Scottish Parliament, 4 February 2015

250 contributions from 52 members. The official report.

Social Justice, Communities and Pensioners’ Rights

John Scott (Conservative, Ayr)

Good afternoon. The first item of business today is portfolio questions. In order to get in as many people as possible, I would prefer short and succinct questions and answers.

Building Standards (Climate Change)

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

1. To ask the Scottish Government how building standards can be improved to help mitigate and adapt to climate change. (S4O-03971)

Marco Biagi (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

On adaptation, recent changes to building standards guidance will increase the resilience of new buildings to the possible effects of climate change. In particular, the guidance will address flood risk assessments, flood resilient construction, the control of surface water at source and construction that is resilient to wind-driven rain.

With regard to mitigation, energy standards that are being introduced in October 2015 will reduce carbon dioxide emissions by around 21 per cent for new dwellings and 43 per cent for new non-domestic buildings, when compared with the current standards.

No assessments have been carried out through the building standards system to compare the energy efficiency benefits of different types of construction material. In general terms, the mandatory standards do not favour one form of construction over another. That helps to avoid issues related to European construction products regulations, under which favouring one form could be considered a barrier to trade. I would hope that planners were aware of that.

We recognise that current new-build energy standards and supporting guidance already make a significant contribution to mitigating fuel poverty. Their contribution will be further increased in October 2015 when the next set of standards is announced.

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

Is the minister aware that local, Scottish-sourced timber for buildings embeds more carbon than imported photovoltaic equipment does, and that planners do not seem to give timber-constructed buildings preference?

What assessment has been made in order to compare the costs associated with the insulation properties of mass-built conventional housing with the potential of mass-built wooden homes in our fight against fuel poverty and to reduce heating costs for families across Scotland?

Poverty

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

2. To ask the Scottish Government what support it provides to people facing poverty. (S4O-03972)

Margaret Burgess (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame South)

We are committed to tackling the long-term drivers of poverty through early intervention and prevention. That is why, over this session of Parliament, we plan to invest more than £1.7 billion in affordable housing and why, over a three-year period, we are spending around a quarter of a billion pounds on fuel poverty and energy efficiency programmes. It is also why we have contributed to collective investment of more than £274 million in the early years change fund.

Further to that, the First Minister outlined a range of actions to tackle poverty and inequality in the programme for government. As part of that, we are having to provide more than £104 million of devolved funding in 2015-16 to mitigate the welfare cuts that are being imposed by Westminster.

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

I thank the minister for that answer and welcome all the measures that she outlined in it.

Does the minister agree that local authorities play a very important part in delivering some of those front-line services? Is she as horrified as I am at South Lanarkshire Council’s proposals to cut the befriending services run by Community Volunteers Enabling Youth, funding for advice services, and teacher and nursery teacher numbers? Now the council leader has thrown her toys out of the pram by refusing to set a budget when budget-setting time comes.

Margaret Burgess (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame South)

I agree with Christina McKelvie that local authorities have a responsibility to deliver services, and the local government settlement is a good settlement through which to do that. However, individual local authorities are responsible for managing their own budgets, and when doing so they allocate the resources that are available to them according to local needs and priorities while at the same time recognising their statutory obligations.

We encourage councils to use their resources to address poverty and inequality. We also encourage them to engage actively with communities in the democratic process of deciding their spending priorities.

Ken Macintosh (Eastwood) (Lab)

Does the minister recognise that 20 per cent of families that contain a disabled adult live in relative poverty, whereas the figure for families without a disabled adult is only 14 per cent? Has she made an assessment of the impact on disabled adults of rising care charges in recent years? In particular, will she promise to get rid of Scotland’s unfair care tax?

Margaret Burgess (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame South)

The Scottish Government has announced that we are looking at care charges with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities. The Government has outlined a programme to tackle poverty in disabled and other families, including our child poverty strategy. In response to Christina McKelvie’s question, I spoke about what we are doing in general about poverty. We are also continuing with our social wage, which is helping families throughout Scotland, including families with disabled children.

Equal Pay (Dumfries and Galloway Council)

Alex Fergusson (Conservative, Galloway and West Dumfries)

3. To ask the Scottish Government what engagement it has had with Dumfries and Galloway Council and Unison regarding equal pay claims from 2005. (S4O-03973)

Alex Neil (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

Equal pay for local government staff is the responsibility of councils as employers. The Scottish Government has therefore not had any engagement with Dumfries and Galloway Council and Unison about equal pay claims from 2005.

Alex Fergusson (Conservative, Galloway and West Dumfries)

I am grateful for that confirmation.

Many classroom assistants and special needs assistants in Dumfries and Galloway received notification from their union last week of the settlement of their long-running equal pay claim, which the union has been pursuing against the council. Inevitably in such a rural area, many employees did not hear about their ability to claim. I have already heard from a number of my constituents, whose colleagues received sums ranging from a few hundred pounds to several thousand pounds, whereas they will receive nothing, and they have been told by the council that any further claims will be time barred.

I am sure that the cabinet secretary will agree with me that that is not fair, and that it is most certainly not equal. Are there any steps that the Government can take to intervene in the situation? Will he agree to meet me to discuss it?

Alex Neil (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

I absolutely agree with the member. In my own area, the Labour-controlled North Lanarkshire Council has spent thousands of pounds fighting the workers who are fighting for equal pay. That is outrageous.

I am more than happy to meet the member. Although I have very limited statutory responsibilities in the area, I certainly think that maximum political pressure should be applied to all the recalcitrant local authorities that are not playing fair with their own employees.

Town Centre Regeneration (Dumfriesshire)

Elaine Murray (Labour, Dumfriesshire)

4. To ask the Scottish Government how it will support town centre regeneration in Dumfriesshire in 2015-16. (S4O-03974)

Alex Neil (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

We published the report “Town Centre Action Plan—One Year On” last November. The report, which was debated in the chamber, sets out the range of actions that the Government is taking to support town centre regeneration. That includes expanding fresh start rates relief for small businesses, increasing opportunities for town centre living and agreeing the town centre first principle with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities.

Local authorities are best placed to respond to the local needs of their communities and to work with them to develop the right vision for their town centres. The town centre action plan sets the conditions for that to happen. We call on the wider public, private and community sectors to take action to help address the issues that are faced by our town centres.

Elaine Murray (Labour, Dumfriesshire)

Regeneration initiatives involving community groups, housing associations and the local council are under way in several towns and villages in my constituency, but I note that none has been successful in achieving funding through the regeneration capital grant fund.

Can the minister advise me what support is available from the Government to support regeneration in smaller communities? What opportunities is it providing to enable the sharing of good practice in achieving funding?

Alex Neil (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

The town centre regeneration fund was one of the most successful initiatives ever undertaken by the Parliament, which gave it unanimous support. The fund spent £60 million on projects, including some in Dumfries and Galloway. Ideally, I would like to rekindle such projects but, unfortunately, because of the capital cuts from Westminster, we have been unable to do so.

That said, there are a range of funds that local groups can apply for, depending on the nature of the projects. I will be happy to ask my officials to send the member a list of all funds that may be open to applications.

Margaret McCulloch (Labour, Central Scotland)

The Scottish Government previously indicated that both the new start and fresh start relief schemes could support town centre regeneration. However, in response to a written question, I was told that data on the uptake of those schemes is “not held centrally.” How is the Government monitoring the effectiveness of the new start and fresh start schemes?

Alex Neil (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

As is normal, from time to time we do a full-scale evaluation of all those schemes, in co-operation with the local authorities involved. If we monitored everything centrally and collected all the information, we would need another army of officials. It is much better to do a proper evaluation on a timeous basis, either as part of a quinquennial review process or, if that is too long a period, before a quinquennial review, as an independent evaluation task.

Youth Homelessness

Siobhan McMahon (Labour, Central Scotland)

5. To ask the Scottish Government what progress is being made on preventing youth homelessness. (S4O-03975)

Margaret Burgess (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame South)

Preventing homelessness among young people is a priority for the Scottish Government, and the work is overseen by the homelessness prevention and strategy group. Homelessness applications to local authorities from 16 to 24-year-olds have fallen from around 15,000 a year between 2003-04 and 2010-11 to under 9,000 a year during 2013-14, which is primarily due to the person-centred housing options approach that is being taken forward by local authorities. The Scottish Government also provides funding for a range of third sector projects that are working to prevent homelessness among young people.

Siobhan McMahon (Labour, Central Scotland)

The minister will be aware that family breakdowns, addiction issues and mental health problems are most commonly behind youth homelessness. There is also an employability challenge for young homeless people, as a perceived stigma is attached to homelessness. What housing advice, information or support is being provided to homeless young people, and particularly to those who have been in care, to ensure that their complex needs are being met? What steps is the Scottish Government taking to address the significant obstacles to employment, training and education that young homeless people face?

Margaret Burgess (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame South)

Siobhan McMahon outlines very well some of the difficulties that young homeless people face. The purpose of the housing options approach, which is a person-centred approach, is to take into account the individual and all the circumstances around homelessness in order to prevent someone from becoming homeless. That includes providing support on a range of issues—for example, referring people to addiction services, or providing money advice support or support with a new tenancy.

There is a statutory duty on local authorities to provide support and advice services to certain homeless people, and that certainly includes young people.

On young care leavers, we strengthened the Children and Young People (Scotland) Act 2014 to ensure that they can continue to get services and after-care services up to age 26. Homelessness teams are also working hard in local authority areas to ensure that young people have a smooth transition from care to settled accommodation. It should be a planned process, through the housing options approach, and young people leaving care should not have to make a homelessness application.

Poverty (Highlands and Islands)

Rhoda Grant (Labour, Highlands and Islands)

6. To ask the Scottish Government what it is doing to tackle poverty in the Highlands and Islands. (S4O-03976)

Margaret Burgess (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame South)

In reply to Christina McKelvie, I outlined the national approach that we are taking to tackling poverty. However the challenges of living in rural areas are well understood. Increasing travel and fuel costs and difficulties with access to digital services can often have greater impact in rural areas such as the Highlands and Islands. We are working with others on research to share our understanding of how we can better target support to the rural areas of greatest need. In response to the “2014: Rural Scotland in Focus Report”, we are also refining socioeconomic index tools that will better measure poverty and disadvantage across a rural area. That will help us to better target support to the rural areas of greatest need.

Rhoda Grant (Labour, Highlands and Islands)

The minister will be aware of the incredible 139 per cent increase in claims to the Scottish welfare fund in Highland last year. She will also be aware that the cost of basics is much higher in rural areas, including heating fuel costs, which she mentioned. That means that fuel poverty is much higher in off-gas-grid areas. Will the minister reinstate targeted fuel-poverty funding and ensure that that assistance is available in off-gas-grid areas?

Margaret Burgess (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame South)

The Scottish Government home energy efficiency programmes for Scotland—HEEPS—initiative is based on areas of deprivation and rurality as well as on the number of people in fuel poverty, and rural areas got extra funding last year for that.

We recognise that there is a problem in off-gas-grid areas, and we have made that case to the United Kingdom Government on more than one occasion. Fergus Ewing has written to the UK Government to ask that the price of fuel in rural areas be looked at. I wrote to Ed Davey to ask him to increase the warm homes discount, and to ensure that it is paid out of central funds and consider how it impacts on rural areas. Although the UK Government is not going to increase the warm homes discount, it has, in the new scheme, taken on board the fact that there is a greater problem in rural areas, and the Scottish fuel poverty forum is represented on the working group.

Dave Thompson (Scottish National Party, Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch)

The 2p per unit electricity surcharge in the Highlands and Islands contributes a fair bit to poverty in my constituency. Will the minister respond to my energy survey? It showed that 95 per cent rejected the 2p surcharge, and nearly 99 per cent of the 1,700 replies that I received backed public ownership of electricity production and supply.

Margaret Burgess (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame South)

As I said in my previous answer, the Government is concerned about the level of energy bills throughout the country, and especially in the north of Scotland. Fergus Ewing has raised the issue of high electricity bills and charges with the chief executive of the Office of Gas and Electricity Markets, and he has written to the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change to highlight our concerns about the impact of the current charging arrangements and the apparent slow progress of Ofgem’s further investigation into the matter. We will continue to press for a timely and effective solution.

