Scottish Parliament, 13 June 2019

343 contributions from 82 members. The official report.

Higher and Further Education (Care-experienced Young People)

Fulton MacGregor (Scottish National Party, Coatbridge and Chryston)

1. To ask the Scottish Government how it supports care-experienced young people into higher and further education. (S5O-03382)

Richard Lochhead (Scottish National Party, Moray)

The Scottish Government provided additional investment of more than £5 million in 2018-19 and 2019-20 to increase the care-experienced student bursary across further education and higher education to £8,100 per year. The additional investment funded an increase from the previous levels of £7,625 in HE and £4,185 in FE, providing a significant increase in the financial support that is available to care-experienced students. We are continuing to work on improvements that will focus additional student support funding on students who are most in need.

Fulton MacGregor (Scottish National Party, Coatbridge and Chryston)

The minister might be aware that I recently wrote to the Student Awards Agency for Scotland on behalf of a constituent who has been told that she does not qualify for a care-experienced student bursary because her period of care was not in the United Kingdom. I suspect that such cases are anomalies in the system, and will affect only a small number of students, but will the minister commit to looking into the matter further to ensure that all care-experienced children have equal rights, regardless of where in the world they have experienced being in the care of the state?

Richard Lochhead (Scottish National Party, Moray)

I will certainly look into the circumstances that Fulton MacGregor has outlined. I am sure that he appreciates that there might well be anomalies in the system, which should be investigated and sorted if necessary. Clearly, we need to lay down criteria for who qualifies for student support in Scotland, but I agree with the premise of the member’s question. I hope that he will get a satisfactory reply. I will certainly investigate the circumstances of the case.

College Students (Fees)

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

2. To ask the Scottish Government what guidance it provides for college students regarding fees encountered for starting a course and then withdrawing. (S5O-03383)

Richard Lochhead (Scottish National Party, Moray)

The majority of colleges do not apply a fee to full-time students at higher education level who withdraw early from their course. As colleges operate independent of Government, it is ultimately the decision of individual colleges as to whether they apply charges to students who withdraw early, before the fee cut-off date of 1 December. Students are advised by the Student Awards Agency for Scotland that they could be charged a fee by their institution, should they withdraw before the fee cut-off date. However, I expect institutions to take into account the personal circumstances of individual students when applying any fees.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

I thank the minister for that helpful response. I was contacted by a constituent who was forced to drop out of a higher national certificate course after a deterioration in her mental health. After she returned to Orkney, her mother passed away suddenly, which added further distress at an already anxious and difficult time. Almost simultaneously, and without warning, my constituent was informed by her college that she would face a charge of more than £400 and even the threat of court action. I am in touch with the college’s principal, who has helpfully agreed to look into the matter.

Does the minister believe that colleges could be provided with clearer advice about using discretion in levying charges in such circumstances? Does he accept that that reflects the duty of care that colleges owe their students, including those who are left with no option but to drop out early?

Richard Lochhead (Scottish National Party, Moray)

I am very sorry to hear about Mr McArthur’s constituent’s personal circumstances, and I understand why he is raising the case. I expect colleges to understand the reasons why a student might withdraw from a course early. It is very important that they take decisions about asking for fees to be paid after taking into account the circumstances that led to the withdrawal. I will ask my officials to look into the case that Mr McArthur has highlighted. I am pleased to hear that Mr Paul Little, the principal of the City of Glasgow College, is looking into the matter, and I hope that he will give a satisfactory response.

Oliver Mundell (Conservative, Dumfriesshire)

Will the minister clarify whether Scottish Government statistics on positive destinations take into account young people who start a college course and then withdraw after a short time?

Richard Lochhead (Scottish National Party, Moray)

The statistics take a range of circumstances into account. There is not a simple answer to the question, because there are different cut-off dates and different ways in which the statistics are calculated. However, I will certainly drop the member a note that will elaborate on that point.

Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (NHS Grampian)

Peter Chapman (Conservative, North East Scotland)

3. To ask the Scottish Government what percentage of children in the NHS Grampian area who have mental health issues are being seen within the 18-week referral to treatment target. (S5O-03384)

Joe FitzPatrick (Scottish National Party, Dundee City West)

In the latest quarter for which statistics are available, which is January to March 2019, 43.3 per cent of children and young people who were referred to the Grampian children and adolescent mental health service were seen within 18 weeks.

Peter Chapman (Conservative, North East Scotland)

I thank the minister for that answer, although I am very disappointed by it. As the minister said, in the first three months of this year, only 43 per cent of young patients were seen within 18 weeks. NHS Grampian has said that it has some of the longest waiting times and it is also the lowest-staffed board, with 53 per cent less staff than other boards. It is also the lowest-funded health board in Scotland.

The consistency in missed targets in NHS Grampian shows that there is a real problem. Can the minister stop with the excuses, accept that that is unacceptable and tell me how the Scottish Government plans to address the issue?

Joe FitzPatrick (Scottish National Party, Dundee City West)

The Minister for Mental Health has been absolutely clear that that situation is unacceptable, which is why we have taken a range of measures to support health boards in reaching the standard of 90 per cent of patients being seen within 18 weeks of referral. The Scottish Government is currently working with health boards, including NHS Grampian, to agree their annual operation plans, including how they will deliver on the standard.

To help boards and integration joint boards achieve that ambition, we have outlined a package of measures to do more to support positive mental health and to prevent ill health, which includes £0.25 billion of additional investment. That is in addition to the £54 million that has already been invested to help boards to improve their performance against waiting time targets by investing in workforce development, recruitment and retention, and service improvement support. That investment has allowed the CAMHS workforce to increase by 75 per cent—the number of CAMHS psychologists has more than doubled under the SNP Government.

Children Starting School (Costs)

Gil Paterson (Scottish National Party, Clydebank and Milngavie)

4. To ask the Scottish Government how it helps families to meet the cost of a child starting school. (S5O-03385)

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

We have delivered a wide range of initiatives to help families to meet the cost associated with starting school, including the pupil equity fund and improvements to free school meals and the school clothing grant.

Our best start grant has already provided more than £3.5 million to families on low incomes at key stages in their children’s early years. Since 3 June, it has also provided a £250 school-age payment when a child is due to start primary school, which can be used for anything from school clubs, to travel costs, to days out, to clothing.

Gil Paterson (Scottish National Party, Clydebank and Milngavie)

I have raised the issue with the cabinet secretary previously and have lodged a motion in a similar vein on awareness of universal credit. What is the Scottish Government doing to promote and inform the public about the new best start payment? We need to ensure that those who need support know exactly where they can get it.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Mr Paterson makes a serious point—he has made it to me on several occasions—on raising awareness of such measures to support families. A co-ordinated communications plan is being implemented with local authorities, health boards and third sector organisations that support applicants.

As we did for the launch of the previous best start grant payments, we have provided a range of guidance, promotional materials and media content for stakeholders. We hope that that will explain eligibility criteria and encourage applications.

Climate Emergency (Skills)

Gillian Martin (Scottish National Party, Aberdeenshire East)

5. To ask the Scottish Government how it is ensuring that there is the skills base to deliver the transformational change required to address the climate emergency. (S5O-03386)

Jamie Hepburn (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld and Kilsyth)

We established the just transition commission, which has expertise in labour market and skills, to advise ministers on the move to a net zero economy. The commission’s work plan has identified skills as a key topic. Analysis of current and future labour requirements, including skills, will form an on-going part of its considerations.

Gillian Martin (Scottish National Party, Aberdeenshire East)

The just transition commission will be key to ensuring that Scotland’s transition from burning fossil fuels to a low-carbon economy is one in which citizens’ employment is not disadvantaged and in which they have the opportunity to gain skills for the future. As its work continues, will the just transition commission include representatives from Scotland’s colleges and universities? What role will Skills Development Scotland play in ensuring that our workforce is ready for the transition?

Jamie Hepburn (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld and Kilsyth)

The commission’s membership, as laid out last December, includes representatives of academia: Professor Jim Skea, the chair; and Professor Karen Turner, from the University of Strathclyde.

Skills Development Scotland, our national skills development agency, undertakes skills planning across all sectors, across all areas of the country, and supports our assessment of current and future skills needs. When we set out our ambitions, we expect the Government skills agency to respond, and this area is no different.

Jamie Halcro Johnston (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

It has now been two years since the Scottish Conservatives first called for the establishment of a circular economy education and skills academy, a move that could boost the skills base to tackle climate breakdown. Now that the First Minister has declared a climate emergency, does the minister agree that such an academy should be established as a priority?

Jamie Hepburn (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld and Kilsyth)

We will consider all reasonable propositions that are made in good faith. We have a well-established skills system and invest considerable amounts in it. We expect that skills system to be responsive to our needs, including in this area. We will shortly be publishing our national skills action plan, which will set out how we intend to ensure that we have a skills system that is ever more responsive to all requirements. I will always be ready to consider propositions, but I will be candid in saying that we have a skills system in place and I expect it to respond to the task in hand.

Deposit Return Scheme (Glass)

Ruth Maguire (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame South)

6. To ask the Scottish Government what assessment it has made of the potential impact on glass recycling rates of including glass containers in its planned deposit return scheme. (S5O-03387)

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

As outlined in our stage 1 full business case, which was published on 8 May, we anticipate that a DRS will increase glass bottle recycling rates from the existing 64 per cent towards 90 per cent. As bottles make up the bulk of glass packaging that is used for food and drink, that will drive up the overall glass recycling rate.

The Scottish Government remains committed to supporting local authority collection arrangements for a range of packaging materials alongside DRS. Under our proposed reforms of wider packaging producer responsibility arrangements, the costs to local authorities of delivering those services will in future be met by producers.

Ruth Maguire (Scottish National Party, Cunninghame South)

Ardagh Glass is an important employer in my constituency and has raised concerns with me that, in other countries, an unintended consequence of including glass in deposits was that manufacturers switched to plastics. Can the cabinet secretary provide reassurance that the inclusion of glass is being considered carefully and that industry and consumers are being consulted? Will she join me on a visit to Ardagh Glass, in Irvine, to see first hand the contribution that it makes to recycling?

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

I am committed to working closely with industry as we progress to implementation of our proposals. I am already meeting Ardagh Glass, on 26 June, to discuss our plans in more detail. I recognise the concerns around the inclusion of glass, but I believe that those factors are more than offset by the significant increase in glass recycling and the reduction in carbon emissions that it will deliver. There is also the potential for the glass industry to directly benefit from the higher quality recyclable glass that we expect to capture through DRS.

Maurice Golden (Conservative, West Scotland)

I refer members to my entry in the register of members’ interests.

The inclusion of glass in a deposit return scheme is a risk to local authorities and to key sectors such as Scotch whisky. For example, more than £33 million of funding has been withdrawn from Aberdeenshire Council for its new waste collection system and industry has warned about the viability of the supply chain. Will the cabinet secretary pledge to ensure that no council job losses result from the scheme and also that all resources that are collected by the scheme are recycled here in Scotland?

