everything to be “world leading” and has chased down magical progression points as though it is on an “I’m a Celebrity ... Get Me Out of Here!” bush-tucker trial rather than delivering, demanding and demonstrating that the best Scotland for the people is here—it is the one where we remove the walls of devolution and chart a new course of self-determination.
In the absence of the Government making the weather and answering the big questions of 2014, the grass-roots movement stepped up. It is time to harness that talent across Scotland and again unite to bring groups such as the Common Weal, the Scottish currency group and Believe in Scotland into the light. Only our collective effort can make a real difference.
At the last general election, the member’s party achieved fewer than 12,000 votes across the whole of Scotland, so how much influence does she think her party really has in this debate?
Surely, any speaker who has a seat in this Parliament is entitled to put forward their suggestion for how we should go forward, and that is what I intend to set out.
Nothing says self-determination like putting the question of independence into the hands of the British Supreme Court. That predictably British answer to the ill-fated attempt to do something without thought to the next steps disabused many trusting independence supporters of the illusion of a secret plan. I am not too sure what we expected when we had to board our British Airways flight to go down to the British non-ministerial Government department—the British Supreme Court—which sat in London and gave a judgment under a British flag, swearing an oath to a British Queen. We have heard what the British think; now it is time to listen to the people of Scotland.
I want to maintain the spirit of the referendum. It was a time when everyone came together and put our differences aside for independence. As members know, I rarely agree with the Green Party on anything, and I do not fully agree with the amendment that it has lodged, but I will support it as an addition to the toolkit for independence. The promised constitutional convention is well overdue, but the next best time for it is now. I will also support the Government motion from the First Minister. Likewise, in the face of recurrent defeat, I have offered to support the upcoming budget on the basis of mutual support for a policy that was endorsed by the Scottish National Party conference and included in the Scottish Government’s strategic approach to prostitution. My unbuyable bill is definitely supportable.
There are three pro-independence parties in the chamber. If we start working on it today, we still have the time and the arithmetic to turn the ship around and achieve independence, because the Scottish Parliament is the voice of the Scottish people and it can play a crucial role in our journey towards independence.
I move amendment S6M-14524.1, to insert at end:
“and considers that, 10 years on from the Scottish independence referendum, the next democratic opportunity must be set, with a commitment to use the Scottish Parliament election list vote as a plebiscite for the people of Scotland to demonstrate their constitutional choice for independence.”
We now move to the open debate.
15:46
Ten years ago, we proposed our path to creating a modern, diverse and dynamic Scotland; it was the path of independence. We were told by the better together parties that we did not need to leave Westminster, because we could change Westminster, but, within a heartbeat, Scotland’s voice was silenced and, the next day, the debate was all about English votes for English laws.
We were told at that time that our hope would lead to Scotland leaving the European Union, but it was the campaign of fear that spawned the Brexit campaign of misinformation that ripped Scotland out of Europe against our will. We were told that our hope would lead to food costs skyrocketing and energy bills going through the roof, but that is exactly what Scotland has now, with many unable to afford the cereal that we were told to eat. They said that our hope would crash the pound, destroy the economy and create a fiscal black hole, but it was not our hope that crashed the pound; it was Westminster’s Liz Truss. It was not our hope that destroyed the economy; it was Westminster austerity. It was not our hope that created the fiscal black hole; it was Westminster mismanagement.
Ten years later, Westminster has changed. Finally, after another decade of Tory misery, we have a Labour Prime Minister in number 10. After 10 weeks of Labour change, the vow is now for more austerity and that things can only get worse. However, some things have not changed. The old Westminster politics of jobs for your mates and bungs from millionaires and billionaires is still alive and kicking.
The key to creating a modern, diverse and dynamic Scotland is, quite simply, independence, and not just independence for Scotland the nation, but independence for the people of Scotland. We need an independence that is built on freedom from soul-destroying poverty and that allows people the personal independence of thinking about where they will be tomorrow rather than how they will get through today. Thinking about where we will be tomorrow opens up the idea of who we will be tomorrow. Modern Scotland must be a nation of people with personal independence that grows from the freedom of being who and what they are and from knowing where they want to go. It should be a nation of people who are comfortable with who they are, where they are going and how they are going to get there—a diverse nation, many working together as one, but not of one mindset or one identity, or having one way of doing things, and certainly not one group of people who are destined for the top because of the colour of their school tie.
The power of an independent Scotland will come from the hopes of independently minded Scots, and it is the unique perspective of each Scot that will create a modern Scotland. Such uniqueness is enriched by a diversity of thoughts, views, perspectives and backgrounds, and it is encouraged by a culture of tolerance, respect and hope. Let us be clear that we have the people, the talent, the culture, the skills, the beauty, the natural resources, the institutions and the hope. We just need our independence.
15:50
Ten years ago to the day, Scots were asked whether they wanted independence or whether they wanted to remain a part of the United Kingdom. They went and voted and they chose the union. You would think that, 10 years after Scotland voted decisively to remain in the UK, SNP ministers might have finally learned to move on—even if they did not want to, in their hearts, you would think that they would realise that they needed to, in their heads.
However, today’s motion from the First Minister tells us everything that we need to know—that he represents a Government that is so out of touch with the majority of Scots. In the years since that vote, the push for another divisive independence vote has been continually pursued. That has been done despite so many urgent matters needing the attention and funding that were consumed by pursuing that vote.
After losing the first vote, the SNP looked forward to an independence bill, which went to the Supreme Court and was unanimously rejected by top judges. The SNP Scottish Government has spent more than £2 million on its obsession with independence, including publishing 13 papers on independence, one of which was entitled “Independence in a Modern World”. Presiding Officer, I do not believe that there is anything modern or forward thinking about repeatedly reopening the divisions of an independence vote that took place exactly a decade ago. Instead, I want the Scottish Government to forgo all the wasted resources that have gone towards this and redirect them towards addressing the priorities of everyday Scots.
I hear what the member is saying and I recognise and respect the fact that we come from different political stances on this, but is she saying that there is never going to be any legal way for people in Scotland to express their views again on the matter of independence, given that elections and opinion polls tend to suggest that half the country wants that?
You lost the independence vote. You need to just deal with that and move forward. That is what we need to do in this Parliament—
Speak through the chair, please.
We need to deal with the things that I am going to tell you that we need to deal with—the things that people are telling me that we have to deal with.
Creating a modern, diverse and dynamic Scotland requires addressing the everyday issues of people across our nation. A summary of polling data from 2021 that the Scottish Government published found that, across all age groups, the economy and health are consistently ranked as the top two priorities.
On the economy, the SNP’s long record in government leaves much to be desired, to put it mildly. Under the SNP’s leadership, the state of the Scottish economy has cost the budget £624 million. If members do not take my word for it, they can take the opinion of Graeme Roy, who is the chair of the Scottish Fiscal Commission. Even more disappointingly, the Scottish National Investment Bank, which the SNP established, suffered pre-tax losses amounting to £14.6 million between April 2023 and March 2024, further to a £20.2 million loss the year before.
On the second priority—health—the SNP has been unable to reach its own cancer treatment target. The target is that 95 per cent of patients who are referred with suspected cancer should begin treatment within 62 days of their referral. The last time that the target was met by NHS Scotland was in 2012, which is well before Brexit and well before the Covid-19 pandemic.