Third Sector (South Scotland)

Jim Hume (Liberal Democrat, South Scotland)

7. To ask the Scottish Government how it will support and develop the third sector across the South Scotland region. (S4O-03977)

Alex Neil (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

The Scottish Government recognises the critical role that the third sector plays in addressing issues of inequality and the needs of disadvantaged communities, and it is committed to supporting the sector across Scotland, including in the South Scotland region. The 2015-16 Scottish Government budget will enable us to continue to invest significantly in the third sector as a key social partner, and we will maintain funding of £24.5 million towards direct support of the third sector.

Jim Hume (Liberal Democrat, South Scotland)

The cabinet secretary may be aware that funding difficulties that have been encountered by Action on Hearing Loss Scotland have meant that the excellent hear to help initiative is coming to an end across Ayrshire and Arran and the Borders in March. We know that service users potentially face isolation without the support of the initiative. Does he agree that, as we move towards integrating health and social care, health boards need to look at their services to ensure that best use is made of the extra reach and resource that third sector organisations such as Action on Hearing Loss Scotland provide in supporting people with hearing loss in their communities?

Alex Neil (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)

The health boards and the new partnerships need to take care of the priorities, and assisting people with hearing difficulties must be a priority. However, I say gently to Jim Hume that if his colleague Danny Alexander had not sliced the Scottish Government’s resource budget by 10 per cent, we would have far more money to help the third sector not only in South Scotland but throughout the country.

Empty Properties

Mike MacKenzie (Scottish National Party, Highlands and Islands)

8. To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to help bring empty properties back into use as housing. (S4O-03978)

Margaret Burgess (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame South)

We are bringing empty properties back into use through the support of the Shelter-led Scottish empty homes partnership, the £4.5 million empty homes loan fund and other funding programmes. Scotland’s network of empty homes officers have reported that more than 500 empty homes will have been brought back into use in 2014-15, which is up from 278 in 2013-14. We have recently extended the partnership for a further three years, at the end of which we expect that 1,200 homes per annum will be brought back into use.

We are also finalising details on a new £4 million town centre empty homes fund to provide grant and loan funding to increase the supply of housing. It will focus on problem empty homes, which cause blight on their community, and on the conversion of empty commercial space into residential accommodation.

Mike MacKenzie (Scottish National Party, Highlands and Islands)

The minister will know that there are significant rural housing pressures. What action is being taken to bring empty properties back into use in rural areas?

Margaret Burgess (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame South)

Action is being taken across Scotland to bring empty homes back into use. I saw a great example of that at first hand in the rural town of Kirriemuir, where the empty homes loan fund has helped to turn a disused church hall into nine units of affordable housing. There are more empty homes loan fund projects in rural areas, and the town centre housing fund also welcomes bids from rural towns.

Modern Apprenticeships (Disabled Young People)

Alison McInnes (Liberal Democrat, North East Scotland)

1. To ask the Scottish Government what steps it is taking to improve access to modern apprenticeships for disabled young people. (S4O-03981)

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Mid Scotland and Fife)

The commission for developing Scotland’s young workforce recognised the need for more action to support young disabled people and made specific recommendations to achieve that. In response, “Developing the Young Workforce: Scotland’s Youth Employment Strategy” sets out the framework for how we intend to tackle the issue. For example, Skills Development Scotland is working with Barnardo’s, Remploy and training providers to increase the take-up of modern apprenticeships by disabled young people. Skills Development Scotland has also met the BRITE—Beattie resources for inclusiveness in technology and education—initiative and Capability Scotland to discuss ways in which the accessibility of SDS’s My World of Work web service can be improved to ensure that it is accessible to all customers.

Alison McInnes (Liberal Democrat, North East Scotland)

With less than 0.5 per cent of modern apprenticeships secured by disabled people, we have a long way to go. The commission that the minister mentioned highlighted that

“The learner journeys of young disabled people are often disjointed and can take longer to complete.”

The commission concluded that funding levels and funding rules

“should be adjusted to give them the best possible chance of succeeding”.

Will the minister update us on what adjustments have been made to those funding levels and funding rules?

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Mid Scotland and Fife)

The specific recommendations that have been incorporated in the refreshed youth employment strategy are being actively worked on. It might interest the member to know that there are a number of funding streams. About £3 million has been allocated directly in response to the recommendations of the commission on developing Scotland’s young workforce to address wider underrepresentation across our employability programmes. [Annabelle Ewing has corrected this contribution. See end of report.] The Scottish Government has provided £2 million for the targeted employer recruitment incentive, to facilitate transitions to sustainable employment. There is also the community jobs fund, which the Scottish Government delivers in partnership with the Scottish Council for Voluntary Organisations and which creates targeted opportunities for those who face additional barriers to employment, including those with a disability.

Of course, more can always be done. The Scottish Government is determined to do all that we can to improve access for disabled people to apprenticeships and therefore to the world of work.

Bob Doris (Scottish National Party, Glasgow)

The minister outlined the Scottish Government’s plans to tackle underrepresentation in the modern apprenticeship programme. Does she agree that, crucially, disabled people need adequate money to live on in the first place and that therefore continued welfare cuts of successive United Kingdom Governments are holding back disabled people completely?

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Mid Scotland and Fife)

As a former member of the Parliament’s Welfare Reform Committee, it is clear to me that the UK Government’s changes to the welfare system continue to cause hardship for a significant number of people in Scotland, with disabled people suffering disproportionately. That is unacceptable.

The Scottish Government will continue to do what it can to help those who are most affected, but it is clear that, whatever the exact nature of the powers that may come to the Parliament, they will come with a 20 per cent cut across the board that Westminster will impose. It is sad that, for the Westminster parties, spending £100 billion on new nuclear weapons takes precedence over providing a safety net for some of the most vulnerable people in our country.

Work Programme

Mary Fee (Labour, West Scotland)

2. To ask the Scottish Government how it will roll out the work programme once it is devolved. (S4O-03982)

Roseanna Cunningham (Scottish National Party, Perthshire South and Kinross-shire)

Following the publication of the United Kingdom Government’s command paper, we are taking forward discussions with the UK Government, through the joint ministerial group on welfare, on the devolution of the work programme and the other employment services that are currently contracted by the Department for Work and Pensions. Meaningful devolution of those services could provide an opportunity to offer far greater support into work for the unemployed in Scotland, and especially for those who face the greatest barriers to work. Once we have greater clarity from the UK Government on the details of its legislative proposals, we will engage with colleagues from across the chamber and civic society to maximise the opportunity that is afforded in our future services.

Mary Fee (Labour, West Scotland)

As the cabinet secretary knows, many companies are desperately looking for young people to work in the science, technology, engineering and mathematics sectors. How can the work programme be used to boost opportunities in the STEM sectors?

Roseanna Cunningham (Scottish National Party, Perthshire South and Kinross-shire)

I say with the greatest respect to Mary Fee that we do not yet know what will be available to us in the work programme once it has been devolved. The things that she discusses will be for us to consider once we are aware of exactly what will be available. At present, it looks as if what is proposed will relate only to the longer-term unemployed—those who have been unemployed for longer than a year—and there are some restrictions regarding the disabled as well.

Until we are aware of what we will be able to do and what powers we will have, it is difficult to answer specific questions. However, I have given a commitment to come back to the chamber and engage with members on specific aspects once we know the detail.

John Mason (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Shettleston)

What scope does the Scottish Government have to go down a different route from Westminster’s, given that, as I understand it, the work programme contracts have been extended despite the Smith commission recommendations?

Roseanna Cunningham (Scottish National Party, Perthshire South and Kinross-shire)

In some senses, my answer to John Mason is similar to the answer that I gave to Mary Fee. It looks as if there might be scope to redesign services for the long-term unemployed in Scotland, which would better align future delivery with the Government’s policy objectives, but we understand that limitations exist—primarily conditionality and sanctions—that will remain reserved to the UK Government. The UK Government’s command paper limits the devolution of contracted services to those that last longer than a year, which appears to unduly restrict the further devolution of any services.

We continue to discuss the position on the work programme extension in Scotland through the joint ministerial welfare group. We will press for a resolution that meets the needs of the unemployed in Scotland and delivers the spirit and letter of Smith, but it is a little premature for me to be able to go into the detail that members undoubtedly want to know.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Question 3, in the name of Jamie McGrigor, has not been lodged, but a satisfactory explanation has been provided.

Jobs Fund

Mark Griffin (Labour, Central Scotland)

4. To ask the Scottish Government whether it plans to establish a future jobs fund for Scotland. (S4O-03984)

Roseanna Cunningham (Scottish National Party, Perthshire South and Kinross-shire)

The Government has invested in a wide range of employment initiatives that are available from day 1 of unemployment and directly help to move our young people into sustainable employment opportunities. Through the youth employment Scotland fund, we are providing support, in partnership with local authorities, to move 10,000 young people into sustainable employment, and through our community jobs Scotland programme, we have supported more than 5,000 young people into job training placements in the third sector.

As members are aware, we recently published “Developing the Young Workforce”, which presented our refreshed youth employment strategy. Given all that work, there are no current plans to establish another jobs fund in Scotland.

Mark Griffin (Labour, Central Scotland)

Is the cabinet secretary aware of North Lanarkshire Council’s youth investment scheme, through which the council has invested over the past three years £7.5 million to secure 5,000 jobs for young people in my region? Does the Scottish Government have any plans to investigate the success of that scheme and are there any plans to roll it out across Scotland?

Roseanna Cunningham (Scottish National Party, Perthshire South and Kinross-shire)

I would always want to investigate any schemes that are brought to my attention. If we see successful schemes—by the sound of it, this might very well be one—it is important that we consider whether lessons can be learned in other areas. Of course, that is a decision that local authorities can take. As well as the Government looking at the scheme, local authorities can look at its success and consider it for their areas. I will engage with Mark Griffin on the specifics of the scheme if he wishes to discuss it further.

Commission for Developing Scotland’s Young Workforce

Nanette Milne (Conservative, North East Scotland)

5. To ask the Scottish Government what progress it is making on implementing the recommendations of the commission for developing Scotland’s young workforce. (S4O-03985)

Roseanna Cunningham (Scottish National Party, Perthshire South and Kinross-shire)

We are making good progress against the milestones set out in our implementation plan, “Developing the Young Workforce: Scotland’s Youth Employment Strategy”, which was published in December 2014 and was the subject of some of my responses to earlier questions. I am particularly looking forward to the inaugural meeting of the national advisory group tomorrow, which I shall chair jointly with Councillor Douglas Chapman, the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities spokesperson for education, children and young people, at which we will discuss progress.

Nanette Milne (Conservative, North East Scotland)

The commission recommended that

“The Scottish Government, working with the proposed new Apprenticeship Supervisory Board, should ring-fence a proportion of all Modern Apprenticeship starts for STEM frameworks. This proportion should be significant and should be above the current level. These STEM apprenticeships should be actively promoted to employers and young people.”

Given that the oil and gas sector faces a significant level of retirement among its workforce, what discussions have taken place with the industry to plan for future workforce needs? How many science, technology, engineering and mathematics apprenticeships does the Scottish Government envisage that there will be?

Roseanna Cunningham (Scottish National Party, Perthshire South and Kinross-shire)

The delivery of apprenticeships in Scotland requires a partnership between employers, colleges and schools. STEM apprenticeships, engineering apprenticeships and information technology apprenticeships are all things to which we afford a great deal of priority. As Nanette Milne is aware, a great many conversations are taking place about the situation in north-east Scotland. It is important that all employers, including those in areas such as the north-east, engage actively in the work that we are doing, because apprenticeships require employers to take on the apprentices and to continue offering jobs.

I hope that the specifics of the regional difficulties that can arise, such as have arisen in the north-east, will also be addressed through our invest in young people groups. At some point in the near future, I hope to discuss a regional group for north-east Scotland, where the issues that Nanette Milne raises would be a prime area of discussion.

Engineering Apprenticeships

Linda Fabiani (Scottish National Party, East Kilbride)

6. To ask the Scottish Government how it encourages engineering apprenticeships. (S4O-03986)

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Mid Scotland and Fife)

Through Skills Development Scotland, we have exceeded our ambitious target to deliver more than 25,000 modern apprenticeship starts each year, with 77,402 new opportunities delivered over the past three years. The number of apprentices starting engineering frameworks has gradually increased in recent years. There were almost 500 more engineering apprentice starts in 2013-14 than in 2010-11.