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

I had understood that the Conservatives supported the inclusion of glass in the scheme, and I hope that, given the tone of Maurice Golden’s question, they are not beginning to renege on that support. Special advisers and officials have recently met other glass industry interests, so we are aware of the concerns and I made that very clear when I made my statement. We understand the issues around the inclusion of glass, but I was clear in my earlier answer to Ruth Maguire that the issues that are connected to local authority recycling

are not as straightforward as Maurice Golden is perhaps suggesting. Of course, we will continue to keep all the issues related to the scheme under consideration—that is what the implementation advisory group is for.

NHS Highland (Bullying)

Edward Mountain (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

7. To ask the Scottish Government on what date it was first made aware of bullying in NHS Highland, and what action it took. (S5O-03388)

Jeane Freeman (Scottish National Party, Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley)

As Edward Mountain will know from the response that he received to the same question on 23 May, a search of all records available from 1 January 2011 showed that the earliest correspondence on file relating to NHS Highland that mentioned the term “bullying” was received on 16 March 2014. That correspondence was addressed to a trade union and copied to the Scottish Government for information only. The Scottish Government has proactively engaged with the individual concerned and continues to engage to this day.

Edward Mountain (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

I understand that the board of NHS Highland knew about serious bullying allegations in 2010. As the cabinet secretary has pointed out, the Scottish Government knew about bullying in March 2014. If the issue had been dealt with properly then, there would not be the crisis that there is today. Does the cabinet secretary agree that a serious failure by the Government allowed the situation to develop as it has?

Jeane Freeman (Scottish National Party, Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley)

No, I do not agree with that. Despite Mr Mountain’s best efforts to suggest otherwise, we have handled the situation very well since the commissioning of the Sturrock report, which was prompted by allegations of a culture of bullying, not individual cases. We have handled the situation swiftly and well.

The independent report has been well received—I am sure to Mr Mountain’s chagrin—by staff and others in NHS Highland, and we continue to act on it. Indeed, a week today, I will visit NHS Highland in order to understand exactly how it is progressing its action plan. It behoves members—particularly those who claim to represent people in the Highlands—to get behind that report and give it their absolute support.

David Stewart (Labour, Highlands and Islands)

Has the cabinet secretary considered the Francis review, which looked into bullying in the national health service in England? Its recommendations included early support of whistleblowers, cultural change and the prevention of isolation and containment. Will the cabinet secretary incorporate those recommendations in NHS Highland and beyond?

Jeane Freeman (Scottish National Party, Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley)

As Mr Stewart knows from the statement that I made on the publication of the Sturrock review, I have made it clear that I understand well that some of the lessons in that report apply across our NHS. That is why one of the actions that I have taken has been to bring together a leadership group from across our regulation bodies, our royal colleges, our staff and trade union representatives and our boards to meet me over the summer to look at what more we need to do across our NHS to ensure that we have a positive working culture. That, of course, responds in many ways to the recommendations of the Francis review.

Jarlshof (Coach Parking)

Tavish Scott (Liberal Democrat, Shetland Islands)

8. To ask the Scottish Government what progress is being made in developing coach park facilities for the Jarlshof site in Shetland. (S5O-03389)

Ben Macpherson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Northern and Leith)

As the Cabinet Secretary for Culture, Tourism and External Affairs, Fiona Hyslop, explained in a letter to Tavish Scott on 2 May, discussions on the proposed improvements to visitor facilities at Jarlshof remain on-going. Legitimate questions have been raised about best value for money for the public and taxpayers, and ministers await further advice that the position has been addressed. The cabinet secretary has asked Historic Environment Scotland to ensure that matters are expedited in so far as is within its control.

Tavish Scott (Liberal Democrat, Shetland Islands)

Sumburgh hotel, local bus businesses and the cruise line industry have been told for three years that

Historic Environment Scotland, the agencies and the Government would sort out those coach park facilities, but all that we have had has been endless buck passing. Why?

Kenneth Macintosh (Labour, West Scotland)

Apologies to Jenny Gilruth and Bill Kidd, but our time is up.

Education (Subject Choice)

Ruth Davidson (Conservative, Edinburgh Central)

1. Last week, the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills took issue with our raising questions about Scottish education in the chamber, so I would like to return to the matter. Recently, Mr Swinney claimed that there has been no narrowing of subject choice for senior pupils in Scotland. Indeed, he said that choice is “blossoming” and that the range of options that are available to young people is “colossal”. Where is the evidence for that?

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

Perhaps I could quote Ruth Davidson’s education spokesperson, Liz Smith, who, a couple of weeks ago, in the relevant committee, said that there is “more choice” for young people. So, there is some evidence. However, I think that the best evidence of how our education system is performing is the results that our young people are achieving. Whether we look at level 5 qualifications, level 6 qualifications, the number of young people who are getting more than five highers or the narrowing of the attainment gap, we find improvement on all those measures.

That takes me to the flaw in Ruth Davidson’s argument. She wants to tell people that there is something terribly wrong in our education system. Unfortunately, the pupils of Scotland are proving her wrong by doing better each and every year.

Ruth Davidson (Conservative, Edinburgh Central)

The First Minister talks about the number of qualifications that are being gained, but what she does not say is that the number of A to C grades has dropped by 3 per cent on her watch.

We asked for the evidence on subject choice, and here is what we found. We got results from every school in Scotland, setting out the average number of qualifications that have been taken by pupils in secondary 4 over the past few years—not just national 4 and 5, but every qualification that has been taken. In 2013, when curriculum for excellence was introduced, there were 308 secondary schools in which pupils took an average of seven or more qualifications in S4. By 2018, that figure had fallen to just 182—a drop of more than 40 per cent. By contrast, the number of schools where pupils took six subjects or fewer went up from just 46 in 2013 to 165.

To go back to the education secretary’s comments, does that sound like “blossoming” choice to the First Minister?

The First Minister

As we have discussed many times in the chamber, it is not simply a matter of the qualifications that young people take in S4. What matters is the qualifications that young people leave school with—the qualifications that they take over the entirety of the senior phase of education.

The head of education in Tory-led Aberdeenshire Council has said:

“Young people mature at different rates, and having qualifications available to them over a three-year period gives much greater flexibility and allows them to learn at a stage when they are ready.”—[

Official Report, Education and Skills Committee

, 15 May 2019; c 3.]

It is the entirety of the senior phase that matters.

Here are the facts. At level 5 and level 6, we see the percentage of pupils getting qualifications increasing. In 2009, 22 per cent of young people left school with five highers or more, and that figure is now more than 30 per cent. Further, we are seeing the attainment gap narrow.

I come back to this fundamental point: the evidence does not bear out Ruth Davidson’s analysis. The evidence is of an education system that is improving and young people who are doing better.

Ruth Davidson (Conservative, Edinburgh Central)

To be fair, I did not expect a completely impartial answer from the First Minister, so, in anticipation, we decided to seek one out. We put all our findings to Professor Jim Scott, the former headteacher who has probably spent more time than anyone examining changes in subject choice in Scotland. He says that the data confirms that, since the introduction of curriculum for excellence,

“just over 200 schools have declines, or significant declines, in the number of entries (for SQA qualifications) whereas just over fifty demonstrate an increase.”

Does the First Minister accept that, or is that just part of some great moanfest conspiracy, too?

The First Minister

Much of the analysis that Professor Scott has done has looked at qualifications at S4, but the fundamental point that we are making is that, although that is, of course, important, what is more important is the qualifications that young people leave school with, and we are seeing more young people leave school with more qualifications. We are also seeing the gap between the richest and the poorest narrow. A report this week from our commissioner for fair access says that we are making significant progress in narrowing the attainment gap in terms of young people going on to university. Further, we have a record number of young people going into positive destinations overall.

We will continue to work hard to make progress in education. No matter how much Ruth Davidson wants to talk down the performance of Scottish education, the facts are, quite frankly, proving her wrong.

Ruth Davidson (Conservative, Edinburgh Central)

If we are going to improve education in this country, we need to accept information and evidence, whether on combined classes or on subject choice being restricted, and the First Minister and the education secretary need to listen. The issue is not just down to schools exercising choice; it is down to schools not having enough teachers or support to provide full choice. Children from disadvantaged areas are suffering the most, because they are still the ones who are most likely to leave school at the end of S4.

The Parliament is already conducting an inquiry into the matter. Will the First Minister and her education secretary spend a bit less time attacking the messengers and a bit more time listening to the evidence that they come forward with?

The First Minister

We will continue to spend time looking at the evidence. Ruth Davidson never quite manages to respond to the actual evidence, so let me set it out for her again. When this Government took office, just over 70 per cent of young people left school with a level 5 qualification. The figure is now 86 per cent. When we took office, just over 41 per cent of young people left school with a level 6 qualification, and now it is 62 per cent. In 2009, 22 per cent of young people left school with five highers or more, and the figure is now more than 30 per cent. We are also seeing the gap in attainment narrowing. Those are the facts, but Ruth Davidson does not like them because they do not suit her.

On teacher numbers, there are more teachers in our schools now than at any time since 2010. There are more primary school teachers in our schools than at any time since I was at primary school. Ruth Davidson has a bit of a cheek to talk about the number of teachers in our schools when she is the leader of the austerity party in Scotland and the leader of the party that would give tax cuts to the richest and take money out of our education system.

We will get on with the job of improving education, and we will leave Ruth Davidson to defend whichever latest Tory ends up imposing austerity on Scotland.

Pensioners (Poverty)

Richard Leonard (Labour, Central Scotland)

2. This week, our pensioners faced a direct attack on their living standards when the BBC announced its plans to scrap universally free television licences for the over-75s. The Scottish Pensioners Forum said that the decision is

“potentially plunging older people into a solitary existence with no means of contact with the outside world.”

It is right. Will the First Minister add her name to a letter that I am circulating today to all party leaders in the Parliament, which calls on Theresa May—in one of her final acts as the Prime Minister—to take back responsibility, honour her 2017 manifesto pledge and reverse the decision, because our pensioners deserve so much better?

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

I am very happy to look at any letter that Richard Leonard wants to send me, but I understand that the Scottish Government has already written to the United Kingdom Government on the matter and has made clear our position. We have not waited until today; we have got on and done it, but we will consider any proposed cross-party action.

I oppose the decision that has been taken by the BBC. As Richard Leonard alluded, the BBC has been left to take the decision but the responsibility for the decision lies fairly and squarely with the Tory Government at Westminster. Let all of us in the chamber—I challenge the Scottish Tories to do so as well—stand up and back the continuation of free TV licences for all pensioners not just in Scotland but across the UK.

Richard Leonard (Labour, Central Scotland)

Our pensioners suffered another blow this week when the Scottish Government voted to slow down and water down its plan to end fuel poverty. Back in 2008, when addressing the Parliament, Nicola Sturgeon said:

“I reiterate the Scottish Government’s continued commitment to tackling fuel poverty and to meeting the 2016 target, which is to ensure, as far as is reasonably practicable, that no one is living in fuel poverty by 2016.”—[

Official Report

, 19 November 2008; c 12483.]

