Scottish Parliament, 27 November 2014

273 contributions from 57 members. The official report.

Antisocial Behaviour (Quad Bikes)

Claire Baker (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

1. To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to deal with antisocial behaviour on quad bikes. (S4O-03751)

Paul Wheelhouse (Scottish National Party, South Scotland)

Section 126 of the Antisocial Behaviour etc (Scotland) Act 2004 provides powers for the police to seize vehicles being used in a manner that causes alarm, distress or annoyance. The Scottish Government supports the work of Police Scotland in dealing with vehicles that are being used antisocially. Local community policing teams are ideally placed to engage with members of the community to identify areas of concern that can be prioritised for proactive patrols to prevent repeat instances of such behaviour and to deal with any offences.

Claire Baker (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

Antisocial behaviour happens on farmland and grass land and is increasingly a nuisance and threat on pavements and urban streets. I recognise that the minister is new to his post and I wish him well in his new role. Can he say whether the Government is open to the option of strengthening fixed-penalty notices to deal with the problem and to give the police more tools in their box?

Paul Wheelhouse (Scottish National Party, South Scotland)

I would be happy to discuss those issues with Claire Baker, especially if she has any ideas to propose that would tackle the issue. It is worth stressing that we have specific offences that can cover off-road activities as well as those on the road, depending on which section of the Road Traffic Act 1988 applies. The police can proactively patrol areas to clamp down on antisocial behaviour. I am willing to listen to any positive ideas from members and am happy to meet Claire Baker on that basis.

Rural Crime

Alex Fergusson (Conservative, Galloway and West Dumfries)

2. To ask the Scottish Government what progress it is making on tackling rural crime. (S4O-03752)

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

Tackling crime, including rural crime, is an operational matter for Police Scotland. Local policing remains the bedrock of Police Scotland’s activities and has been strengthened under a single service. All 14 divisions have a designated local commander to work with communities, councils and other partners to shape and deliver local policing.

The Scottish Government funds Neighbourhood Watch Scotland and its well-respected alert system, which allows individuals, businesses, Police Scotland and other agencies to share general safety messages and alerts. Farm watch and rural watch areas across Scotland enable specific alerts about thefts, appeals for information and work being carried out on and around farms to be shared quickly and easily.

Alex Fergusson (Conservative, Galloway and West Dumfries)

I congratulate Michael Matheson on his elevation to the Cabinet.

Despite the figures that have been given, rural crime cost Scotland almost £2 million in 2013. Ayrshire seemed to be a particular hotspot and the cost to its local economy was almost £0.5 million in that same year. Last weekend, goods worth £6,000 were stolen from a farm near Hawick. Oil, tools, quad bikes, machinery and garden equipment seem to be the top items that are targeted.

Greater geographical distances and a lower concentration of police resources in rural areas make tackling crime more difficult. On top of the steps that the cabinet secretary has detailed, what more might the Government do to ensure that the barriers of rurality are overcome?

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

I appreciate that some aspects of policing in rural areas create additional challenges. The data that we received this week show that crime in Scotland is at a 40-year low, but in some areas increases in particular types of crime—the very types of crime to which the member refers—can be identified. In the discussions that I had yesterday with Vic Emery, the chair of the Scottish Police Authority, I was keen to explore how local policing strategies will reflect those data. I want to make sure that all 32 of our local authority policing plans and local scrutiny committees have a role to play in considering that data so that the plans reflect the rural dimension and the needs of that community.

Christine Grahame (Scottish National Party, Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale)

While local policing plans are all well and good, concerns have been expressed that there are insufficient specialist wildlife crime officers in Scotland. Will the cabinet secretary raise those concerns in his conversations with the SPA and Police Scotland, particularly the chief constable?

Michael Matheson (Scottish National Party, Falkirk West)

Tackling wildlife crime is very important, and Police Scotland has a team of officers who specialise in that particular field. If Christine Grahame has any specific suggestions that she feels the Scottish Police Authority and Police Scotland should consider, I would be happy to consider them too.

It is important that we progress a range of measures that can help to reduce wildlife crime, on top of the measures that are already in place, to build on the work that has been done in recent years. I am happy to hear from Christine Grahame any suggestions that she thinks could assist in tackling wildlife crime much more effectively, and to consider how the Scottish Police Authority might take those forward.

Immigration (Economic Benefits)

John Mason (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Shettleston)

3. To ask the Scottish Government what the economic benefits of immigration from the European Union are to Scotland. (S4O-03753)

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow)

The Scottish Government recognises the importance of migration for healthy population growth and sustainable economic growth. European Union migrants play a valuable role in our economic prosperity and will always be welcome in Scotland. A University College London report that was published earlier this month made the value of EU migrants clear. It found that, between 2001 and 2011, recent European migrants made a net contribution of £20 billion to the United Kingdom economy.

John Mason (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Shettleston)

I thank the minister very much for that response. My understanding is that certain sectors in our economy are very dependent on folk from overseas, including those from European Union countries. Will he join me in deploring the anti-immigration hysteria that has been encouraged by some political parties?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow)

John Mason makes a very valid point. Where concerns and tensions exist we have a duty to address them, but politicians must not be tempted to use inflammatory rhetoric in the pursuit of cheap political gain.

I felt disheartened and angry when I read the comments from the UK Secretary of State for Defence, Michael Fallon, about towns and cities being “swamped” and “under siege” from immigrants. We must condemn such distasteful language, which is, frankly, straight out of the British National Party’s handbook.

Immigrants contribute culturally, socially and even—thank god for it—through their cuisine, so EU migrants are very, very welcome in Scotland.

Jamie McGrigor (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

I fully recognise the many benefits that immigration, especially from eastern Europe, has brought to Scotland and to the tourism industry in particular, not least in my region of the Highlands and Islands. However, does the minister agree that it is paramount that we ensure that we have a fair immigration system that favours those who want to come here to work hard and contribute to Scottish society rather than those who wish only to reap benefits?

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow)

I do not see anybody advocating, and I have never come across a politician or political party that advocates, illegal immigration. We all want to clamp down on those who choose to abuse the system, and that is absolutely correct. However, we must understand that being part of the European Union means that, for every person who comes from eastern Europe to work in Scotland, there is a Scot who has a retirement villa on the Costa del Sol. It is a two-way process, which we enjoy.

I agree with Jamie McGrigor that there are vital sectors that need immigration, and the UK Government’s immigration rules are completely counterproductive in filling those skills gaps. That is why the Institute of Directors, the Scottish Trades Union Congress and Universities Scotland have requested a measure of devolution on immigration.

We will chew over what the Smith commission has said on the matter as one of the issues for consideration. I am sure that Jamie McGrigor, given the geography that he represents, will wish to make further representation on the matter too.

Non-domestic Rates

Gavin Brown (Conservative, Lothian)

4. To ask the Scottish Government what plans it has in respect of the non-domestic rates system. (S4O-03754)

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

This Government remains committed to maintaining the most competitive tax environment that is available anywhere in the United Kingdom.

Gavin Brown (Conservative, Lothian)

I thank the cabinet secretary for that answer, and congratulate him on his new role as Deputy First Minister for Scotland.

Does the Scottish Government support the continuation of the below-inflation cap on increases for non-domestic rates?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

First, I thank Gavin Brown for his kind remarks, which are greatly appreciated.

On our approach on business rates, the Government remains committed to two things: first, to uprating business rates in line with the September retail prices index figures, which represent the normal metrics by which that process is undertaken; and, secondly, to ensuring that business rates poundage in Scotland is equal to that south of the border. That will be the Government’s approach in any future decisions.

Integration of Health and Social Care

Kevin Stewart (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Central)

5. To ask the Scottish Government what progress it is making with the integration of health and social care. (S4O-03755)

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

The Public Bodies (Joint Working) (Scotland) Act 2014 came into effect in April 2014. A full public consultation on the regulations and orders that support the act has been conducted. The regulations and orders have now been laid with the Scottish Parliament and are due to come into effect in December. Partnerships are currently developing their integration schemes, which must be submitted to the Scottish Government by 1 April 2015.

Kevin Stewart (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Central)

We have seen a dramatic rise in delayed discharge in Aberdeen since the inception of the arm’s-length company Bon Accord Care. When the Scottish National Party was in power in Aberdeen, delayed discharge was at zero. Does the cabinet secretary foresee any problems with the integration of health and social care in areas where councils have passed the delivery of care to arm’s-length companies?

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

First, the member can be assured that addressing delayed discharge is absolutely my top priority going forward. It is obviously up to local partnerships to take a collective view on the provision of health and social care services in their area. I am sure that the member will be aware that one of the key problems in Aberdeen with regard to delayed discharge is the challenge of recruitment and retention of staff to deliver the care. Aberdeen is an area of low unemployment with a strong economy, so there are significant challenges in attracting employees to the care sector there.

The member might be aware of the discussions between NHS Grampian and Aberdeen City Council, which are working together to identify land assets that could be developed as low-cost, affordable housing to help with the on-going recruitment problem in the area. I am very keen that both organisations pursue that, and I have asked to be kept up to date on that regularly.

Neil Findlay (Labour, Lothian)

The integration of health and social care is vital for dealing with delayed discharge but, given the crisis in local government finance, where on earth are councils expected to find the match funding demanded in the First Minister’s statement yesterday?

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

Of course, local government has received a higher percentage share of funding than happened under the previous Labour Administration. What I can say to Neil Findlay is that the critical element is the integration of health and social care, because for too long the national health service and local government have budgeted and worked in two separate silos. In-between those silos in many cases are the vulnerable elderly people who are not getting the quality of service that they require. Integration of the two significant resources of health and local government is critical for addressing that.

I point out to Neil Findlay that the joint resource that health and social care will have from April next year will amount to £7.6 billion, which is a huge resource. However, what is important is how that resource is spent. I am absolutely clear that I expect both organisations to make the improvements that require to be made.

John Scott (Conservative, Ayr)

The cabinet secretary will be aware of the delayed discharge problems in NHS Ayrshire and Arran and of the shortage of available beds there at the moment, with the winter bugs not having kicked in yet. Does she share my concern about the situation in Ayrshire and will she raise the problem as a matter of urgency with NHS Ayrshire and Arran with a view to finding a solution?

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

All the health boards are under no illusion about the priority that we give to tackling delayed discharge, but of course the solution to that problem does not lie only within the health service. It is about the health service working with local government to address the problem. The partnerships have been working very hard to address some of the challenges from winter pressures, which we know are short-term but big challenges.

The plans that are beginning to be put in place for the partnerships from April are critical. We need to redesign many of the services. We need to avoid people turning up to hospital when they do not need to be there, and we need to have far better alternatives, particularly for vulnerable elderly people, for many of whom an acute hospital setting is not the right one.

I give the member an absolute assurance that this is my top priority going forward, and I would be very happy to keep him up to date on developments in his area.

Commonwealth Games Legacy

James Dornan (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Cathcart)

6. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on its legacy plans from the Commonwealth games. (S4O-03756)

Jamie Hepburn (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld and Kilsyth)

The Scottish Government and our legacy partners are working to capitalise on the opportunities that were brought about by our hosting the best Commonwealth games ever. In the days following the games, £6 million was announced towards Scotland’s first ever dedicated parasports centre, as well as a further £2 million to build on and deepen the legacy, which is already delivering benefits nationwide.

A further £50 million will be invested by sportscotland in the active schools programme between 2015 and 2019, significantly increasing opportunities for children to participate in sport across the whole of Scotland.

More recently, on Tuesday, the opening at Grangemouth stadium of a new track that uses the track from Hampden park means that young people can now train on the track that was used by Eilidh Child and Usain Bolt, which will inspire the next generation of champions.

A full economic assessment of the games will be published in the spring, but recent analysis points to £282 million being spent by visitors to the games. A post-games legacy evaluation report that assesses progress towards legacy outcomes will be published in July 2015.

James Dornan (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Cathcart)

I thank the minister for that comprehensive response and congratulate him on his well-deserved new position as a minister.

My Glasgow Cathcart constituency has a number of interesting legacy projects, including a plan to turn the disused St Martin’s church in Castlemilk into the Cathkin Braes mountain bike and activity centre. Will the minister come and visit the site of the proposed centre and meet those who are involved in the proposal? What assistance is the Government giving or intending to give to local and community projects to assist them with such legacy building in local communities?

Tricia Marwick (None, Mid Fife and Glenrothes)

Briefly, minister.

Jamie Hepburn (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld and Kilsyth)

I thank Mr Dornan for his welcome.

Having delivered the most successful Commonwealth games ever, we are determined to secure its legacy, and communities across Scotland are interested in playing their part. I encourage communities across Scotland to visit the legacy website to find out more about the on-going sources of support such as the legacy 2014 active places fund and the legacy 2014 sustainable sport for communities fund.

I am delighted to learn of the efforts in Glasgow Cathcart. I wish those who are involved well, and of course I will be happy to visit with Mr Dornan.

Energy Storage Technologies

Joan McAlpine (Scottish National Party, South Scotland)

7. To ask the Scottish Government what its policy is on the development of energy storage technologies. (S4O-03757)

Fergus Ewing (Scottish National Party, Inverness and Nairn)

Energy storage can help us to make the most effective use of Scotland’s energy resources. Pumped hydro plays a vital role in meeting United Kingdom energy security, which is why our third national planning framework identified new and expanded pumped storage facilities as a national development, and why we are seeking to work with the UK Government and industry to consider how pumped storage can be supported in the future.

Joan McAlpine (Scottish National Party, South Scotland)

The Institution of Mechanical Engineers estimates that 3.4GW of energy storage will be needed in Scotland by 2020, but current storage capacity is only a little over 0.75GW and is largely pumped storage. A number of companies are developing technologies such as liquid air battery storage, and the former nuclear power station at Chapelcross is being suggested as a possible site for such developments. Does the Government agree that such projects should be encouraged, particularly as a way to make the most of Scotland’s renewable energy resources?

Fergus Ewing (Scottish National Party, Inverness and Nairn)

Yes, I do. I met the member and one of the individuals involved regarding the Chapelcross proposal, and since then Scottish Enterprise has had a follow-up meeting on 17 November.

On the general point, there is over 2GW of potential pump storage capacity at present, but what there is not is a route to make that happen under electricity market reform. The EMR proposals are entirely devoid of any mechanism to bring forward pump storage. That is entirely wrong, and it is why I support the proposal by Scottish Renewables that a Scottish and UK Government intergovernmental panel should be established. I put that proposal to the UK energy minister on 13 November and a reply is awaited.