In August 2014, Skills Development Scotland published the skills investment plan for the engineering and advanced manufacturing sector. Developed in partnership with industry, the skills investment plan provides the necessary blueprint for addressing skills supply issues in the sector, including a specific action to better meet employer demand through the promotion of modern apprenticeships in engineering.

Linda Fabiani (Scottish National Party, East Kilbride)

I thank the minister for that answer, which I will have to read closely, because there was so much in there. Is she aware of the excellent work of the East Kilbride and District Group Training Association, and that the first two apprentices in sign making ever trained in Scotland, entirely through the good work of the training association and their respective employers, recently received their certificates? Will she, and perhaps the cabinet secretary, too, visit the East Kilbride and District Group Training Association during apprenticeship week to see the innovative work that is carried out there?

Annabelle Ewing (Scottish National Party, Mid Scotland and Fife)

It is kind of Linda Fabiani to extend the offer of a visit. I am always happy to visit examples of local good practice. Whether I do so during apprenticeship week would depend on my diary commitments, but I shall ask my office to get in touch with her. I noted the member’s motion on the subject, and I offer my congratulations to the young apprentices who have completed their sign making apprenticeship and wish them the very best for their future careers.

I also acknowledge the efforts of private training providers such as East Kilbride and District Group Training Association in supporting the Government’s ambitions for the modern apprenticeship programme and, indeed, the ambitions of our young people. The target to which I referred, which we have exceeded, is not where we are going to sit. We have set a further, more ambitious target of 30,000 modern apprenticeship starts by 2020.

Glasgow College Region Curriculum and Estates Plan

Patricia Ferguson (Labour, Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn)

7. To ask the Scottish Government what steps it is taking to ensure that the Glasgow curriculum and estates plan’s proposed transfer of activity to the city centre does not have a detrimental effect on the training needs of people from deprived communities in Maryhill and Springburn. (S4O-03987)

Roseanna Cunningham (Scottish National Party, Perthshire South and Kinross-shire)

The Glasgow Colleges’ Regional Board is responsible for planning college provision that meets the needs of learners and employers, and it has a legal duty to exercise its functions with a view to improving the economic and social wellbeing of the city. We understand that the Glasgow curriculum plan proposes a 2.5 per cent increase in activity in community locations, including access level courses, supporting more students who live in the most deprived areas, those with low or no qualifications and those who are furthest from the labour market.

Patricia Ferguson (Labour, Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn)

I thank the cabinet secretary for that answer and for the information about access courses, which is welcome. However, a great deal of uncertainty has been caused by a lack of clarity in the plan, as it suggests that some specialties or skills and training opportunities will not be available in the local communities where they are most needed. I would be grateful if the cabinet secretary was able to reassure me that that unwanted scenario will not, in fact, transpire.

Roseanna Cunningham (Scottish National Party, Perthshire South and Kinross-shire)

The colleges in Glasgow have carried out an extensive review of the region’s curriculum offer. A wide range of stakeholders has already been consulted on the plan, and the regional board has endorsed the direction of travel. It is an ambitious plan that recognises the collective resources that are available in Glasgow. The aim is for the transfer of activity not to take place until August 2015.

There is a huge opportunity for college education in Glasgow to be the jewel in the crown and it is important that the many positives for learners and employers are not overshadowed by difficult questions, such as the one that Patricia Ferguson rightly raises. Overall, colleges have always delivered strongly for deprived communities in Scotland, so I hope that I am able to reassure the member that that will continue to be the case in Glasgow.

Students from deprived areas benefit from free full-time education and record bursary support and the results for colleges speak for themselves. Two thirds of those from the 20 per cent most deprived areas studying for recognised qualifications at college successfully completed their courses, which is up on 2012-13. The latest figures show that 26.6 per cent of students come from the 20 per cent most deprived areas.

That is the backdrop against which the plan that Patricia Ferguson is talking about will be set. I hope that fairness will always be a major consideration, regardless of what aspect of the roll-out we are talking about.

Information Technology (Careers)

Clare Adamson (Scottish National Party, Central Scotland)

8. To ask the Scottish Government what it is doing to promote the information technology industry as a career choice. (S4O-03988)

Roseanna Cunningham (Scottish National Party, Perthshire South and Kinross-shire)

An underpinning theme of the information and communication technology and digital technologies skills investment plan, which was published in March 2014, is to raise the profile of careers in the IT sector.

To help to achieve that, Skills Development Scotland is working in partnership with the industry on a multichannel marketing campaign that is aimed at highlighting the opportunities that are available through a career in IT. The campaign will begin in spring 2015 and will complement the wider careers information, advice and guidance that is already available through the my world of work website.

I hope that that answer is also of interest to Nanette Milne.

Clare Adamson (Scottish National Party, Central Scotland)

The cabinet secretary might be aware of an event that was hosted by the Oracle academy last week, entitled future job framework, at which the Oracle academy and New College Lanarkshire presented on their joint working. Does she agree that that is an excellent example of the IT industry engaging with local colleges and, in so doing, expanding knowledge and the variety of opportunities in Scotland?

Roseanna Cunningham (Scottish National Party, Perthshire South and Kinross-shire)

Yes, I agree with Clare Adamson. That type of collaborative working is a step in the right direction to ensure that people who are entering the labour market are equipped with the knowledge and skills that such a fast-paced and dynamic sector requires.

The Scottish Further and Higher Education Funding Council currently supports seven early-adopter college regions to explore and develop senior-phase vocational pathways. Focusing on science, technology, engineering and mathematics and regions of importance, that activity will bridge the gap between school, college, university and employment for 15 to 18-year-olds.

The pilot projects from Skills Development Scotland will begin to improve representation and will identify best practice that can be shared and replicated. It is of interest that one of those pilots is a partnership project in West Lothian to encourage women into STEM subjects.

Employment Conditions (Scottish Government Agency and Contract Staff)

John Pentland (Labour, Motherwell and Wishaw)

9. To ask the Scottish Government how it ensures that the agency and contract staff it employs enjoy fair terms and conditions. (S4O-03989)

Roseanna Cunningham (Scottish National Party, Perthshire South and Kinross-shire)

Agency staff are not directly employed by the Scottish Government. The agency staff suppliers are responsible for pay and other terms and conditions of service. However, the Scottish Government works with them throughout the contract period to ensure that the best terms of supply are available.

John Pentland (Labour, Motherwell and Wishaw)

How many people who are employed by the Scottish Government’s contractors and subcontractors are employed using so-called umbrella company contracts?

Roseanna Cunningham (Scottish National Party, Perthshire South and Kinross-shire)

It would be difficult to establish the exact figure, because the nature of those contracts means that people are set outside the normal employment patterns.

I am aware that there is a members’ business debate this evening on precisely that subject. It has been a matter of some concern. I have a meeting in respect of the umbrella contract position this afternoon, and another meeting, which has been rescheduled, with the Labour front bench spokesperson on the matter. We wish to discourage all unfair or unacceptable uses of contracts such as umbrella contracts where possible.

Budget (Scotland) (No 4) Bill: Stage 3

John Scott (Conservative, Ayr)

The next item of business is a debate on motion S4M-12226, in the name of John Swinney, on the Budget (Scotland) (No 4) Bill.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The Budget (Scotland) (No 4) Bill confirms our spending plans to deliver a more prosperous and fairer Scotland. Although the latest economic indicators continue to be encouraging, we recognise that a strong economy is successful only if it is underpinned by a society that is fair and equitable.

To ensure that all our citizens have the opportunity to achieve their potential, today’s budget will invest £16.6 million to implement the findings of the Wood commission on developing Scotland’s young workforce; spend £526 million in our colleges and over £1 billion in our universities; expand our modern apprenticeship programme towards a target of 30,000 starts each year by 2020; secure capital investment of around £4.5 billion in our schools, hospitals, homes and transport networks; allocate £81 million to mitigate the most harmful impacts of the United Kingdom Government’s welfare reforms; and deliver more than £200 million to support health and social care integration. Those are just some of the measures that we are taking forward to create a fair and prosperous Scotland.

We have also taken progressive decisions on land and buildings transaction tax, which mean that 50 per cent of residential transactions at the lower end of the property market will be taken out of tax altogether, providing a welcome boost to first-time buyers and the property market into the bargain. Over 90 per cent of taxpayers will pay no tax at all or be better off compared with the UK’s current tax rates.

Our landfill rates balance concerns about waste tourism with the appropriate financial incentives that are needed to deliver our zero waste ambitions.

We will maintain the most competitive business environment in the UK. Some 95 per cent of non-residential tax payers are better or no worse off under LBTT. Not only will we continue to support the small business bonus scheme, which is worth an estimated £172 million to businesses the length and breadth of Scotland in 2015-16, but we will also invest £11 million to match the poundage for business rates south of the border.

I have taken a prudent approach to forecasting revenues from the devolved taxes, and my forecasts have been endorsed as reasonable by the independent fiscal commission. With tax devolution, however, inevitably comes an increase in the exposure to risk, and I have decided to hold £15 million in 2015-16 to provide insurance against such risk.

Our economic strategy is working, but we must continue to act swiftly to address Scotland’s economic challenges. We have established the energy jobs task force to help the economy of the north-east, and we have committed to the apprenticeship guarantee for oil and gas. We give the categorical assurance that we will deploy the leadership, the energy and the resources of our enterprise and skills network to tackle economic problems wherever they emerge in Scotland.

We recognise, however, that in some circumstances the substantive powers to tackle those issues lie outwith our control, and I once again urge the United Kingdom Government to reduce the supplementary charge, invest in exploration credits and back our North Sea oil and gas industry.

Our tax measures will support the housing market, and they are complemented by our investment in housing supply. We are more than two thirds of the way towards delivering our five-year target of 30,000 additional affordable homes by March 2016, including 20,000 homes for social rent.

We recognise that, within that approach, more has to be done to tackle fuel poverty and improve energy efficiency within the housing stock. More than half a million tonnes of carbon and more than £200 million in household fuel bills will be saved over the lifetime of the measures that were installed through our programmes in 2013-14.

Improving energy efficiency not only helps to address both social and environmental inequality but can also improve our housing stock and support our economy by creating and sustaining employment. That is why we are already investing £94 million in 2014-15, which is a higher level of funding than ever before. However, too many people are continuing to struggle with the costs of heating their homes this winter. Having listened to points raised by parliamentary committees, I can announce that we will increase investment in domestic energy efficiency by £20 million to provide a total budget of £114 million in 2015-16. That extra £20 million of investment gives clear and powerful impetus to our efforts to tackle fuel poverty and will have a positive impact on tackling climate change emissions from housing.

Patrick Harvie (Green, Glasgow)

As we have consistently argued for many years now, any increase in this area is welcome, but has the extra £20 million been calculated on the basis of what is necessary to meet fuel poverty targets or to contribute to meeting the climate change targets? The issue of the lack of an assessment of the scale of investment that is needed has been raised not only by us but by committees.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

We are considering the full extent of the scale of investment that would be required to tackle this issue. Indeed, the matter has been raised with us by the Parliament’s Economy, Energy and Tourism Committee. I am not for a moment suggesting that the £20 million that has been allocated today will meet all the requirements in this area, but it represents a solid commitment by this Government to tackling fuel poverty and energy efficiency and to making a constructive contribution to realising our climate change targets, to which the Government attaches great significance. I should also point out that our carbon reduction efforts will be complemented by an additional £4 million of capital funding to support cycling infrastructure in 2015-16. Ministers will announce the details of that investment shortly.

To deliver a fairer society, we must focus on the importance of creating a fair work culture. This Government has targeted its pay policy at those on the lowest incomes through measures such as the Scottish living wage. More than 100 companies across Scotland are now accredited as living wage employers to the benefit of 100,000 individuals, and we aim to expand that number to 150 companies by the end of the year. We will also promote better engagement of employees in business through the establishment this year of the fair work convention.

We are pleased with the progress that is being made, which has been supported by the additional £200,000 that we allocated to the Poverty Alliance in November to encourage more employers to deliver the living wage in Scotland. However, we are determined to do all that we can and, today, I can announce that I will allocate an additional £200,000 in 2015-16 to support further progress in our fair work objectives.

Neil Findlay (Labour, Lothian)

I wonder whether in his speech Mr Swinney could advise us as to why the Scottish Government has delayed releasing the guidance on the living wage with regard to procurement.