Under the SNP’s leadership, NHS Scotland’s waiting lists have more than doubled over the decade since 2014. At the end of June this year, there were 714,000 people on waiting lists for new out-patient appointments or for in-patient day-case appointments, as opposed to 313,000 in September 2014.
No conversation about health would be complete without talking about the SNP’s most shameful legacy of all, which is the drug deaths crisis—21,965 drug and alcohol-related deaths have been recorded since 2014. Year after year, Scotland’s reputation for having the western world’s worst record for drug-related mortality is reaffirmed. How do affected families feel about the SNP’s claims of a modern, diverse and dynamic Scotland? Perhaps the Scottish Government should use the 10th anniversary of the 2014 independence vote as a decisive moment to move on.
The Scottish independence cause was put to a vote exactly 10 years ago, and Scots voted to keep their nation a part of the UK. The debate is dedicated to creating a Scotland that is fit for the future. To do so, I do not believe that fixating on the past, especially on issues that are as divisive as independence, should be the answer, nor should that be a key priority for any Government. Instead, I implore the members of the SNP Government to focus on addressing the issues that affect regular Scots and on the plethora of issues that we face every day.
15:56
It is always a pleasure to speak in the chamber, and I am delighted to have the opportunity to speak on the 10th anniversary of the Scottish independence referendum. In that referendum, the people of Scotland had the opportunity to remind the world of what a diverse and dynamic country Scotland is. However, for various reasons—a fear of the unknown, the false promises of a better future, the continual lies and scaremongering from the no camp and many sections of the media and, in some cases, a truly held belief in the benefits of being part of the UK—Scotland narrowly voted no.
No matter how you voted, nobody can argue that it has not been a tumultuous decade since that day. I doubt that anyone can honestly say that Scotland has benefited from the no vote in the referendum, despite the vehement protestations to the opposite that we have heard from members on other parties’ benches. How could we seriously believe otherwise? In those 10 years, Scotland has suffered from a Brexit that we voted against; a cost of living crisis that harms the most vulnerable in our society, deliberately inflicted through the policies of austerity; and an acceleration of the plundering of Scotland’s natural resources to keep Britain afloat. Any of those factors, taken in isolation, would have been cause for putting the question to the people of Scotland again, but all of them combine to make the case for a second referendum unanswerable.
It is my continual hope but, based on what I have heard in the debate, sadly not my expectation, that UK politicians will soon embrace the concept of fairness and decency and realise that democracy is not an event but a process. All people have the right to self-determination. Opinions can change markedly in 10 years. If people do not think so, I ask them why Northern Ireland defines a political generation as seven years. If the polls in Northern Ireland showed the support for a referendum that recent Scottish polls have shown, they would have triggered a border poll. In a recent Scottish poll, 56 per cent said that they would vote in favour of independence, compared with just 32 per cent who would still vote no, if an independent Scotland were to join the EU. The real reason why unionists oppose another independence referendum is that they are terrified that they will lose, which they will, convincingly.
Despite on-going misleading claims by our opponents, the Scottish Government has done much in the 10 years since the first independence referendum to help to protect the people of Scotland from the worst of the Tory cuts from Westminster. The money that has been spent to mitigate the effect of Westminster’s harsh and unfair policies, from the bedroom tax onwards, has already been well highlighted. We have spent about £1.2 billion on mitigating the impacts of 14 years of harmful UK Government policies. The Scottish Government could have spent that money on health, education or transport priorities, but it has been spent to simply stop the UK Government harming Scotland’s people. Imagine how much better we could do as a country and a society if that were no longer the case.
The UK Government’s decision to restrict winter fuel payments means that there has been a drop in the Scottish budget of about £160 million, while the Secretary of State for Scotland has, coincidentally, been given a budget of £150 million to spend on anti-poverty measures. In effect, the UK Government is stripping pensioners of their winter heating money to attempt to provide Ian Murray with a degree of relevance in Scottish public discourse. As has been shown by the most recent decisions by the quaintly named Labour Party, that is a drop in the ocean compared with the cuts that are to come down the line.
As has been shown already, we do things differently here in Scotland—primarily, we value our public services and our NHS. However, we are still hampered by successive UK Governments, which often act contrary to the best interests of the people of Scotland. For example, is it possible to believe for a second that, in an independent Scotland, the only oil refinery in the part of Great Britain that is by far the most oil rich would be closed? Further, while Ireland—which was once part of this benevolent union, remember—has given every pensioner €1,000 to help with their winter fuel, Labour in Westminster has scrapped the winter payment for pensioners, as prices rise here in the coldest part of the UK. In an independent Scotland, we would treat our pensioners more like Ireland does than like the UK does.
Of course, if we really want to think about creating a modern, diverse and dynamic Scotland, independence is the only long-term answer. Members do not need to just take my word for how successful we would be; they can read the words of the chief executive of the Confederation of British Industry, who described Scotland’s resources as
“the golden ticket for UK growth”,
which highlights that Scotland has the tools at its fingertips to be a global clean energy superpower. That is undoubtedly true, but we will not be that under the new UK Government, which is led by a Prime Minister who has clearly shown already that his focus is on style over substance. He is happy to take money off weans and pensioners while accepting huge donations from all sorts of people for all sorts of things—it really did not take him long to become prime ministerial in the fashion of his recent predecessors.
With independence, we would have a real opportunity to do things differently. We are an educated, industrious, modern nation that benefits hugely from its national resources. However, until we unlock the UK’s shackles, we will never be able to show the world that Scotland is again the diverse, dynamic and driving force for good that it once was.
16:01
Today, the SNP is using this Parliament to go through the motions and to reheat the old arguments. For all the talk of constitutional conventions and, rather bizarrely, the result of the 2026 Scottish Parliament regional list vote—in my view, that is insulting the intelligence of the people of Scotland—nobody really believes that there is any appetite now for another referendum. Yet the Government asks us this afternoon to suspend reason and fall for the notion that a rerun referendum and, resulting from that, a victory for nationalism is the only way to win a modern, diverse and dynamic Scotland. Well, the Government is entitled to its opinion, but we are entitled to ours.
I have never believed that the sky would fall in with an independent Scotland and, when people ask whether I am a nationalist or a unionist, I say that I am neither—I am a socialist. Neither have I ever believed that the real division in society is between Scotland and England. The real division is between those who, through their hard work and endeavour, create the wealth and those who end up owning the wealth. That is the real division.
The truth is this—under John Swinney and Kate Forbes’s independent Scotland, there would be no redistribution of wealth and no redistribution of power. The same people would still be in charge. Jim Ratcliffe would still be in control of Grangemouth and still holding the Government to ransom—or, as we saw just last week, ignoring it completely.
Today, the First Minister tells the party faithful that he wants to concentrate on what he can do and not on what he cannot. However, his problem is that this SNP Government has been in office now for 17 years. After its 17 years in charge of land reform, what is modern, diverse and dynamic about Scotland’s feudal pattern of land ownership? Half of our land is still owned by just 343 wealthy individuals, aristocrats and not-so-noble families.