Tricia Marwick (None, Mid Fife and Glenrothes)

That ends general questions. Before we move on to the next item of business, members will wish to join me in welcoming to the gallery His Excellency Mr Péter Szabadhegy, ambassador of Hungary. [Applause.]

Engagements

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

1. To ask the First Minister what engagements she has planned for the rest of the day. (S4F-02424)

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

Later this afternoon I will travel to the Isle of Man for tomorrow’s meeting of the British-Irish Council.

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

I wish the First Minister a safe journey.

I am sure that the whole chamber will welcome the all-party consensus on the Smith commission. I thank Lord Smith and all the party commissioners for their hard work in reaching agreement. They have delivered a powerhouse Parliament; a promise made before the referendum is now a promise delivered—and more. Does the First Minister agree that this is the most substantial transfer of powers to Scotland since a Labour Government delivered the Scottish Parliament itself in 1999?

The First Minister

On a note of consensus, I, too, pay tribute to Lord Smith, who is to be commended. I spoke to him this morning and thanked him, on behalf of the Scottish Government, for his role in this process.

I also welcome the new powers that are recommended. I want this Parliament to be as powerful as possible, so I welcome any new powers that come to it. The powers now have to be delivered. Some of what is recommended—devolution of air passenger duty, for example—was first recommended by the Calman commission, but the Westminster parties decided to shelve that. We need to ensure that the powers are delivered. If some of the sabre rattling that we are hearing on English votes for English laws is anything to go by, that might not be as smooth as we think.

Overall, the package is disappointing.

Members: Aw!

Labour should perhaps listen to what I am about to say. I heard Grahame Smith of the Scottish Trades Union Congress on Radio Clyde a little while ago. He said that the package is underwhelming and that it falls short of the vow.

Seventy per cent of our taxes will continue to be set at Westminster. Eighty-five per cent of social security spending will be controlled at Westminster. This Parliament will be responsible for less than half of the money that we will spend. It is not so much the home rule that was promised; in so many respects it is continued Westminster rule.

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

That consensus lasted less than a minute.

Any politician not electrified by the possibilities that these new powers present for us—

Members: Oh!

Tricia Marwick (None, Mid Fife and Glenrothes)

Order!

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

—to change the lives of the most vulnerable people in our country needs to ask themselves whether they are in the right job.

The Smith proposals will see huge devolution of power to this Parliament: control over £20 billion of taxation and £3 billion of welfare and the power to create new benefits. The Parliament will have substantial control over income tax, borrowing, air passenger duty, the Crown Estate, the work programme, work choices, a long list of benefits and much more.

It is time to talk about what we would do with those powers; on that I agree with the First Minister. One of the key economic powers that are coming to this Parliament is the power over income tax. Will the First Minister confirm whether she supports Labour’s proposal to raise the top rate of income tax to 50p?

Tricia Marwick (None, Mid Fife and Glenrothes)

Order!

The First Minister

Finally, I say to Jackie Baillie that what would have electrified me and this Parliament would have been control of job-creating powers, control of the minimum wage, control of the income tax personal allowance, control of national insurance contributions, control of universal credit and tax credits and control of the kind of things that create jobs and help us tackle inequality. Those are the kind of powers that any self-respecting Labour Party would be arguing for instead of siding with the Tories. [Interruption.]

Tricia Marwick (None, Mid Fife and Glenrothes)

One moment, Ms Baillie. There is too much shouting across the chamber. Please allow Ms Baillie to speak and the First Minister to answer.

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

Before the ink has dried, the Scottish National Party is already unpicking the consensus. I listed in my previous question a range of work-creation powers that will help put Scotland back to work, but the First Minister clearly was not listening.

The Parliament will also be responsible for £3 billion of welfare—and, yes, I am excited about the possibility of creating new benefits that will help the most vulnerable in the country. We will also have power over disability living allowance, personal independence payments, attendance allowance, carers allowance, severe disability allowance, sure start grants, cold weather payments, winter fuel payments and many more besides. These are serious and substantial powers.

The First Minister has been in the job for a week, and she has been handed the biggest transfer of powers since the Parliament was established in 1999. Frankly, I would be excited by that, but today John Swinney, her Deputy First Minister, has criticised it and Stewart Hosie, her deputy leader, has done likewise. All she can talk about is what she has not got and what she cannot do. Surely she should be focusing on what she can do with these new powers to change the lives of people across Scotland.

The First Minister needs to understand the mood of the country—

Members: Oh! [Interruption.]

Tricia Marwick (None, Mid Fife and Glenrothes)

Order! Let us hear Ms Baillie.

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

The First Minister has the opportunity to transform lives. What particular powers in the Smith commission report will she use to transform the country?

The First Minister

I said at the outset of my first answer to Jackie Baillie that I welcome all new powers that come to this Parliament. Every power that is recommended for devolution to this Parliament in the Smith commission report I warmly welcome, and when we get our hands on those powers we will use them all to better serve the people of Scotland.

Jackie Baillie might find it easy to dismiss my view—that is fair enough; that is politics—but I caution her against dismissing the view of the STUC, the SCVO and organisations such as Engender Scotland. Those organisations speak for real people across this country, and they are saying that this package of powers falls short of what is needed to create jobs and more equality in our country.

If the proposals are implemented, we will get control over £2.5 billion of welfare spend. However, that is £2.5 billion out of £17.5 billion. I do not want to have the power just to top up Tory cuts to welfare or to put a sticking plaster on a broken system. I want to have the power in our hands to create a better system, to lift people out of poverty and to get our economy growing. That is the kind of powerhouse Parliament I want, but sadly that is not the one that will be delivered.

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

If that was a warm welcome from the First Minister, I would hate to get on her wrong side.

We cannot face two ways. Just two weeks ago, the First Minister told her conference that

“the promise of more powers will evaporate, the vow will be broken.”[Interruption.]

Tricia Marwick (None, Mid Fife and Glenrothes)

Order!

The First Minister

If Jackie Baillie says often enough that this is the biggest transfer of power ever, she might manage to convince herself but, unfortunately, she will not convince anybody else.

I quote, again, Grahame Smith of the STUC, who said that the proposals fall short of the vow. I thought that Labour was on the side of the trade unions. It turns out that Labour is just on the side of the Tories.

It is not me who Labour has to worry about being on the wrong side of. Increasingly, Labour has to worry about being on the wrong side of the people of Scotland. When it comes to the general election in May, I think that it will find out just how much on the wrong side of the people of Scotland it has become.

On the last point, if I was taking that decision now, yes, I would raise the top rate of income tax to 50p. Scottish National Party MPs voted in the House of Commons against the reduction of the top rate of tax; Labour MPs did not turn up to vote. That is the reality.

The question that Labour should ask itself is how has it managed to find itself on the same side as the Tories and on the wrong side of the STUC. What has gone wrong with Labour?

I prefer to look at the views of those organisations that represent real people—so let us look at some of them. One Parent Families Scotland has said that it is “disappointed”; the STUC has said that it is “underwhelmed” and that there is

“not enough to empower the Scottish Parliament to tackle inequality”;

Engender Scotland is “disappointed”; and the Scottish Council for Voluntary Organisations, too, is “disappointed”. [Interruption.]

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

It might not be comfortable for SNP members to hear this, but the vow that was made to the people of Scotland has been delivered before St Andrew’s day, ahead of schedule.

I genuinely thank the Scottish National Party for its help in delivering the vow, because, working together, we have delivered the biggest transfer of powers to the Scottish Parliament since its inception. Promise made; promise delivered—£20 billion of taxation and £3 billion of welfare. Further, I encourage the First Minister to read the small print, because she now has the power to create her own benefits, and I look forward to hearing what they will be.

The First Minister promised that the referendum was a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. We have kept our promise to the people of Scotland. Will the First Minister now keep hers?

Prime Minister (Meetings)

Ruth Davidson (Conservative, Glasgow)

2. To ask the First Minister when she will next meet the Prime Minister. (S4F-02421)

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

No plans in the near future.

Ruth Davidson (Conservative, Glasgow)

Well, Nicola Sturgeon’s consensus politics seems to go only so far because, this morning, she was tweeting lines that she did not like from the Smith report before the commissioners had even sat down. Personally, I think that this is a great day for Scotland. This pocket-money Parliament is finally going to have to look taxpayers in the eye.

The First Minister needs to check the figures that she gave today. This morning, I asked the Scottish Parliament information centre to do just that, and it confirmed that nearly 60 per cent of all money that is spent by the Scottish Government will now have to be raised by the Scottish Government.

We all know that anything short of independence would not satisfy the First Minister, but she should remember that independence was the one option that the people of Scotland roundly rejected. This is a big, bold package of measures, so why can the First Minister not give it the warmer welcome that it clearly deserves?

The First Minister

I am happy to trade figures with Ruth Davidson but, even taking account of the assignation of VAT revenues—which I welcome, although I would rather be in control of tax than have tax revenues assigned—we will be responsible for raising less than half the money that we spend: 48 per cent.

However, even if Ruth Davidson is correct, is that the limit of her ambition—that we should control 60 per cent of the spending of this Government? For goodness’ sake, how on earth can anyone describe that as a responsible, powerhouse Scottish Parliament?

I have already welcomed the powers that are being transferred. Nobody on this side of the chamber will ever do anything other than welcome powers coming to this Parliament, because the difference between us and some other parties in this chamber is that we want to have maximum powers so that we can do the maximum amount of good for the people of Scotland.

Let me read to Ruth Davidson from paragraphs 80 to 85 of the Smith commission report:

“All aspects of National Insurance Contributions will remain reserved ... All aspects of Inheritance Tax and Capital Gains Tax will remain reserved ... All aspects of Corporation Tax will remain reserved ... All aspects of the taxation of oil and gas receipts will remain reserved ... All other aspects of VAT will remain reserved.”

There are sections of the report that talk more about what is being kept in the hands of Westminster than about what is coming to this Parliament.

At the end of the day, we can argue in this Parliament about what we think is good and what we think is bad about the report, but the ultimate verdict will be for the Scottish people. I think that, in the general election in May, the Scottish people have an opportunity to say to the Westminster parties, quite clearly, “Thanks very much for your opening offer; now we want to up it.”

Ruth Davidson (Conservative, Glasgow)

Drowning not waving, I think—the First Minister is purposefully missing the scope of what is proposed today. Let me put her grievance in a bit of context for her. Professors David Bell and David Eiser at the University of Stirling have looked at how much devolution exists in countries in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. They have even plotted it on a handy graph. Today’s announcement means that Scotland will have more devolved tax and spending than exists in nearly every other country in the developed world. Arguably, Scotland is behind only Canada, and we are now set to overtake Belgium, Norway, Italy, Finland, Iceland, France, Sweden and even the fully federal countries of America and Germany. Holyrood will become one of the most powerful devolved Parliaments on the planet.

With that in mind, and in the spirit of the new consensus, will the First Minister agree that these new powers can deliver for everyone in Scotland, no matter which way they voted in the referendum?

The First Minister

In the spirit of consensus that has been offered, I repeat that we will use all the new powers that come to the Parliament in the best way possible to improve the lives of the people of Scotland. That is what we do with the existing powers that we have and it is what we will do with any additional powers that we get.

I guess that Ruth Davidson and I will just have to have an honest disagreement. She may believe—she is entitled to believe this—that a situation that leaves 70 per cent of our tax being set at Westminster and 85 per cent of our social security spending being controlled at Westminster represents what was described in the referendum campaign as genuine home rule, but I am afraid that I take a different view, and I think that the people of Scotland will take a different view of it as well.

I appreciate that the quotations from respected organisations—the Scottish Council for Voluntary Organisations and the Scottish Trades Union Congress—that I gave in response to Jackie Baillie might not cut much ice with the Tories, so I will quote an organisation that might cut more. The Institute of Economic Affairs has stated:

“The Smith proposals are a dangerous half-way house, failing to bring about the benefits that much fuller devolution would have brought to Scotland.”

I say again—I cannot say this any clearer—that I welcome what is being recommended. I hope that, unlike the situation with Calman, the Westminster parties will now deliver all those proposals. However, I think that the verdict of the Scottish people will be that it is not enough—that it does not live up to the vow and it does not deliver the modern form of home rule, the near-federalism solution—and I think that, in the general election, they will choose to make that verdict very clear.

Cabinet (Meetings)

Willie Rennie (Liberal Democrat, Mid Scotland and Fife)

3. To ask the First Minister what issues will be discussed at the next meeting of the Cabinet. (S4F-02419)

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

A range of issues to carry forward the Government’s programme for Scotland will be discussed

Willie Rennie (Liberal Democrat, Mid Scotland and Fife)

So much for the new beginning from the new First Minister. For the first time ever, all Scotland’s political parties have reached a powerful constitutional agreement. Three hours later, she is sitting there rubbishing the agreement that she has just signed. The agreement means that we will have a new £3 billion Scottish welfare system and the Scottish Parliament will get the financial muscle that it needs with taxes worth £20 billion. Cannot the First Minister be a little bit more positive?

The First Minister

Let me say again, for the benefit of Willie Rennie, what I said to both Jackie Baillie and Ruth Davidson. I welcome all the powers that have been recommended for devolution to the Scottish Parliament. I think that that devolution represents a degree of progress.

However, I am not going to stand here and pretend. My idea of consensus—I say this seriously to Willie Rennie—is not my somehow refusing to stand up for what I think is right on behalf of the Scottish people. I do not think that the proposals go far enough because—in this I am in agreement with the Scottish Trades Union Congress—I do not think that the powers that have been recommended will give me and my Government the ability that we need in order to get our economy growing faster and to tackle the inequality that is a scar on the face of our nation.

Yes—we will take the new powers and use them in the best way we can, but we will keep arguing for the real powers that the Parliament needs in order to do the best possible job for the people of Scotland.

Willie Rennie (Liberal Democrat, Mid Scotland and Fife)

The First Minister cannot keep on rerunning the referendum. She must accept that the report recommends more powers on income tax and VAT; powers on a new welfare system, with disability living allowance, attendance allowance and carers allowance and the power to create new benefits; powers on the work programme; powers on housing benefits; control over tribunals, railways and pay-day lenders; and powers on votes at 16. The list goes on. Will the First Minister give unqualified support for what will be a massive transfer of power, or is she always going to say that that will never be enough?

The First Minister

First, if the Westminster parties carry on as they are, it will not be me who forces the rerunning of the referendum, but them.