Jim Hume (Liberal Democrat, South Scotland)

Will Mr Swinney explain how cutting the budget allocation for general medical services—the funding for general practitioners—is protecting our public services?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

For Mr Hume’s information, I can tell him that an extra £40 million has been put into that budget line.

Yesterday, I had the pleasure of meeting families for whom our additional investment of more than £300 million in expanded early years provision is delivering tangible benefits.

Malcolm Chisholm (Labour, Edinburgh Northern and Leith)

Will the cabinet secretary give way?

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Order.

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

Mr Swinney also talked about applying sanctions collectively, which would be administratively difficult to do—never mind unfair.

Most bizarre of all is the SNP’s starting point. The SNP’s baseline is 2014, when the teacher to pupil ratio got worse and the number of teachers fell even further. Mr Swinney is accepting and building on failure.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

In her comments, will Jackie Baillie do something helpful and encourage Labour councils to protect teacher numbers?

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

Our position is to maintain teacher numbers. The SNP promised to do just that, but it has failed miserably. We have almost 4,500 fewer teachers in Scotland today than we had when the SNP took charge. According to the Scottish Parliament information centre, spending on education, which showed a steady increase from 1999, has levelled out since 2008-09. Indeed, the Government’s figures, which were supplied to the Education and Culture Committee, show an increase of a fraction of a per cent, which is in effect a real-terms reduction in schools spending.

Education is a key tool in the battle against inequality. It is perhaps one of the most significant opportunities to overcome inequality that is provided over a person’s lifetime, yet the SNP has presided over a cut in teacher numbers, a cut in college places and a decreasing number of students from the poorest backgrounds accessing university. The SNP’s approach to education actually entrenches inequality.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Will Jackie Baillie give way?

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

I will give way in a second.

I turn to the resilience fund. There can be doubt that what we are witnessing in the North Sea with the drop in oil prices has the potential to have a significant negative impact on the economy of Scotland. The scale of the job losses could exceed the scale of the losses at Ravenscraig. Only this week, we heard that Shell is drawing up plans to close the Brent field and that BP is making billions of pounds’ worth of spending cuts due to the drop in oil prices. A total of 133,000 jobs in the north-east of Scotland are supported by the oil and gas industry, including 46,000 in the constituency of Gordon, where Alex Salmond is standing in the general election. There may be the risk of an economic tsunami in the north-east, but all of Scotland will be badly affected.

The potential loss of jobs is bad enough, but the loss to public revenue is of the order of £6 billion. I will make that sum real: it is the entire schools budget for Scotland. However, the SNP’s response has been so slow that it has been positively glacial. Both the UK and Scottish Governments need to do much more to help one of Scotland’s key industries.

Our call for a Scottish office of budget responsibility is about building trust and transparency into the forecasting of the nation’s finances. As the Smith agreement transfers even more powers over taxation and welfare to the Scottish Parliament, we need to be sure that our scrutiny inspires confidence. We need a body that is wholly independent of Government and is able to oversee our public finances and economic forecasting in a hitherto unseen way.

I am genuinely disappointed that John Swinney does not appear to have listened to any of our proposals; there can be no denying the need that lies behind them. Our approach is measured, proportionate and costed—the money is there. It appears, however, that rather than work together, the SNP will put party interests before the interests of the people of Scotland. If the proposal comes from Scottish Labour—[Interruption.]

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Order. I call Gavin Brown. Before he speaks, I encourage members to follow the good example of the Deputy First Minister and to make interventions when standing up and not from a sedentary position.

Gavin Brown (Conservative, Lothian)

I will begin with what the Deputy First Minister ended with: education. Although I was not privy to the detail of the discussions between the Scottish Government and COSLA, I cannot help but think that the education of our children will be best served if all levels of government work together to achieve outcomes instead of using a budget speech as a platform for creating a turf war with COSLA. I do not think that that serves any great purpose. Perhaps there are faults on both sides—who knows?—but using a budget speech to kick COSLA when it is not in a position to stand up for itself does not demonstrate—[Interruption.]

COSLA is not speaking in this debate, unless I am mistaken.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Will Mr Brown take an intervention?

Gavin Brown (Conservative, Lothian)

I will, in a moment.

We should remember that we heard talk earlier of clawbacks, penalties and ring fencing, but just a few months ago the First Minister said in her programme for government that her Government would be a great decentralising one. What, in that case, is decentralising about today’s budget announcements?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Mr Brown has complained about my coming to Parliament and explaining the outcome of my discussions with COSLA, which, I volunteered, had not reached agreement. Mr Brown would be at the front of the queue to complain if I had made the announcement anywhere other than in a budget speech to Parliament. In fact, I properly informed Parliament about the unsuccessful conclusion of my negotiations with COSLA.

John Mason (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Shettleston)

Will Gavin Brown give way?

Gavin Brown (Conservative, Lothian)

I have only 20 seconds or so left, so I am afraid that I am not able to do so.

We are concerned about the impact that that will have on the economy—particularly on the housing market, but also on business rates. Things such as the retail levy and the empty property tax have come into force, and there has been a failure to implement a retail bonus.

Slowly but surely, the advantage that we had is being eroded away. For that reason, we will not support the budget at decision time.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

We are extraordinarily tight for time. Speeches of up to six minutes would be welcomed.

Mark McDonald (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Donside)

It is clear that Mr Swinney is once again looking to protect the front line, despite the austerity measures that are being imposed on Scotland. The additional money for the health service is welcome.

Let us be clear: the national health service is a vital service that all of us will rely on at some stage in our lives. It is therefore important to protect investment in it. The Scottish Government’s spending on the health service is going above £12 billion, and the revenue budget is being protected. In my area of north-east Scotland, there is welcome news for NHS Grampian as a result of that.

The way to test public opinion about how the national health service is operating is to look at patient satisfaction with it. We are seeing high levels of patient satisfaction with the health service as a whole and with accident and emergency services. In particular, the patient satisfaction levels for accident and emergency services are above those of England and Wales. We see a strong record for the health service that is being bolstered by the investment that Mr Swinney is putting in.

The Labour Party stands up and calls for a £100 million front-line fund, set against a £12 billion-plus budget. The money that is being invested in the health service is front-line funding. It is there to fund the front-line services on which people rely.

I do not seek to diminish the individual cases that many of us deal with as politicians. We receive cases of people in our constituencies for whom, for whatever reason, the health service has not performed to the standard that we would expect it to. That will not change, irrespective of the funding levels that are thrown at the health service, because it is a human organisation, and in human organisations errors will occur. The key thing is to ensure that, for the overwhelming majority of people who go through our health service, the support is there to ensure that they get the best treatment that we can give them. That is what the Government seeks to do.

Willie Rennie (Liberal Democrat, Mid Scotland and Fife)

Will the member take an intervention?

Mark McDonald (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Donside)

I might do so a bit later, but I want to make progress.

What the cabinet secretary has done on teacher numbers is entirely appropriate. It is clear that COSLA cannot now speak on behalf of all local government, because it has been unable to come to the table on behalf of local government and strike a deal with the cabinet secretary. Therefore, the only option that is left to him is to put the money on the table, and each local authority can declare its intentions.

In my area, I urge Aberdeen City Council to commit to maintaining teacher numbers in order to unlock the finances that are available on the basis of the cabinet secretary’s announcement. I hope that other local authorities will follow suit as well, because it is vital to maintain teacher numbers so that our young people get the best education possible.

Alex Rowley (Labour, Cowdenbeath)

I agree that we should be doing everything within our power, and local authorities should do likewise, to maintain teacher numbers and improve education. Does the member accept that councils the length and breadth of the country, regardless of their political make-up, are having to make major budget cuts in front-line services, and education services are not exempt from that?

Mark McDonald (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Donside)

I am always interested by the Labour Party narrative. On the one hand, it is all for local decision making and the flexibility for councils to make their own decisions. Across the piece in local government, the Government has removed large amounts of ring-fencing that existed prior to 2007. However, in certain key areas, where we have agreed key national priorities, it is entirely appropriate that councils have to fulfil their part of the bargain.

I was on the Local Government and Regeneration Committee with Mr Rowley when we had Labour-led local authorities saying that they wanted flexibility over teacher numbers. That was flexibility not to put teacher numbers up but to cut them. That is unacceptable. The message is clear that local authorities absolutely have to commit to maintaining teacher numbers. If, within the budgets that are allocated to them, they wish to go further, that is fine—I am all for that. At the very least, though, they must take the money that Mr Swinney has put forward and commit to maintaining teacher numbers.

As for my area in north-east Scotland, I mentioned the situation at NHS Grampian. Thanks to the Government’s investment decisions, NHS Grampian is now receiving its population share of funding, which the Labour Party never delivered when it was in power. That will be welcomed by staff working on the front line and by patients in the north-east who rely on the health service.

Aberdeen City Council has received the highest cash increase of any local authority, yet when it sets its budget, it will do so from a position in which it holds over a quarter of its revenue in reserve—some £116 million is held in cash reserves—although Audit Scotland recommends that councils hold 3 per cent of their revenue in reserve. I call on the council not only to use the additional money from the Scottish Government but to use it to protect front-line services and invest in preventative activity.

In my last 15 seconds, I say that I wish that the Labour Party would clarify—Jenny Marra is next, so she can clarify it—whether the resilience fund that it proposes is a genuine resilience fund or is, as Jenny Marra said on the BBC just before the budget debate started, an oil resilience fund. What is the resilience fund? Is it a general fund or an oil resilience fund, as she labelled it? Let us have the answer.

Jenny Marra (Labour, North East Scotland)

I am always happy to provide Mark McDonald with the answers. If he had listened to the debates throughout the budget process, he would know that we propose a resilience fund for industries that are under strain. If he had paid attention to the news in his home region of the north-east, he would know that the oil industry is under severe strain, as Jackie Baillie pointed out today. Therefore, the resilience fund would initially be used to support the oil industry.

Unless Mark McDonald has more questions for me, I will turn to the health service. Yesterday, the Government published its accident and emergency figures. It does not do that very often—far less than in England—and we are still not sure why that is. The Government in England publishes its A and E statistics weekly so that patients and families up and down the country can see how their national health service is performing. The Cabinet Secretary for Health, Wellbeing and Sport says that her agencies have advised her to publish figures far less often than that. Yesterday, we found out why.

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

I do not know whether Jenny Marra is aware that, for something to be part of an official statistics release, it must be ensured that it is not subject to political interference. Is she suggesting that we should politically interfere with the way in which official statistics are released? She should clarify that point very carefully.

Jenny Marra (Labour, North East Scotland)

I am suggesting that it is the job of Shona Robison, as health secretary, in the interests of the Scottish people and the Scottish NHS, to make decisions about how information is published, on what basis and how often, in the interests of transparency. If she is telling me that she cannot overrule civil servants in agencies, that is a very weak—

Members: Oh!

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Order.

Jenny Marra (Labour, North East Scotland)

That is quite a weak position to be in.

We also found out why the SNP decided last week to downgrade its A and E waiting time target from 98 per cent and keep it at 95 per cent. We thought that 98 per cent might be difficult when the announcement was made last week. Now we discover that 95 per cent, the current target, is itself impossible—and slipping fast.

The figures are worse than those for the same period last year. Things are not improving and they are not even staying the same—they are getting worse. We all know that there are a few key reasons for that. They have been well discussed in the chamber, in private meetings and at meetings with health stakeholders. That is why it was even more surprising that Friday’s press release from the SNP sought to see off Scottish Labour’s proposal for a front-line fund to ease pressure in our hospitals by announcing yet another review, with the cabinet secretary buying herself another six months before she takes action.

The front-line fund simply reflects SNP policy. It is the right thing to do—Labour and Government members know it. We have the Government’s policy papers on seven-day hospital services, evening diagnostics, weekend surgery and round-the-clock discharge. For some reason, however, the cabinet secretary wants to wait another six months before she lets that happen.

We have again seen that reflected today, in John Swinney’s budget. The money that has been announced is simply money that has already been announced over the past few weeks. The £29 million that he said was additional is not actually additional—it is health consequentials that were already sitting there.

The task force was put on the back burner. Could it be that it was put on the back burner during the referendum campaign?

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

Oh, God.

Jenny Marra (Labour, North East Scotland)

The cabinet secretary laughs, but the evidence bears this out. The task force was announced in a press release in October 2013. The Government paper said that it would meet every two months, but I have not received an answer to my parliamentary questions on whether it has met at all. Not much seems to have happened.