However, instead of eradicating fuel poverty by 2016, the First Minister now wants to eradicate it by 2040. Instead of having a definition of vulnerability that extends to all pensioners, the Scottish Government has now excluded everybody below the age of 75, even though life expectancy in Scotland’s most disadvantaged communities is less than 75. When will all of Scotland’s pensioners finally be lifted out of fuel poverty?

The First Minister

I am confused. This week, Labour voted for the Fuel Poverty (Targets, Definition and Strategy) (Scotland) Bill. It is strange that Richard Leonard now seems to oppose it.

The latest figures, which were published in December last year, show fuel poverty in Scotland at the lowest recorded rate since 2005. However, we all have work to do, which is why we passed that legislation. The Scottish Government is among only a handful of European Governments to define fuel poverty, let alone to set standards related to its eradication, and we will continue to work to eradicate fuel poverty. The targets that we set this week will focus us on doing that. I hope that we will have the support of Scottish Labour not just in passing legislation on the targets but in taking the action that will make sure that we meet those targets.

Richard Leonard (Labour, Central Scotland)

These are the facts: pensioner poverty is up; free TV licences are under attack; care and support needs are unmet; life expectancy is falling; and the promise to end fuel poverty is broken. The way that we treat our elderly citizens is a mark of the kind of society that we are. They are people who have contributed all their working lives. Many of them are still contributing today, as unpaid carers, yet too many of them are forced to choose between heating and eating.

The First Minister’s target date for ending fuel poverty was 2016; now, it is 2040. Does the First Minister appreciate the anger that will be felt by pensioners when they realise not just what the Tories are doing this week, but what the Scottish Government has done this week?

The First Minister

We will continue to be one of the only Governments across Europe that is setting targets to eradicate fuel poverty.

The regulation of energy prices in this country is a reserved matter, and pensions and television licences are reserved matters. If Richard Leonard wants this Government to have responsibility for all those matters, I will be the first to agree with him. Having reversed his position on a second European Union referendum at the weekend, perhaps he will now see the light and reverse his position on a second independence referendum, so that this Parliament can take control of those matters out of the hands of the Tories and serve our pensioners along with the rest of our country.

Duchess of Hamilton Park War Memorial

Clare Adamson (Scottish National Party, Motherwell and Wishaw)

The First Minister might be aware of reports that the

first world war memorial in the Duchess of Hamilton park in my constituency has been vandalised. My great uncle is remembered on that memorial. Does the First Minister share my disgust at that abhorrent act, especially in such close proximity to the commemorations for the 75th anniversary of the D-day landings? Will she join me in sending a message that hate crimes and hate behaviours have no place in a modern Scotland? Will she urge those who are responsible to reflect on the hurt and upset that they have caused my constituents, and to come forward and take responsibility for their actions?

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

I thank Clare Adamson for raising that issue.

I was disappointed and disgusted to hear of the vandalism of the first world war memorial in Motherwell and I join Clare Adamson and others in condemning such a wicked and despicable act. That it happened at a time when we have been commemorating the sacrifices that were made by our armed forces makes it all the more abhorrent. The police are investigating it. I call on the perpetrators to reflect on their behaviour and come forward. I agree with Clare Adamson that we must all join in sending a clear message that hate crime has no place in Scotland and that it will not be tolerated.

European Social Fund

Brian Whittle (Conservative, South Scotland)

A charity in my area that is waiting for European social fund payments has contacted me to say that it is struggling with costs and that it found out that there was an issue with the fund only when someone read about it in a national newspaper. Given the third sector’s limited budget and need to control cash flow, does the First Minister think that it is acceptable for the Scottish Government to communicate with the sector in that way? Moreover, while the charity is trying to resolve its administration issues with the fund, perhaps the Scottish Government might consider paying its proportion of the grant in advance.

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

The Scottish Government met the Scottish Council for Voluntary Organisations just yesterday to update it on the situation and to provide further reassurance. Of course, the concerns relate to evidence provided by lead partners in these projects that this is a common issue with European social funds, and similar problems have been identified in England, but we are determined to avoid any charity or third sector body suffering as a result of this.

We continue to make payments to projects unaffected by these issues, and we are working to resolve the situation as quickly as possible with the European Commission. We have already sent a list of proposed solutions to the Commission, and we await confirmation that it is content to accept the proposals, which will ensure that lead partners in the various projects are able to generate the evidence that they need to support their claim for payment. The Government is doing and will continue to do everything to resolve this situation as quickly as possible.

Gas-Fired Power Stations

Ross Greer (Green, West Scotland)

The First Minister might be aware of proposals by Peel Ports for a significant development adjacent to the Hunterston nuclear power station in my region. The proposals are varied; some are very interesting and could provide much-needed jobs, but one that is causing local residents serious concern relates to liquefied natural gas and a proposal for a terminal, a storage facility and a new gas-fired power station. Does the First Minister agree that new gas-fired power stations in Scotland are not compatible with her declaration of a climate emergency?

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

I certainly appreciate and echo Ross Greer’s sentiments with regard to the climate emergency, and we want to do everything possible to meet that challenge.

As for any proposed developments, Ross Greer will be aware that they will have to go through a whole series of applications and considerations, and it would not be correct for me to pre-empt any of that process. However, this Government’s commitment to tackling climate change and reducing emissions is very well evidenced across our energy policy.

St Ambrose and Buchanan High Schools

Fulton MacGregor (Scottish National Party, Coatbridge and Chryston)

I know that the First Minister is aware of the situation at St Ambrose and Buchanan high schools in my constituency, and I whole-heartedly welcome John Swinney’s announcement yesterday of an independent and impartial review into the matter. However, given that more than 400 people attended a public meeting that I arranged last week and more than 14,000 folk have signed an online petition, what reassurances can the First Minister give that the review will involve hearing the views of parents and school staff? Will the review’s public health lead have the power to order appropriate tests and investigations in order to get a full understanding of the safety of the site?

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

I appreciate this opportunity to address an issue that I know is causing parents considerable concern, despite the efforts of the council and the health board to assure people of the safety of the schools. Indeed, that is why we announced the independent review yesterday; it will engage with parents, teachers, staff and, perhaps most important, all pupils in the schools, but exactly how it will be taken forward is rightly a matter for the review itself, given the importance of ensuring its independence.

The same is true with regard to the question of testing. Let me be clear: if the review’s experts conclude by recommending further tests on the site itself or, with the appropriate parental permission, on the pupils, that is exactly what will happen. However, we must respect the review’s independence and allow it to reach its own conclusions. The critical point about this work is that the review must be—and must be seen to be—independent and impartial. Nothing less will be acceptable to staff, parents and pupils, and nothing less will be acceptable to the Government.

Bedbug Infestation

Annie Wells (Conservative, Glasgow)

In my Glasgow region and the First Minister’s constituency, a school has been forced to take desperate action to eliminate a four-year bedbug infestation ordeal. Kids are getting rashes; pest control teams are visiting every few months; and staff have had to destroy their home furniture. First Minister, what century is this?

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

This is an issue in different parts of Glasgow. From my constituency interest in the case that Annie Wells cites, I know the intensive work that is being done by the council. I speak to council officials regularly on these matters and about the other issues that are raised in this area of my constituency and I know that intensive work is going on. All of us have to encourage those involved in this to follow all the guidelines so that the work that is being done has the best chance of succeeding.

General Practice (Funding)

Alison Johnstone (Green, Lothian)

3. Like me, the First Minister will have received hundreds of emails from constituents this week backing calls for 11 per cent of national health service funding to go to general practice, to enable our local surgeries to employ more doctors and nurses, to provide longer appointments, and to tackle the health inequality that continues to blight Scotland.

In April, Parliament voted for a Green motion demanding an urgent review of GP recruitment, resources and funding. When will the Scottish Government respect the will of Parliament and launch such a review?

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

We are taking a range of actions to boost recruitment into general practice. The Government is committed to increasing the proportion of funding going to primary care services to 11 per cent and half of that will go to GPs in particular, but of course GPs do not work in isolation. Increasingly, it is the entire primary care team that is important in terms of delivering the services that people need in communities, and shifting the balance of care from acute services to primary care.

We continue to work to achieve that aim and to work on the different actions that we are taking to ensure that we are recruiting the right number of people, not just into general practice but into different professions across our health service.

Alison Johnstone (Green, Lothian)

The fact is that the overwhelming majority of patient contacts are made with our GPs, yet they receive less than 8 per cent of the NHS budget. Although 11 per cent of the budget may be going to primary care, the call is for 11 per cent to go to GP practices. They are overstretched and underresourced. A quarter of GPs do not think that they will be in general practice five years from now and the Royal College of General Practitioners is warning that this untenable situation is putting patient safety at risk.

If we want to look after people in their homes and communities rather than in our hospitals, we need more GPs. The RCGP says that surgeries will struggle to deliver the healthcare that we need without at least 11 per cent of the NHS budget. Are the GPs wrong?

The First Minister

We continue to talk to and work with GPs. I understand that the health secretary will meet the RCGP shortly to have further discussions about its report. We are taking a range of actions on recruitment. The number of trainee doctors, for example, has increased by more than 10 per cent since 2007 and the majority of new places are focused on primary care and general practice. The number of trainee GPs in 2018 was at its highest level for over a decade.

We will continue to take those actions.

We have made a commitment to increase the share of funding going to primary care and we will meet that commitment. General practice is a vital part of that but—as anybody who understands how the health service works will know, and I know that Alison Johnstone knows this—general practice does not work in isolation. It is part of a multidisciplinary team. Increasing the share of funding going to primary care helps not just the entirety of the primary care team but general practice, because tasks that might currently be done by GPs can be done by other members of the team. This is an important commitment and we will continue to make progress in meeting it.

In-care Child Abuse Survivors (Advance Payment Scheme)

Johann Lamont (Labour, Glasgow)

The First Minister will be aware of the advance payment scheme for older survivors of in-care child abuse. In a recent written answer to me, the cabinet secretary for education said that no application to the scheme had been refused. Some survivors, however, are reporting that applications are being refused on the ground that they do not have the documents to prove where they were in care.

Of course, we know that some organisations running children’s homes destroyed many of their historical records.

I ask the First Minister to have this investigated as a matter of urgency, given the distress that this may be causing to people who, throughout their lives, have had their trust betrayed.

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

As I hope that Johann Lamont will recognise, this important issue has been taken seriously by the Government. We owe a debt to these people and we are determined to do what we can to repay that debt.

My understanding—although of course we will look into the information that Johann Lamont has just provided—is that, so far, no application has been refused for lack of documentation. Johann Lamont is giving me different information and I will make sure that the Deputy First Minister looks into that. We will write to Johann Lamont as soon as we are in a position to do so.

Lock-change Evictions

Sandra White (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Kelvin)

The First Minister will be aware of the announcement that Serco plans to resume its lock-change eviction programme across Glasgow. What action will the Scottish Government take to prevent such inhumane treatment of asylum seekers by Serco?