On a genuine attempt to find some consensus—I hope that Willie Rennie will agree with me on this—I welcome the fact that disability living allowance and personal independence payments are recommended for devolution to this Parliament. Will he join me in asking for those powers to be transferred before the Tory-Liberal coalition imposes a 20 per cent cut on the budget? Yes or no?

Willie Rennie (Liberal Democrat, Mid Scotland and Fife)

The luxury of having three supplementary questions—[Interruption.]

Members: Answer the question!

Tricia Marwick (None, Mid Fife and Glenrothes)

Order!

Willie Rennie (Liberal Democrat, Mid Scotland and Fife)

The First Minister seeks consensus across the chamber. She needs to recognise that this is a big package. Of course we will work together across the chamber, but she needs to start off by recognising what we have achieved today. So far, she has absolutely not done that.

The First Minister

I will take that as a no.

There is a serious point to be made here. I warmly welcome the transfer of disability benefits. However, as matters stand, by the time we get those powers the budget for them will have been cut by 20 per cent. If we want genuine consensus across the Parliament—where we can find it—I say genuinely to all parties let us, as a Parliament, ask the Westminster Government to transfer the powers as soon as possible and to do it before the cut is imposed, so that we can decide the right level of budget to protect our disabled people.

Mental Health Services (Royal College of Nursing Report)

Mark McDonald (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Donside)

4. To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government’s response is to the Royal College of Nursing report on mental health services. (S4F-02423)

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

I very much welcome the report, which highlights the importance of mental health services and acknowledges that care in treatment has improved over the past 15 years.

Of course, we can always do more. Earlier this month, we announced an additional £15 million investment over the next three years to improve mental health services. The new funding will be targeted on two main areas: a mental health innovation fund, and boosting staff numbers to address the mental health needs of children and adolescents, and to meet the rising demand for child and adolescent mental health services.

Mark McDonald (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Donside)

I welcome the innovation fund and the additional funding that has been allocated by the Scottish Government. The RCN has stated that pursuing nurse-led services and using advanced nursing practitioners to deliver services that were previously led by doctors could assist in delivering even stronger outcomes for mental health patients.

I am aware of nurse-practitioner-led services in my constituency in the Middlefield healthy hoose, which, although it does not deal directly with mental health services, operates across services that have more traditionally been delivered by general practitioners. Does the First Minister agree that health boards, in using the funding to invest in the appropriate recruitment and training, should examine whether nurse-led services and mental health services could be provided in communities?

The First Minister

I agree that that should be examined. I am a big supporter, from my time as health secretary, of the work of advanced nurse practitioners across a range of specialties in our national health service.

We have seen a substantial increase in the number of mental health nursing staff under this Government, but we should always be looking for ways to improve services further. Mark McDonald has made a very constructive suggestion. I am sure that the health secretary will be happy to discuss that further with him.

Nanette Milne (Conservative, North East Scotland)

What is the First Minister’s view of the fact that there is only one available child psychiatric bed in the north and north-east of Scotland, which has created a situation in which young people are being admitted to adult psychiatric wards? Have any young people with mental health problems ever been admitted into a young offenders institution for treatment? Will she agree to undertake a review of the provision of child psychiatric beds?

The First Minister

I am happy to ask the Cabinet Secretary for Health, Wellbeing and Sport to write in more detail to Nanette Milne or to meet her on the serious issue that she has raised. There are occasions on which young people under 18 are admitted to adult wards. Most of them are aged 16 and 17. An adult facility might, in certain circumstances, be judged to be clinically appropriate. Obviously, it is not something that we want to happen.

We have been seeing increases in capacity for young people under 18. For example, work on a new 12-bed in-patient unit to replace the current six-bed unit in Dundee has already commenced on site and it is expected that the new unit will be commissioned in late 2015. That will increase the national bed base from 42 to 48 beds.

The issue is serious and the Government is doing serious work to address it, but I recognise that we need to do more. As I said at the outset of my answer, the Cabinet Secretary for Health, Wellbeing and Sport will be happy to discuss the matter further with Nanette Milne.

Child Literacy

Kezia Dugdale (Labour, Lothian)

5. To ask the First Minister how the Scottish Government will respond to Save the Children’s “Read On. Get On.” report on child literacy. (S4F-02428)

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

The Government welcomes the timely launch of the “Read On. Get on.” campaign. The campaign complements the work that we are already doing through our literacy action plan, curriculum for excellence and the getting it right for every child approach, plus specific programmes such as play, talk, read and bookbug.

We will now give all that existing good work an even sharper focus by introducing a read, write, count literacy and numeracy campaign aimed at primary 1 to 3 children. There will be a particular focus on improving outcomes for our most deprived communities.

Kezia Dugdale (Labour, Lothian)

The report maps the literacy levels of 11-year-olds. Every day of their school lives has been spent under the Scottish National Party Government and the report tells us that 20 per cent of kids from the poorest backgrounds still cannot read well enough. It tells us that progress has been too slow. The call is for the Scottish Government to ensure that every child leaves school able to read. After seven years in power, is it really too much to ask?

The First Minister

I know Kezia Dugdale, and I genuinely believe that she has an understanding of the complex issues that lie behind the important matter that she raises. I hope that we can find some consensus on it.

I also know that Kezia Dugdale will have listened carefully to my statement yesterday announcing the Government’s programme for the next year, in which I specifically mentioned the need to raise attainment in our most disadvantaged areas and in which I focused on literacy and numeracy. In my first answer, I referred again to the new campaign that we are about to launch.

Let us not get into a political point-scoring exercise if we can avoid it. [Interruption.] Well, the Labour Party wants consensus until it does not suit it to have consensus. [Interruption.]

Tricia Marwick (None, Mid Fife and Glenrothes)

Order.

The First Minister

On an issue as important as the educational attainment of our young people, we should strive to work together. Therefore, I will happily reach out to Kezia Dugdale, whatever capacity she might find herself in over the coming weeks, and see whether we can find ways to work together on that important issue.

Food Banks

Stuart McMillan (Scottish National Party, West Scotland)

6. To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government’s response is to the Trussell Trust report indicating that the number of people in Scotland visiting food banks has doubled. (S4F-02425)

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

The numbers in food poverty in Scotland are completely unacceptable and an indictment of the United Kingdom Government’s programme of welfare cuts. To be frank, it is shocking that more than 51,000 people visited Trussell Trust food banks between April and September this year and even more shocking that more than 15,000 of them were children.

The Trussell Trust points out that welfare problems account for the highest proportion of those numbers. We are funding 26 projects with more than £500,000 through our emergency food fund. We will continue to do all that we can to tackle the problem, but it underlines the need for the Scottish Parliament to have not only limited powers over welfare but all powers over it.

Stuart McMillan (Scottish National Party, West Scotland)

I am sure that the First Minister will agree that the report should be a wake-up call for all society, bearing in mind the fact that Scotland and the UK are wealthy countries.

Does the First Minister consider that the failings and, more specifically, delays of welfare reform could have been prevented? That would have ensured that many of our citizens need not have been forced to go to food banks.

Does the First Minister also welcome the support that many of the 42 Scottish Professional Football League football clubs, to which I have written, are giving to their local food banks? That support also aims to remove the stigma among some supporters and the feeling that food banks are not for them, even in times of need.

The First Minister

It is appalling that, in a country as wealthy as Scotland, anybody has to rely on a food bank. Some football clubs are already providing valuable assistance in their local communities and helping the organisations that seek to help others.

I am aware of Stuart McMillan’s campaign to encourage SPFL clubs to support their local food banks through collections and awareness raising, and I agree whole-heartedly that football can play a much wider role in our society. Our football clubs are a vital part of our communities, and it is very welcome that so many of them are playing their part in supporting those people who are forced to use food banks by the UK Government’s devastating welfare cuts.

Rail Services (Reston and East Linton)

Elaine Smith (Labour, Coatbridge and Chryston)

The next item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S4M-11550, in the name of Jim Hume, on being one step closer to trains at Reston and East Linton. The debate will be concluded without any question being put.

Motion debated,

That the Parliament welcomes the Scottish Government’s agreement in the ScotRail franchise contract to provide a two-hourly service between Edinburgh and Berwick-upon-Tweed that will call at Reston and East Linton stations; further welcomes the Scottish Government’s commitment to having the service operational by December 2016; notes what it considers the socioeconomic benefits that this will undoubtedly bring to the Scottish Borders and East Lothian, a view that was echoed in the 2011 report that was commissioned by Network Rail, The Value of Station Investment, which suggested that stations can have a significant impact on the towns and cities that they serve by acting as regional gateways, attracting businesses and helping to stimulate economic growth; further notes that the Scottish Government’s document, Rail 2014 – Public Consultation, states that “new stations assist with a number of strategic aims such as stimulating sustainable economic growth or encouraging modal shift”; recognises the joint feasibility study launched in December 2013, which recommends that this local service with the reopened stations should be taken forward to the next stage; praises what it considers the tireless work of the local campaigners, Barrie Forrest and Tom Thorburn, and all their volunteer colleagues from the Rail Action Group East of Scotland (RAGES), in driving forward this rail transport vision for south-east Scotland, and notes the collaborative funding bid to the Scottish Stations Fund by Scottish Borders Council, East Lothian Council and the South East Scotland Regional Transport Partnership.

Alex Johnstone (Conservative, North East Scotland)

I thank Jim Hume for bringing the subject to the Parliament for debate. The opening of railway stations will appear on our agendas increasingly over the years, because the case for each station can be made so effectively.

I apologise; I am a last-minute substitute in the debate, because local member John Lamont has been called away on a constituency matter. He was extremely keen for me to take the opportunity to express his support for the reopening of the stations at Reston and East Linton and his continuing support as we move towards achieving that objective once and for all.

For many years, evidence has been mounting that a little investment can go a long way in improving our rail services. Chic Brodie talked about the Bathgate line. I can talk about our experience in the north-east with the reopening of Laurencekirk station, which underlines the success of reopening stations.

Laurencekirk—like Reston and East Linton, it is on the east coast main line—is some 30 miles south of Aberdeen. The case for reopening Laurencekirk station was made consistently for a time. We thought that the case had been made successfully, but the Government took no action in the early part of the previous decade. However, in one of the first actions of the Scottish National Party Government when it came to power in 2007, the transport minister at the time, Alex Neil, took the project forward. He was proud to come along and participate in the reopening of the station when that eventually happened.

The business case for reopening the station had been made, but Laurencekirk rewrote the book in that regard. The number of passengers that use the station has vastly exceeded expectations and Laurencekirk is experiencing all the problems that arise when transport links are better. There are huge-scale applications to build additional houses in the area, because people want to live in a town that has a station and direct rail services to Aberdeen, for those who work there, and to Edinburgh, Glasgow and the central belt, for those who want to go south.

If we provide services, people will use them. The evidence is there, all round Scotland. I think that the decision to go ahead with reopening Reston and East Linton stations will result in more evidence to back up the business cases for many more new stations in Scotland. As the minister takes the matter forward, let him be well warned: success breeds success and he will have to budget for a few more stations.

Anne McTaggart (Labour, Glasgow)

At the outset, I welcome Derek Mackay to his new ministerial role and tell him that I am missing him already from local government. I thank Jim Hume for recognising in the motion a great example of the Scottish Government doing its job.

The motion recognises a simple matter on which the Scottish Government has worked to benefit directly the people of the eastern borderlands. The creation of a bi-hourly service from Berwick-upon-Tweed to Edinburgh is an amazing way of directly helping the Scottish people, which we have been sent to this Parliament to do—sometimes we wonder.

Opening this service creates a host of benefits for the eastern borderlands and the commuters who live there. The service makes it realistic for people living in towns near the stations to come into Edinburgh for work and bring the money back into their own communities, which it was previously difficult to do.

In addition, the increased traffic makes the areas around the stations centres of their region and places for businesses to open and for people to live in. That is particularly true of the areas around East Linton and Reston, which have had train stations sitting idle for nearly 50 years. The reactivated rail stations will bring in money and commerce, which have been missing. All of that spells economic prosperity for the borderlands and the Scottish people who live there.

This opportunity for benefit was clearly not missed by the local activists who succeeded in advocating this action by the Scottish Government. I am not sure whether the name of the group—RAGES—had anything to do with that, but I am sure that I would be afraid of it.

Particularly when times are still hard for many families, we need to see more actions such as these, which put money directly into projects that benefit people.

It should come as no surprise to the chamber that Jim Hume’s motion has received cross-party support. Although the various parties of the Parliament do not always agree—anybody who was in the chamber earlier would testify to that—when it comes to measures such as promoting prosperity and commerce in Scotland, we are able to get together and do amazing things.

I sincerely hope that that spirit of co-operation continues to exist in the Parliament, so that we may work as a group to benefit our constituents and work towards a stronger, more prosperous Scotland.

I thank Jim Hume again for lodging the motion, not only because I support the work that the Scottish Government has done in opening railway stations for the benefit of the community but because the motion exemplifies the type of cross-party work that we could and should do in the Parliament.

Jim Hume (Liberal Democrat, South Scotland)

Would the minister be able to give us a—I cannot get away from the puns—timetable on such as decision?

Derek Mackay (Scottish National Party, Renfrewshire North and West)

I would be happy to write to the member with the details of how we will consider that and with a target date. I want to be transparent about the options that are open to us and to make sure that locals are informed about likely progress. However, the member will appreciate that, in my first week in the job, there is much for me to consider and I am waiting for the required information from Network Rail so that I can properly consider the bid, cost it and ensure that what we do is credible and beyond challenge.

I am proud of our impressive record of continued investment in transport and improved accessibility to the rail network across Scotland. The investment continues to create employment, to stimulate growth and to create conditions of advantage and opportunity for Scottish communities. I encourage all those who are working towards the opening of Reston and East Linton stations to maintain that momentum with the new services, because they will greatly support the realisation of the goal of bringing the new stations to fruition and the benefit of public transport for all.

13:00 Meeting suspended.

14:00 On resuming—

Jim Hume (Liberal Democrat, South Scotland)

I am delighted to host this members’ business debate, which I am even more delighted to say marks a key moment in the long-running campaign to bring trains to Reston and East Linton. Over the years, the campaign to get rail services to Reston and East Linton has rightly received widespread support from residents and community councils. It has attracted cross-party support from MSPs and has been supported across boundaries by East Lothian Council and Scottish Borders Council. Such is the social and economic case for the reinstatement of rail services at Reston that, more recently, Scottish Borders Council increased its financial commitment to the project to £1.28 million.