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

I am astounded. The task force has met every two months. The PQ is being answered today. The member really ought to move away from the conspiracy theories and let the people who are on the task force get on with the good work that they are doing.

Jenny Marra (Labour, North East Scotland)

I am glad that the cabinet secretary was able to clarify that for me today. She was not able to answer that same question when I put it to her last week.

Yesterday, Jim Murphy and I witnessed at first hand the difference that seven-day services would make. At Monklands hospital, the A and E consultant talked us through a chart that showed a significant peak in—

Mark McDonald (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Donside)

Will the member give way?

Jenny Marra (Labour, North East Scotland)

I would like to make progress, if that is okay.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

You should do so in your remaining minute.

Jenny Marra (Labour, North East Scotland)

The consultant showed us the difficulty that the unit faces when discharges are not made at the weekend and beds are at a premium when they are most needed, on a busy Monday.

There was no new money in John Swinney’s budget today for front-line services, and I ask the Parliament to consider—

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

Will the member give way?

Jenny Marra (Labour, North East Scotland)

I am happy to take an intervention from the health secretary if she would like to go again.

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

I wonder whether Jenny Marra might have a bit of self-awareness, in that she is talking about an A and E unit that she and her party wanted to close. Will she congratulate us on keeping it open so that she and Jim Murphy could have the pleasure of visiting the excellent facilities in Monklands hospital?

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Jenny Marra is in her last 10 seconds.

Jenny Marra (Labour, North East Scotland)

There is no new money in today’s budget for front-line services in the NHS. The health secretary knows as well as I do how desperate the situation is and how the Government needs to invest.

Linda Fabiani (Scottish National Party, East Kilbride)

I was stunned yesterday to see photographs of Jim Murphy standing outside Monklands A and E, and I am even more stunned today to learn that Jenny Marra thought that it was worth raising that in the chamber. I remember fighting an election in Lanarkshire a couple of years ago when an awful lot of the campaign was based on the Labour Party’s proposals to close A and E units.

That sums up what the Labour Party, under its new leadership and regime, is doing right now, which is saying, “Let’s find an issue—any issue—and have a go,” with absolutely no self-awareness of the role that it played in creating the problem in the first place. I suggest that some kind of collective memory should kick in before that goes any further.

The people of Scotland are not fooled. They are rolling about their living rooms right now, listening to the machinations of the Labour Party, not least among which is the suggestion that it will ensure that we get more powers for Scotland. My goodness—if the Labour Party had been true to that over the past few years, perhaps we would not be having the wrangles over the Smith commission agreement and the rolling back from it that we have seen from the Labour Party, the Conservatives and the Lib Dems, in their wee partnership. Instead, Labour would have been sticking up for Scotland.

It was the same when I listened to Jackie Baillie’s analysis of John Swinney’s opening speech. There was nothing in her speech that said, “Do you know what? We agree with you that equality and fairness should be at the heart of everything that we do; that we should be boosting our small business to improve our economy and our communities; and that education is really important for our children.”

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

I do not often disagree with Linda Fabiani in the chamber but, on that point, she clearly was not listening. I said that education is a key tool in tackling inequality and talked about the importance of education. Will she therefore revise her comments?

Linda Fabiani (Scottish National Party, East Kilbride)

No, I will not, because Jackie Baillie belongs to the same party that is paying off teachers in Glasgow—

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

That is not true.

Linda Fabiani (Scottish National Party, East Kilbride)

I am sorry; I will take back “paying off”. Jackie Baillie is in the same party as those who are reducing teacher numbers and raising class sizes in Glasgow and those who are running South Lanarkshire Council and have not got their budget through because the SNP group says that the council should not be increasing class sizes and reducing teacher numbers. Perhaps Labour Party members should get together and talk about their vision for this country instead of being all over the place in the way that the party is.

Labour should start by welcoming the fact that an A and E unit was kept open in Lanarkshire and that the bedblocking and patient-flow situation is therefore not nearly as bad as it might have been if the Labour Party had had its way. It should welcome the extra funding that has been put in to tackle delayed discharge; the joined-up approach that we are starting to take to social care and hospitalisation for our elderly; and the fact that the Government believes that education is so important for children that it is taking steps to ensure that no child in Scotland should be unfairly disadvantaged because of the political machinations of whatever group happens to be running an area.

Labour should welcome the fact that we are trying to address fuel poverty and the need for greater domestic energy efficiency, which have been issues in this country for many years. Above all, I ask Labour to welcome the fact that some of the reduced budget that comes to Scotland is being spent on mitigating the effect of welfare policies that are hammering people across the country.

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

Will the member take an intervention?

Linda Fabiani (Scottish National Party, East Kilbride)

No, thank you—we have heard enough from the Labour Party. It cannot even welcome free higher education or free prescriptions that provide free medical attention at the point of need. The Labour Party has gone so far from its roots that hatred of the SNP is much more important to it, and its members scrabble about and talk about resilience funds, offices for budget responsibility and a fund for the NHS—I cannot remember what Labour calls it.

Members: The front-line fund.

Labour talks about a front-line fund for the NHS, but it cannot welcome or work together on some of the things that are happening and are welcomed by civic society, to which the Labour Party used to listen.

Perhaps I was wrong in what I said earlier: Labour members should not get together and talk to each other, as there seems to have been far too much of that already. They should start to talk to the people of Scotland and find out why their support has gone down the tubes, and join those of us who really want to make a better future.

Willie Rennie (Liberal Democrat, Mid Scotland and Fife)

The context for the budget is an economy in recovery. There are now 168,000 more jobs in Scotland than there were when the UK Government came to power; employment is up by more than ever before; gross domestic product is up above the level that it had reached before the recession; and unemployment is down. We should remind ourselves that that is all based on a plan that SNP and Labour members said would not work.

Although the economy is in recovery, the NHS is in crisis. I do not like to use the word “crisis” frequently, but that is exactly how we must describe the NHS as we see it today. The remarks from John Swinney and Mark McDonald showed a creeping complacency about what the NHS is facing just now.

Mark McDonald (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Donside)

Will the member give way?

Willie Rennie (Liberal Democrat, Mid Scotland and Fife)

Not just now.

Those who meet NHS workers regularly understand the enormous pressures that they are under just now, partly as a result of demographic changes but partly because the SNP took its eye off the ball during the referendum. The SNP was distracted by its obsession with independence, and we are seeing the price that has been paid by our hospitals.

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

Will the member give way?

Willie Rennie (Liberal Democrat, Mid Scotland and Fife)

Not just now. I do not like to use the word “crisis”, but there is no doubt—we have seen the figures on A and E waiting times this week, which have plunged below the level of waiting times in England—that the NHS is in crisis.

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

Will the member give way on that point?

Willie Rennie (Liberal Democrat, Mid Scotland and Fife)

Not just now.

It is also clear that the colleges are under extraordinary pressure. Part-time courses have been cut and full-time courses are not quite full time any more, at a time when industry needs an increasing number of skilled workers. Targets on class sizes and cancer waiting times have been missed. On teacher number targets, I have to say that for the Government to attack local government for its own failure to meet its targets is below acceptable.

Mark McDonald (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Donside)

Will the member give way?

Willie Rennie (Liberal Democrat, Mid Scotland and Fife)

Not just now.

All that shows that, at a time when we needed the Government to focus on the big challenges that public services face, it took its eye off the ball to focus on independence.

Mark McDonald (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Donside)

Will the member give way?

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

Will the member give way?

Willie Rennie (Liberal Democrat, Mid Scotland and Fife)

Not just now.

We have made a realistic and costed set of proposals. The Deputy First Minister knows that Liberal Democrats have taken a constructive and costed approach to the budget process in every single year. We do not oppose budgets on the basis of being opposed to everything that the SNP says. We look at budgets on their merits. That is the approach that we have taken in the past. We supported the Government when it increased funds for colleges and house building, when it ensured that thousands of two-year-olds got 15 hours of nursery education each week and when it provided free school meals for children in primary 1 to 3. On every single occasion when the SNP proposals met our ambitions, we supported them, so, when we oppose, we do not do so just for the sake of it; we oppose for realistic reasons.

Again this year, our proposals were realistic and costed. We wanted the NHS to get the investment that it needed, including for mental health. We wanted all the Barnett consequentials to be transferred to the NHS, unlike in previous years. We identified that the additional funds that the Scottish Government has received through the pharmaceutical price regulation scheme should be spent on mental health.

Our second recommendation was that the Government should match the level of support in England for childcare for two-year-olds. In England, 40 per cent of two-year-olds get 15 hours a week, but the figure in Scotland is only 27 per cent. We are two thirds of the way there, but there is still a bit of a way to go. We know that that is the best educational investment that we can make.

Our third recommendation was on student loan repayment thresholds. In England, graduates start to repay their loans once they earn £21,000 a year but, in Scotland, the figure is down to £16,950. We believe that graduates cannot afford to pay that, and that we should therefore give them extra support. Mr Swinney, to his credit, has said that he is investigating the matter. We welcome future discussions on that.

Colleges have been at the forefront of the SNP’s cuts in recent years. However, with this year’s budget, college funding is still not back up to the level that it was at in 2011-12, when it was £544 million. There is a big shortfall, and students are paying the price as a result.

Those were the reasonable tests that we set the SNP Government for the budget this year. I am sorry to say that the Government has not met those tests and that therefore we will be unable to support the SNP’s budget. The SNP took its eye off the ball in the referendum.

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

Why not spend more on Trident?

Elaine Smith (Labour, Coatbridge and Chryston)

Order, please.

Willie Rennie (Liberal Democrat, Mid Scotland and Fife)

We have now seen the price that people are paying as a result. We believe that that is unacceptable, which is why we will not support the budget.

Bruce Crawford (Scottish National Party, Stirling)

I seek clarity, as I may have missed something, and I hope that Malcolm Chisholm will forgive me if I did. I am pretty sure that, at stage 1, Jackie Baillie also suggested that there should be more money for local government, and I have not heard Labour restating that today. Is that Labour’s position?

Malcolm Chisholm (Labour, Edinburgh Northern and Leith)

We did not say that today and it is not the correct interpretation of what Jackie Baillie said at stage 1 either.

We must respond to the crisis. The barometer of the problems, of course, is what is happening in accident and emergency, but it is closely related to the big increase in the number of bed days occupied by delayed discharge patients. I am never unkind to the Cabinet Secretary for Health, Wellbeing and Sport, but The Herald ran a cartoon of a delayed discharge patient in bed, and the hospital manager was telling the patient not to worry because

“the Health Secretary has a long-term plan.”

Reviews are good, but—

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

Will the member give way?

Malcolm Chisholm (Labour, Edinburgh Northern and Leith)

I am in my final minute. Can I take an intervention, Presiding Officer?

The Deputy Presiding Officer

We are rather tight for time. It would need to be a quick one.

Malcolm Chisholm (Labour, Edinburgh Northern and Leith)

I am sorry. I never like being unkind to Shona Robison but I have to be because the Presiding Officer tells me to be.

Reviews are good, but there is an urgency about what is required now.

I would have liked to know more about the performance fund, which is why I was trying to intervene on the finance secretary in his speech. Perhaps he can explain how it will be distributed in his closing speech.

In principle, the delayed discharge money that Shona Robison announced should be distributed according to the formula, but I argue that, as a one-off, it should be distributed on the basis of the boards that currently have the biggest problem with delayed discharge.

Kenneth Gibson (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame North)

I welcome this opportunity to support the 2015-16 budget bill.

Scotland has made clear its desire for more powers to be devolved to the Scottish Parliament since the Smith commission reported and the UK command paper was published the week before last. Indeed, a YouGov poll on Monday found that support for Scottish independence was at a record high of 53 per cent. It seems that the Scottish people share the SNP view that the Smith commission proposals are a watered-down version of the panicked promises that were made just before the referendum.

Even Gordon Brown seems to be riding on the SNP’s coattails by claiming that the Smith commission’s report was too weak. It is interesting that the comments that he made last November, in which he expressed grave concerns about devolving control of income tax to the Scottish Parliament, sang a different tune. His previously expressed concerns about devolving tax control to Holyrood have now taken a back seat to Labour’s urgent need for naked political survival three months tomorrow.