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

I deeply regret Serco’s decision. It is inhumane to evict people from their homes by changing the locks. The Scottish Government has made its views known; we have worked and will continue to work with Glasgow City Council to protect asylum seekers as much as we can.

The root problem is the inhumane asylum policy that the Home Office and the United Kingdom Government have pursued, which needs to change. Given her partnership with the Home Secretary, perhaps Ruth Davidson will take the opportunity to ask him to end the situation in which people can be evicted from their homes in such a way. I look forward to hearing from her once she has done that.

Student Debt

Iain Gray (Labour, East Lothian)

Figures that have been released today show that Scottish student debt has soared to £5.5 billion, which is three times what it was in 2007. The average individual debt is more than double what it was when the Scottish National Party came to power.

When the First Minister says that we should judge her by her record on education, are Scotland’s students and graduates, who were promised no student debt, entitled to judge the situation as a betrayal that grows bigger year by year?

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

I will focus on the exact loan debt figures. The individual loan debt figures are £35,950 in England, £22,920 in Labour-run Wales, £23,550 in Northern Ireland and £13,800 in Scotland—that is some £9,000 less than in Wales, where Labour is in government. Average student debt increased by £670 in the most recent year but, in Labour-run Wales, it increased by £1,610.

Labour’s hypocrisy on the issue knows no bounds. The fact is that we are increasing support for students and increasing student bursaries. We are determined to keep education in Scotland free. That is the difference between the SNP and the Tories, Labour and the Liberals.

Scotland Acts

Jenny Gilruth (Scottish National Party, Mid Fife and Glenrothes)

Today’s

Daily Record

reports on the Tory party’s latest priority, which is that it wants its new Westminster leader to rip up the Scotland Acts and seize control of spending and decision making in devolved areas. Does the First Minister condemn that latest attempt at a power grab on Scotland’s Parliament?

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

Everything that the Tories do and say now, and the shrill way in which they say it, demonstrates that they know that they are losing the argument on independence, so they are reduced to trying to frustrate democracy. The Tories are not interested in more money for Scotland—if they were, they would have stood up against the cuts that the Tory Government imposed on this Parliament. The Tories are interested in undermining this Parliament. We have had the legislative power grab; we have seen the petty but completely unsuccessful attempt this week to constrain the ability of the Scottish and Welsh Governments to represent our interests overseas; and now we have the money grab.

We are learning two things. First, the Tories cannot be trusted with devolution. Secondly, and perhaps more interesting, the Scottish Tories know that they will never be in government in Scotland. If they had any hope of that, they would not allow a UK Tory Government to undermine this Parliament in the way that it is.

University Hospital Hairmyres (Industrial Action)

Mark Griffin (Labour, Central Scotland)

The First Minister will be aware of press reports that the GMB union is balloting 300 members of staff at Hairmyres hospital on taking strike action. A payroll system change means that the staff are collectively owed £72,000, have been paid two weeks’ wages for three weeks’ work and have been offered a loan instead of wages that they are rightly owed, which has pushed many into debt. Will the Scottish Government make a public intervention, in line with the workforce’s wishes, to ensure that staff are paid what they are owed and to avert strike action, with its likely knock-on effect on patients in my region?

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

The Cabinet Secretary for Health and Sport has already made a public intervention. She has written to the company, she has met representatives of the union concerned and she continues to encourage the company to adopt an approach that is fair to staff and that avoids any disruption to services. We will continue to do everything that we can as a Government to bring about that resolution.

The issue comes from the private finance initiative contract for Hairmyres hospital, which I seem to remember came about under the most recent Labour Administration. This is one of the symptoms of PFI, which Labour was so happy to support all those years ago, and which its members now have the nerve to complain about in the Parliament. We will continue to do the work that we can to resolve the matter. Perhaps Labour should spend a bit more time reflecting on why we find ourselves in this situation.

Road Closure (Stranraer)

Emma Harper (Scottish National Party, South Scotland)

Has the Scottish Government had any contact from Dumfries and Galloway Council following the closure of Church Street in Stranraer, which is due to safety concerns over the dilapidated grade B-listed George hotel, on whether assistance could be offered?

The First Minister

We will be happy to liaise with the council and to do everything that we can to help with the situation, which I know is of concern to Emma Harper’s constituents. I would be happy to ask the relevant minister to look further into the matter and to get back to Emma Harper as soon as possible.

Scams

Stuart McMillan (Scottish National Party, Greenock and Inverclyde)

4. To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government is doing to make people aware of scams, in light of reports that nearly half of people in Scotland have been targeted at least once in the last year. (S5F-03429)

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

The number of people targeted by scams is of great concern. The Scottish Government believes that prevention through education and raising awareness is key to reducing the harm caused. We are funding Citizens Advice Scotland to deliver an awareness campaign, in partnership with trading standards Scotland, Police Scotland, Young Scot, Age Scotland and other agencies. The campaign, which was launched this week, aims to challenge perceptions and stigma associated with scams and urges people to speak up and report them.

We also fund Crimestoppers, which has been working with Police Scotland on the “Shut out scammers” campaign to raise awareness of doorstep crime and to protect the most vulnerable in society. We are also working with stakeholders to develop a prevention strategy so as to ensure a more co-ordinated response to tackling the issue across Government.

Stuart McMillan (Scottish National Party, Greenock and Inverclyde)

Does the First Minister agree that the efforts of Citizens Advice Scotland and Police Scotland to make people aware of scams are welcome, but that we should all remain vigilant and that we should highlight the point that, regardless of whether scammers are successful, they are committing a crime? Does

the First Minister also agree that scams are a continual problem and that we need to continue that partnership working, both to raise people’s awareness and to target the criminals?

The First Minister

Yes, I agree with all of that. We must be vigilant and report any concerns to the police, regardless of whether a scammer is successful. As I have just said, the Scottish Government is working with a range of partners to embed cyber-resilience within our education and lifelong learning systems at all levels. That will help to ensure that everyone has a fundamental awareness of cyber-risk and of how they can take basic but important steps to reduce it.

I very much agree that scams are an on-going problem, and that partnership working of the type that I spoke about in my initial answer will be key to raising awareness and preventing crimes of that nature.

Maurice Corry (Conservative, West Scotland)

The Scottish Conservatives called for a vulnerable persons aggravator almost exactly a year ago, after that was recommended by the Bracadale review. That would mean that those who commit crimes targeted at the elderly and disabled would be punished more harshly by the courts. Why has the Scottish National Party Government failed to introduce that?

The First Minister

We consulted on changes to hate crime legislation, and the results of that are currently being taken forward. Parliament will continue to scrutinise the decisions that Government makes and, ultimately, the decisions that Parliament makes itself. It is important that we consider carefully any aggravations to crime, making sure that we have the right evidence base in place and that we take the right action to protect vulnerable groups, whoever they are. We will continue to take action of that type.

Glasgow and Aberdeen Airports (Strike Action)

Jamie Greene (Conservative, West Scotland)

5. To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government’s response is to strike action taking place at Glasgow and Aberdeen airports. (S5F-03416)

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

It is very d

isappointing that the industrial action is taking place. It is a matter for AGS Airports and the trade union, and I would encourage them to work together to reach a resolution to the dispute. I appreciate that the strikes will be concerning for passengers, particularly as we enter the summer holiday season. I know that measures have been put in place to minimise the impact on passengers and that no flights have been cancelled at either airport because of the industrial action, but I urge AGS Airports and Unite to continue talks to resolve the matter and to avoid any disruption to passengers.

Jamie Greene (Conservative, West Scotland)

The First Minister is no doubt aware of the strategic importance of Glasgow airport, not just to the city but to the wider west of Scotland region, for business and tourism. I am sure that similar can be said of Aberdeen airport.

Given that potential further strikes are planned and that the peak travel season is upon us, it is important that the dispute is resolved fairly and quickly. How will the Government, its ministers or its agencies provide assistance to either party, to help to settle the dispute quickly?

The First Minister

The Scottish Government is not a party to the dispute. I am sure that that is appreciated. That said, the Scottish Government always stands ready to help, if there is help that we can provide, to resolve such disputes.

This is fundamentally an issue between the airport company and the trade unions.

As I did a moment ago, I encourage them to work together, with a view to reaching a resolution that avoids disruption for passengers and that is fair to the workers in the airports. The airport company is a private company, so we do not have a direct role in the talks. However, we want the dispute to be resolved as quickly as possible and if there is anything that we can reasonably do to help to bring about that outcome, we stand ready to do it.

Neil Bibby (Labour, West Scotland)

Hundreds of workers in my region have been forced to strike because their pay and pensions have been attacked, in violation of an Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service agreement, and strikebreaking labour is being used despite serious safety concerns. Unite repeatedly offered to talk up to the strike action, but Glasgow airport, which has made profits of more than £90 million, will not work with the union to end the dispute.

Given the airport’s vast profits, which are projected to grow by a further 6 per cent, can the First Minister justify why hundreds of workers in my region should be treated in such a way?

The First Minister

The Scottish Government is not a party to this dispute; AGS Airports is a private company. I was very deliberate when I said in my previous answer that I want to see a resolution that avoids passenger disruption and that is fair to the people who work in the airport, because the company—as with any company—cannot function without the work of its employees. I want to see fairness for workers.

I encourage the airport to get round the table with trade unions and come to a resolution, and I hope that all members will do that. There has to be a recognition that this is not a dispute to which the Scottish Government is a party, but that does not stop us encouraging those who are parties to the dispute to get round the table and come up with a solution that is fundamentally fair.

Scottish-European Growth Co-investment Programme

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

6. To ask the First Minister for what reason only £3.2 million out of a £200 million Scottish-European growth co-investment programme has been spent in supporting Scottish businesses. (S5F-03432)

Nicola Sturgeon (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Southside)

The

Scottish-European growth co-investment programme has provided £12 million of investment so far—the £3.2 million to which the member referred is the Scottish Enterprise contribution and includes deals that are currently being finalised. There have been challenges with take-up of the scheme, including on-going uncertainty around Brexit. Scottish Enterprise is continuing to work with investors and companies to secure investment decisions and maximise the number of businesses that benefit from the scheme.

The Government is committed to supporting small businesses. The co-investment programme is just one part of the Scottish growth scheme, which is funding a range of financial interventions that are aimed at helping small and medium-sized enterprises to realise their growth and exports ambitions. Overall, the growth scheme has supported 158 companies, with £125 million of investment so far.

Jackie Baillie (Labour, Dumbarton)

I have to say that £12 million out of £200 million is not much better, at

a time when the economy appears to be contracting, manufacturing is declining and, according to the Clydesdale Bank SME health check index, small business confidence is at its lowest since the bank started recording it.

When the fund was announced in the programme for government in 2016, it was welcomed across the Parliament. It was designed to help businesses to grow, in the face of Brexit. This week, the Cabinet Secretary for Finance, Economy and Fair Work claimed that the very fund whose aim was to help to prepare for Brexit has been affected by Brexit.

Will the First Minister tell me whether the Scottish Government completely misread the market, given that there is so little demand, and whether the co-investment programme, which is largely financial transaction money, will be revised to ensure that the right help is available for businesses in these difficult times?