What is modern, diverse and dynamic about a Scotland that denies the dignity of the migrant workers from central Asia who work on Scotland’s farms, whom I met over the summer? They are exploited and are living in inhumane accommodation on Scotland’s farms, today and tonight. What is modern, diverse and dynamic about that?
Just a few days ago, in the programme for government, the Government said that it wanted
“a stronger, inclusive economy”
that was
“tackling inequalities faced by women and marginalised groups … helping people into work, and supporting diverse businesses.”
So why is it that actions taken directly by the Scottish Government—and by the NHS under the Scottish Government’s direction—are threatening 60 jobs at Haven Products, a supported business in Larbert that provides useful work for people with disabilities? If this factory is not part of an “inclusive economy”, I do not know what is. I am sure that the First Minister will recall that this was a factory, back in 2015, that he himself opened.
So let this Parliament hear about the conditions that people are living in now—not independence in the abstract, but the independent living of those magnificent workers today. As part of his reawakening, I say to the First Minister, as you wake from your slumbers, step in and halt these redundancies.
Far from being modern, diverse and dynamic, under the SNP, control over the economy has been confined to investment through foreign direct investors and multinational corporations. Look at the ScotWind licensing round. Look at the private equity-owned tax avoidance scheme providers that the Scottish National Investment Bank is lending public money to.
I sincerely believe that the answers to the great challenges that we face—inequality, poverty, the extreme imbalance in the distribution of wealth and power, nuclear disarmament and the climate crisis—do not lie in nationalism or patriotism, but in a socialism that has democracy as its essence and humanity at its centre.
I say this to my own party, too. It is not just where the powers lie—it is what you intend to do with them, for what purpose and in whose interests. That is the real test of any political party that stands for change and, for me, that means how we secure not just a politics but an economy that is of the people, by the people, for the people.
16:06
When I have popped my head into my sons’ bedrooms, I have heard accents from around the globe—from the United States and places all over Europe and Asia. They are all coming together, connected by a community that they have built online. They live in an online world that is international, inclusive and full of possibilities that reach around the globe. However, every time I hear those voices, I am reminded that my children are growing up in a smaller, more insular Brexit version of Britain, which is disconnected from the opportunities and relationships that once felt within reach. It is an international embarrassment.
That was not the future that I fought for in 2014. I was a stay-at-home mum. My daughter was older and had left home at that point, but I was still juggling the care of five neurodiverse sons and volunteering in my community. I was not a politician, but I cared deeply about what kind of Scotland my children were going to inherit.
As the independence referendum approached, I was appalled by the negativity of the no campaign, and we can see some of that reflected today. I could not understand why anyone would think that we were not capable of standing on our own two feet. The implication that we needed outside help to succeed was an insult that stuck with me. It was not just me—it offended many others who knew that our nation’s potential was far greater than the fearmongers would have us believe.
Since then, the UK Government has built nothing but a house of cards. Meanwhile, over the past 10 years, we have seen what the SNP Government has done with our limited powers of devolution. It has built our house on a rock and laid the foundations of a better, fairer Scotland through policies such as the Scottish child payment, which is lifting thousands of children out of poverty; the protection of free university tuition; free prescriptions and personal care; and the building from scratch of a social security system that is rooted in dignity, fairness and respect.
Those were not just policies; they were acts of resilience that prepared us for the storms that were ahead and which we face now. The decision, which Scotland did not make, to pull us out of the European Union brought chaos to our economy. Tory austerity, which is now Labour’s, has eroded our public services and left families struggling.
Because we built those foundations and used our devolved powers wisely, we have been able to shelter our people from the worst of it, but we can only do so much. It is Westminster’s choices that have driven up the cost of living, decimated our ties with Europe and plunged Scotland into uncertainty, but let us be clear that this is not where our story ends.
The member claims that it is decisions at Westminster that have resulted in the cost of living crisis. Does she not agree that maybe Ukraine or the pandemic had something to do with it?
Here is the deal with this: we are told that the union is there to help and support us, and that it has broad shoulders, but where have those broad shoulders been? Slopey, more like.
Will the member take an intervention?
No, I have taken enough.
Scotland has the potential to be a global leader in renewable energy. We are generating more than 113 per cent of our electricity needs from renewable sources but, once again, the ties to the union hold us back. Instead of being rewarded, we are penalised. We pay higher transmission charges to access the UK’s grid, which is an injustice that holds us back from fully capitalising on our green energy potential.
Let us not talk only about economics; we must talk about the kind of society that we want to be and about a future in which no matter someone’s background, culture, or identity, they can live freely and without fear, in which we can dismantle the barriers of ignorance that hold so many back and in which we can build a nation that is rooted in fairness and opportunity for all.
Ten years on, I am now a grandmother, and I often see the world through my posterity’s eyes—the opportunities of a global community and an open, dynamic future for Scotland. More than 60 per cent of our young people support independence, because they understand that it is not just necessary but normal to control our own future. With that stat, we see that it is no longer a question of if—the Conservatives do not like to hear it—but when. Our young people are leading the way, showing us that Scotland’s future lies beyond the limitations of the union. They are ready for a Scotland that is confident, outward looking and free to make its own choices on the world stage.
Scotland has the resources, the talent and the determination to succeed. The SNP Government has shown, time and again—
You need to conclude.
—that even with the limited powers that we have, we can create positive change. Imagine what we could achieve with the full powers of independence. We are not saying that we will be perfect—no country is perfect—
You need to conclude.
We are saying that we deserve to control what we do in the country in which we live, and to have a chance to flourish.
We are already running over time. Members will need to stick to their time allocations.
16:12
When this Parliament started 25 years ago, we had a great vision for Scotland—a Parliament where parties could work together to serve the people of Scotland and, as Richard Leonard said, to tackle the deep-seated inequalities that hold people and communities back and to build a brighter future for Scotland.
As a member who was first elected in 1999, I have seen the Parliament take great strides forward, but I have also seen it paralysed. I have seen where our constituents urgently need change but it does not happen. In a way, that is why this debate and the past 17 years have been so frustrating. The SNP Government has wasted the time and resources of Parliament to push the agenda of independence, when it was rejected by the public in Scotland. We had a big debate, but it was also rejected 10 years later in the general election in 2024—it was not people’s priority. A poll yesterday showed that even more people than a decade ago are against independence.
Will the member take an intervention?
No, thank you.
It is frustrating, because we are getting people talking down the powers of this Parliament, which we should be using now to support our constituents. There are things that we could do. For example, when we first established the Parliament, Labour committed to working towards a 50:50 Parliament in gender representation from day 1. There is still a lot of work to do, but I am proud that we are now the largest cohort of female MSPs yet in Holyrood. However, the issues of childcare and our kids getting education in a school that fails them came up time and again in the general election campaign. We have the privilege in here to deliver change, but we are not using it enough.
I was involved in the first two national parks, free bus travel for the over-60s in Scotland, new active travel and railway line investment. However, we are going into reverse. We are losing bus services across Scotland and the ScotRail peak fares removal pilot has been brought to an end. At a time when we need to tackle air quality and the climate emergency, that prevents people from affording or having low-carbon transport options.