There are no signs that, after five years in power, the UK Government has any intention of loosening the noose of austerity from the neck of the UK economy. Members should recall that, only last month, Labour voted with its Tory pals for a further £30 billion in cuts. Such an approach has been condemned by several leading economists. Olivier Blanchard, chief economist of the International Monetary Fund and a Massachusetts Institute of Technology professor, claimed that the Conservative party leadership is “playing with fire” in continuing to pursue austerity policies. In addition, a report published by Paul De Grauwe—a London School of Economics professor and an adviser to the European Commission—said that a unilateral application of austerity policies is not only ineffective in resuscitating the economy but more often than not leads to greater state problems such as civil unrest.

If last week’s success of Syriza in Greece has taught us anything, it is that the people will ultimately have their say on the budgetary actions of the state. In a statement on future UK spending, the Office for Budget Responsibility announced that

“Between 2009-10 and 2019-20, spending on public services, administration and grants by central government is projected to fall from 21.2 per cent to 12.6 per cent of GDP and from £5,650 to £3,880 per head in 2014-15 prices.”

That cut of almost one third of public spending will impact mainly low-income families, with welfare recipients, low-paid workers and pensioners bearing most of the brunt.

Labour has fundamentally contradicted itself time and again by claiming to have Scottish interests at heart while voting for policies that are detrimental to Scotland and the Scottish people, particularly those who are most vulnerable to public spending cuts.

It is imperative that the SNP Government uses the economic levers that it has to tackle inequality. That is why I am delighted that, in the 2015-16 budget bill, we will deliver welfare reform mitigation of £81 million. The cabinet secretary’s land and buildings transaction tax and Scottish landfill tax will encourage first-time home buyers, which will stimulate house building and work synergistically with the additional £125 million investment in affordable housing.

My view on more expensive houses differs from Gavin Brown’s. The tax level for them will serve to dampen house price inflation and, ultimately, save money even for the people who will pay that additional taxation. The new rates satisfy the principle of revenue neutrality that Mr Swinney laid out in October—again, I disagree with Gavin Brown on that. Creating a system in which the first £145,000 of every residential purchase is tax free means that, in more than 90 per cent of transactions, people will pay the same in taxes on their new homes as, or less than, they would pay under the current UK arrangements, as the cabinet secretary pointed out.

The Scottish Government is committed to increasing employment and promoting a burgeoning Scottish economy. I was delighted that, at a time when Scotland has unemployment rates below those for the UK as a whole, the budget will enhance employment by providing £16.6 million to support youth employment through the commission on Scotland’s young workforce.

As we have heard, the budget invests in the public sector, boosting the NHS by an additional £383 million. In contrast with George Osborne’s austerity measures, which are crippling local government in England, the Scottish Government has delivered a fair settlement for our local authorities, enabling the delivery of shared priorities such as education, free school meals and childcare. We note no calls from the Opposition parties for additional spending in those areas.

The bill demonstrates the Government’s commitment to tackling inequality, with more than £100 million being committed to delivery of the living wage and implementation of a two-year public sector pay policy that increases the minimum uplift for those who earn less than £21,000 a year.

A variety of investments that are outlined in the budget demonstrate the Government’s efforts to support a more prosperous Scotland and measures to improve opportunities at all stages of life. For example, £160 million will be invested in early learning and childcare and, as John Mason mentioned, we will see an extra £20 million for delivering energy efficiency. In addition, £615 million will be invested to provide the most competitive business taxes in the UK, and almost £1 billion will be invested in capital projects through the non-profit-distributing model.

The bill is a testament to the SNP’s abilities to act prudently within the constraints set by the UK Government in terms of the devolution of powers and Tory austerity measures, sadly supported by Labour. In short, the budget augments the Scottish economy, boosts employment, tackles inequality and invests in public services.

We can compare that with Labour’s irresponsible shopping list. We heard about the £100 million. To my mind, that figure seems to be plucked from thin air. It has no detail behind it that I have been able to see, and there is no detail of where that money is to come from. If we look at other recent Labour statements, we see that, on 29 December, Kezia Dugdale suggested 100,000 new homes be built in Scotland, and whatever happened to the legendary Glasgow airport rail link?

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Will you draw to a close, please?

Kenneth Gibson (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame North)

On 12 November, Jackie Baillie said:

“Fifty million pounds is a small amount of money”

to

“cancel Scotland’s care tax”.—[Official Report, 12 November 2014; c 28.]

Whatever happened to that? Perhaps Ms Baillie could tell us.

Labour is all over the place on the budget, so I am pleased that we have a responsible and prudent Scottish Government that can deliver a sensible budget for the people of Scotland.

Iain Gray (Labour, East Lothian)

Our focus in this budget debate and indeed in the whole budget process this year has been health and the NHS, and there are good reasons for that. It is the single biggest component of the Scottish Government’s budget, and it is also the area in the most urgent need of attention, given the stories of crisis that we regularly read or hear about, particularly in relation to accident and emergency services and bed blocking. However, it is also a natural thing for us to do, because it was Labour that created the national health service. It is the thing of which we are most proud and we will always defend it first and foremost, so that has been our focus.

However, if Labour’s proudest achievement is universal healthcare, Scotland’s proudest achievement in public services is universal education. It is almost 500 years since the predecessor to this Parliament enacted the famous school-in-every-parish legislation, so it is also right that we judge not just the budget that we are discussing but the Scottish Government’s record in almost eight budgets, now, on how it has supported education.

As with health, the story is that much was promised but little has been delivered. In that regard, the budget for 2015-16 is one more chapter. Listening to Mr Swinney’s opening speech, we would imagine that the Scottish Government had delivered on its promises on schools and education, that it had sustained teacher numbers and that basically everything was right. Nothing could be further from the truth.

In 2007, the SNP’s promise was that it would maintain teacher numbers as they were at that time. In 2011, its promise was that it would look first to maintain the recent improvement before continuing with progressive reductions in class sizes and improved pupil teacher ratios. The reality is that teacher numbers reduced in 2008, in 2009 and in 2010. They went down in 2011, in 2012 and again in 2013, and as Mr Swinney mentioned, they dropped last year, in 2014. We now have almost 4,500 fewer teachers than when the SNP came into power.

The story on pupil teacher ratios is the same. There was an improvement from 2007 to 2008, but in every single year after that pupil teacher ratios have worsened year on year. As for the core promise of class sizes of 18 in primaries 1 to 3, when the SNP came into power, 15.3 per cent of P1 to P3 pupils were in classes of 18 or fewer, and the figure is now 12.9 per cent. On every one of those promises, the situation has worsened.

We are beginning to see some of the effects, particularly of the loss of teachers. The introduction of new exams has been delayed and, as we saw last week, appeals are being squeezed out to save money for the Scottish Qualifications Agency’s central budget. This week, Moray Council suggested that it might have to close schools because it does not have enough teachers; the EIS told the Education and Culture Committee that our schools are running on the good will of teachers and that the situation cannot go on; and headteachers have referred to the potential for total disaster. Clearly, education requires some attention in this budget.

Bruce Crawford (Scottish National Party, Stirling)

I am sure that Iain Gray is genuine in the points that he is making, but can he tell us what additional spend Labour would make in local government to support the issues that he has raised?

Iain Gray (Labour, East Lothian)

I am talking about a situation that has taken eight years to develop. If the member is suggesting that a single amendment to the budget could reverse that, I have to tell him that I do not think that that is possible.

However, I will comment on the action that the cabinet secretary has taken today. When he introduced the budget, he told us that he was going to bring forward educational outcome agreements with COSLA that were going to be agreed in consultation with local authorities, parents and teachers. I say to Linda Fabiani that I would welcome such agreements, but it begs the question of why, after eight years, the Government is only now beginning to think about the outcomes that it would like from our education system. It also begs the question of what happened to those promises to sustain teacher numbers, and the EIS, in particular, was quick to rumble this move as a cover for abandoning them.

To be fair, the cabinet secretary responded to that by turning to his usual scapegoat: local government. First, he made local government an offer that it could not accept of an amount of money that was nowhere near what would have been required to deliver what he was asking for. Today, he is trying to make it an offer that it cannot refuse. This is the man who used to boast in budget debates about the concordats that he had signed with local councils; now he is reduced to bragging about the ultimatum that he has issued to them.

The truth is this. Faced with the growing evidence from teachers, headteachers and councils—[Interruption.]

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Order, please.

Iain Gray (Labour, East Lothian)

—that local authorities do not have enough resources to sustain teacher numbers, Mr Swinney’s answer is to claw resources back. It is hard to see how that will do anything except accelerate the drop in teacher numbers for which he is already responsible.

What will Mr Swinney do with this money that he claws back? Perhaps he can add it to his own education department underspend, which at the last count stood at £165 million while our schools lack the resources they need.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Please draw to a close.

Iain Gray (Labour, East Lothian)

The truth is that, as always, this budget fails our education system, and it will be parents, teachers and pupils who pay the price.

Sandra White (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Kelvin)

Once again, I thank the cabinet secretary for his speech and his announcement of extra revenue, particularly for the health service, for energy efficiency measures and for tackling fuel poverty. Indeed, the last of those is very important, given that the lack of heating in households can lead to ill health and other inequalities.

I welcome the cabinet secretary’s announcement that teacher numbers will be protected and increased. Having listened very carefully to Iain Gray, I have to tell him that, in the Glasgow Kelvin constituency that I represent, the problems with teacher numbers and class sizes are being caused by Glasgow City Council. I would appreciate it if Mr Gray spoke or wrote to some of the parents of pupils at Hillhead primary school about the situation that they find themselves in as a result of Glasgow City Council closing schools and not having a big enough school for the pupils in question. It is an absolute disgrace. He cannot blame this Government for what is happening, particularly in my constituency—the blame lies fully with Glasgow City Council.

Iain Gray (Labour, East Lothian)

The member cannot seriously be saying that, when the Scottish Government makes promises to parents and then starves local government of the resources that it requires to deliver them, it is somehow not the Government’s fault.

Sandra White (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Kelvin)

The Government did not starve Glasgow City Council of any moneys; Glasgow City Council took it upon itself to build a school without taking cognisance of the evidence from parents that the school could not provide for pupil numbers. Now it has an absolute mess in which children cannot even get into their local school. That mess is being called in thanks to the Greens and the SNP group. The blame lies firmly at the door of Glasgow City Council. We will look into whatever is happening there. The member must recognise that it is not just about the Government.

I have listened to Opposition members on the health service. Willie Rennie, who is not here at the moment, referred to a “crisis”, and that word has been bandied about. It is as if they want to give everyone bad news consistently in order to frighten them. We have fantastic people working in the health service. How do Opposition members think that those people feel every time the Labour Party and the Lib Dems in particular say that the NHS is in crisis? They talk as if the NHS is falling apart. It is not falling apart.

Alex Rowley (Labour, Cowdenbeath)

I was interested that Willie Rennie used the word “crisis”. This morning, I had a phone call from a lady who had arrived at a hospital in Fife at a quarter to 8. She was due to go for a gall bladder operation. She was prepped and saw the consultant and the anaesthetist. She was sitting in her bedclothes, ready and waiting. At 11 o’clock, she was told to go home because her operation had been cancelled. Is that acceptable?

Sandra White (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Kelvin)

That is not acceptable. I am sure that if Alex Rowley wrote to the Cabinet Secretary for Health, Wellbeing and Sport, she would look into that case. I do not cover the Fife area; I cover the Glasgow area. [Interruption.]

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Order, please.

Sandra White (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Kelvin)

I answered Alex Rowley, Mr Gray, so let me carry on, please.

I want to let members know the good news about the health service. I talk to people in my constituency, including patients, doctors, consultants and nurses. They are not all saying that the NHS is in crisis. Let us look at the figures. NHS consultant numbers are at a record level, with a 36.8 per cent increase and more than 1,300 whole-time equivalents since 2006; overall, NHS staffing is up 7.6 per cent; the number of qualified nurses and midwives is at a record high; the number of NHS medical and—this is important, because they are sometimes overlooked—dental consultants is at a record high; and the number of GPs is up 5.7 per cent. The number of senior managers is down 29.3 per cent; people have always called for that, because we want staff at the coalface, not just at the managerial level.

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

Does Sandra White accept that vacancies are also up and that posts are vacant for much longer? More people are being treated in the NHS, but demand is outstripping the number of staff available.