The First Minister

I say in response to the last part of the question that we will always look at how we ensure that we provide the kind of help that businesses need, and if we need to make changes to the design of programmes we will certainly do that.

However, I think that most people understand and appreciate that Brexit has had and is having an impact on investment decisions, which is having a knock-on impact on the number of companies that are coming forward to take part in such schemes. That is a reality that I would have thought that Labour, at least, if not the Tories, would have been able to understand.

Overall, the growth scheme is helping a number of companies—as I said, so far, £125 million of investment has been provided to 158 companies. We will continue to do everything that we can to make sure that that very helpful funding gets to companies, but we require companies to come forward with investment propositions, and we will keep encouraging them to do so.

Dean Lockhart (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

In the 2016 programme for government, the First Minister announced that the Scottish growth scheme would provide £500 million of loans and guarantees to business, but support under the scheme is now largely provided in the form of equity finance. Why do Scottish firms now have to sell part of their business, often to foreign fund managers, in order to get support under the Scottish growth scheme?

The First Minister

A range of financial interventions is available, and discussions will take place with companies about what best suits their business needs, whether that is loan funding or other forms of funding.

I would have hoped that Mr Lockhart, as a Conservative member, would have recognised that such schemes are being affected by companies’ reluctance to invest because of the Brexit uncertainty. That a Tory in particular can ask such a question when he seems to be oblivious to that situation just underlines the fact that the Tories have no regard whatsoever for the damage that their policies are doing to the economy of the United Kingdom right now.

The Presiding Officer

That concludes First Minister’s question time. We will have a short suspension before the next item of business.

12:41 Meeting suspended.

12:43 On resuming—

World Environment Day 2019

Linda Fabiani (Scottish National Party, East Kilbride)

Would members of the public who are not remaining for the next item of business leave quietly, please?

The next item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S5M-17329, in the name of Gillian Martin, on world environment day 2019. The debate will be concluded without any question being put.

The debate is quite heavily subscribed, so I will have to be strict on timings in order to give us time to get the chamber ready for this afternoon’s 2 o’clock start.

Motion debated,

That the Parliament welcomes World Environment Day 2019, which will be marked on 5 June; notes the recent publication of the report,

Scotland’s Nature on Red Alert

, by Scottish Environment LINK, which highlights the potential impact of climate change on Scotland’s biodiversity; understands that almost one-in-ten Scottish species are at risk of extinction, and applauds the work of MSPs who work as species champions to protect Scotland’s wildlife and to help raise awareness of threatened species in their regions and constituencies.

Gillian Martin (Scottish National Party, Aberdeenshire East)

I am delighted to open the debate to celebrate world environment day, to highlight the importance of biodiversity to our environment and to give all our species champions a chance to highlight the importance of their species to the natural balance that must be protected at all costs. From the tiny insect that pollinates our plant life to the giant cetacean that inhabits our seas—and everything in between—everything has its place. When the population of a species decreases or is at threat of extinction, that fine balance is disturbed, and that impacts on us all.

The motion highlights Scottish Environment LINK and WWF Scotland’s report, “Scotland’s Nature on Red Alert”, which outlines the key areas of concern. The threat to the natural balance is a fairly successful species—us. There is no doubt that human beings have caused the global warming that is the biggest threat to our plants, birds, insects and animals, so it is our moral duty to deliver the solution to that problem.

The warming climate has the potential to impact biodiversity globally and locally. If members are not convinced by the moral obligation argument, they can look at the matter from an anthropocentric point of view. Biodiversity has a key role to play in many of the ecosystem processes that we, as human beings, depend on—for example, nutrient cycling and pollination. Negative impacts on our biodiversity will potentially affect our food and water supplies and our air quality—basically, our life support systems.

The “State of Nature 2016” report indicates that almost one in 10 Scottish species is at risk of extinction. Some of our iconic wildlife species are among those that could be affected: the capercaillie, the puffin, the kittiwake and other seabirds, and the freshwater pearl mussel and Atlantic salmon. Marine species that are at their southern limit around Scotland, including the Arctic char and the white-beaked dolphin, simply might not swim in our Scottish waters any more. The same goes for smaller fish and organisms that are important food sources for other species. Increasing acidification of the oceans might affect not just our wildlife, but our shellfish industries. Our world-renowned salmon rivers might lose more fish as water temperatures rise and summer water levels decline.

Plant communities will change as populations of upland species are reduced. If our peatlands dry out, they will no longer be able to store as much carbon for us, and our rivers might no longer protect us from flooding if rainfall levels rise. As any farmer could tell us, last year’s dry summer had a massive impact on crop production and feedstock for animals.

Changed human behaviour is the key to halting declines in species populations, and as the newly appointed grey seal champion, I know that only too well. Globally, the grey seal is one of the rarest seal species, and about 50 per cent of the world population lives in British and Irish waters. At the start of the 20th century, it was estimated that there were about only 250 grey seals left in United Kingdom waters, and they were near extinction. Certainly in my home village of Newburgh, I rarely saw a seal on the River Ythan estuary when I was growing up in the 1980s because they were routinely shot by people who had fishing interests. Now, as a result of a range of protection measures, the grey seals are thriving—not least in the Ythan estuary, where we have the largest colony in the UK.

Earlier this week, I promised the pupils of Balmedie primary school that I would tell the story of why I feel particularly qualified to be the grey seal champion. Eight years ago, while walking with my daughter at the Ythan estuary, we encountered a small grey seal who had beached herself, exhausted from hauling behind her the metres of fishing net and rope that was tangled around her neck. Every time we approached to try to disentangle the seal, she scarpered back into the river. Worried about distressing her further, we let her be and continued on our walk.

We spotted the seal on the way back: by that time she was so exhausted that she no longer had the energy to move away from us. I managed to get hold of the rope that had embedded itself in the skin of her neck and I pulled it off, but not before she sunk her sharp teeth into my wrist and secured me an appointment at the accident and emergency department later that day. I still have a fairly large scar.

Members will be aware of the origins of Spiderman. [

Laughter

.] Peter Parker was bitten by a spider and developed spider-like powers. Who knows what that seal bite gave me? I have yet to discover an increase in my swimming skills, so being the grey seal champion will have to suffice until the powers inevitably reveal themselves. My Marvel “Seal Girl” back story is a funny story to tell the kids in schools, but, in all seriousness, I want to use my position as grey seal champion to campaign against the fishing gear and other debris that entangle our marine species, including seals and cetaceans.

I also want to help local campaigners who want to educate the public on the best way to view the seals without disturbing them. In my area, that would be from the other side of the River Ythan, on Newburgh beach, where there is a better view of the colony and some of the seals come right up to people rather than bolting away from them in panic.

I am also lucky enough to be the champion of the world’s oldest tree species—the yew, which is also a superhero. Members might remember my speech last year when I called it the Dr Who of trees due to its powers to regenerate and live on and on, defying mortality, not to mention its life-saving powers in providing ingredients for cancer drugs.

Our woodland species champions will know that a decrease in native tree species means huge loss of species’ habitats and, ultimately, no life support for our insects and mammals, including us upright mammals. Nearly half of our native woodland is in poor condition for biodiversity, and of all the ancient woodland that was mapped in Scotland about 40 years ago, around 12.5 per cent has been lost to fragmentation and failed regeneration. That trend must be reversed if we are to protect our most biodiverse habitats and sequester the required amount of carbon to halt climate change. New woodland creation and natural regeneration will need to happen on a faster and far greater scale than ever before. Natural regeneration across Scotland is severely impacted by grazing by herbivores, especially deer. Woodland regeneration could provide new habitat and extend existing ranges for many woodland-dependent species.

Biodiversity loss will affect us all. Before I sit down, I want to say how heartened I am that so many of my colleagues have asked to speak in the debate to highlight the importance of Scotland’s natural heritage. I look forward to hearing about the species that they hold most dear and continue to champion.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

We move to the open debate, with speeches of absolutely no more than four minutes, please.

Alexander Burnett (Conservative, Aberdeenshire West)

As the species champion for that endangered species the pearl mussel, I am delighted to take part in the debate, which has been brought to the chamber by Gillian Martin, and to discuss the problems that the species faces. I am lucky enough to live beside the River Dee, which is one of the most famous salmon rivers in the world. Anyone who has been there will say how incredible it is. We welcome people from across the world in their bids to cast a fly for our salmon. In order not to disappoint expectations, I refer members to my entry in the register of interests in relation to the Dee.

For those who do not know, I point out that salmon stocks are important in the battle to increase pearl mussel numbers, because the larvae rely for their survival on host fish, including salmon. Pearl mussels each release about 2 million to 3 million larvae, which are either inhaled by or settle in the gills of salmon, where they remain in the winter then drop off into the gravel the following spring. Members can see why salmon stocks are so important to the survival of pearl mussels.

A co-ordinated effort is required to help to save the pearl mussel, so I will take this opportunity to talk about three projects from across Scotland that are bidding to improve salmon stocks and, consequentially, pearl mussel numbers. The first is at Dryhope farm in the Scottish Borders, which won the Scottish Land & Estates enhancing our environment award in 2018. The project linked upland peatland restoration with salmon fishing on the River Tweed, from catchment to catching fish. It was found that damaged peat and drainage channels were reducing the capacity of peatland to stay wet and regulate water flow. By restoring those, the gravels can be stabilised so that fish ova are not swept away and thereby become unviable. That results in an increase in fish stock, which ultimately benefits pearl mussels.

As a side note, I point out that that project also increases carbon storage, improves water quality and creates better habitats for upland wildlife such as black grouse and hen harriers, which I know the Minister for Rural Affairs and the Natural Environment champions. It is a fantastic project for much of the local environment.

Another project that has created a huge boost for pearl mussel numbers is run by the Ness & Beauly Fisheries Trust. After obtaining further funding from SSE, the trust continued the work of the pearls in peril project, with the result that, between 2012 and 2018, more than 2,500 fish were exposed to pearl mussel larvae. In 2017, monitoring showed that up to 25 per cent of all fish captured were carrying the larvae, with more than 100 on each gill in some cases.

Finally, Vattenfall UK has committed €3 million to several research projects, with the River Dee Trust, Aberdeenshire Council and Marine Scotland all gaining shares. Local to me, a project is looking to provide previously unknown information on salmon and sea trout movements out at sea. I am grateful to Vattenfall for contributing to that important research.

Although we welcome companies investing in restoring our environment, we need the Scottish Government to do more. Legislation has made poaching pearl mussels illegal, but not enough is being done to enforce that. We need to take further steps not only to prevent illegal poaching but to increase numbers of that endangered species, and of host species such as salmon, which are also under threat. We cannot rely only on private companies to make the investment, so I urge the Scottish National Party Government to do more to protect our environment.

Keith Brown (Scottish National Party, Clackmannanshire and Dunblane)

I, too, thank Gillian Martin for securing this debate to celebrate world environment day, which was held earlier this month.