Yes, the title of the debate is crucial, but we are in danger of wasting the resources in Scotland unless we get serious about what we need to do to build a diverse, dynamic country. Take our culture and the arts. We have everything from the biggest arts festival in the world to grass-roots events and organisations in neighbourhoods across the country. We can rightly celebrate that, but we could lose talent, investment and international recognition if the Scottish Government does not give clear, consistent support every year.
Nowhere is Scotland’s potential more evident than in the exciting future of green energy, which Karen Adam has just mentioned. We have a talented workforce with transferable skills, but we do not have an offshore skills passport. We have fantastic opportunities with our natural resources on land and offshore, and technological innovation is driven by our higher education sector and businesses.
We have huge opportunities, but we are not getting the progress that we need, because the planning system is not efficient or properly resourced. People are having to wait not just months but years for decisions. The investment is ready, and it must not be blocked or endlessly delayed. Take the ScotWind project. That huge resource has been removed, meaning that supply chains will not get the investment, confidence is not there and we are not getting the training opportunities that people need now. We have the skills, but we do not have the jobs.
Our newly elected Labour UK Government has started delivering, setting up GB energy, creating a national wealth fund that will deliver and making sure that we get the investment that we urgently need in our ports across Scotland.
We can do a huge amount—the NHS, education, housing and transport are all areas for which the Scottish Parliament is responsible, but they are close to breaking. Our remarkable potential as a country is being squandered.
Scottish Labour has a vision for brand Scotland—to present the very best of our country to the rest of the world and to support our economy. We can be a leader in renewables. We can be one of Europe’s leading artistic hubs. We have industries that are the envy of the world and a dedicated workforce. Think about our fantastic food and drinks industry, and about our beautiful natural environment, which can fuel a tourism industry to bring benefits to local communities across the country.
We can build a modern, diverse and dynamic Scotland to tackle the deepening social inequalities and our climate emergency. To do that, we need to seize the opportunity with both hands and use all the levers that are available to us. We need a Government that focuses on the day job, not on using the constitution as an excuse.
In the past few weeks, we have seen the difference that Labour is making—we have co-operative, constructive engagement between the UK and Scottish Governments, and there is respect. I agree that the Scottish Parliament should be working towards building the future, but it will take Scottish Labour to make that a reality.
16:17
When I first read its title, I thought that the debate would be about diversity and how it can help to create a modern and dynamic Scotland. As the first Indian woman and the first Sikh elected to the Scottish Parliament, I was excited to speak about the contributions that different ethnic minorities make to Scottish society and how they help Scotland thrive. However, when I saw the motion, I was disappointed. The SNP Government has chosen to hijack this important issue to talk about one thing and one thing only: independence. That is not a surprise.
On this day 10 years ago, Scotland overwhelmingly voted to stay in the United Kingdom. Yet, 10 years later, the SNP is unable to let go. Its obsession with the constitution means that the economy, education, health and many more important issues have taken a back seat.
I remind the SNP Government of some of its 17 years of so-called accolades—or, should I say, failures? The SNP has presided over financial mismanagement, from ferries that do not float to doomed legal battles, the most striking of which being the one on the Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill.
If the SNP had its way, and if it were not for the previous UK Conservative Government, men would be able to be legally recognised as women simply by declaring it. Just a month after the vote on the bill, a convicted rapist was transferred to a women’s prison, with the then First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon, refusing to call him a man. Instead of learning its lesson, the SNP Government wasted more than £200,000 of taxpayers’ money on legal costs to defend that doomed bill.
SNP ministers have chosen to punish hard-working Scots and businesses by making Scotland the most highly taxed part of the United Kingdom. Most people in Scotland pay higher taxes than their counterparts in the rest of the United Kingdom thanks to SNP tax rises; anyone earning more than £28,850 is considered wealthy in the SNP’s Scotland. That includes nurses, police officers, teachers and so on. A recent report by the Fraser of Allander Institute found that nearly two in three firms have been affected by the SNP’s income tax policy, as it has made it difficult for them to attract and retain staff. At the same time, the SNP Government failed to pass on the 75 per cent rates relief for businesses that the previous Conservative UK Government provided.
An educated workforce is key to growing an economy. Unfortunately, the SNP Government has presided over cuts to further and higher education budgets while the former Deputy First Minister announced the axing of at least 1,200 university places.
I wonder where Pam Gosal would have laid the cuts from the Conservatives’ tax policy. If we had followed Conservative advice on setting Scotland’s income tax rates, our public services would be worse off to the tune of £1.5 billion. Would the cuts have been made in the education sector, the health service or our courts? Where would Pam Gosal have made those cuts?
Maybe Ross Greer did not listen to what I said, so let us be very clear: it is about financial mismanagement. That tells you where you would get the money from. I hope that Ross Greer will take some accountancy advice from me as someone who has run businesses and knows where money comes from and where it goes out.
Scotland’s schools have suffered under 17 years of SNP Government, with the attainment gap widening, poor results in international maths, reading and science tests, and an increase in violence in schools.
Speaking of violence, the SNP Government’s soft-touch approach to justice has made Scotland a more dangerous place. Police officer numbers are at their lowest since the SNP came to power, and crime has risen by 17 per cent since 2014. Despite that, the SNP chooses to release hundreds of dangerous prisoners early.
Last but not least, I will talk about health. Since the 2014 referendum, NHS waiting lists have more than doubled, while the SNP has yet to meet its cancer treatment targets. In addition to all that, Scotland remains the drug deaths capital of Europe.
You need to conclude.
It is therefore clear that, if an independent Scotland was anything like those 17 years of the SNP Government, it would be one of incompetence and stagnation.
If the SNP is serious about creating a modern Scotland, it should stop fixating on independence and instead focus on tackling the problems that it has presided over.
You need to conclude. Thank you.
16:23
Ahead of the referendum, the yes campaign ran an advert that began:
“Hi, my name is Kirsty and I’m going to be born on 18 September 2014—the very same day as the referendum on independence for Scotland. The question is, what kind of country will I grow up in?”
Today is Kirsty’s 10th birthday, and we have a chance to look back on the country that she has grown up in. Is it a Scotland that is fairer and more prosperous? Is it a Scotland where she has been able to reach her full potential? Is it a Scotland of opportunity? Is it a Scotland where our wealth and natural resources are in our hands, harnessed to help everyone in Scotland prosper?
Let me tell you a little bit about how Kirsty is getting on. Before her first birthday, the UK elected a Tory Government that had a majority across the UK but just one single MP in Scotland. That meant that her early years were marked by austerity.
When Kirsty was one, the UK voted to leave the EU, despite a majority of voters in every Scottish local authority area voting to remain.
In the years that followed, Kirsty started school in one of the more than 1,000 schools that have been built or upgraded under the Scottish Government, and her little brother and sister were born. Kirsty was delighted when the baby boxes arrived. They meant that her siblings would get the best possible start in life—and, of course, she could help to colour them in.
Then the world changed with the pandemic. It took a wee while, but things slowly started to go back to normal, or the new normal. Kirsty went back to school, although she had to wear a mask and some of her friends had moved away due to Brexit. Her siblings started nursery, benefiting from the 1,140 hours of free childcare.