The tenacity of the members of the rail action group east of Scotland—or RAGES, as we all know it—is immense. Without a shadow of a doubt, their sheer hard work, determination and savvy campaigning have kept the issue in the spotlight across changing Holyrood and council administrations since the group was set up back in 1999. The chairman of RAGES, Tom Thorburn, its vice-chairman, Barrie Forrest, its secretary, Russell Darling, and all its committee members have campaigned tirelessly to keep rail services for Reston and East Linton on the agenda. That hard work is paying off.

The RAGES team is an exemplar of community campaigning, and I am pleased to say that we are in the presence of that campaigning tour de force, as some of the RAGES team are in the public gallery. I hope that the debate lives up to their expectations, and I am sure that my MSP colleagues will join me in welcoming them to the Scottish Parliament.

To provide rail services for communities across coastal Berwickshire and rural East Lothian is a historic achievement, and I welcomed the news from Keith Brown in his previous post as transport minister that a two-hourly service had been agreed in the ScotRail franchise and that trains would come to Reston and East Linton from December 2016. I hope that the new minister will be in a position to echo that commitment, and I look forward to hearing from him on that.

I am pleased that good progress is being made on the joint bid to the Scottish stations fund by Scottish Borders Council, East Lothian Council and the south east of Scotland transport partnership. Again, I welcome the positive comments that Keith Brown made on that submission, and I hope that the new minister will also look favourably on it.

In time, it will be important to see an affordable pricing structure for passengers and a timetable that works for commuters and tourists alike. More immediately, it is imperative that we get a firm timetable and deadline for construction works, and I look forward to hearing from the minister on that. I welcome Derek Mackay to his new position.

I have already hinted at the length of time for which the campaign has been running. In 2002, Tom Thorburn of RAGES and Ted Clemit of Reston and Auchencrow community council took a petition to the Scottish Parliament to reinstate services at Reston and East Linton. Since then, I have been pleased to support RAGES fully in its work to secure rail services at Reston and East Linton. It is certainly clear from feasibility studies that there will be significant socioeconomic benefits.

On the other side of the Borders, work is under way on the Waverley rail line, which will benefit not just the Borders but Midlothian and, of course, Edinburgh. As work recently began on laying track, Alex Salmond set out his vision for 1 million passengers using the service annually. The two projects are very different, but that sentiment underlines the promise of the benefit that rail services bring to our communities through both inward investment and the tourism economy. That in turn reflects what we wish to happen at Reston and East Linton.

I would like the Waverley line to be extended to Hawick and beyond, to join up with Carlisle. I see no reason why the Scottish Government should not at least commit to a feasibility study, in the light of the former First Minister’s ambitious vision. That discussion is for another day, however—today is about Reston and East Linton.

Our rural and coastal areas can often be left behind when it comes to investment. Our coastal towns and villages, which have traditionally relied on fishing, have recently had to diversify in a changing economy. I am pleased to say that Eyemouth is still a busy working port that services fishing and commercial fleets. Over the years, an increase in tourism activities has brought visitors into the town and the wider county of Berwickshire, which has fantastic attractions along its coastline, such as St Abbs and Coldingham Bay, to name a couple.

It is easy to argue for the need for trains to Reston and East Linton. Such a move will make the area more attractive to young people and new business. Population alone justifies a rail service, which will help to get people out of their cars. It will perhaps even help Scotland to meet its climate change targets, too. Reston station could serve a population of roughly 10,000 in the eastern part of the Borders, and East Linton station will be a welcome addition, as we know that East Lothian’s population is projected to experience the biggest increase in Scotland—33 per cent—by 2035.

It is not an overstatement to say that today’s debate marks a seminal moment for rail travel in the south of Scotland. As work continues apace on the Waverley line, the east is now tantalisingly within touching distance of train services at Reston and East Linton.

I pay tribute to RAGES members for leading on this important local issue. They have been an impressive machine behind the campaign. They have kept up the momentum year after year, and I am sure that MSPs from across the chamber will agree that it is they who deserve the credit for bringing rail services back to Reston and East Linton.

Chic Brodie (Scottish National Party, South Scotland)

I thank Jim Hume for securing the debate. The campaign for additional services in East Lothian and the Borders has been on-going for a while—since the first East Lothian rail study in 1999.

I, too, pay credit to the rail action group east of Scotland for its role in the campaign. RAGES was formally established at an inaugural meeting in Dunbar on 13 January 1999, and it has been campaigning for the reopening of East Linton and Reston stations since then. In 2008, a steering group was established under the auspices of East Lothian Council. That brought together MSPs and councillors from all parties to take forward and co-ordinate the desirable plans. SEStran has also been instrumental in moving the project forward. The cross-party approach has proven to be very successful in getting us to the stage that we are at today. I know that Jim Hume agrees with that.

Keith Brown’s announcement last week that the new train stations for East Linton and Reston are a step closer was welcome. Services that are written into the next franchise include the two-hourly service between Edinburgh and Berwick, with stops at the two new stations as part of the planned timetable. We hope that trains will run through both stations as soon as December 2016. That is a huge step forward towards the realisation of the services, and it shows real commitment from the Government.

That is a real investment. New stations elsewhere have been a driver for economic regeneration by bringing jobs, investment and social opportunities for communities.

The Scottish stations investment fund was launched in April 2012 to provide £30 million to support new railway stations and existing station refurbishments. The fund is now awaiting further details from the south east of Scotland transport partnership, East Lothian Council and Scottish Borders Council on the funding application that will make the new stations at East Linton and Reston a reality.

Investment in the stations will certainly encourage alternatives to private car use, which will contribute to the Government’s ambitious targets for the reduction of greenhouse gases. Evidence from recent rail reopenings in Scotland suggests that passenger use often far exceeds the forecasts. One recent reopening was of the line from Edinburgh to Bathgate. In 1986, it was forecast to carry more than 250,000 passengers per annum, but by 1989, usage had already exceeded 1 million per annum.

The Berwickshire area has a high proportion of residents working in what are typically lower-paid sectors. The Scottish Borders area has deprived settlements such as Eyemouth, as identified by the Scottish index of multiple deprivation. Eyemouth has separately been identified as being among the most vulnerable rural communities in Scotland. Opening Reston station will provide new employment opportunities to residents in Berwickshire and subsequent economic benefits.

As we have heard, there is strong support from local businesses for the introduction of the new rail service and stations, which adds to the strong support from local stakeholders, community councils and of course elected representatives.

I will close with a quote from RAGES chairman Tom Thorburn. Following last week’s announcement, he said:

“This is terrific news for our area and will be of huge benefit to a whole range of people and businesses, namely those wishing to access jobs in Edinburgh, students being able to commute for their tertiary education at QMU, Edinburgh etc, the ability to take in the theatre and sporting fixtures, and tourist access to our areas from other parts of the country.”

Let us make sure that those benefits are fully realised.

Iain Gray (Labour, East Lothian)

I, too, congratulate Jim Hume on obtaining the debate. He and I have worked together on the campaign over the years. However, for me, today is not the best day for him to have got the debate. With your forbearance, Presiding Officer, I will have to leave a little early for a Smith commission-related engagement, for which I apologise to colleagues and in particular the minister. I very much wanted to take part in the debate, because the campaign is important in East Lothian and the Borders.

The inclusion of a proper local service between Edinburgh and Berwick that will stop at new or restored stations at Reston and East Linton is a victory for common sense and for persistence. It is a victory for common sense because, in my constituency, the community of Dunbar has a working railway station but no proper local service, so my constituents there depend on east coast main line train services, which sometimes stop at Dunbar and sometimes do not, depending on the timetable. That is a ridiculous situation.

Even more ridiculous is the situation of my constituents in East Linton, where the station was closed many years ago. They see trains run through their community daily, but none of them stops and my constituents have no opportunity to use those services. It is simple common sense that those two communities should have a proper local rail service, and the same is true of Reston.

The decision is also a victory for persistence—particularly the persistence of the local rail campaign RAGES, to which Mr Hume and Mr Brodie paid tribute.

Mr Hume mentioned some of the stalwarts of RAGES. They are some of the politest and most courteous people one could ever do business with, but their group’s acronym is not RAGES for no reason. For years they have raged against the argument that it is not possible to reinstate services to their communities, they have raged against the argument that there are not enough train movements to enable services to be reinstated and they have raged against the argument that significantly underestimated potential passenger numbers on reinstated services. They have won every one of those arguments.

There has been persistence on the part of East Lothian Council and Scottish Borders Council, which provided resources for the original Scottish transport appraisal guidance assessment and have committed significant resources to the reopening of stations, as members said. There has also been persistence on the part of local politicians such as Councillor Norman Hampshire in Dunbar.

I am happy to acknowledge the role that the minister’s predecessor, Keith Brown, played. He responded positively to representations that were made to him and he deserves credit for the inclusion of the services in the franchise.

The victory has been gradual. Some ScotRail services have been provided to Dunbar and there is the prospect of a two-hourly service, but we still have to build two stations to make it happen. My message to the new minister is this: make no mistake, RAGES will stay on the case and will not rest—and nor will we—until the victory is complete and literally on track.

Derek Mackay (Scottish National Party, Renfrewshire North and West)

I thank members for their warm and generous welcome to my new post of Minister for Transport and Islands. I appreciate the keen interest that has been shown in this issue by a number of parties in the chamber.

I understood some contributions more readily and easily than others, given the geography involved. Added to that is the fact that I am obviously intimidated by my ministerial colleague sitting to my left, Paul Wheelhouse, who also has a keen interest in this issue, along with the other members who have taken forward this important local cause. In that tone, I congratulate Jim Hume on securing the debate.

This is an important issue to communities in East Lothian and the Scottish Borders. The Scottish Government’s record on opening new stations—as broadcast and explained by Alex Johnstone—shows just how important it is to us. Our record speaks for itself. Since 2007, six new stations have been built and nine more are due to be opened as part of the Borders rail project.

We are committed to supporting major projects and improvements to infrastructure and services across the network to contribute to sustainable economic growth. That is reflected in an ambitious £5 billion package of funding and investment until 2019.

We are delivering the Borders railway—the longest new domestic railway to be constructed in Britain for over 100 years—on time and within budget.

Next year, as we all know, two new exciting rail franchises will be in operation. They will build on passenger feedback to the rail 2014 consultation and the results of the national rail passenger surveys, all of which point to the need for an efficient, reliable and value-for-money service for Scotland’s passengers. As such, we have secured contracts that reflect our desire that the franchise should put the passenger first, contribute to the overall economy and build on the successes of the current franchise. The successful bidder’s proposals satisfy those requirements and more. They underline the Government’s commitment to providing enhanced rail services across Scotland. Trains will be introduced that are more suited to the demands of intercity travel, journey times will be shorter, facilities will be improved and there will be galley catering and more comfort for passengers.

We will deliver value for money by offering passengers a £5 advance fare between any two cities together with other proposals such as the club 50 and reduced travel costs for jobseekers and the newly employed. That is in addition to Scottish ministers’ commitment to restrict fare increases, which will further improve rail travel’s appeal and encourage modal shift.

The Borders will also benefit from being part of the great Scottish scenic railway, which will market Scotland’s scenery, heritage and tourist attractions to a wider audience. There will be special steam services to promote local attractions and grow tourism. I hope that community rail groups, local businesses and the wider rail industry engage with Abellio Scotrail to maximise the opportunities arising from those initiatives.

Mr Brown, my predecessor, was delighted to have secured services in the new Scotrail franchise that will accommodate stops at Reston and East Linton. The service is scheduled to be a two-hourly service between Edinburgh and Berwick and I am sure that we can all agree that it is a major step forward in bringing those stations back to life.

We have been open and responsive to the representations of East Lothian Council, Scottish Borders Council, SEStran and RAGES and we appreciate the work that they have done to date. East Lothian has a growing population and a new service will help to deliver sustainable economic growth and reduce the impact on the road network. In Berwickshire, the key issues are accessibility and social exclusion. Crucially, the proposed new services and station will provide improved access to work and educational opportunities and they will be a driver for economic regeneration. The benefits that the services will bring are evident to all.

The final element that is still to be put in place is the capital funding for the stations. We recognise the importance of infrastructure to sustaining our economy, providing access to opportunities and bringing our communities closer together. The investments that we have delivered or are in the midst of constructing and those for which we have detailed plans confirm our commitment to improving Scotland’s infrastructure. That commitment is backed by our £30 million Scottish stations fund, which was announced in June 2012 as part of Scottish ministers’ high-level output specification. The fund is designed to lever in third-party funding to provide new and improved stations, and it gives East Lothian Council and Scottish Borders Council the opportunity to achieve additional funding for the stations just as it was designed to do.

The bid is currently under consideration and a decision will be made once Network Rail has completed the scope and design work for each of those stations. I look forward to seeing that progressed as soon as possible.

St Andrew’s Day 2014

John Scott (Conservative, Ayr)

Good afternoon. The first item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S4M-11565, in the name of Annabelle Ewing, on St Andrew’s day 2014. The debate will be concluded without any question being put, and I invite members who wish to speak in the debate to press their request-to-speak button now or as soon as possible.

I call Bruce Crawford to open the debate on behalf of Annabelle Ewing.

Motion debated,

That Parliament notes the view that St Andrew’s Day should be celebrated as a full national holiday and for it to be celebrated at home and throughout the world; believes that St Andrew’s Day is a valuable opportunity to showcase all that is great about Scotland and promote economic and cultural opportunities, and considers that, with St Andrew’s own roots in Asia, Scotland’s national day is an opportunity to celebrate diversity of cultures, faiths and ethnic origins and in this momentous year for Scotland, in which it has welcomed the world to the Commonwealth Games and Ryder Cup and voted in a historic referendum, that St Andrew’s Day offers a great opportunity for Scotland and its friends at home and abroad to celebrate together.

Bruce Crawford (Scottish National Party, Stirling)

I congratulate Annabelle Ewing on becoming a minister in the Scottish Government. I thank all those who signed the motion and those who have turned up for the debate. I also thank Annabelle Ewing for creating the opportunity for me to lead this debate on celebrating St Andrew’s day.

I particularly want to reflect on Scotland’s place in the world. As stated in the motion, St Andrew himself was a man who touched many countries. The obvious countries with which Scotland has links are our friends in the Commonwealth countries across the world. It was in the Commonwealth countries that many of our forebears chose to make new lives for themselves in the more recent past and, of course, vice versa.

However, Scotland also has centuries-old relationships with our Scandinavian neighbours, and with Poland, Germany and the Netherlands. Many Scots emigrated to those countries, mainly in search of economic or military careers, while many from those countries also settled here. It was the same for our neighbouring countries across these islands, and again vice versa.