This year’s theme for world environment day was air pollution, given the shocking fact that nine out of 10 people around the world are breathing polluted air. Even when I travel to and from Edinburgh, I am aware that there is a noticeable change between city life and my Clackmannanshire and Dunblane constituency. Luckily, if I ever feel the need for a lungful of fresh air, I am completely spoiled with some of the best opportunities for hill walking in Scotland. If members wish to stretch their legs in Scotland’s most stunning constituency, they are more than welcome to join me—they can bring their own sticks.

If we go on that walk, we might come across the rare and endangered sticky catchfly—a plant for which I am delighted to be the species champion. Presiding Officer, I was going to test your patience by bringing in a sample of sticky catchfly today, but unfortunately it is endangered and very fragile. It is restricted to just a few sites in Wales and Scotland. It can be found on Arthur’s Seat, which is just behind us here in Edinburgh, but it is most often found in the Hillfoots cliffs of the south Ochils, which are lit up by clusters of beautiful pink flowers and are home to the largest population of sticky catchfly in the UK. As species champion, I have the great pleasure of having the opportunity to—

Bruce Crawford (Scottish National Party, Stirling)

Will the species champion give way?

Keith Brown (Scottish National Party, Clackmannanshire and Dunblane)

Yes, I will.

Bruce Crawford (Scottish National Party, Stirling)

I thank the member for giving way, because I need to go to another event, which I am chairing, at 1 o’clock. I am the species champion for the slow worm. Does the member agree that it is a grand thing that the slow worm is one of the most sexually active species on the planet?

Keith Brown (Scottish National Party, Clackmannanshire and Dunblane)

I am not entirely sure how to respond to that. I suppose, in the interests of sustainability of the species, that it must be a good thing.

As I said, it is a great pleasure to be species champion for the sticky catchfly and to work with organisations such as the Scottish Wildlife Trust’s Stirling and Clackmannanshire local group and Alva Glen Heritage Trust, which has allowed me to learn more about the vital work that they do to protect local biodiversity and to encourage the growth of sticky catchfly. Incredibly important reintroduction work, which has involved seeds being collected from the Yellow Craig cliffs above Blairlogie—with which Bruce Crawford will be very familiar—and grown in allotments in Bridge of Allan, has led to the successful reintroduction of 40 sticky catchfly plants in places such as Alva Glen, where sticky catchfly had become extinct.

The plant is rumoured to have been King James VI of Scotland’s favourite flower 400 years ago, and it is down to the invaluable dedication of the Scottish Wildlife Trust’s Stirling and Clackmannanshire local group that the plant may be enjoyed—I hope—for another 400 years.

As species champions, we all know how crucial the local work that is done by wildlife groups is in protecting the vulnerable and endangered species that we represent. That great work extends beyond species to the environment itself. We must see the work to protect species as part of wider efforts to tackle climate breakdown.

Under this Scottish Government, Scotland is seen as a world leader in setting ambitious green targets—and rightly so. My Clackmannanshire and Dunblane constituency is seen as a green leader here in Scotland. Under the Stirling and Clackmannanshire city region deal, my constituency will become the base for Scotland’s international environment centre. Investment of £22 million will create a research and policy hub at the University of Stirling, and an environmental business incubator in Clackmannanshire, which will be tasked with providing a comprehensive approach to unlocking inclusive and green economic growth. Stirling and Clackmannanshire will therefore be at the forefront of providing the conditions for Scottish business to prosper in a way that ensures a cleaner, sustainable and healthier environment for the generations that follow.

I hope that today’s debate will serve as a powerful reminder that now is the time to act. Locally and nationally, we in Scotland are stepping up to that challenge. I wish to see our ambition being matched by our friends across the UK, the European Union and the world, to ensure that we tackle climate breakdown in order to secure a tomorrow for the species that we champion in the chamber today.

Claudia Beamish (Labour, South Scotland)

I, too, thank Gillian Martin for securing her motion for debate.

World environment day 2019 gives us a poignant reminder of the stark reality that is facing our natural environment. As Gillian Martin’s motion highlights, nearly

“one-in-ten ... species are at risk of extinction”

in Scotland, and one in 25 species are under threat world wide. The world is on red alert for its future.

However, progress is being made—we can and must save our biodiversity for future generations, but we must act now. Recently, Scottish Labour announced a climate emergency, as did the Scottish Government, and I was proud to vote in support of that statement in the Parliament. It is an important step in recognising the serious state of affairs. However, I also call on the Scottish Government to declare an environment emergency. When better to do that than in the context of world environment day? I hope that the minister will consider my call and make comment on it.

The interrelationship between climate change and its effects on our environment are increasingly evidenced. We are now unlikely to meet our country’s internationally binding 2020 biodiversity targets. We now need a bold and inclusive set of actions to establish a post-2020 biodiversity action plan. Can the minister give us some reassurance on how that will be developed?

I was happy to see the species champions recognised in the motion and the small part that we can play in highlighting the work of the tireless volunteers and organisations who work to protect various rare and wonderful animals and plants. I am the champion of the forester moth. How they are faring is not well known due to their elusive nature; despite being beautiful, emerald green daytime moths, they are very shy.

When I went to the Mabie forest in Dumfries to do some forester moth spotting, I enjoyed being in the dappled wooded glades and marshlands—the specialised mixed habitat that such moths need—but I did not see a single forester moth. However, Butterfly Conservation Scotland has now developed a pheromone lure—do not worry, it is not something scary—to attract forester moths, so that they can be spotted in different places. I might have better luck next time.

A forester moth has been seen in a new site on Mull, which is very exciting. Last year, forester moth caterpillars were also found for what is probably the first time in Scotland, in Argyll.

Butterfly Conservation is also working with farmers promoting the agri-environment and climate scheme. The scheme encourages farmers to maintain suitable sites for cattle grazing, which is essential for the forester moth. Such schemes and others protecting the rest of our wildlife must not be threatened due to Brexit—whatever the future may hold.

All the Scottish Labour MSPs are now species champions. I will not name and shame anyone in any other party who is not a species champion, but it would be a good story to tell if all the MSPs were species champions. My friend and colleague, Alex Rowley, is species champion for an ant. What type was it?

Alex Rowley (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

The narrow-headed ant.

Claudia Beamish (Labour, South Scotland)

Thank you. He is species champion for the narrow-headed ant and has actually spotted them in the Perthshire highlands.

This year’s world environment day theme is “beat air pollution”. On Tuesday, I was outside the Parliament to support campaigners for Mark Ruskell’s Restricted Roads (20 mph Speed Limit) (Scotland) Bill, which we will be considering this afternoon. I believe that the Scottish Government will have a change of heart on that and see how much sense it makes. Let us help beat air pollution as a mark of respect on world environment day, and give relief to those living in poor local environments.

I thank Gillian Martin for giving us the opportunity to look forward to creating robust actions for a better environment, from local to global.

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

I, too, thank my fellow champion, Gillian Martin, for securing this important debate. I declare an interest as the species champion for the wild cherry—a tree with white flowers, as distinct from the more common pink cherry tree.

When we think of Scotland’s natural heritage, our biodiversity and the threats faced by many species across our land, it is the threat to our native fauna that tends to make the headlines, but our flora is of equal if not more importance, as plants underpin all life on earth.

I recently had the pleasure of visiting a great example of the wild cherry tree, in bloom, in Dawson park in my constituency. The visit was organised by the Woodland Trust Scotland, and I thank the trust for the work that it does on the creation, restoration and maintenance of our woodlands. The trust has identified that at least 46 per cent of our native woodland is in poor condition and around 12.5 per cent of our ancient woodland has been lost to fragmentation and failed regeneration over the past 40 years.

We spoke of woodlands’ benefits when tackling climate change and their effect on carbon capture, moderating the local climate, saving energy, flood management, improving our health and clean air. A recent study in Chicago showed that the trees in the city remove 10.8 tonnes of pollutant material a day, and a University of Columbia study has shown that asthma rates among children aged four to five fell by 25 per cent in areas where there was a concentration of trees. The UK has one of the world’s highest rates of childhood asthma, with around 15 per cent of children affected and a higher prevalence in lower socioeconomic groups in urban areas, so that is an important benefit of urban woodlands.

I am encouraged that the Scottish Government recognises the importance of woodland and it is to be applauded for its work on afforestation. In 2017, 14 million new trees were planted, which accounted for more than three quarters of tree planting in the UK. The Scottish Government’s Scottish forestry strategy notes the importance of urban woodlands and aims to increase urban tree canopy across Scotland’s towns and cities—which Dundee does quite well, although there is progress to be made. I welcome that aim and would be interested to learn from the minister what specific steps the Government is considering to support it.

Another benefit that was highlighted on my visit was the positive effects that trees and woodlands can have on people’s wellbeing. In Dawson park, alongside the beautiful cherry blossoms sits the Duntrune community garden, which is managed and maintained by the Scottish Association for Mental Health in partnership with Dundee City Council. From the gardens, SAMH runs its chrysalis project, which is a therapeutic horticultural service that works with people to support their recovery journey by developing self-resilience and employability skills. Such examples are important to highlight, because they illustrate the important part that green spaces of all shapes and sizes play not only in protecting the environment but in bringing benefit to the people around them.

If we are to protect Scotland’s nature—flora or fauna—raising awareness, engaging with local communities and encouraging them to take action, individually and collectively, are paramount and must be part of our future thinking on these matters. In Dundee, I am proud that that thinking is already firmly embedded in our approach to the protection and enhancement of our urban woodlands. Dundee’s strategic plan states that its urban woodlands are a vital element of delivering our vision for the city by helping to build stronger communities and to promote social inclusion and active citizenship through community ownership and local participation in the management of our green spaces.

Having identified the importance of our local woodlands in supporting health and wellbeing, Dundee City Council applied for funding from a variety of sources. It was successful and is to be congratulated on following through on 21 projects. The funding will increase community involvement through the establishment of the Dundee trees and woods in greenspace—TWIG—project.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Could you come to a close, please?

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee City East)

I ask the minister, when she responds, to outline the Government’s current thinking on funding for such projects.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Speeches are starting to go over the four-minute mark, which may disadvantage members later on.

Alison Johnstone (Green, Lothian)

I thank Gillian Martin for bringing this important debate to the chamber as we mark world environment day. It has taken decades, but we have finally reached a point when news about our natural environment makes daily headlines. We can no longer claim ignorance of the impact that human activity is having on the natural ecosystems that sustain us—although, sadly, a few prominent individuals continue to do so.

I congratulate the efforts of environmental non-governmental organisations that have contributed to that growing awareness, including members of Scottish Environment LINK and its “Scotland’s Nature on Red Alert” report. The report brings home the realities of what biodiversity loss might look like in Scotland: fewer wild salmon as the water temperatures of our rivers and oceans rise; fewer kittiwakes—although they are a common sight along our coastlines, they have already seen their population decline by 66 per cent; and some native woodland plants could disappear as climate change intensifies.

As the report makes clear:

“Our habitats and species are of value not just in their own right, but also for the ecosystem services they support and on which we all depend.”

That is why the findings of the intergovernmental science-policy platform on biodiversity and ecosystem service should be a call to action.