Sandra White (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Kelvin)

It is good that more people are being treated. Jackie Baillie mentioned that vacancies are up. We have more staff, so more people are applying for jobs. That can only be a good thing.

The NHS is not deteriorating and it is not in crisis, although that is the impression that the Opposition parties are giving to people. That is a dangerous thing to do—and it is disingenuous—not just for the people out there, but for the staff who work in the NHS. We should think very carefully about what we are saying. Another member asked—I think that it was Gavin Brown—why we do not work together. We have been trying to do that. We have listened to people not just in the various parties, but throughout the country.

We are trying to agree a budget. John Swinney has proposed a very sensible budget. Opposition members are constantly talking about the NHS being in crisis and saying that it is falling apart, even though, as I have just read out, staff numbers are increasing. That is rather disingenuous; it frightens people. I am not saying that that is what the Opposition parties are trying to do—I would never say that—but people need to sit down and think very carefully about what they are saying.

I will support the budget at decision time. I hope that the Opposition parties will think very carefully about not supporting the budget.

Patrick Harvie (Green, Glasgow)

This budget, like several recent budgets, takes place in a context in which we see continual pressures on public services, particularly those at local government level, and continuous public sector pay cuts in real terms, even if there have been moves to ameliorate the situation at the lowest end of the wage scale.

We are also discussing the budget in the context of continual challenges in meeting the targets that we have all signed up to on issues from climate change to fuel poverty. In particular, there is a recognition that energy and transport are areas in which not enough progress is being made from the point of view of social justice and environmental priorities.

At the same time, there is a crisis that could be turned into an opportunity in the energy sector, yet the Scottish Government continues to make appeals to the UK Government for tax breaks for more fossil-fuel exploration. That will only dig us deeper into the hole that we are in and leave our economy ever more exposed to the vulnerability of the carbon bubble when we could be looking to a new energy future that is based much more on renewables and public and community ownership.

In that context, we have continued to ask the Scottish Government what budget will be associated with the new body wave energy Scotland. Last week, the Deputy First Minister said that money from the energy budget would be allocated to that, but we still do not know what the figure will be. I hope that greater clarity can be provided on that.

In addition to those issues of context, we put several issues on to the agenda for discussion with the Scottish Government. Energy efficiency is by no means a new topic for the Greens in budget negotiations, but it is one on which we still believe that not enough progress has been made. The cabinet secretary mentioned the provision of an additional £20 million on top of the £94 million that was announced for energy efficiency at stage 1. Steps in that direction are, of course, welcome, but expenditure on energy efficiency remains short of what the non-governmental organisations that are specialists in the sector have been calling for as the bare minimum annual spend.

It would be wrong for the discussions that take place each year to end up merely as horse trading. We should be taking a coherent approach to the issue and conducting an assessment of what is needed to reach the targets that all political parties have signed up to. The Economy, Energy and Tourism Committee recommended that—it called for a full cost analysis to be carried out of what it will take to reach the statutory target on fuel poverty. That has not happened, so it is difficult to know how much closer the extra £20 million will take us to that crucial target and the social justice and environmental goals on which we agreed in setting it.

The cabinet secretary mentioned that an additional £4 million would be provided for cycling. As not just a regular cyclist but someone who wants our transport system to be transformed and to move towards a more sustainable model, I believe that that must be a step in the right direction. The Deputy First Minister said that more information would be provided about how that money will be deployed. It will have some positive effects but, although I am sure that some good will be done with that £4 million, the investment that the Government is providing does not yet represent the concerted shift in transport policy that I believe is needed. I am talking about a transport system that allows money to circulate in local economies and strengthens the resilience of those economies, but which does so within environmental limits and saves people money.

It is also not yet clear what additional measures will be taken to address the air pollution that arises from transport, which is particularly acute in certain parts of Scotland. We argued for such measures to be taken in the same context of sustainable transport.

We also argued that there would be a need—albeit one that was on a smaller scale in budgetary terms—for local authorities to be able to build their skills and capacity in relation to unconventional gas techniques such as fracking if such applications were to come through. In the light of the moratorium that has been announced, which is very welcome, it is clear that that is not such an urgent priority, although we reserve the right to return to the issue if the moratorium is ever lifted and local authorities find themselves burdened with the threat of unconventional gas applications. If they are to be able to deal with such a situation adequately, we will need to skill up their staff.

I would argue—and I have put this to the cabinet secretary—that the same kind of opportunity exists, through small investment at local authority level, to add skills in relation to renewable energy. There is the opportunity for every local authority to build up a local energy company that can not only contribute to our country’s energy needs cleanly but generate revenues for the authority.

We are missing a trick in that regard. The barrier is partly to do with skills. Local authorities simply do not have people who know what needs to be done to get under way on the issue. The cabinet secretary might have decided that today is a day to take what I am sure that he regards as a robust approach with local government, rather than an empowering approach. I encourage him to consider the opportunity that I described.

I had hoped to be able to give three cheers on the three main themes that we raised. I might have been willing to settle for two cheers. It seems that there might be scope for one and a half cheers, so I might reserve my position when we come to vote at the end of the day.

Bob Doris (Scottish National Party, Glasgow)

It is often said that politics is about spending priorities. If that is true, it is undeniable that the Scottish Government has prioritised health spending again for the financial year 2015-16.

It is worth putting on record the significant cash uplift that the NHS has had under the SNP Government. In the five years up to and including the year of the budget for which we seek parliamentary approval, the NHS will have had a real-terms increase of 4.6 per cent. That should be contrasted with the 10 per cent by which the UK Government has slashed the Scottish resource budget in real terms. That shows the Scottish Government’s priorities.

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

Will the member take an intervention on that point?

Bob Doris (Scottish National Party, Glasgow)

I ask Ms Baillie to let me make progress. I might take an intervention later.

All Barnett consequentials from health spending have been given to our NHS in each and every year, as promised. That commitment now extends over the next parliamentary session, should the SNP Government be re-elected in 2016. NHS funds sit at more than £12 billion in 2015-16 alone. The Scottish Government’s commitment to our NHS is evident for all to see.

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

Does the member agree that between 2007 and 2010, when a UK Labour Government gave the NHS inflation-busting increases, the SNP did not pass those increases on to the health service?

Bob Doris (Scottish National Party, Glasgow)

I ask Ms Baillie to sit tight and not to worry, because I will contrast the condition of the NHS in 2006-07, when Labour was last in power, with the situation today. I assure Ms Baillie that the NHS’s condition today is far superior to its condition when Labour was in power.

The Scottish Government’s commitment to giving our NHS financial backing is self-evident. I hope that that can be accepted across the party political divide and that we can have a new, constructive conversation about how best to spend record levels of financial support for the NHS. That is the chat that we should be having.

The budget will provide additional funding of £173 million from the Scottish Government to support health and social care integration. If members support the budget today, they will help to achieve that.

The budget will also help to sustain the huge increase in staffing that we have had under this Scottish Government, compared with the situation when Ms Baillie’s party was in power. As we heard, there are 1,300 more consultants in the NHS and more than 1,700 more full-time-equivalent nurse posts than there were under the last Labour Government.

However, it is about not just nurses and doctors but pharmacists, allied health professionals and a range of social care staff. We require the right skills, in the right place and at the right time if we are to deliver the health and social care service that we want to see. There is no room for complacency, but it is important to point out the progress that has been made.

There is a commitment to maintain the progress on delayed discharge that has been made since 2007. I am delighted by the £15 million partnership deal, which is supported by the budget and will involve the NHS, the Scottish Government and—I have to say on this occasion—COSLA taking action.

I met Robert Calderwood, the chief executive of NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, recently. He told me that money has already been put to good use in Glasgow. There are an additional 120 step-down care beds, to better support older people who are clinically fit to leave hospital but do not yet have social care packages in place. That is the reality of what additional funding from this Government can do on the ground in Glasgow.

We all know about recent challenges in relation to delayed discharge, but we can get some perspective on that by comparing it with the position in 2007: delayed discharge has reduced by two thirds since then and the average delay is down by 50 per cent. We have short-term challenges but long-term progress under this Government, with financial support sustained over a period of time despite huge cuts from the UK Government.

The budget will also ensure that the first tranche of an additional £100 million over three years will be invested specifically to enhance social care services. That money is aimed at ensuring that medically fit patients can be more speedily discharged from hospital, where appropriate, with appropriate care packages put in place; it will also help deliver preventative actions that I hope will help older people to avoid having to go to A and E.

We should therefore put the budget and the commitment on the national health service into some kind of context. Yes, we will always hear claims for more money. For example, we heard on 13 January from Neil Findlay about only West Lothian Council—not other councils—which I believe he said had a shortfall of £108 million; we heard from Jackie Baillie that we could get rid of care charges, which I believe would be at a price of £50 million; Johann Lamont wanted to cap childcare costs, but SPICe says that that could cost up to £1 billion; and we heard a call from Iain Gray for more money for teachers that was totally uncosted: there was no explanation of where even one penny of it would come from.

It takes this budget by the SNP Government to balance the books, despite huge austerity cuts from the UK Government, and to prioritise the NHS. We have done that here this afternoon, but all I hear from other parties are empty promises. They will scurry about Scotland promising everyone money for everything but do nothing to stop the £30 billion of UK austerity cuts coming from London, to which the Labour Party has signed up in order to win right-wing votes in south-east England.

I know who I stand with on this budget, and it is not Scottish Labour and Mr Murphy; it is John Swinney, our Deputy First Minister. I commend his budget to members.

Alex Rowley (Labour, Cowdenbeath)

I certainly will not be able to support this budget today, because I think that it fails on a range of fronts that need to be tackled.

Sandra White said earlier that the Government was committed to the NHS and that others were talking the NHS down. My personal experience and my family’s experience is that the NHS has always been there for us, and we could never repay what the NHS has done for our family. There are families in communities up and down Scotland who would say the same. However, that does not mean that we do not ask questions about the NHS. It was the greatest creation of last century, and in this century, regardless of what party we are in, we have a duty as politicians to stand up and fight to make the case for the NHS.

I told Sandra White about the case of the lady with the cancelled operation, who suggested to me that there were 10 cancellations this morning. I will take that matter up with the health secretary when I meet her tomorrow. I will also call for an inquiry into NHS Fife’s practices, because another patient has died. We saw the accident and emergency waiting times that came out yesterday for NHS Fife. Again, they were not acceptable.

The point is that Mr Swinney comes along here today and tells us that patient satisfaction is up, cleaning results are up and that accident and emergency figures are up. The situation is a bit like the emperor’s clothing. We would expect the health service to be improving, but where it is not—as in the case of NHS Fife, where it is bouncing from crisis to crisis—we need to be able as elected politicians to speak up about that.

Mark McDonald (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Donside)

Will the member take an intervention?

Alex Rowley (Labour, Cowdenbeath)

Sorry, but not just now.

I want to touch on a number of other points. Mr Swinney talks about a fairer society and says that the economic strategy is working, but one of the major failures of this budget is that it fails to ensure that everyone can enjoy the benefits in Scotland of a stronger economy. At present, 160,000 people are unemployed in Scotland and are certainly not reaping the benefits. There are many more who are not registered as unemployed but who are out of work and have no skills, so they cannot access the jobs that are there. In my constituency, we see pods being built in Rosyth and elsewhere to house workers coming from abroad, and employers tell me that they cannot get skilled people locally. At the same time, we have seen a 37 per cent cut, amounting to about £60 million, in college budgets since 2007. For me, that does not equate to some kind of fairness.

Bob Doris (Scottish National Party, Glasgow)

Like others, I do not doubt the sincerity of Labour members’ speeches, but a budget has to be agreed this afternoon. How much money is the Opposition Labour Party pledging for Scotland’s colleges? Is that costed? How many places will there be? Can Labour deliver that, or is that just a soundbite to garner favour with whoever is being talked to at any given time?

Alex Rowley (Labour, Cowdenbeath)

We put forward the figure of £100 million for the national health service, because that is a key priority. It is clear that there is a crisis in the national health service in Fife. The £67 million that has been taken out of the colleges over the past seven or eight years will not be put back in one budget. That is the point that Iain Gray made.

I am absolutely appalled by the Deputy First Minister’s attack on local government. He knows that, right across Scotland, local authorities are absolutely struggling with the budgets that they are trying to deal with. In Fife, for example, the deputy leader of the council advised me that the council was faced with a bill for some £3.5 million for pension costs at the end of last year. There are many other costs.