Kirsty’s world changed again when her dad got ill and lost his job. It is here that we have a tale of two Governments. Kirsty’s parents did not get universal credit for her younger sister because of the two-child cap. In the years that followed, the family’s gas and electricity bills started to go up, followed by the cost of food and then their mortgage payments. At eight years old, Kirsty did not understand what was happening, but she knew that the house was colder and darker, that she was not getting new clothes or toys any more and that her parents always looked worried.
However, there was still some help for Kirsty and her family from the Scottish Government. Her parents received the Scottish child payment for her and both her siblings. They received best start grants when her brother and sister started school, along with school clothing grants at the start of every school year. When times were tight, they got support with bills through the home heating support fund and the Scottish welfare fund.
When Kirsty’s dad got better and was able to go back to work, he was able to get a job that paid the real living wage. He now pays less income tax than he would elsewhere in the UK under Scotland’s more progressive taxation system.
Kirsty and her siblings get free bus travel. They get free entry to national museums and galleries. At school, they get two hours a week of physical education and free music lessons.
At just 10 years old, Kirsty is still a child, with her whole future ahead of her. As things stand, as she gets older, she will benefit from free period products. When she turns 16, she will get to shape this country—her country—at the ballot box. If she goes to university in Scotland, she will not have to pay a penny in tuition fees.
As Kirsty grows, she will decide what she does for work and whether to have a family. She will make her own decisions and write her own story. What will Scotland look like when we get to that point? Will we be an independent country with decisions about Scotland being made in Scotland? Will we be writing our own story and our own history?
I continue to campaign tirelessly for independence because I believe that it will give us a better Scotland for all who live here. In the decades since the referendum, the Scottish Parliament, often working across party lines, has put in place measure after measure to build a better future for the next generation, but it keeps getting undermined by Westminster austerity. I believe that we all want a fairer Scotland, a more prosperous Scotland and a modern, diverse and dynamic Scotland—a Scotland where Kirsty and all our bairns can reach their full potential. The question for folk up and down our country today is simply this: do they feel that that is more likely in a nation that decides for itself? I believe that it is.
We move to closing speeches.
16:29
In 2014, the royal family—including Will, Kate, Harry and Meghan—were in the news, the Commonwealth games were being held in Glasgow and the world was reporting on a possible Trump presidency. I am almost scared to turn around in case Bill Murray is in the gallery, rebooting “Groundhog Day”, because, 10 years later, a new generation of the royal family is in the news, the Commonwealth games are returning to Glasgow and an older, if not wiser, Donald Trump is campaigning to be the US President again. The only thing not to be repeated is a democratic event that would allow Scots to choose independence.
It is time to break out of that repeating “Groundhog Day” cycle of ask-the-British-Government-and-get-refused, and to put the question back to the people of Scotland by using what has been staring us in the face for 10 years—the ballot box. Let us hold the constitutional convention, assemble the independence commission and put democracy back in top gear in 2026 by putting the question of independence to the people on the ballot. Self-determination is the path to the beginning of our empowered future. A simple majority of pro-independence votes on the Scottish parliamentary list vote will trigger the clear instruction from the people that is needed to demonstrate that democratic authority for Scottish independence.
I cannot say that this has been a very enlightening debate, but at least we found out that Alex Cole-Hamilton is in a buoyant mood after a recent visit to Brighton. However, I caution him that using words such as “fanatic” and “fanaticism” lets him down. There is nothing strange or unusual about believing strongly in the human right to self-determination.
If I understood Richard Leonard correctly, he said that using the 2026 list vote would be an insult to the people of Scotland. I do not agree with that, and the people of Scotland do not agree with that. Just last week, a poll showed that 57 per cent of the Scottish public think that we should have another referendum. The Labour Party and the Conservative Party must say why they are willing to prevent Scots from having their say.
That brings me on to the Greens. I do not say this often, but Ross Greer hit the nail on the head when he spoke of denying Scots’ democratic wishes. That is where we have a deep issue, because not one of the Labour, Tory or Liberal Democrat speakers addressed themselves to this fundamental question: if SNP mandate after SNP mandate did not secure a second referendum, how can Scotland express its choice? What is the democratic route that is open to Scotland? I am still waiting to hear it. Perhaps I will hear an answer to that question in the summing up from the unionist parties.
It is time to say goodbye to this non-functional union and embrace the untapped potential of an independent Scotland. We know that the union’s greatest fear is us firing on all cylinders, with the Scottish Parliament’s full powers and the backing of the Scottish people.
Column inches have been padded out in recent years by how vicious, detailed and incisive our fury with each other has been. I hope that they have seen nothing like what is about to be unleashed by the union, if we can all work together. We are a resource-rich nation and our people deserve so much better than surviving through this UK managed decline. We have in abundance the resources and the talent that we need to thrive under self-determination. No individual can change Scotland; only a collective effort will deliver the Scotland for all of us that we want to see. I urge that we all set aside our differences and work together towards a common goal—our nation’s independence.
The independence phoenix can rise from the ashes, and it will burn brighter and stronger than the fuel of our collective experience. We are taking this fight up a notch to match our rising ambition. We are discussing big ideas and bold promises. I believe that the people’s voice and their votes matter. The people of Scotland are sovereign, and only they will decide when it is time to reject Westminster’s decline and chart a new course into the safety of independence.
Thank you. I encourage those who are sitting at the back of the chamber to stop their private conversations or to take them outside the chamber.
16:34
I pay tribute to all those who were involved in the independence referendum 10 years ago. Democracy thrives through the active support of volunteer campaigners who put aside their spare time for the aid of democracy.
I pay particular tribute to the late Alistair Darling. The contribution that he made during that campaign—sacrificing years of his life for his country—is commendable. Our country is poorer for his loss. [Applause.]
Ross Greer, at the beginning of his contribution, rightly said that there was division in the country. Some people felt that the campaign was a joyful and positive experience. Many people thought that it was liberating. For others, it was oppressive. It was division. It meant disagreements with their family and friends. Some relationships have never been repaired as a result. However, I accept that some people were lifted up.
What I found most difficult during that campaign was the implication and sometimes being bluntly told that, because I did not support independence, I did not support my country. I am as Scottish as any nationalist in the country. I was born in Fife—in fact, I was born in Perth, but I have lived in Fife all my life. I regard myself as Scottish, and I think that everybody who chooses to live in this country should be valued in the same way. There was an implication that, because I did not support the policy that was advocated by those who supported independence, I was somehow not loyal to my country. A bit of that is coming out today, so I hope that the SNP and the nationalists reflect on that in future because, if they continue along that line of thinking, it will serve to alienate people who might otherwise be persuaded to their cause.
Sarah Boyack was bang on in talking about how some are choosing to talk down the powers of the Parliament. I am a proud member of this Parliament and I love being in this place. The opportunity that we get as members to influence the daily lives of people is fantastic. I will always look back on this time in Parliament as an opportunity and a privilege to be able to help people who are struggling with their mental health, or to get them a warm home, or to make sure that they get an education that can lift them up and help them to achieve great things in their lives.
However, I am also proud of the United Kingdom. I say that because, although all countries have their faults, the UK has done some bloody brilliant things. Look at the fact that we founded the NHS. The international aid budget was one of the biggest in the world and has changed lives across the country. That is an immense—
Mr Rennie, I caution you about the language that you are using.
Yes, Presiding Officer, but I feel passionate about the United Kingdom. We are sometimes challenged to set out a positive case for it, so that is what I am trying to do today.