Similarly, across the world, in more contemporary times, in first maritime and then air travel, we have witnessed Scotland take her place as part of a smaller and more interdependent world. People have come to enrich our society, whether that has been the Italians and the Poles, or people from Pakistan and India and so on. In developing our place in the modern world, and as a result of our many links around the globe, we have become a much more ethnically rich and diverse country. That has helped us to retain a unique and outward-looking culture.

It goes without saying that 2014 has been a year like no other to celebrate all that is good about Scotland. Our referendum was a magnificent renewal of Scotland’s national democracy, with an enormous turnout and truly incredible levels of democratic engagement from our citizens.

When I was in Fort William earlier this week with the Devolution (Further Powers) Committee, we had the chance to speak to many 16 and 17-year-olds who were involved in that democratic process. There is no doubt in my mind, given what we have heard from the Smith commission this week and from all the parties in Parliament, that we recognise and value the contribution of those young people as part of the referendum process. I am glad that everyone is now committed to giving 16 and 17-year-olds the vote in our country.

The referendum was a spectacle, which was watched in awe across the world. The journalist Jack Wright wrote this week in his “The View from ... America” column for The National—an excellent addition to Scotland’s daily newspaper titles—as he commented on the new-found interest in Scotland and our politics, that

“Our brand is stronger than ever in the US”.

However, it is more than that. We have welcomed visitors in the second year of homecoming from all over the world. I met many of them at the Bannockburn event. We have succeeded in organising and delivering the best Commonwealth games ever, as well as the magnificent spectacle that was the Ryder cup. We have had a wide range of cultural events at which to reflect upon and commemorate this year for Scotland. One example, relating to our country’s historical heritage, was the hugely successful marking of the 700th anniversary of the battle of Bannockburn.

The Commonwealth games in particular presented a golden opportunity to celebrate the diversity of the family of nations that the Commonwealth represents and the diversity to be found in modern Scotland. Former First Minister Alex Salmond elegantly described the diversity of modern Scotland when he said:

“There are many different colours and threads woven into the Scottish tartan and all must be celebrated.”

I whole-heartedly agree with those sentiments.

The richness of that tartan is reflected in analysis work that has been done on the 2011 census. Dr Andrew Smith, senior lecturer in sociology at the University of Glasgow, said:

“What our research in the Centre on the Dynamics of Ethnicity reveals is a picture of growing diversity within Scotland and of diversity spread across different areas of the country.”

He added:

“What the analysis also reveals is that Scotland’s growing diversity is not producing ‘polarised islands of different groups’ but a ‘mosaic of differently mixed areas’.”

Those findings are reassuring in modern Scotland, but there is no room for complacency in the Parliament or in Scottish society more generally. We must always strive to ensure that the diversity of society is celebrated and never divides us.

Just as modern Scotland is about those from elsewhere who have made their home in our country, Scots who have left these shores for opportunity have made a huge contribution to the modern world. The USA and Canada are oft-cited examples of countries where millions can claim Scottish ancestry. It is estimated that, from this wee country of ours, between 28 million and 40 million people may be able to claim Scottish descent. I was intrigued to discover recently that 80,000 people in Chile claim Scottish descent. I could not understand that number, as it is more than the figure for many European countries put together. I discovered that it was mostly about sheep and an admiral from Scotland who went to Chile to create the Chilean navy. Forgive me, but I cannot remember his name.

John Mason (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Shettleston)

Will the member give way?

Bruce Crawford (Scottish National Party, Stirling)

Yes. I am sure that John Mason will now tell me his name.

John Mason (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Shettleston)

No. The member mentions other countries, but does he realise the connection with Jamaica, which also has a saltire in its flag? Scots were involved there and there are a huge number of Scottish names in Jamaica.

Bruce Crawford (Scottish National Party, Stirling)

Yes, I recognise that although, obviously, the saltire that goes through the flag of Jamaica is yellow. Further south from Jamaica, there are places such as Guyana, where lots of Scots went during the times of the sugar plantations. Scots have made a significant contribution in that part of the world. It is a pity that the bobsleighers from Jamaica are better than ours, though.

Yesterday, I was reminded by my American intern Heidi Brown that today is thanksgiving day in the United States. On that national holiday, families are given the day off to rejoice and celebrate the co-operation between native Americans and the pilgrims during that period. Americans mark the day by feasting, as they did after their first successful harvest in 1621, and by giving thanks in a continued tradition of expressing gratitude to the native Americans. I therefore wish Americans here in Scotland a happy thanksgiving day on their national holiday.

The motion advocates the celebration of St Andrew’s day as a national holiday. I have no doubt that it is not beyond our wit to designate St Andrew’s day as a national holiday and to rearrange our calendar of public holidays to reflect that, if that is what we choose. If ever there was good reason to celebrate St Andrew with a public holiday, it is to celebrate Scotland’s contribution to the world and, even more important, to celebrate and raise a toast to those from all round the planet who have chosen Scotland as their home and so enriched our culture and daily lives.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I call Christine Grahame, who has four minutes, or thereby.

Christine Grahame (Scottish National Party, Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale)

I like the “thereby”, Presiding Officer.

I congratulate Bruce Crawford on congratulating Annabelle Ewing on securing the debate to celebrate St Andrew’s day and our patron saint in Scotland. He is also the patron saint of not just Jamaica but Greece, Romania, Russia and some other countries. It is good to see Jamie McGrigor, who will speak later from the Conservative benches, in the chamber. I have to remark that there is nobody on the Labour or Liberal benches to speak to a motion celebrating Scotland’s national day, which is pretty disgraceful.

The raising of the profile of our national day is undoubtedly due in part to the reconvening of this Parliament some 15 years ago, and not least to Dennis Canavan’s St Andrew’s Day Bank Holiday (Scotland) Act 2007. However, St Andrew’s day is not a full national holiday, as Bruce Crawford said, and is not yet as celebrated as Burns night.

At one time, Google displayed the saltire on its home page on St Andrew’s day. I hope that it does so this year. I suggest that members who are not in the chamber—that is most of them—pay attention and suggest to Google that it puts the St Andrew’s flag on its home page on 30 November. That is good business for Scotland, and it is appropriate.

St Andrew gave us the saltire. Flags are at the beating heart of a nation. It is symbols of nationhood, such as our patron saint and the flag that is emblematic of his crucifixion, that have carried the hearts and hopes of Scots in good and bad times, from confrontations on football pitches to those on battlefields.

Where is that symbol of our patron saint more distinct than in our flag, the saltire, which was inspired by the vision at Athelstaneford in 832 AD? I should say that I wasnae there. At Athelstaneford, King Angus—Angus is my oldest son’s name; there’s DNA for you—led the Scots in battle to defeat the Angles. The night before battle, St Andrew appeared before King Angus, assuring him of victory, and in the morning a white saltire against a blue sky appeared to both sides. It scared the Angles to bits; they lost confidence and were defeated. The image has been our flag ever since.

The saltire was also used on the nation’s coinage when it was introduced by King David I in the 12th century. It therefore has an ancient and noble lineage.

On St Andrew’s day in our capital city there is the opportunity to fly the St Andrew’s flag in a prominent position on the castle. Why does that not happen? There is a false argument that the castle is an army garrison—it is not. It ceased to be a garrison in 1920, and the army is there largely in a ceremonial capacity.

I am thankful that Historic Scotland saw the light last year and did not put the Olympic rings on the castle. I have another suggestion: why not project a large saltire on the ramparts of the castle on 30 November?

In commemoration of St Andrew’s day, St Andrew’s flag may fly over Edinburgh castle, but not in pole position; the British Government, on behalf of the Ministry of Defence, designated the castle as an official flag-flying station, therefore the union flag takes precedence. However, under the Scotland Act 1998, and by agreement between the Crown Estate Commissioners and the Scottish Office, ownership of Edinburgh castle and other historic buildings transferred from the Crown to the Secretary of State for Scotland and thence to the Scottish ministers.

The transfer of 26 properties took place in 1999. Fact. The properties included, inter alia, Edinburgh castle. The Government, through its ministers, is the owner and is therefore landlord to the MOD. The MOD is merely our tenant. It is time for the landlords, on behalf of the Scottish people, to tell the tenants to take down the union flag and fly the saltire in its place, not only because it symbolises our nation and its patron saint but because—to be frank—if it is good enough for recruiting Scots to fight in illegal wars, it is good enough to fly all year round.

Despite the narrow miss of independence—or perhaps because of it, because of those 1.6 million Scots who voted yes in the face of a unionist tsunami of negativity, and because of the baby steps that are being taken under the Smith commission, with the redefining of “substantial and cohesive”, “home rule” and “vow”—we all know, whatever side we are on in this Parliament, that Scotland’s story has not yet been told. The ending remains unwritten—but when it is written the saltire will fly everywhere.

Jamie McGrigor (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

Like Christine Grahame, I am astonished that no one from the Labour benches is here for the debate. That was also the case in the debate on Ukraine the other day; I thought that that was rather odd. Perhaps Labour members have all been rendered speechless by something.

I congratulate Annabelle Ewing on securing this debate, and I am glad to take part in it, because it is important. Christine Grahame told the story of the Scottish saltire and the legend of St Andrew, which I was about to relate, so that has taken away some of my speech.

Christine Grahame (Scottish National Party, Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale)

Sorry about that.

John Mason (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Shettleston)

Will the member give way?

Jamie McGrigor (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

In a moment.

The Confederation of British Industry Scotland has stated in the past that more and more firms are moving away from closing on specified days to a system in which employees have an annual leave entitlement and decide for themselves, in agreement with their employer, when to take a holiday. We would be happy for employees to engage with their employers to discuss taking St Andrew’s day off instead of another holiday if that was appropriate, which might be the case if the employee’s spouse, partner or children have St Andrew’s day off.

I will take the intervention now.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Make it a brief one, please, as the member is in his last minute.

John Mason (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Shettleston)

Thank you, Presiding Officer. Does the member think that the retail sector might benefit from a holiday at this time of year, which could boost sales leading up to Christmas?

Jamie McGrigor (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

That is a good point well made.

I agree with the motion that St Andrew’s day is a great opportunity to celebrate the diversity of our cultures and faiths. We also recognise that tourism businesses can need extra promotion during the winter months, which we have talked about. We want to see a continued focus to boost winter tourism in Scotland.

I am pleased that Historic Scotland offered free tickets to many of its properties on St Andrew’s day. I pay tribute to all those enterprising businesses, shops and tourism enterprises in my region of the Highlands and Islands that seek to use St Andrew’s day to boost trade.

As a keen angler, I have always thought it very appropriate that our Scottish patron St Andrew was a fisherman from Galilee. I wish all those who have Friday off for St Andrew’s day an enjoyable day. I hope that some of them will do a spot of fishing or even enjoy some of our first-class shellfish.

Christine Grahame (Scottish National Party, Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale)

Absolutely—just give me the flag.

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow)

I will certainly do so, and I will also get a photographer on site to capture the moment.

On a serious note, I recently visited Stirling castle, where the First Minister—the former First Minister, I should say—had managed to secure an agreement for the lion rampant to be flown there for only the second time in 400 years. I am more than happy to explore Christine Grahame’s idea and her suggestion that we contact Google to find out whether it will be advocating the saltire on its page.

It is my hope that our 2015 year of food and drink will sustain and build on the momentum that has been generated by this year’s homecoming. I hope that all members in the chamber will be impelled to take part, thereby helping to inspire the people of Scotland and our visitors to celebrate Scotland’s outstanding natural larder; to further develop Scotland’s ever-growing reputation as a land of food and drink; and to promote and celebrate our nation’s culinary achievements not only on St Andrew’s day but throughout the year.

There is a lesson in St Andrew’s story for every single one of us. He was a man of great humility, which he demonstrated even in death and persecution when he refused to be crucified on the same cross as Christ.

There are many lessons that we can learn from St Andrew, but the best lesson, as Bruce Crawford said, is that our national day should be celebrated by all of Scotland’s communities and all Scots who have chosen to make other parts of the globe their home. I hope that, in that spirit of unity, diversity and tolerance, each and every one of us will have a very happy, enjoyable and festive St Andrew’s day.

Jamie McGrigor (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

I was very glad to learn that it was a dream of St Andrew that inspired the saltire. It is a beautiful flag and it is owned by all the Scottish people—and of course it is part of the union jack.

Quite why St Andrews was considered to be the end of the earth, where St Rule was instructed to take St Andrew’s remains, is a mystery to me, as I have always considered it a very fine town, with a great university and a marvellous golf course. Perhaps St Rule arrived on a bad day, which was made worse by a haar or something like that. He was, however, lucky to get away with his life, unlike the Hussites who arrived in St Andrews from Czechoslovakia and were burnt at the stake.

What celebrations St Andrew has inspired worldwide, particularly in Australia and Canada. In China, the Caledonian Society of Beijing, of which my brother was a previous chairman, holds a St Andrew’s ball, where an enormous amount of Scotch whisky is consumed. Amazingly, in the Czech Republic, where the Hussites I spoke of came from, they hold a St Andrew’s night as well, which is very forgiving of them. In Saudi Arabia, they hold a St Andrew’s night ball in Jeddah, but I do not think that quite so much whisky is drunk at that one.

I turn to slightly more serious matters. During my time as an MSP, I have spoken in many debates on St Andrew’s day. I have argued before that our position on making the day a national holiday is consistent and clear. We have always been supportive of the desire to have St Andrew’s day as a bank holiday, but in exchange for another day, not in addition to existing days.

That was the approach adopted in the 2007 act and we remain supportive of that. St Andrew’s day is, correctly, a voluntary public holiday. That is the approach that our Parliament takes. Strangely enough, Eton College also celebrates St Andrew’s day as a holiday and has done so for hundreds of years.

We did not support the argument that St Andrew’s day must be a compulsory national holiday, as the cost of that inevitably falls on businesses, especially small businesses, and the taxpayer.

Humza Yousaf (Scottish National Party, Glasgow)

I congratulate Annabelle Ewing on lodging this motion and on her ministerial appointment, as she will be a colleague in the Government. I also congratulate Bruce Crawford on taking up the mantle somewhat at the last minute. I can think of no MSP more appropriate to have done so.

I am delighted to wind up this debate on behalf of the Government. I, too, am surprised at the lack of some Opposition members, but, nonetheless, today’s debate about St Andrew’s day being celebrated widely as a national holiday is incredibly important for a number of reasons.