The scientists have shown that nature faces more trouble now than at any other point in human history. Because of pressures from human society, including expanding agricultural lands, overfishing and pollution, 1 million species may be pushed to extinction in the coming decade, with extraordinary consequences for life on this planet. That has major implications for our food systems, human health and water security.

The future might seem bleak, but the co-chairman of the IPBES report, Professor Josef Settele, has stressed that society can mitigate many of the worst effects by changing the way that we grow our food and the way that we generate energy, by our response to the climate emergency, and by how we recycle our waste. The key message from that scientist is that we need transformative change.

Individuals can act, of course. We can change our diets, choose active travel, and reduce our consumption to limit demand for natural resources. However, we must acknowledge that 90 companies are responsible for two thirds of all greenhouse gas emissions in the industrial age, and they have to change their behaviour.

The situation also puts a responsibility on national Governments and, indeed, Parliaments around the world to respond, including in Scotland. We are fast approaching the end date of Scotland’s 2020 biodiversity road map, but one in 11 Scottish species is at risk of extinction, and we are on track to meet only seven of the 20 targets set by the international community to protect biodiversity.

There is a tendency for us to focus overwhelmingly on the aspects of the interlinked climate and environmental emergencies that affect humans, but our policies and actions need to recognise that our plant and animal species are valuable in their own right. I am a passionate species champion for the brown hare and the mountain hare, and I am well aware of the impact that climate change is having on the mountain hare. Mountain hares’ snow-white winter coats mark them out to predators in our warmer winters, in which some hillsides see no snowfall.

Thankfully, many of the actions that we need to take to address the climate emergency involve restoring our natural habitats, which will be critical in tackling the biodiversity crisis. That includes restoring our peatlands, planting native woodland species, holding back from building new roads, and applying smarter planning principles to ensure that our towns and cities incorporate the maximum amount of green space.

In closing, I want to mark the work of the late Polly Higgins, who was an inspirational lawyer who campaigned throughout her life for the crime of ecocide to be established in international law. Ecocide is the loss and damage of ecosystems by corporate and state actors. Polly Higgins was determined that there should be a higher accountability for crimes against nature. In 2010, she presented her proposal to the United Nations, and she continued to champion the cause until her untimely death in April this year.

I hope that the Scottish Parliament can find the opportunity to continue the work to strengthen the protections for wildlife and habitats in this country and fight the climate and environmental emergency.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I ask the remaining speakers to consider making their speeches three and a half minutes.

Angus MacDonald (Scottish National Party, Falkirk East)

As Gillian Martin’s welcome motion highlights, world environment day was on 5 June. The day has helped to give focus to the need for nature-based solutions to be deployed to tackle climate change and to make our nature more resilient.

It is clear that the Scottish Government is making significant progress in tackling climate change, but we need to up our game and address biodiversity loss as well. As we know, we are in a climate emergency. According to Scottish Environment LINK, which was represented at an event that I hosted yesterday, we are also in an ecological emergency. There is no doubt that we must redouble our efforts to protect our environment and reverse the effects of climate change.

The importance of protecting our environment cannot be overstated, of course. It is a fact that sea levels are rising and that we are seeing more extreme weather events than ever before. Insects and invertebrates are in decline, not entirely through climate change but also through habitat destruction and biodiversity loss—which, in turn, is affecting climate change and our environment.

One way to keep the issue on everyone’s radar is through the species champion initiative. Buglife Scotland tasked me with being the species champion for the bog sun-jumper spider—or Heliophanus dampfi to those of us who are more acquainted with the wee critter. I assure members that it is cuter than it sounds—it is not cuddly, but it is cute. Unfortunately, like Gillian Martin, I have not acquired any spider-like powers since I became the species champion for that spider, but I live in hope—I think.

At just 3mm long, the spider might be very small but it has huge character. It is mainly black in colour, but it has distinctive and striking iridescent green mouth parts. It is also incredibly rare: it is found in only six places across the UK, five of which are in Scotland and one of which is in Wales. Two of those places are in my Falkirk East constituency. Coal-bed methane extraction in my patch was a further threat to this little spider, so the Scottish Government’s effective ban on fracking has had another otherwise unknown but positive unintended consequence.

The little spider lives in lowland raised bogs—habitat that is crucial in tackling climate change. Unfortunately, raised bogs have declined by more than 90 per cent over the past 100 years, with the majority of bogland left damaged and in poor condition. Protecting our remaining peatlands is essential. Not only are they important for threatened wildlife, but they also store and regulate huge amounts of carbon and water, helping to reduce greenhouse emissions and prevent localised flooding.

Around eight years ago, the RSPB proposed a levy for peat use in horticulture and the UK Government published a white paper setting out its ambition for the horticulture sector to end its use of peat by 2030 through voluntary partnership. No levy has been forthcoming, unfortunately, but the Scottish Government could act where the UK Government has ultimately failed by looking into the possibility of implementing a levy on horticultural peat use. A welcome development would be consideration of new regulations on the labelling of products containing peat that are sold in Scotland, and another positive step would be to consider stopping the use of peat altogether by public bodies, including local authorities.

Scotland’s peatlands are internationally important; yet, despite that, peat extraction continues. I hope that the issue stays on the Government’s radar over the next few years.

Finlay Carson (Conservative, Galloway and West Dumfries)

I thank Gillian Martin for bringing this debate to the chamber. I am delighted to speak in it and to follow on from Spiderman.

Members will be aware that Robert Pattinson has been confirmed as the new Batman, but they perhaps do not know that I am the Scottish Parliament’s very own Batman, as I am the species champion for the Leisler’s bat. However I, too, have not been bitten by a member of the species that I champion, and I have not brought my cape.

I thank Liz Ferrel for providing a briefing for the debate, outlining how bats can enhance the national environment and detailing the threats that they face. As predators of common insects, bats can tell us a lot about the state of the environment, and they are sensitive to changes in land use. Many of the pressures that bats face, such as landscape change, agricultural intensification, development and habitat fragmentation, are relevant to other wildlife species, which makes bats excellent indicators of the wider health of the UK’s wildlife.

Although bats can provide a valuable service for agriculture, some historical agricultural practices have had a detrimental impact on bats. The use of pesticides meant that bats suffered from a lack of insect prey. The practice of removing hedgerows and woods from farmland is also concerning, as bats often rely on those features for roosting, hunting and getting around. Indeed, the Leisler’s bat roosts not in roofs but in woodlands. There is a large colony in the Wood of Cree, which is just up the road from my home.

It is welcome that the national bat monitoring programme says that populations of bats are recovering and beginning to stabilise, although that has not always been the case. We want to continue the pursuit of positive environmental legislation, as it is vital that that continues. That is why I am backing calls from the Bat Conservation Trust for the Scottish Government to immediately take action to reverse biodiversity loss and clearly lay out what it hopes to achieve after 2020. It is disappointing that, at the moment, the Government is failing to meet its targets around habitat loss, the control of invasive species and the extinction of other species.

The Government needs to significantly increase its efforts ahead of 2020 and must look now at measures that can be implemented to ensure that biodiversity is not reduced. One way in which that could be achieved is through establishing a national ecological network, which would give us a practical, strategic and long-term way in which to invest in natural assets such as peatland and woodland, which can, as we know, store carbon.

It is not only bats that are affected by changes in our natural environment. The Galloway Fisheries Trust has been doing some fantastic work in my constituency to save the sparling in the River Cree. The sparling—or the cucumber fish, because it smells like cucumber—was found in various Scottish rivers in the past but died out because of overfishing, pollution or barriers preventing it from reaching its spawning grounds.

Records show that, historically, up to 6 tonnes of sparling, which equates to about 50,000 fish, were being caught in the River Cree alone. During the sparling’s annual migration, children would grab the fish out of the river and take them for their tea. However, there has been a huge decrease in numbers, and the River Cree is now one of only three rivers in Scotland in which the fish are found. The Galloway Fisheries Trust project was a two-year scientific and educational initiative that was aimed at restoring the fish populations. It held community events to reconnect the community with the sparling’s heritage, and local schools were involved. The lower Cree has been designated a site of special scientific interest in order to protect the rare fish, and it is hoped that the population can be successfully increased.

The debate is an important one, as it comes at a time when we are all looking to protect our environment. I hope that some of the points that have been raised today can be taken forward positively.

Gail Ross (Scottish National Party, Caithness, Sutherland and Ross)

I, too, thank my colleague Gillian Martin for bringing this important debate to the chamber today.

I am the species champion for the red squirrel, but I am proud to say that I am also the very first species champion for seagrass. Seagrasses are flowering plants that have adapted, over millions of years, to life in the sea. The meadows that seagrasses form play an important role in keeping our oceans healthy and stocked with food. They provide a home for all kinds of marine life including food fishes, such as juvenile cod and plaice, and endangered species, such as seahorses. Additionally, seagrasses absorb large amounts of carbon dioxide from the surrounding sea water and have an important role to play in tackling the climate emergency.

However, like so many species, seagrass has not been immune to global declines. Research that is taking place at University College London provisionally estimates the current extent of UK seagrass to be a little bit more than 8,500 hectares, which is down from about 76,000 hectares at the turn of the 20th century. That is an estimated loss of nearly 90 per cent of our coastal seagrass meadows in just 100 years. Even if we make a cautious estimate from the data, it is abundantly clear that we have lost more than three quarters of our seagrass meadows and, with them, the ecosystem services that seagrass meadows provide.

Today, we are tackling both a climate crisis and a biodiversity crisis that were started many generations ago and that have only increased in severity through decades of intensified industrial production and global economic expansion. It is clear that our response to those challenges must be twofold: we need to consider what we can do now to stop further losses from current practices and what can be done to restore habitats that have been degraded by what has happened in the past.

The good news is that, over the past decade, an increased understanding of the reproductive biology of seagrasses and their environmental requirements has led to vast improvements in the capacity of scientists to restore the meadows. In Scotland, we have two seagrass species—eelgrass and dwarf eelgrass—which have both suffered losses. Their reintroduction into known previous sites provides a significant opportunity to enhance their recovery and support biodiversity.

The UK is a signatory to the Paris climate agreement, which emphasises the critical importance of conserving seagrasses and other blue carbon ecosystems. Seagrass meadows rapidly store organic carbon from sources inside and external to the meadow in sediment that remains locked up and stable for very long periods of time.

I could go on, but I know that my time is limited, and I will respect that.

Our seagrass meadows are very precious. Organisations such as Project Seagrass are undertaking fantastic mapping and restorative work, and I thank Dr Richard Lilley and his team for all the hard work that they do, not just here but all over the world. I ask people who are watching the debate to please help us to save our seagrass. Join Project Seagrass, become a seagrass spotter and ensure the survival of this vital part of our ecosystem.

Lewis Macdonald (Labour, North East Scotland)

Last month’s UN report on biodiversity was clear that our global ecosystem faces a crisis that is on a par with the threat from climate change and that urgent action is required. That has implications for policy makers everywhere, including here in Scotland.