The UK has the soft power to influence different parts of the world to take a different tack from the ones that they are on just now. I am proud of those people in England who stood up against the racists and the thugs who sought to exploit the attacks in Southport; they did great things, and we should all be proud of them. That is why I am proud of the UK.
I also have enough confidence to talk about reform of the UK. Although I think that it has done some great things, I also think that it needs to change, just as I think that this place needs to change. That is why I was at the forefront of advocating, through the Smith commission and the Calman commission, for more powers on tax and social security. It is not often recognised now that those significant powers and multibillion-pound budgets were transferred to this institution. I also want to change the United Kingdom. I want to change the House of Lords and the voting system, and I want to change towards a federal structure. We can believe in all those things while still believing in this institution.
None of that has ever been addressed. There has been no substantial debate about those things, so it is no surprise that there has not been any move in public opinion.
Richard Leonard, in a typically passionate speech, said that the Government was going through the motions today, and it does feel a bit like that. It had to have this debate, because it was 10 years on from the referendum, the party expects it and the activists are still yearning for independence. However, John Swinney knows that it is not a priority for the people in Scotland. He knows that, because the general election in July told him that. He knows that because he has knocked on lots of doors and people have told him that that is the case. Therefore, he knows that it is not a priority, but he is a prisoner of his party and the circumstances. I hope that we can move on from this afternoon’s rather humdrum debate to something that deals with the issues that we were elected to this Parliament to deal with.
The SNP has a big question to answer—
Please conclude.
Does it carry on with debates such as this, or does it listen to the people of Scotland?
There are still too many private conversations going on around the chamber, and not just in the back row. I ask colleagues to cease and to give due respect and consideration to the person who is speaking. On this occasion, that person is Lorna Slater. You have up to six minutes, Ms Slater.
16:41
I am really very much enjoying what I feel is positive energy from the pro-independence benches—it feels a bit like getting the band back together—whereas, from the unionist benches, we are hearing nothing but misery. They are really grumpy and so negative. You would not think that they had won, would you?
Alex Cole-Hamilton, for example, mistakes enthusiasm and passion for fanaticism, he does not want to hear another thing about indy. I have bad news for him about this evening’s members’ business debate, when will be doing this all over again.
We had to get all the way to Willie Rennie’s closing speech before we got a single unionist trying to say anything positive about the union. Everyone else has been saying how awful the current situation is, from both sides of the chamber, but Willie Rennie was the first person to try to make a positive case for the union, and that is really telling. Douglas Ross did not have a single argument in defence of the union and had nothing positive to say, and nor did Anas Sarwar. There was not a single defence of Brexit—but you guys think Brexit is great, right? Even the Liberal Democrats would tie us to Brexit, first-past-the-post voting and nuclear weapons. They are passionate that those things should stay in place.
I think that we know who is being negative now. Sarah Boyack made a very positive speech about the powers of this Parliament and the benefits to the United Kingdom, so I hope that the member will recognise that.
I thank Willie Rennie.
One of the things that I am imagining is a modern country. A challenge that Douglas Ross laid before us was to imagine Scotland as a modern country. It is very difficult for me to imagine Scotland as a modern country with a crumbling dinosaur of an institution such as the House of Lords—unelected lords, including hereditary ones—and the anachronism of a hereditary monarchy. Modern dynamic nations have elected heads of state. Modern dynamic nations have written constitutions. Scotland cannot be that modern dynamic nation while we are chained to a UK that has an anachronistic constitutional settlement.
Anas Sarwar highlighted the housing emergency, so I look to his enthusiastic support for the Scottish Greens’ policies on rent controls as those are brought to Parliament.
The Scottish Greens have a vision for an independent Scotland in which we can tax extreme wealth to fund a compassionate social security net. It would be an independent Scotland with a written constitution that set out the values of our nation—what is protected and what our rights are—so that Parliament could not be prorogued by Boris Johnson and so that those rights did not depend on the character of goodness’ knows who might be elected Prime Minister. Instead, those values would be set out in writing and decided on by the people of Scotland at a constitutional convention, so that our rights and responsibilities as citizens were written into constitutional law. It would be an independent Scotland with a fully democratic elected head of state.
That is a vision that the Scottish Greens have. It is of a democratic Scotland that would rejoin the EU to reconnect with those opportunities that our young people have lost to live, love, travel and study in Europe; to undo the economic damage done to our fishers, farmers, businesses and individuals as a result of being cut off by a hard Brexit—how different the independence referendum of 2014 might have been if a hard Brexit had been on offer at the time; to get the nuclear weapons out of Scotland; and to transform our economy into a greener and fairer one, taking full advantage of the economic levers that we currently lack in order to transform that economy and taking best advantage of what is ahead of us.
I am no longer serving in the Scottish Government, but every day in that job, I found myself asking, “Well, can we do this? What about if we try that? How about if we take this forward?” In every instance, the answers were, “No, that’s not devolved”, “No, that’s a reserved power”, or “No, that will be interfered with by the internal market act.” Over and over, we are limited in what we can do in Scotland by Westminster’s vision and the extent of what happens there.
I see an immeasurable amount of brass neck in the chamber from people who talk about cuts and challenges in Scotland—for example, the performance of our NHS—without looking at how comparable regimes across the UK perform. We are part of this UK and, therefore, all part of the decisions that are made at Westminster. How each nation of the UK takes those decisions forward and how things are different in Scotland is something that is worth recognising.
It is absolutely worth recognising the benefits that we get in Scotland in exchange for people who earn a bit more paying a bit more. The First Minister listed those benefits in his speech, including the baby box, free university tuition and the Scottish child payment. All of those things, which benefit people across the spectrum, mount up and build the fairer, greener country that the Scottish Greens will continue to work for.
I should say that members will be hearing from me again in a few minutes in the members’ business debate.
16:46
The motion is entitled “Creating a modern, diverse, dynamic Scotland”. As the First Minister has said, I am sure that that is something that we all want to achieve—creating a future that embraces the aspirations of Scotland’s people and harnesses our collective talents.
However, it is one thing to talk about that future and another to deliver it. That requires ambition; competence; an impatience for change; a focus on the future, not the past, as Anas Sarwar rightly said when he opened; and a focus on what is happening in 2024, not on what might have been in 2014. However, the past 10 years have been a lost decade, spent largely doing exactly the latter.
The Government once again betrays its lack of ambition for Scotland in the second half of its motion. It perpetuates the myth that no good can happen until day 1 of Scottish independence and that the constitutional cul-de-sac is the only means to that end. We have heard as much from SNP, Green, and Alba members. However, there are three things that it contradicts. First, it overlooks our vast potential to thrive right now with the powers that we already have. Secondly, it disregards the wishes expressed by the people of Scotland on how to reach that ambition, both at the recent general election and 10 years ago today. Finally, the ambition for modernity, diversity and dynamism aligns entirely with the mission set by the new UK Labour Government.
Will the member take an intervention?
Do I have time for an intervention?
You do not have additional time, Mr Bibby.
I will make some progress, Mr Greer, with the limited time that I have.
A great many Scots made the respectable and honourable decision to vote in favour of Scottish independence. Many more—a clear majority—affirmed our place as a proud nation in the world’s oldest union.