I particularly want to pick up the point that Bruce Crawford and, latterly, Jamie McGrigor made about this being an opportunity to celebrate Scotland as an outward-looking nation. Scots have travelled the world over, sometimes for good reasons and sometimes—such as when it comes to Jamaica—probably not for particularly great reasons. It is also a country that has opened itself up to migrants and been welcoming in that regard.

As Jamie McGrigor alluded to, St Andrew is the patron saint of fishermen and fishmongers. I am certainly not looking at any members in the chamber, particularly not at any members behind me, when I say that St Andrew is also the patron saint of singers, spinsters, maidens, old maids, and women wishing to become mothers. Also—this is perhaps a good thing for politicians—he is the patron saint for people with sore throats.

It has been seven years since the Scottish Parliament approved the bill to have a national holiday on or around St Andrew’s day. As members know, since then, the Scottish Government and public sector organisations such as VisitScotland have observed that holiday. Many local authorities also observe it but we hope that more will take up the challenge—and indeed the opportunity, as John Mason said—to take the day as a holiday.

Members will also be pleased to hear that we have gathered some encouraging evidence that suggests that the celebration of St Andrew’s day is gathering momentum. For example, in 2013-14, Scottish winter festival events recorded a total footfall of 257,884. That is an 8 per cent increase on the footfall the year before. Also, the number of private sector organisations offering free or discounted entry on St Andrew’s day increased by 140 per cent between 2012 and 2013.

Bruce Crawford’s remarks about the global Scottish diaspora reminded me of a saying that I am sure members will have heard many a time: that there are two types of people in the world—Scots and those who wish they were Scottish. In that vein, it is estimated that 50 million people across the globe claim Scottish ancestry. Many of those Scots and Scots at heart, wherever they are from in the world—from Beijing to Rio, Toronto and Brisbane—will be remembering and marking the national day, as they do hogmanay and Burns night every year.

People were quite correct to mention that St Andrew is also the patron saint of many other countries, including Greece, Russia, Romania, and—apparently—Barbados, which is fantastic. As external affairs still come into my remit, if members would want me to, I could submit myself to the country to go on a fact-finding mission to Barbados in that regard—I would be more than happy to do that.

We are working hard with our partners across the world to establish St Andrew’s day as an important day to mark. I am delighted that we are working closely with the Foreign and Commonwealth Office to promote the celebration of St Andrew’s day. I was having a Twitter exchange with the high commissioner to Zambia, James Thornton, who was at the Caledonian ball to celebrate St Andrew’s day just this week. Jamie McGrigor also gave many examples of other celebrations. We are delighted that our partners are doing all they can—as we are doing all we can—to promote St Andrew’s day across the world, as well as members here who will be celebrating in their local constituencies.

As the motion states, St Andrew’s day is also

“an opportunity to celebrate diversity of cultures, faiths and ethnic origins”

of this small country. Bruce Crawford made that point extraordinarily well throughout his speech. During this year in particular, through all the events that we have had—including, of course, the Commonwealth games in particular—we have managed to bring those communities of Scotland closer together.

St Andrew himself, of course, was an immigrant. He emigrated and travelled to many different countries, including Ukraine, Romania, Russia, Greece and Turkey, to name just a few. One programme of events that helps to celebrate that ethnic diversity on St Andrew’s day this year is the fantastic event that is called the multicultural homecoming. It is being organised by BEMIS Scotland, which is headed by the very able Dr Rami Ousta and his team. The finale of that homecoming celebration is on St Andrew’s night and the Cabinet Secretary for Culture, Europe and External Affairs will be representing the Scottish Government at that event. I myself will be celebrating St Andrew’s day with our vibrant Sikh community in Scotland.

As we enter the winter festival season, it is important to remember that St Andrew’s day is not the only celebration in these winter months. We have a fantastic programme, with hogmanay a month later and Burns night as well.

I thought that some of the ideas that came from members on how we can celebrate St Andrew’s day further and give the day more prominence were very good indeed. Christine Grahame volunteered to climb the ramparts of Edinburgh castle with the saltire in her teeth in order to attach it to the top.

Programme for Government 2014-15

Tricia Marwick (None, Mid Fife and Glenrothes)

Resumed debate.

As the parties were advised, we now move straight to the continuation of yesterday’s debate on the Scottish Government’s programme for government 2014-15. I note that a number of members, despite the warning, are not in the chamber.

I say to all members, whether they are in the chamber or not, that if they spoke in the debate yesterday I expect them to be here for the closing speeches this afternoon. If anybody who spoke yesterday has not sought prior agreement to their being absent from the chamber, I will name and shame them later.

Alex Neil (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

I begin by correcting something that Jackie Baillie said in yesterday’s debate. On a number of occasions, she said that in the period in which the Scottish National Party has been in government, the number of people who worked for Scotland’s local authorities who have lost their jobs is 70,000. I have checked the figures, and I can tell Jackie Baillie that, on a full-time equivalent basis, the reduction in the number of people working for local authorities in Scotland over that period is not 70,000 but 27,600.

Most interestingly, when one looks at the analysis of those figures, one sees that three local authorities account between them for 15,000 of those 27,600 job losses. Those three local authorities are Labour-controlled Glasgow City Council, which accounts for a reduction of 11,500 in the number of people employed; Labour-controlled North Lanarkshire Council, which accounts for a reduction of 1,600; and Labour-controlled Aberdeen City Council, which accounts for a reduction of 1,900.

In the future, when Jackie Baillie is quoting numbers, she should perhaps check the facts first. I wanted to register that point at the beginning.

I have just over four minutes left—

James Kelly (Labour, Rutherglen)

Will the cabinet secretary take an intervention?

Alex Neil (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

Of course. I will always take an intervention from Mr Kelly.

James Kelly (Labour, Rutherglen)

I thank Mr Neil for taking the intervention. Does he accept, as a matter of fact, that thousands of local government workers have lost their jobs because of the cuts that have been imposed by the SNP Government?

Alex Neil (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

If all the councils had followed the same employment policies as the Scottish Government, they would all be in a much better position. Given the record of Labour-controlled authorities, I do not think that Mr Kelly has much to boast about. The budgets that have been set by us are from budgets that were originally set by Alistair Darling and Gordon Brown. [Interruption.]

Tricia Marwick (None, Mid Fife and Glenrothes)

Mr Kelly! Stop heckling!

Alex Neil (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

They were the ones who imposed the cuts originally. I really do not think that the Labour Party has much to boast about at all.

On a more positive note, I will focus on my new areas of responsibility. Although I cannot list all of them—it is a fairly long list—I will highlight a number of issues on which, as the First Minister said yesterday, we intend to make substantial progress in the period that is left of this session of Parliament. Although we are now within 16 months of the end of this session, there is still a great deal to be done, even before we move on to the extended agenda that will arise from the additional powers that we hope will be transferred to the Scottish Parliament in the months and years to come.

I have identified five or six areas to which I will give priority over the next 16 or 17 months or so: housing, fuel poverty, equalities, welfare, pensioners’ rights and democratic renewal. It is important today of all days, when we are talking about the transfer of powers from London to Edinburgh, that we remind ourselves of the very important principles that were established in the declaration by the former First Minister, Alex Salmond, in relation to subsidiarity within Scotland. It is very much a part of the philosophy and intention of this Government to look at the future government of Scotland internally so that we maximise democratic participation by our people. We know from participation in the referendum and the 85 per cent turnout that there is among people out there a real hunger to become much more engaged in the politics and decision making of our country than they have been over the past 20 years. We want to help people to realise that ambition; democratic renewal is a key part of our forward-looking agenda.

John Mason (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Shettleston)

Does the cabinet secretary agree that if power is to be devolved it should not stop at Glasgow city chambers but should go down to communities?

Alex Neil (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

I could not agree more. I represent a constituency in North Lanarkshire and I look at some of the ways in which the housing stock there is managed, which is anything but democratic or accountable. Empowering tenants much more than we have done in the past is a very good example of how we can do much more genuinely to empower our communities, as we need to do. There was in the past something of the attitude whereby our only empowerment of tenants in some areas was to give them a yes or no choice about transfer of housing stock from the local authority to a third-party organisation. Any transfer should have the democratic acceptance of the tenants, but that is a very narrow view of how tenants should be involved. Extending tenant management and control of local authority housing stock is an area that is ripe for action in terms of democratic renewal and community empowerment.

In the less than a minute that I have left, the other area that I will mention is equalities. Three areas in particular will be priorities for me. The first is domestic abuse. Despite massive cross-party efforts by Parliament under successive Administrations, we still have much more to do to eliminate domestic abuse from Scotland. I will work with all the parties involved to ensure that we do that.

Secondly, the relatively new phenomenon of revenge porn clearly must be tackled. It is totally unacceptable and it damages young people in particular. Again, urgent action on that is required.

Thirdly, in terms of public sector appointments, getting more women on boards is absolutely essential. Obviously, the health department appoints more people to more boards than does any other function in Government, so when I was Cabinet Secretary for Health and Wellbeing I made a distinct effort to use every possible occasion to maximise recruitment of women to our health boards.

Tricia Marwick (None, Mid Fife and Glenrothes)

You need to bring your speech to a close.

Alex Neil (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

I did that; if members consider health board proportions, they will see that the proportion of women is reasonably high. However, we need to extend that and we need to do more on equalities, as well as on women on boards.

I am sorry that I cannot say any more, as I have limited time, but I hope that I have given some sense of the priorities that I intend to follow in the 17 months that are left in the current session of Parliament.

Ken Macintosh (Eastwood) (Lab)

I begin with my own words of welcome to the First Minister and her Administration. We are seven years into this SNP Government, but it is important that we acknowledge what can be seen at least as a change in tone and style from the Government over the past two weeks—notwithstanding some of its reaction today to the Smith commission.

Like most colleagues from all sides in this Parliament, I want to work with the Government when it is taking action to support the lives of people in Scotland, and to that end there are a number of proposals in the legislative programme that give me encouragement.

Just last night, in our debate on Oxfam’s even it up campaign, I outlined that land ownership reflects just one of the extreme inequalities that afflict our nation and which we need to tackle if we are to build a more progressive society. Fewer than 500 people own more than half the land in our country. That is not the threat that it would pose in relation to individual poverty if we had less in the way of alternative employment, but it is still an affront to our sense of fairness and to our broader social and economic wellbeing.

The indications are that Scottish ministers intend to take a slightly more radical approach than that which was indicated by their initial rather insipid response to the findings of the land reform review group. If that is indeed the case, it will be welcomed on this side of the chamber, and we look forward to the launch of the consultation next week.

“Check against delivery”—I believe that those words often adorn press copies of ministerial speeches. With a similar caveat—that we await further detail—there are several other proposals that I welcome. They include the help to mitigate welfare cuts and a stronger focus on the living wage. Who knows? Maybe Labour and the SNP will eventually even see eye to eye on legislation in that area. I also welcome the proposed fair work convention with an accompanying focus on gender equality and the creation of decent sustainable jobs. I know that that issue is particularly close to the heart of the Cabinet Secretary for Finance, Constitution and Economy, and I hope that we can work with him to make progress in that area.

Other proposals that I welcome are votes for 16 and 17-year-olds, which the whole Parliament has now come together on; moves against human trafficking, in relation to which I pay tribute to the work of my colleague Jenny Marra; and a commitment to addressing the needs that have been outlined by Gordon Aikman in his campaign to support people who have motor neurone disease. Those are just some of the measures on which I fully expect Labour to be working constructively with the SNP over the next year or so.

On childcare, too, there are the makings of a common agenda. We seem to agree about the direction of travel on creating more accessible, affordable and available childcare places, although the fact that we are moving at a slower pace than the rest of the UK leaves us with some concern.

It is when we move on to the broader issues to do with education that I begin to have some difficulty. There is an immediate and obvious contrast between the stated aims and aspirations that have been outlined by the Scottish Government and the budget decisions that have been taken by that same Government, which could actively hinder delivery. Labour would entirely support action to raise attainment, especially that which is focused on more deprived areas—including, for example, measures that are designed to widen access to higher education. Unfortunately, the reality is that across Scotland this Government’s funding decisions mean that local authority after local authority is having to work out exactly where ministers want to cut education budgets. Last week alone, we heard that Highland Council, Falkirk Council and East Renfrewshire Council are struggling to maintain the priority that they wish to give education in the face of Scottish Government cuts.

Mark McDonald (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Donside)

At yesterday’s meeting of the Local Government and Regeneration Committee, local authorities were extremely positive about the removal of ring fencing of budgets under the Scottish Government. Local authorities have great flexibility in how they spend the resources that are allocated to them. Mr Macintosh, like many of his colleagues, calls for additional funding for local government. Where does he see disinvestment taking place to allow that additional funding?

Ken Macintosh

Not only do I not recognise the picture that Mr McDonald paints, the stark facts are that this Government spends its time arguing for full control over fiscal powers from the UK Government and yet it freezes the council tax at an unsustainable level. That represents an intellectual paradox, and I cannot believe that the SNP, and Mr McDonald in particular, cannot recognise that. The SNP, by not only cutting local authorities in the way that it has but refusing to give them any powers to raise additional resources themselves, has put a straitjacket on local government and given it no flexibility to address those issues.

Clare Adamson (Scottish National Party, Central Scotland)

I am a bit confused. No local authority has to take the council tax freeze. It is voluntary, based on the funding from the Scottish Government.

Ken Macintosh

It is not quite panto season, but Ms Adamson delivered that with a straight face.

As I remember, local authorities were given an offer. I am not sure whether it was called blackmail—

Members: Oh!

It is pantomime season.

Local authorities were given an offer: either take the deal that John Swinney offered—which included the council tax freeze—and get a decent increase, or do not take it and take a cut. [Interruption.]

Tricia Marwick (None, Mid Fife and Glenrothes)

You are in your last 30 seconds.

Ken Macintosh

Thank you. I feel like a local authority officer being faced with that generous offer from Mr Swinney: I have no choice whatever.

We are facing education cuts, council tax cuts and bed cuts. Delayed discharge is a priority that we will support, but the reality is that no money is going to councils to support that. We will try to work with the Scottish Government; I hope that it puts its money where its mouth is.

Chic Brodie (Scottish National Party, South Scotland)

I apologise for any part I may have played in the confusion regarding my place in the debate yesterday.

The debate, like those on the programme’s predecessors, is important as we continue our progress—I hope that it is joint progress—in the direction in which we wish to travel, towards the vision that we have for our country.