Every local authority is looking at cutting education budgets. There is no doubt about that. I had always taken the Deputy First Minister at his word when he said that he wanted to work with councils, but he has come to the chamber and tried to politicise the relationship between local government and the Scottish Government without recognising the major problems that local authorities face.

There have been year-on-year cash cuts in real terms in local government. The council tax freeze has not been properly funded. As a result of that, cuts are taking place in front-line services. It is difficult to see how, with those budget cuts, education will be able to continue with the current level of services.

Mr Swinney offered to talk to individual councils. I certainly hope that the council in my area and council leaders and education spokespersons across Scotland are knocking on his door and presenting the facts to him. I hope that they will also be able to present the facts to the public.

We must move away from the phoney war between local government and the Scottish Government in which the Teflon Deputy First Minister is prepared to blame local government but not prepared to take responsibility. Our teachers, our parents and, most importantly, our children who are coming through the school system and cannot get jobs are not enjoying a share in the wealth of the Scottish economy. They deserve far better.

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

Will Bruce Crawford take an intervention?

Bruce Crawford (Scottish National Party, Stirling)

Oh, yes. I am delighted to take an intervention.

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

That is very kind of the member. If Bruce Crawford reflects on what the Official Report says, he will see that £1.8 billion is the amount that the Scottish National Party has removed from local government.

Bruce Crawford (Scottish National Party, Stirling)

Interestingly, Jackie Baillie has not suggested today that we put one penny back, if that figure was correct. The Official Report says that the First Minister asked Jackie Baillie a question. She said:

“I have a simple question for Jackie Baillie. I am hearing that she wants to give more money to local government.”

Jackie Baillie replied:

“I said that the issue is too big to be resolved ... It absolutely is. ... We are talking about £1.8 billion”.—[Official Report, 21 January 2015; c 33.]

It has been committed to paper that Jackie Baillie wants to put that amount in—a number that none of the people around her were brave enough to put forward.

I fully respect Labour’s right to propose additional expenditure; that is the right of any party in this chamber, even if the figure of £1.8 billion for local government, in the context of a fixed budget, does seem to be quite extraordinary. In putting forward such proposals, however, Labour also has the responsibility to Parliament and the people of Scotland to identify which budgets would be cut by an equivalent amount.

It is no wonder that Labour is struggling in the polls; it is no wonder because it has shown absolutely no responsibility in the budget process here today. Labour will continue to suffer in the polls until it learns what responsibility is all about.

Murdo Fraser (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

Bruce Crawford made a fair point. Labour members need something of a reality check: if they are going to pledge to spend more money, they need to say what areas of the budget should be cut.

It is not just Labour members who need a reality check, if I may say so. In these debates, we have become used to hearing SNP members complain about the level of budget settlement that is received from the UK Government. Today we heard Mark McDonald, Kenny Gibson and others making just that point.

As I pointed out in the stage 1 debate—I make no apology for repeating it this afternoon—in reality the budget for 2015-16 is the highest we have ever had to deal with in cash terms. It might not be the highest in real terms, but it is the second highest: only in 2009-10 was it higher, and in each of the past 16 years, with that one exception, the budget was lower.

When we hear SNP members talk about “savage cuts” or the budget being “sliced to ribbons”, we need to put that in context. For all the complaints about austerity, the Scottish Government has historically had huge sums to deal with. Today, it has given no indication that it is a Government that is having to count the pennies.

Gavin Brown mentioned business rates. We firmly believe that all the business-related consequentials coming up from UK Government spend should be passed on in rates reductions. Otherwise, the competitive advantage that Scottish businesses have had—which we have very much welcomed—will be eroded. The Scottish Government should have ensured that the additional sums coming up here from down south reflected the support for retail premises that exists south of the border by mirroring that support in Scotland, or by passing the sums on to business in some other way.

I make no apology for raising again the proposal from the Scottish Government to introduce rates on sporting interests, which will have a negative impact on the rural economy.

It is, however, in relation to LBTT rates that we have the greatest disagreement with the Scottish Government. Mr Brown set out our proposed alternative to the approach that is being taken by Mr Swinney on LBTT. We believe that a 10 per cent rate kicking in at £325,000 will have an adverse affect on many individuals who would not regard themselves as wealthy. We have some supporters in that view. Even that leading member of the yes campaign, the independent Midlothian councillor Peter de Vink, has expressed concern about wealth creators being chased south of the border by the measure. I heard Councillor de Vink on the BBC’s “Morning Call” programme on 22 January. That is the man who stood shoulder to shoulder with Mr Swinney on platforms as part of Yes Scotland. He said:

“I don’t like the direction of travel ... Scotland will be known as a high tax country ... this sends out all the wrong signals. We shouldn’t be hitting wealth creators, we need to keep them here ... I am deeply, deeply disappointed.”

When even Mr Swinney’s closest allies are taking such a dismal view of his tax plans, he can hardly blame us for being critical of them.

On the phone-in programme that I was listening to, Mr Swinney’s plans took a pasting from callers, but with one exception: someone called Dave from Blairgowrie, who called in to support Mr Swinney’s proposals in fulsome fashion. Dave had a voice that sounded remarkably like that of Mr Swinney’s constituency assistant, Councillor Dave Doogan. Surely it cannot be the case that the only people who are prepared to support Mr Swinney’s taxes are his own staff members and he has to instruct them to spend their time calling radio phone-in programmes to support his position.

Alex Johnstone (Conservative, North East Scotland)

I don’t know: the First Minister has done it.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Order, please.

Lewis Macdonald (Labour, North East Scotland)

Yesterday, I heard the Cabinet Secretary for Health, Wellbeing and Sport say:

“We need to do more”.

She was responding to the accident and emergency figures that were published this week, which showed the performance of Scotland’s NHS going in the wrong direction. She was right, and it is that need to do more that we have asked the Government to address, above all, in supporting Scotland’s NHS.

In December, the number of people attending A and E units who were not treated within the Government’s four-hour target fell below 90 per cent for the first time in nearly two years. Shona Robison said that that was because of unprecedented pressures. On one level, she was right. Professor Malcolm MacLeod of Forth Valley royal hospital in Larbert told The Scotsman earlier this week:

“Every year we get busier and busier.”

He was right, too. As more people live longer, each year is likely to see more demand than the year before. The pressures would be all the greater if we were faced by, for example, an epidemic of influenza. However, health boards already face a challenge in meeting the pressures to which Ms Robison referred.

Last week, I visited the emergency department at Aberdeen royal infirmary with a number of colleagues, and heard about the concerns of senior staff. NHS Grampian is more than 300 nurses short of what it needs to deliver the services that patients are entitled to expect. Some, but not all, of that figure can be met by bank nurses working for the health board on an ad hoc basis. However, even after that is taken into account, more than 100 posts are unfilled. It is no wonder that NHS Grampian and other health boards find it hard to meet their targets, despite the fantastic commitment and effort of those who work in them.

There are not enough nurses or senior medical staff, and Grampian is not the only health board that struggles to recruit the staff that it needs to provide round-the-clock emergency services.

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

Will Lewis Macdonald take this opportunity finally to welcome the additional national resource allocation committee funding for NHS Grampian, and the fact that additional nurses are planned for the Grampian area, which will help to address some of the issues that he is outlining?

Lewis Macdonald (Labour, North East Scotland)

Any step towards the NRAC formula—which the Government promised some eight years ago would be put in place—would, of course, be welcome. That small step perhaps goes a little way in that direction. However, we have to recognise that the pressures that I have described are not so easily dealt with.

Of course, likewise, the passing on of health consequentials today is also welcome. That will do a little to help. However, it is not enough. The Government needs to do more, as we said here two weeks ago and have said again today. That is why we have made a case for a front-line fund to help to ease the pressure on A and E units and NHS services in general. We propose that £100 million from the remaining Barnett consequentials that are available to ministers be used to allow out-of-hours access for patients to hospital and primary care services. A front-line fund would signal a willingness to explore new ways of delivering healthcare outwith the standard working week and, by making it easier for people to be treated close to home, it might even reduce the number of patients who are forced to travel for treatment to other health board areas, or to turn to the private sector.

Sandra White (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Kelvin)

Lewis Macdonald mentioned private healthcare. Do he and his colleagues agree with John McTernan, who was recently appointed by Scottish Labour’s leader, Jim Murphy, and who said that Labour is committed to £20 billion of cuts if elected, and that

“The NHS needs the savings that privatisation creates”?

Lewis Macdonald (Labour, North East Scotland)

I certainly regret the trend in the NHS to refer more and more patients, including many of my constituents, to private sector providers, because services cannot be provided in the local board area.

We asked at stage 1 for ministers to discuss future funding with local government. As we heard earlier, Mr Swinney has done so and has found an additional £10 million to offer councils. However, the way in which he announced that today can hardly be described as a step in the right direction. Indeed, Jackie Baillie said that the historic concordat between the Scottish Government and local government “lies in tatters” following the Deputy First Minister’s speech today, and Alex Rowley spelled out what that would mean.

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

Will Lewis Macdonald take an intervention?

Lewis Macdonald (Labour, North East Scotland)

As Mark McDonald revealingly said, COSLA no longer speaks for local government—not because some councils might withdraw from COSLA but because it could no longer deliver the deal that the Scottish Government wanted.

Mr Swinney criticised local councils on the grounds that they had received specific and sufficient funding to maintain teacher numbers, which is why he plans to impose clawbacks and penalties. It sounds very much as if ring fencing is back, as if the concordat is over, as if local councils will pay a price in clawbacks and penalties for not doing the Government’s bidding, and as if consensus somehow comes to an end the moment when other people fail to agree with the Government.

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

Will the member give way?

Bruce Crawford (Scottish National Party, Stirling)

Will the member give way?

Angela Constance (Scottish National Party, Almond Valley)

Will Mr Macdonald give way?

Lewis Macdonald (Labour, North East Scotland)

I give way to Angela Constance.

Angela Constance (Scottish National Party, Almond Valley)

Let us get down to brass tacks. Will Lewis Macdonald here and now call on all Labour councillors to protect teacher numbers?

Lewis Macdonald (Labour, North East Scotland)

In this debate, I will call on Mr Swinney to abandon his plans to take money away from councils—the very money that could be used to improve the situation—[Interruption.]

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Order, please. We cannot hear Mr Macdonald.

Lewis Macdonald (Labour, North East Scotland)

I am sure that Ms Constance will recognise that many councils throughout Scotland are unable to recruit staff and need support from the Government, rather than the penalties that have been proposed.

The Government needs to do more not only to protect our most important public services, but to respond to pressures on our productive economy. The oil economy is in a very different category from the NHS. Every decision in Scotland’s national health service is the Scottish Government’s responsibility, and every penny that Scottish health boards spend is provided from Mr Swinney’s budget. In the oil and gas industry, by contrast, most of the big decisions are made not by Governments but in the boardrooms of multinational oil companies around the world. In the past few days, we have heard of decisions by oil majors such as BP and Shell to cut global investment to the tune of billions of dollars.

As a result, urgent action is required here. We know that many thousands of jobs are at risk in Aberdeen and throughout Scotland as a result of the low price of oil. Indeed, Bob Dudley of BP spoke yesterday about the price remaining low for the near-to-medium term, which means that he foresees no recovery in real terms over the next two to three years.

If pressure on the NHS is the biggest challenge facing our public sector, the consequences of the on-going low oil price are the biggest issue facing our private sector and the wider economy. I agree with the Scottish Government that fiscal measures by the UK Government can help in the longer term and would signal Westminster’s recognition of the problem’s urgency. I am glad that both Governments supported the oil jobs summit in Aberdeen this week and agreed to work together on a city deal for the Aberdeen city region.

However, the Scottish Government could and should do more in the light of its having stewardship of the Scottish economy. We have pressed again today for a resilience fund to give local councils the flexibility to support sectors of the economy that face sudden economic shocks—whatever sector and whatever area might be involved. Ministers have not responded positively to that proposal, which is disappointing. They promote the merits of PACE—partnership action for continuing employment—which I welcome, because it is important that workers who are facing redundancy get the support that they need. However, it is essential that the Government assesses the potential impact on the wider economy of a continued low oil price. I believe that, if it does so, it will see clearly the case that we have been making for a resilience fund.