On that first point, members, including Richard Leonard and Sarah Boyack, have talked about the importance of the Parliament’s and the Government’s having a can-do attitude to solve the problems faced by the people of Scotland. John Swinney even said earlier that Scotland must start focusing again on the things that we can do instead of regretting what we cannot do. However, I say to the First Minister that many people will be thinking that it is not Scotland that has been the barrier to that for the past 17 years—it is the SNP Government.
Will Mr Bibby answer a specific point about the implications for Scotland of the legislative change after the Brexit referendum? I know that he was involved in many of those issues in Parliament. Does he agree that it is important that the changes that eroded the powers of the Parliament now be reversed?
The new UK Labour Government is clear that it wants to reset its relationship with the European Union, and we want the relationship between the Scottish Government and the UK Government to be reset. I know that UK ministers will be working to rebuild relationships with the Scottish Government and other devolved Governments across the UK.
It would be helpful if the First Minister could relay the point about having a can-do attitude to his back benchers and ministers, because the point is lost on them. The people of Scotland do not need to hear that can-do attitude on only one particular day—there needs to be a culture of leadership from the Government every day.
On the issue of co-operation, John Swinney is right that the Scottish Parliament was created 25 years ago, after Labour passed the Scotland Act 1998, and we will mark that anniversary next week. However, we want to focus on the future, not the past. If we want to take inspiration from the past, let us listen to what Sarah Boyack said about the spirit of collaboration in the early years of this Parliament. We want the powers of devolution to be used to their fullest and to have a spirit of co-operation rather than conflict in order to deliver for the people of Scotland.
The new UK Government is committed to resetting the relationship with the Scottish Government and working closely with this Parliament in the best interests of the people of Scotland. We can match that approach and unite over our ambitions to improve the lives of Scots by working together in partnership to deliver for them. One positive example of that joint working happened yesterday with the positive announcement of the Commonwealth games coming to Glasgow in 2026.
I have also said that work needs to be done on our future relationship with the EU, and we are committed to resetting that. The Constitution, Europe, External Affairs and Culture Committee recently published a report on the trade and co-operation agreement, and we need to work together to resolve the challenges that it highlights.
The Tories made a complete mess of Brexit, but—and SNP members and Lorna Slater neglected to mention this—it has shown the complexities, costs and disruption that arise from breaking up a political and economic union. Frankly, leaving our biggest trading partner—the UK—would make Brexit look like a cakewalk.
Whether it is Brexit or independence, the constitutional argument exists on a spectrum—it is not binary. The question that members of this Parliament face now is this: should we wait for the constitutional settlement of one’s choice to materialise for better or for worse, or should we get on with making change happen right now? This is the choice that the people of Scotland will face at the next Scottish Parliament elections in 2026: continue the constitutional debate endlessly or accept the settled will of the Scottish people and use our place in the UK to deliver on their ambitions for a better Scotland. Either we fold our arms in disappointment or we roll up our sleeves. The growing divide is between the can’t-dos and the let’s-dos.
John Swinney talked about the need for a reawakening. With respect, the SNP Government needs to wake up to what people in Scotland have been telling it for years. Let us not talk down this place’s ability to make change—let us use the powers that we have to deliver change, because the people elect us to make their lives better. They want action on the issues that matter to them—action on helping people on the NHS waiting list, on restoring our once-leading education system, on reversing declining standards and on tackling the housing emergency.
You must conclude, Mr Bibby.
They are looking for us to grow Scotland’s economy. I believe that this side of the chamber—the side that is impatient to deliver a modern, dynamic and diverse Scotland now, not in some imaginary future—will win that argument. We will not hide behind an alibi of failure.
16:53
I join Willie Rennie in paying tribute to Alistair Darling, who was a fine public servant. I think that members from across the chamber looked up to him.
This debate has underlined how and why the SNP Government has failed Scotland in the years since the 2014 referendum. In short, the Scottish Government did not, and still does not, respect the result of a referendum that it lost convincingly. Rather than say that enough is enough, it doubled down on division. It has held people and business in political paralysis over a lost decade—a decade in which Scotland should have been looking forward, not back over its shoulder to the divisions of the past.
John Swinney already has the powers to create a modern, diverse and dynamic Scotland.
Will the member take an intervention?
I will not quite yet.
The levers to control those powers are vested in this very institution; they sit in the hands of front-bench ministers. On tax, welfare and public services, the SNP has the power to make this country more modern, more diverse and more dynamic, but John Swinney and his party have actively chosen to do the opposite. The years after the referendum could have been used to heal our nation, bury the hatchet and end the division that it created. Instead, the SNP has neglected to do the day job. It has failed to use devolution to bring our country together, and, by not doing so, it will not be able to take it forward. In short, Scotland would have been a better place—a more modern, forward-looking and prosperous place—had the SNP accepted the result of the referendum.
I will reflect on today’s contributions. Pam Gosal was entirely correct—as I have always found her to be. As the first Indian woman and the first Sikh elected to Holyrood, Ms Gosal has had much to offer about diversity issues in the chamber. However, as she noted, the SNP Government chose to hijack this important conversation to talk about one thing and one thing only: independence. That was clear from the contributions from SNP back benchers. As Alex Cole-Hamilton said, however much the SNP talks about it, out there in the country, in the real world—in the pubs, bars, restaurants and shops, and on the streets of Scotland—independence is no longer the priority even of those who favour it, but we know that that is what the SNP wanted to focus on in the debate.
Kevin Stewart gave us a rhetorically excellent speech, but it was misty eyed and simplistic in its outlook of how an independent Scotland would possibly function. Ross Greer informed us that, as a much younger man, he was dispatched by the organisers of the yes movement to go out and talk to undecided voters. I thank the organiser who deployed him for that tactic. Ash Regan mentioned the weather, but she did not mention her independence barometer. Even she would agree that, under the SNP Government, independence is stone-cold dead.
There are serious issues at the heart of today’s debate because the Government failed to recognise a once-in-a-generation referendum. That was a failure of national leadership, but the failures did not stop there. There was then a failure to grow the Scottish economy; the Scottish budget would be £624 million higher this year if Scottish economic performance had matched that of the rest of the UK. Only last year, there was a failure to ensure that the Scottish National Investment Bank—which was once the flagship of the SNP’s investment agenda—functioned properly. It lost £14.6 million last year. There was a failure to pass on business rates relief in the budget, which is doing untold damage to Scottish hospitality and retail. There has been a failure on tax, with most Scots now paying higher taxes compared with those in the rest of the UK. The SNP has also failed to tackle waste, with £2.7 billion of taxpayers’ money being squandered over the course of the Parliamentary session. It has singularly failed local government, with councils’ debt soaring to one and a half times their annual budget.
Annie Wells noted the SNP’s failure on health. It has failed to meet its cancer treatment target each and every year since 2014. It has failed to tackle drug addiction, which is now Scotland's national shame, with nearly 22,000 drug and alcohol deaths since 2014. It has failed to tackle long waits in Scotland’s NHS, where waiting lists have more than doubled since the 2014 independence referendum.