I will not rehearse the well-trailed arguments that we had last year and this year, save to repeat a quotation from the introduction of last year’s programme. Beyond peradventure, we know that

“taking decisions in Scotland works for individuals, families and communities.”—[Official Report, 3 September 2013; c 21871.]

No matter how many impairments we face, this is the route that we should travel.

The programme should be, and is, about taking decisions with participation. It is about participation by individuals and communities and it is about empowerment of those communities. It is about ownership and the attendant responsibility. It is about fairness across society and it is about—fundamentally—maximisation of the happiness of the individuals in our communities.

Henry Ford said:

“Nobody can really guarantee the future. The best we can do is size up the chances, calculate the risks involved, estimate our ability to deal with them and then make our plans with confidence.”

The fundamentals that underpin this programme for government—participation, empowerment, ownership and fairness—will make us more confident about handling whatever the future throws at us.

The programme will increase participation in the general economy. Childcare releases greater opportunity for work; the proposal to increase free childcare from 16 hours a week to 30 hours a week for three-year-olds and four-year-olds and disadvantaged two-year-olds will not just create participation—particularly for women—in the workplace, but will establish a long-term benefit to the community through the shared communication and experience that the children who receive that childcare will have.

Jenny Marra (Labour, North East Scotland)

Will Chic Brodie give way?

Chic Brodie (Scottish National Party, South Scotland)

Forgive me, but I will carry on, if I may.

Participation in the workplace goes beyond involvement. Success in achieving a high-wage and high-productivity economy is built on innovation and an improved research and development environment. It requires—in fact, it demands—expansion of the principle of participation in the workplace. The fair work convention, which we spoke of last week, will improve dialogue among employers, Government, public sector bodies, trade unions and employees, in a marriage between capital and labour, and is absolutely critical to securing Scotland’s highly sought place in the global economy.

Participation in the workplace and elsewhere in the Scottish economy requires more than involvement; it requires and it demands ownership. Whether it is part-equity ownership in industry and commerce or quasi-equity ownership in the public sector, employee involvement is absolutely critical.

Community ownership of things such as energy activities is important, but more important is the ownership of land. David Lloyd George once famously said that

“the land belongs to the people”,

and so it should—not because it is some fanciful dream but because of harsh economic facts. I welcome plans to improve and, I hope, accelerate proposals in the Community Empowerment (Scotland) Bill with the intention of acquiring 1 million acres of land for public ownership by 2020. That is a sound proposition.

Ken Macintosh

Does Mr Brodie envisage the extension of compulsory purchase powers?

Chic Brodie (Scottish National Party, South Scotland)

I am sorry. I missed that.

Ken Macintosh

Would Mr Brodie support the extension of compulsory purchase powers?

Chic Brodie (Scottish National Party, South Scotland)

Compulsory purchase powers should be applied if and where necessary, but ultimately the plan that I hope we will follow in the Community Empowerment (Scotland) Bill will embrace the appropriate processes.

Avoidance of, and even a reduction in, land and property speculation can only benefit businesses and housing for communities over the longer term and, resulting from that, our economy.

I have summarily addressed the keystones of participation and ownership, but I also want to mention fairness and happiness. Fairness is not just about determination of the living wage, even although that is very important to us. It is also about firing the ambitions, the entrepreneurship, the innovation and the internationalisation of Scotland’s people, and it is about the employment and income that flows from all that. We need to develop a tax and social structure that establishes, secures and builds on fairness and individual happiness. That should be the basis of a rapid reduction in the monstrous income gap that currently besmirches our society. If we do not address that chasm, it will eventually devour all of us, financially and socially.

Tricia Marwick (None, Mid Fife and Glenrothes)

You have 30 seconds.

Chic Brodie (Scottish National Party, South Scotland)

Lastly, fairness demands, rightly, that we eschew our past and current culture and that we foster not only gender equality, as has been mentioned, but fair treatment and representation of all, irrespective of race, social circumstances and age. Once that is sorted, the merit that will come from that will be the defining feature of our society.

Let us have a programme that takes us a further step towards that participative, owning, fair and meritorious Scotland. It was Chekhov who said—

Tricia Marwick (None, Mid Fife and Glenrothes)

Chekhov is very interesting, but your time is up. [Laughter.]

Fiona McLeod (Scottish National Party, Strathkelvin and Bearsden)

As Malcolm Chisholm should know, as he was here for part of the debate on the issue, the Standards and Public Appointments Committee is considering the matter and is taking great care over it. Until that committee has completed its inquiry, it would be inappropriate to make a decision on the matter.

Malcolm Chisholm (Labour, Edinburgh Northern and Leith)

I am afraid that that misses the point that I was making about procedure. The procedure is not being followed, and that is totally unfair to my colleague Neil Findlay.

I am looking forward to the passage of the Community Empowerment (Scotland) Bill, which is one of the most interesting bills that is before us. However, I noted that, in its submission to the consultation on the bill, the Scottish Council for Voluntary Organisations said:

“The transfer of assets to communities should not be driven by public sector cost saving exercises. The basis for asset transfers should be that communities are able to better utilise a public sector asset for their own purposes.”

A current example of that in my constituency concerns a situation in which the Granton Improvement Society is trying to take over some land from EDI, which is an arm’s-length body of the City of Edinburgh Council. At the moment, the decision is for EDI, whose board has said no to the society. I hope that it changes its mind or that, when it is passed, the bill forces it to change its mind.

James Kelly (Labour, Rutherglen)

Will the member give way?

Christina McKelvie (Scottish National Party, Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse)

Maybe James Kelly is going to give us something different.

James Kelly (Labour, Rutherglen)

I remind Ms McKelvie that the referendum is over. Scotland voted no by a majority of 400,000 and we all need to move on. The delivery of part of the vow today is part of that.

Christina McKelvie (Scottish National Party, Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse)

Yes, Scotland voted for a vow that was empty and hollow. Labour members are holding hands with their Tory pals across the chamber once again to justify the fact that they turned their backs on the Scottish people.

We have limited control over what we can do now for ourselves but, within that control, our First Minister’s legislative programme is clear and committed to the protection of our most vulnerable citizens. Do Labour members remember them? They know that they have been forgotten. It is disappointing to see the very limited offer from Smith. Where are equalities, the minimum wage and tax and revenues? They are all reserved to Westminster.

In spite of the predictable disappointment of the Smith report, we must now up our game and work even harder to meet the demands of the 1.6 million people who voted for independence and those who voted no on the basis of the vow.

Jenny Marra (Labour, North East Scotland)

Will the member take an intervention?

Christina McKelvie (Scottish National Party, Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse)

The truth really hurts, doesn’t it? Rightly, those people will not be content with the limited controls that Smith is allowing us to operate.

Jenny Marra (Labour, North East Scotland)

Will the member take an intervention?

Tricia Marwick (None, Mid Fife and Glenrothes)

Ms Marra, the member is not giving way. Sit down.

Christina McKelvie (Scottish National Party, Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse)

Less than 30 per cent of our taxes will be set in Scotland and only 20 per cent of the welfare budget will be under our control, yet, from the recent polls, we know that 75 per cent of Scots—the ones that Labour members turned their backs on—want the Parliament to have total control over welfare policy. Our powers do not match the promises, and they certainly do not match the aspirations of the Scottish people.

We have a duty and a responsibility not to sit and laugh at the sovereign people of Scotland—all of them, yeses and nos—and the Government’s programme is a clear statement of its commitment to the common values of prosperity, fairness and equality.

Jenny Marra (Labour, North East Scotland)

Will the member take an intervention?

Tricia Marwick (None, Mid Fife and Glenrothes)

The member has 10 more seconds.

Christina McKelvie (Scottish National Party, Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse)

The lack of ambition and imagination—in fact, the lack of anything—from the pro-union parties is not the settled will of the Scottish people and those parties will feel the full force of it when the people realise that they have reneged on the vow.

Elizabeth Smith (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

Let me be positive, Presiding Officer. We particularly welcome two aspects of yesterday’s Scottish Government announcement that related to education and young people: the growing issue of how best to support children with additional support needs and the Government’s intention to focus fully on addressing the attainment gap. Those are critical issues in education, particularly as they bring specific challenges to some of our most disadvantaged children.

The statistics speak for themselves. In a Conservative-led debate a few weeks back, we all agreed that the current state of affairs is simply not good enough, so we very much welcome those two proposals.

I am not entirely persuaded of the need for new attainment officers in every local authority, as the directors of education are the right people to have a handle on the attainment situation.

Mark McDonald (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Donside)

Will the member give way?

Elizabeth Smith (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

I will not give way just now, if the member does not mind.

The Scottish Government needs to explain exactly what the role of those officers will be and how the funding stream will be provided. I would also be interested to know what criteria will be used when measuring outcomes.

The First Minister was wrong yesterday when she offered the view:

“Against every main measurement, Scottish school education is getting better.”—[Official Report, 26 November 2014; c 24.]

That is not factually true. If she cares to read essays by people such as Keir Bloomer and Lindsay Paterson—I know that the Scottish Government has great respect for them both—she will see that they have praised where praise is due but they have also set out where we are not doing so well and where we have fallen back. Just as the previous education secretary was wrong when he argued a year ago that Scotland does not have any failing schools, the First Minister needs to be careful to present an absolutely accurate picture.

Mark McDonald (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Donside)

Will the member give way?

Rob Gibson (Scottish National Party, Caithness, Sutherland and Ross)

To underline the fact that we have a radical Government, radical land reform is rightly at the centre of the social justice debate.

“The Land of Scotland and the Common Good: Report of the Land Reform Review Group” sets the tone for the wide range of land reform policies that are contained in the SNP programme. We can transform our nation’s fortunes through optimum use of our most basic natural resource. Land reform will deliver participation, prosperity and fairness but, above all, we must diversify ownership to create social and environmental sustainability.

Inequalities in Scotland are summed up by the most concentrated pattern of land ownership in Europe. Land reform is based on the public interest and has overwhelming support in the Parliament. First, we need to know who owns Scotland. Next, we need to build local capacity to own the land and use it sustainably. Crucially, the proposed land reform commission could facilitate the best transfer of public or private land to a new set of non-traditional owners.

A good example of the new hope in land ownership received unjustifiably mixed coverage this week. The community buyout of the Isle of Gigha in 2002 has transformed the island, which has a growing population and a variety of new commercial activities to complement farming and tourism. Nevertheless, the BBC hinted this week at financial trouble for the Gigha Heritage Trust, which took over the island for about £4 million in 2002, saying that it was almost £3 million in the red.

The trust replied that it

“has invested in the housing and other developments on the island some of which has been borrowed, some granted from supporting organisations and some raised from the island’s own businesses and efforts ... In addition to improving our housing stock, £1m was paid back to lenders within a year of the original purchase of the island; over £800,000 has been raised through Trust’s renewables companies; and the value of the island has increased to over £7m.”

It has also recently carried out a strategic review with the support of Highlands and Islands Enterprise.

A typically hostile press has focused on a grumpy farmer, alleged divisions among islanders and implied incompetence among community leaders, not on their successes. The islanders are due to take part in a vote of confidence in the chairwoman of the trust this week.

That stands in stark contrast to the conduct of the private estates that sprawl across our landscape. We never know how much in the red they are and the media rarely asks. Also, the families who live on large estates such as those owned by the 432 individuals and trusts that control half of rural Scotland are never asked their opinions about the future of the land.

Lairds avoid taxes through skilful accountants. James Hunter and company suggested to the Scottish Affairs Committee at Westminster that huge landholders offset losses on land through tax accounting via non-landed enterprises.

All those powers are still reserved and not on offer by the Smith commission.

Elizabeth Smith (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

Does Mr Gibson acknowledge that, nonetheless, many of those private landowners are doing a highly successful job when it comes to Scotland’s economy?

Alison McInnes (Liberal Democrat, North East Scotland)

It would be remiss of me not to start with a mention of the recommendations of the Smith commission, which were unveiled just a few hours ago. Let us be clear: it is a bold package of new powers to give the Scottish Parliament the muscle that it needs to build a fairer society, with opportunity for all.

Scottish Liberal Democrats have championed home rule for decades, so today is exciting for us. We are getting £20 billion in tax powers and £3 billion to build a Scottish welfare system. The Smith commission package delivers on the vow and more—it is vow max.

John Mason (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Shettleston)

Will the member give way?

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I remind members that the debate is once again oversubscribed, so if members could take less than six minutes, that would be helpful.

I am afraid that I must ask you to draw to a close.

Dennis Robertson (Scottish National Party, Aberdeenshire West)

Yes.

That is why Sir Ian Wood’s report is exciting, but we need to be inclusive, fair and equal. My plea to the Government is this: look at the people in our communities who have disabilities and give them a chance.

Bob Doris (Scottish National Party, Glasgow)

Will the member give way?

Alex Rowley (Labour, Cowdenbeath)

No, I have too many points to make in the six minutes that I have.

Last year, NHS Fife overspent on acute services by more than £8 million. The money has to be clawed back from somewhere, which is why we are not seeing the transfer of resources from the acute sector to community care and why we face such big problems.

Alex Neil talked about the transfer of powers from London to Edinburgh. We need to go further and consider the transfer of powers not just to Edinburgh but to local authorities. I sincerely believe that if we are to tackle poverty and inequality in Scotland, the Scottish Government must work in partnership with local government and community planning partners through an anti-poverty strategy that runs through every level of government.

A lot of good work is going on out there through the early years collaborative. We need to be prepared to tackle the areas of highest deprivation and greatest inequality through partnership with the third sector and local government. Excellent work is going on in local authorities across Scotland, with the establishment of family centres, early intervention and the targeting of resources. If we are to tackle poverty, we must tackle the causes of poverty.

I am running out of time but I want to mention schools and education.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

You must conclude, please.

Alex Rowley (Labour, Cowdenbeath)

I am finishing, Presiding Officer.

We must be much more ambitious. We must have a new approach, which involves colleges and employers, so that, starting from the early years, we bring about a revolution in education—

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I am sorry. I really need you to close.

Alex Rowley (Labour, Cowdenbeath)

Because the one thing on which I agree with Liz Smith is that we need to do much better than we are currently doing.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Before we move on, I have to give members fair warning that I am afraid that I will have to cut them dead at six minutes if they cannot keep to their time.

Clare Adamson (Scottish National Party, Central Scotland)

There is absolutely no doubt that this programme for government will create more and better-paid jobs. It will create a strong and more sustainable economy; it will build a fairer Scotland; it will tackle inequality; and it will pass significant powers to our people and our communities.

However, I regret a part of the Government’s programme—although I see that even that comment did not get my cabinet secretary’s attention. What I regret is the sentence that refers to

“£104 million in 2015-16 to mitigate the welfare reforms being imposed by Westminster”.

I regret that because it would have been so much better for the decisions about welfare to have been made here in Scotland, where our money could have been used for the benefit of people and not to undo wrongs from elsewhere.

I was hopeful that the Smith commission might have given us some hope in that direction, but I stand with the Scottish Trades Union Congress in being “underwhelmed”.

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

I thank the member for taking an intervention. I genuinely took hope from the Smith commission when it said that it would give this Parliament the power to set its own benefits.

Clare Adamson (Scottish National Party, Central Scotland)

What we need is control of the whole welfare system, which is not coming to Scotland.

By any measure, whether promised by the Labour Party or delivered by Tories and Lib Dems, austerity is a failed policy. A chancellor who has staked the entire reputation of the UK Government on aggressive deficit reduction, regardless of the dreadful economic and social cost, has categorically failed. In some areas, borrowing is actually increasing.

The social costs of austerity Britain show that the policy is not working. I return to a New Scientist article from 2013 that I have quoted in the chamber before, which talks about the true cost of cuts. It states:

“the immediate consequences of austerity may give way to more enduring and insidious effects on health. It is plausible that protracted economic hardship will lead to increases in heart attacks, strokes and depression. Stress hormones are known to trigger or exacerbate these conditions, and it is hard to argue that those worrying about the security of their jobs, homes, families and finances are not experiencing high levels of stress.”

It goes on to say that, in the political arena, the

“effects on health, on the other hand, have gone largely undiscussed.”

There is an assumption that when austerity ends, the belt tightening goes away, house prices start to rise, the economy improves and health problems will not exist. However, people affected by those problems will undergo a genetic transformation. That will happen to some babies in the womb because of their mothers’ stress hormones. It will be a generational problem that we in Scotland will have to face.

What is really worrying about austerity is that it is not just about the wealth of our nation; it is also detrimental to the health of our nation. That is why, although I regret the necessity of mitigating problems from elsewhere, I welcome the measure that the Government’s work programme has designed to tackle poverty and health and social inequalities in our country.

The community empowerment measures are welcome. I look forward to the people and communities fund, which will have an additional £10 million to allocate next year. That will double the resource to deliver power to our communities. I also welcome the bill that will end historical poll tax debt collection.

I welcome the taking forward of our manifesto commitment to establish an independent commission to examine fairer alternatives to the current council tax system. The commission, which will be established in conjunction with local authorities and COSLA, will start its work early next year to deliver an alternative. I listened carefully to Alex Rowley’s concerns about the council tax. I am a bit more sympathetic to hearing those concerns from him than from the rest of the Labour members, who of course stood on a manifesto promise of a council tax freeze.

Drew Smith (Labour, Glasgow)

A fully funded one.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Order, please.

Clare Adamson (Scottish National Party, Central Scotland)

The council tax freeze has been attacked in the chamber by Labour, the Tories and, regrettably, yesterday by the Green Party. [Interruption.]

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Order, please.

Clare Adamson (Scottish National Party, Central Scotland)

Although I welcome the commitment to seek a fairer system, I must defend what has been an essential policy across my Central Scotland region. At the SNP conference, Alex Salmond talked of the £1,200 on average that hard-pressed, hard-working families had saved through the council tax freeze.

I feel that I have to give a bit of a history lesson here: the council tax was a tax that was out of control, having risen by nearly 50 per cent. It accounts for only 10.8 per cent of council revenues, but families were hard pressed by it.

I remind Labour members that, in the Labour heartland of North Lanarkshire, 83 per cent of families live in properties at band D or below, and £1,200 was an essential lifeline for them when they were hard pressed by the financial downturn and the current—[Interruption.] I cannot believe that I am hearing Labour members say that the 52,363 people in North Lanarkshire in band D properties did not deserve the council tax freeze. [Interruption.]

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Order, please.

Clare Adamson (Scottish National Party, Central Scotland)

That money was for really hard-pressed families. The idea that there are hordes of middle-class people running around rubbing their hands in glee at benefiting from that money is ridiculous—[Interruption.]

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Order, please. We want to hear the member closing.

Clare Adamson (Scottish National Party, Central Scotland)

It is poor families—hard-pressed, struggling families—who have benefited from the council tax freeze, and it has been an absolute lifeline to them during this Government’s time in office.

Jenny Marra (Labour, North East Scotland)

The Government’s legislative programme shows that the SNP under Nicola Sturgeon is finally looking at the business of governing our country. To have 12 bills across a range of issues shows much potential but, as always, the proof will be in what the Government intends to do, how much time and energy it will spend on driving change forward, and whether it will meet priorities with resource and budget commitments.

Educational attainment in my home city of Dundee is not nearly as high as it should be. The Government has said that it will put an attainment adviser in each local authority—great, but how will that be backed up? Will there be targets for improvement? How will those targets be met? What resource will the attainment adviser have at their disposal? That is the meat of change.

Just a few weeks ago in Dundee, early years practitioners, who were all trained in the Read Write Inc programme to give literacy support to primary 1 and 2 pupils, were removed from classrooms by the SNP and redeployed into nurseries to meet the Government’s commitment on 600 hours of childcare. That step came at the expense of literacy, and it is that kind of detail that will truly be the proof of whether the First Minister’s programme is transformative.

There is a commitment in the programme to implement the Wood commission’s recommendations. The Government has still not formally responded to the Wood commission—I hope that that might happen in the new year, because we need a lot of detail on how that will work.

I attended a seminar last week at Dundee and Angus College on implementing Wood’s proposals across our region. Colleges, local businesses and schools are all thinking now about how Wood will work. I feel that the Government is falling slightly behind. It needs to respond to the recommendations and show leadership on how it expects Wood’s recommendations to be implemented, or it risks losing momentum on the important issue of youth employment. I hope that the response will be published soon.

Central to Wood is the restoration of vocational education, but that must be matched by action and budget. As Liz Smith said, cutting college places by 140,000 robs young people of opportunities. John Swinney’s flat cash settlement for colleges this year goes no way towards alleviating the situation. I hope that when the Deputy First Minister sums up the debate, he will be able to tell us how the commitment to implement Wood’s proposals will be supported by the budget for colleges. He knows—I have told him in this chamber—that of the more than 11,000 people who applied to Dundee and Angus College this autumn, 6,000 were unable to get a place. What of the Government’s youth guarantee for all those youngsters?

Bob Doris (Scottish National Party, Glasgow)

Will the member take an intervention?

Jenny Marra (Labour, North East Scotland)

No, thank you. I am sorry, but I have a lot to get through.

The fair work convention is a great opportunity. The First Minister has committed herself to it in the programme, but Annabelle Ewing and Nicola Sturgeon should be clear that they will act on its outcomes. Perhaps they should make a vow, because the vows are being delivered.

Too many recommendations lie dusty on the shelf. Very little from the transformative Christie commission, for instance, has been acted on by the Government, despite its warm words at the time.

There were 30 recommendations in the working together review that was put together by the Scottish Government and the Scottish Trades Union Congress, but we still have no commitment from the Scottish Government on how many of those recommendations it will implement. I hope that we can make progress on that soon, and I know that the STUC is watching the situation carefully.

I was very pleased yesterday to see a proposed human trafficking and exploitation bill on the Government’s agenda. It will be the first ever human rights bill to come before the Scottish Parliament, so its introduction will be a poignant moment.

Agencies estimate that there were 55 victims of human trafficking in Scotland last year. However, we, along with the agencies and the people on the front line who work with victims, know that that is just the tip of the iceberg. Trafficking victims are in our communities, urban and rural. They are brought to this country—many on the promise of a better life—and are held and exploited. Many are sexually exploited, and many are held for forced labour at no or little pay in awful living conditions.

If I tell members that my office has had reports of teenage girls being trafficked back and forth across Scotland for sexual exploitation, they will know how important the proposed legislation is. I look forward to the introduction of the bill, which most importantly should contain a legal right for victims to get the protection that they need—a proposal that has the support of more than 50,000 people.

I wish the First Minister well with her programme for government. Her talk of consensus is nice, but she has a majority in the Parliament and a lot of support. She should do something bold to make Scotland a better place—that will be her legacy.

Roderick Campbell (Scottish National Party, North East Fife)

There is much to be welcomed in the Government’s programme. It contains several bills that are not only of wide national interest but will clearly have a genuine, demonstrable impact on individuals, particularly those who most need help.

I was pleased that the Scottish Parliament pioneered the inaugural annual carers parliament in 2012, and I am glad to see that carers’ needs remain a priority for the Government. Although the vast army of unpaid carers undoubtedly save health and social services a substantial amount of money every year, giving carers a say, on top of financial support and respite care, should be a priority, and I am glad that that will be recognised in legislation.

Like many members in the chamber today, I was fortunate to attend the dinner at Prestonfield House hotel last week. The clear highlight for me was not, I have to say, the two victory speeches from the First Minister, but Gordon Aikman’s speech acknowledging the judges’ award, in which he spoke on behalf of motor neurone disease sufferers and others.

I am glad that the First Minister recognised the issue of social care charging in a meaningful way in her speech yesterday, and I am hopeful that the Parliament can work on the issue together.

I welcome the continuing commitment to widening access to higher education and the increase in funding for the impact for access fund. I represent the University of St Andrews, and I recognise its commitment to widening access, but I also recognise that we still have some considerable way to go in that respect.

On participation, I am pleased that there is consensus on extending the franchise to 16 and 17-year-olds, and I hope that the necessary legislation can be introduced as quickly as possible to enable young people to vote in 2016.

Some legislation in the programme for government will have an impact on those who have no say in the political process but who arguably need our help more than anybody else. I speak, of course, of the proposed human trafficking bill, to which Jenny Marra has just referred.

The introduction of the bill will be a significant step in the right direction, and will require and deserve the full support of members on all sides of the chamber. I commend Jenny Marra on her early involvement in the issue. I recall attending the launch of the Equality and Human Rights Commission’s report on human trafficking in Scotland back in late 2011, when the Labour peer Baroness Kennedy stressed the potential for Scotland to be a leader in tackling human trafficking, so I am pleased that we have got to where we are today.

Last month, along with Jenny Marra and Christina McKelvie, I was fortunate to attend a summit that was held in the Parliament and attended by representatives of prosecuting authorities not only from England and Wales and Northern Ireland but from the Republic of Ireland, which was a first. Collaboration across borders will more effectively help to combat the scourge of human trafficking.

One thing that came out strongly from that summit was the value of the European arrest warrant, so I am pleased that the argument in that respect appears to have been won down south, notwithstanding the best efforts of the Tory right. It is important that the proposed legislation will ensure that victims of trafficking are properly supported through what can be a very stressful judicial system. Accordingly, I welcome the Scottish Government’s commitment to enhancing the rights of victims, and I hope that that plays a central part in the bill.

I also welcome the Government’s commitment to tackling another scourge: revenge porn, to which Alex Neil referred.

The year 1964 was a significant one. Just over 50 years ago, The Sun emerged as a newspaper, in its pre-Murdoch phase, from the ashes of the Daily Herald, and a general election took place in October 1964 from which Labour emerged with a small majority, although Teddy Taylor managed to win Glasgow Cathcart for the Tories. A few months before then, the Succession (Scotland) Act 1964 was passed. It remains the definitive piece of legislation on wills and estates in Scotland.

Society in Scotland has changed significantly since then, as the Scottish Law Commission recognised in its report on the 1964 act in 2009. Some of the SLC’s proposals remain significantly controversial. Although I welcome the Government’s commitment to legislate on a number of technical aspects, such as closing a number of jurisdictional gaps and, in particular, clarifying the effect on a will of divorce, dissolution or annulment, or the birth of a child, I hope that before too long we will as a Parliament take forward legislation to bring our succession law up to date and make it fit for purpose in the 21st century.

The proposed fatal accident inquiries bill is also a positive step forward, and I am hopeful that it will implement Lord Cullen’s remaining recommendations and modernise the way in which fatal accident inquiries are held in Scotland. Further, a community justice bill will obviously need careful consideration, building on the need to ensure a balance of outcomes nationally and locally.

An issue that did not feature very heavily in yesterday’s debate but which I believe merits further discussion is the introduction of a Clare’s law. I am certain that many of us will watch the progress of the six-month trial in Ayrshire and Aberdeen with some interest, and I echo Sandra White’s comments that, hopefully, the pilot scheme can lead to something more substantial throughout the rest of the country.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Final minute.

Roderick Campbell (Scottish National Party, North East Fife)

The introduction of proposals to protect victims of domestic violence is also to be welcomed. Like the proposed action on human trafficking, it is evidence of a Government and a Parliament prioritising the protection of those who need it most.

Jenny Marra and others on the Opposition benches have referred to the spirit of consensus. I hope that the Opposition parties are able to live up to that spirit and co-operate with the Scottish Government wherever possible, but I recognise that some of the bills in the programme for government are controversial, not least among the Conservatives in relation to land reform, on which I welcome the debate.

Mary Scanlon (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

I welcome the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister, John Swinney, to their posts, but I welcome more the tone adopted by the First Minister so far. It is a pity that it has not quite reached the back benches, but we live in hope. I hope for the Parliament’s sake that that tone will continue so that we have a respectful and democratic debating chamber and not a place in which Opposition MSPs raise serious issues week after week but are then ridiculed and humiliated on the basis of their party’s position in the latest polls, accused of scaremongering and talking down Scotland, the NHS and public services—that is finished with, “Well, things are much worse in England”—and told how much out of favour their party is in comparison with the SNP. That is not the Scotland that we want.

An example of what I mean is that, week after week, along with many others, I sat here listening to Jackie Baillie raising genuine concerns about the Vale of Leven hospital, yet everything that I have just said applied to those occasions. Far be it from me to speak in support of a Labour member, but we have all been there. Even the local newspaper raised concerns about the Vale of Leven. Now that Lord MacLean has reported, he is suddenly being listened to. I hope that with the new First Minister there will be a bit of respect.

Bob Doris (Scottish National Party, Glasgow)

Will the member take an intervention?

Mary Scanlon (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

No, certainly not.

I hope that we do not have to bring in Lord MacLean or other judges for the democratic views of people to be listened to.

Bob Doris (Scottish National Party, Glasgow)

Will the member take an intervention?

The Deputy Presiding Officer

The member said that she is not giving way.

Bob Doris (Scottish National Party, Glasgow)

Will the member take an intervention?