The SNP has also failed on education, which was meant to be its number 1 priority. It oversaw the worst-ever international results in reading, maths and science. Levels of violence and disruptive behaviour in schools have skyrocketed. Despite Nicola Sturgeon’s promise, the SNP has failed to close the attainment gap. John Swinney’s recent programme for government rows back on that commitment.
The charge sheet continues. The SNP has failed in its plans to launch a national energy company. It has repeatedly failed Scotland’s oil and gas industry, which supports 93,000 jobs. It has failed on its very own climate targets, after missing them for nine years out of 13. It has failed on ferries, with two vessels now seven years late—and counting—and £300 million over budget. It has failed rural drivers by failing to dual the A9 and the A96, which has resulted in far too many avoidable deaths.
The list goes on and on. The SNP has failed to meet its tree-planting targets in five of the past six years. It has failed on its manifesto commitment to invest £25 million in rural housing. It has failed on its promise to install superfast broadband across rural Scotland by 2021. Let us look at the waste: £2 million of taxpayers’ money was spent on civil servants working with Angus Robertson on independence, and more than £200,000 was spent on 13 independence white papers that nobody is reading. Meanwhile, the percentage of children living in poverty has remained the same in Scotland since 2007, and the SNP has failed to hit the target of transferring all benefits to Scotland by 2020.
Let us look at the police. Police numbers are at their lowest level since the SNP came to power.
Theresa May is on the record as warning, back in 2013, that Scotland would be denied access to the UK’s most sophisticated and secret intelligence and counterterrorism tools if we became independent—in other words, we would be less safe. Can the member explain how Brexit has changed that, given that our European neighbours are our closest allies in this space?
In conclusion, Mr Hoy.
What is not keeping Scots safe is having the lowest police numbers since 2014 and a rise in crime since 2014. Ultimately, this Government has failed that test. It has also failed the transparency test. The SNP’s headquarters have been raided by Police Scotland—
Conclude, Mr Hoy.
Nicola Sturgeon misled Parliament during the Salmond scandal. Ultimately, the First Minister is following in the failed footsteps of his predecessors by failing to respect the result of the referendum and failing to use the powers of this Parliament to full and good effect. In short, on each and every single day of the past decade—
Conclude, Mr Hoy.
—the SNP has put its own interests first and the Scottish national interest second.
Thank you, Mr Hoy. I call Kate Forbes to wind up the debate.
17:00
I certainly cannot believe that it has been 10 years since the independence referendum—a day that many, many people spent years hoping and campaigning for. Regardless of the side that people were on, it was a victory for democracy—discussing and deciding Scotland’s future in a peaceful, largely respectful and thoughtful way. That is surely a success for us all.
Today’s debate has revealed some other successes—the freedom that we still enjoy to debate freely, to hold very different views and to represent every community in Scotland. I agree with Ash Regan about tempering our language to restore respect to the constitutional debate; I also agree with Willie Rennie that that extends to respecting that people can be patriotic and proud while taking different positions on the constitution.
In the spirit of disagreeing well, I will highlight a few comments that have been made. Douglas Ross said that independence would not solve any of the issues that he highlighted as priorities. Foremost among those that he mentioned was the rise of poverty. I assume that that is the same poverty that has been exacerbated by his party dismantling the benefits system, baking indignity and inhumanity into it. Only when devolved has that system actually become fairer.
I ask the member the same question that I asked the First Minister. If those powers are so important to this Parliament, why, then, has her Government returned them to the UK Parliament?
My question in response to Douglas Ross would be, what powers is he talking about? We have worked hard to devolve and transform powers, and the experience for so many people across the country has been dramatically different.
The poverty that Douglas Ross spoke about is the same poverty that catastrophically worsened under a Conservative Prime Minister who crashed the economy, sent interest rates rocketing and earned the mockery of the international community. All that was delivered by a party that had not won an election in Scotland since the 1950s, so there can be no suggestion that Scots ever voted for that. I would have far more trust in the people of Scotland making intelligent, compassionate and wise choices than I ever would have had in successive UK Prime Ministers.
That brings me to Anas Sarwar, who claimed that bills going up during the SNP’s tenure was a strong argument against independence. That makes me wonder what it means for the union as energy bills have spiralled after only two months of Labour rule. Two months is all we have had, but Scots will be poorer and colder for it. Labour promised to cut energy bills by £300, yet bills have gone up by £149. That would be a problem in and of itself, but this is an energy-rich country. We hear time and again that Scotland has the resources and the assets for the just transition—that we will lead when it comes to Labour’s energy future—and yet Scots are paying more.
Labour’s new campaign for the union is that things can only get worse. Vote Labour to get colder and poorer; vote no for a depressing, unequal austerity-laced future. What a vision.
As Kevin Stewart said, all the threats that those in favour of the union put to us in 2014 did actually come true—we had prophets amongst us—but they came true because we voted no. We are out of the EU because we voted no, and Scotland’s vote was irrelevant, and we have seen successive UK Governments mismanage the economy, leaving us wrestling with higher, more stubborn inflation and spiralling costs. However, we need to look to the future, and I want to end on a point of consensus.
As the First Minister said, we are all in politics because we want to be agents of change. We believe that the world is not as fair, prosperous or just as it should be, and we want to fix that. We will do that by listening to the people. We are accountable to them; we owe it to them to represent their views and their experiences, as diverse as they are—and nowhere more so than on the constitution—and we will do that through collaboration. It is no small thing that those on both sides of the constitutional debate can still discuss their views freely and openly.
Our vision is to break the cycle of poverty so that there is equality of opportunity for every child, irrespective of where they are born or who they are; to foster aspiration and entrepreneurship; to unlock creativity; to solve the biggest societal challenges of our day in healthcare, transport and the transition to net zero; and to share prosperity so that every family, household and person in Scotland can make ends meet and thrive. I hope that we all believe that Scotland is wealthy enough, talented enough, and more than enough. It is up to us to either stymie that or to foster it. I remain ever hopeful that the future will be much better than the present.
That concludes the debate on creating a modern, diverse, dynamic Scotland. It is time to move on to the next item of business—
On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I rise to raise a concern about some information that has been put in the Official Report today that might not be accurate—in particular, a statement from Pam Gosal. I do not have her exact words, but she said something to the effect that people in the UK pay less tax than people in Scotland. In addressing that, I am not just talking about tuition fees being free in Scotland, or prescription charges, or the council tax reduction that was mentioned by the First Minister, or the baby box, or the Scottish child payment, or even, in fact—
Mr Brown, if I may interrupt. I know that, as a long-serving member, you will be aware that a point of order is intended to question whether or not proper procedures have been followed or are being followed. I would be grateful for the point of order.
Am I able to conclude my point of order, Presiding Officer?
Yes.
I was not referring to the fact that, in Scotland, we pay between £400 and £500 less in council tax. I was not even referring to the fact that the UK Government has created the largest tax burden since the second world war. I was referring to the fact that the official statistics show that the majority of people in Scotland pay less income tax than they do in the rest of the UK. If Pam Gosal genuinely spoke in error, surely it would be appropriate for her to stand up and correct the Official Report.
I say to all members that questions regarding the accuracy of members’ contributions are not points of order. The content of members’ contributions are matters for the member. All members will be aware that there is a mechanism available through which any corrections can be made.
Previous
Portfolio Question TimeNext
Business Motion