Since 2013, I have been species champion for the curlew, which is a barometer of biodiversity. It has suffered catastrophic decline in Ireland and it is now one of the most pressing conservation priorities for Scotland and across Britain. It is time to step up the actions taken in its defence.

Of the issues that affect the future of the curlew I will highlight just two, for which Scottish Government ministers have responsibility, and I will ask whether our public policy priorities need to change in those areas.

One issue is predator control in Strathbraan. MSPs recently received an open letter from those who are involved in curlew conservation action in that area, and their conclusions should concern us all. They argue that measures to control predation by ravens on breeding curlew are essential, as part of a balanced programme of wader conservation, and that without such targeted conservation action, species such as the curlew will be lost. They call for the Scottish Government and Scottish Natural Heritage to press ahead this year with bold conservation measures in Strathbraan and elsewhere. If that does not happen, they say that it might come to be seen as a defining moment, when the battle to save the curlew was lost.

As species champion for the curlew, I will seek a detailed response from ministers and SNH, and I welcome any comments on that topic that the minister might offer today.

A second specific example is in Gillian Martin’s constituency, where Transport Scotland is considering rerouting the A96 away from Inverurie and building a new dual carriageway through farmland and semi-natural habitats to the north and east of the town. RSPB Scotland says that that area contains moderate clusters of breeding curlew, which would be disrupted and potentially displaced if that option was selected for the A96 project. If we are serious about tackling the biodiversity crisis, the breeding sites of endangered species need to be given the priority that they deserve by transport and infrastructure ministers, as well as by environment ministers.

Of course, good things are going on, and we should celebrate them. RSPB Scotland’s trial curlew management project monitors breeding numbers, predator activity and habitats in key sites in Scotland and across Britain, to establish what more should be done to protect the species. SNH has been supportive of such work in past years and I hope that it will be again.

Last month, I was lucky to visit the demonstration farm run by the Game and Wildlife Conservation Trust at Auchnerran near Tarland, which the minister is familiar with. I saw how efforts to support one species bring benefits to others. For example, in that case, curlew, lapwing and oyster-catchers all thrive in what is both an eco-friendly and commercial agricultural environment.

We need more such projects to support biodiversity. We need policy makers in Government, here and worldwide, to be clear about their priorities and to take decisions that will make a difference to species such as the curlew, for the sake of future generations.

Mairi Gougeon (Scottish National Party, Angus North and Mearns)

I will do my best to get around to the many points that members have raised. As ever, it has been an interesting and enjoyable debate.

I thank Gillian Martin, because I always look forward either to responding to this debate or, when I was not a member of the Government, speaking in it. It is one of the highlights of the year, not least because of all the weird and wonderful stories that it tends to bring to light. We discover that we have a number of superheroes across the chamber, such as Finlay Carson and Angus MacDonald. One year, in relation to the yew tree, Gillian Martin regaled us with tales of her goth days. Today did not disappoint. I did a quick search for Gillian Martin’s potential superhero powers. We might need a catchier name than “seal woman” but she has some great powers and behaviours to look forward to, such as high intelligence—of course, she already has that—travelling, foraging, resting, mating, pupping, digesting, socialising and moulting.

Bruce Crawford made an interesting intervention about the sexual activity of slow worms as Keith Brown spoke about the sticky catchfly.

The species champion initiative covers species on land as well as in the sea, and plants as well as animals. Shona Robison raised the important point that plants underpin all life on earth. This initiative is important because it covers such a wide variety and diversity of species.

I thank everyone for their contributions, which not only were enjoyable but got to the heart of some of the most serious issues that we face today. We realise from listening to the speeches that there is a very delicate balance to our environment and, as Lewis Macdonald has just pointed out, species such as the curlew act as a barometer for biodiversity and a gauge for how the environment is doing. That is why I thank Gillian Martin for the event that she held in Parliament with Scottish Environment LINK on world environment day last week, which highlighted not only some of the major challenges that we face but the ways in which all of us in society can do something about the situation.

Much of the fight has been led by our young people. Last week’s event was attended by the Sunnyside ocean defenders, who personally handed me their contributions to the consultation on our proposed environmental governance and principles. I also want to mention the Ullapool sea savers. Young people are really at the vanguard of some of the action that we are seeing at the moment.

It is also important to remember that Scotland is not only taking action but leading the world with the ambitious targets that we are putting in place. With our recent amendments to the Climate Change (Emissions Reduction Targets) (Scotland) Bill, we are aiming for net zero emissions by 2045. If we achieve that, it will mean that, within a generation, Scotland will no longer be contributing negatively to climate change.

A number of members have mentioned the recent global assessment of biodiversity that has highlighted the serious impacts of the biodiversity loss that is happening around the world. That report underlines the links between biodiversity loss and climate change; indeed, members will have heard the First Minister say in response to a question from Claudia Beamish that biodiversity loss is as important as climate change. As with climate change, we want Scotland to be at the forefront of addressing those issues.

From the hard-working pollinators that sustain our ecosystems to our keystone species, we have taken action to address the climate emergency. Pollinators are a vital part of our biodiversity and wider environment—many of our native wildflowers, shrubs and trees would be unable to exist without them—and bees and hoverflies also provide the backbone for much of Scotland’s agriculture, contributing around £43 million to the economy each year. In 2017, we set out a 10-year pollinator strategy for Scotland to make our country more pollinator friendly and to halt and reverse the decline in native pollinator populations.

With regard to other species that we have, I highlight our red squirrel population, which is championed by Gail Ross, who, like Gillian Martin, is a champion of land and sea, with a few species to their name. That population was seriously in decline, due to their invasive non-native cousins, the grey squirrels, but thanks to the work of the saving Scotland’s red squirrels project, they are now returning to areas in Aberdeenshire and Tayside where they had previously disappeared.

However, there is, as always, so much more that we need to do, and a number of members—particularly Finlay Carson, Claudia Beamish and Alison Johnstone—made that point during the debate. As far as biodiversity is concerned, we want Scotland to be the first country to carry out a thorough analysis of what we are already doing, the areas where we need to do more and what we should be doing differently, and we aim to write to the Environment, Climate Change and Land Reform Committee with our initial assessment by the end of 2019.

Alison Johnstone asked about our biodiversity targets. We are on track to achieve seven out of the 20 that were agreed by the international community in Aichi in 2010, and we are progressing towards another 12. However, we have to step up and do more if we are going to meet the 2020 deadline.

That is where species champions can play such a key role. It will come as no surprise that, as champion for the hen harrier—something that was mentioned during the debate—I feel very passionately about the species champion initiative, and it is clear that many in the chamber feel the same way. The initiative was relaunched in September 2016 and, to date, 104 MSPs—or 80 per cent of the Parliament—are now species champions. However, I want to echo Claudia Beamish’s call for the remaining 20 per cent to join in; it is not too late to sign up, and I really want 100 per cent of MSPs to be involved.

Before I finish, I want to do my job as species champion and draw people’s attention to the hen harrier. I represent a constituency where the harrier should be thriving; however, it is not. As we are all aware, deliberate and illegal persecution continues to threaten the very existence of raptors, and we need to end it. There are a number of on-going projects that are geared towards growing and sustaining raptor populations in Scotland. For example, the heads up for harriers project works with estates to identify, monitor and thereby protect hen harrier nests. At the end of 2017, we set up an independent group to conduct an in-depth review of how grouse moor management can be made sustainable and compliant with the law, and one of the key issues that is being examined is raptor persecution. Led by Professor Werritty of the University of Dundee, the group is due to report later in the summer.

There is also the partnership for action against wildlife crime in Scotland, which comprises a variety of organisations and sectors, including the police, the shooting industry, the science community and conservation groups, the ultimate aim of which is to reduce raptor crime. In response to Alexander Burnett, I point out that I chaired a meeting of that group yesterday; it has a sub-group on freshwater pearl mussels that is considering all the issues in that respect.

Unfortunately, however, even with so many groups working together, harrier conservation efforts are continually being let down. In the last few months, for example, we have seen the disappearances of hen harriers Marci and Skylar. The Government, though, is committed to doing more and, indeed, to doing all that we can to end this persecution.

It is fantastic to have been able to focus on the wonderful diversity of our species in Scotland and to hear the enthusiasm and commitment of members in the chamber. The debate has also raised awareness of some of the serious issues that we face in Scotland, but I want to say again that the Scottish Government is taking the matter very seriously and is taking action to prevent further biodiversity loss. I hope that the debate has prompted us all to consider what further action we need to take to protect our native species and enhance biodiversity right across Scotland.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

That concludes the debate. The meeting is suspended until 2 o’clock.

13:36 Meeting suspended.

14:00 On resuming—

Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body Question Time

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

Good afternoon. The next item of business is Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body questions. Question 1 has been withdrawn.

Pension Scheme (Fossil Fuels)

Claudia Beamish (Labour, South Scotland)

2. To ask the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body what its response is to the call by just transition for the divestment of its pension scheme from fossil fuels. (S5O-03392)

Kezia Dugdale (Labour, Lothian)

I recognise Claudia Beamish’s longstanding commitment to the just transition agenda. However, I say to her from the off that there is a clear separation of duties between the SPCB and the fund trustees, in order to avoid any sense of a conflict of interest.

To set it out in detail, under schedule 1, part B, rule 8 of the Scottish Parliamentary Pensions Act 2009, the corporate body is responsible for the appointment of fund trustees. Under schedule 1, part D, rule 32 of the act, the corporate body is also responsible for providing the funding for the employer pension contributions. Schedule 1, part B, rule 5 of the act sets out that the fund trustees are responsible for the governance, management and administration of the scheme and for the management of the scheme’s assets. That includes decisions about investments. Any decision about divestment is therefore a matter for the fund trustees and not for the corporate body.

Claudia Beamish (Labour, South Scotland)

I understand that division which Kezia Dugdale has helpfully explained for the record. This is an opportunity to recognise the legal fiduciary duty of the pension trustees, the pension fund responsibilities and indeed the division of responsibilities and the reasons for that.

W

ith the forbearance of the Presiding Officer, I would like to highlight

that a number of members of the Scottish Parliament have recently signed a divest Scotland pledge, which says:

“I pledge to support the Scottish Government and Parliament divesting from fossil fuels and investing in a just transition to a zero carbon economy over an appropriate time-scale.”

I am not in any way asking for reassurances, because that would not be appropriate. However, would it be appropriate for the corporate body simply to highlight the pledge to the fund trustees, which I will also do?

I recognise that, in addition to safeguarding the financial stability of our funds, work is being done to further explore the wider ethical considerations, such as climate change—

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Thank you—I will stop you there. I think that we have the gist, and Ms Dugdale has made the

corporate body’s position clear. However, she may want to give a brief response.

Kezia Dugdale (Labour, Lothian)

I welcome Claudia Beamish’s response and I reiterate how aware we are of our responsibilities not to go beyond the scope of the 2009 act. I add that the fund manager operates an environmental, social and corporate governance policy that is in line with the United Nations principles for responsible investing, which we are a signatory to, so those things are considered. However, it is a matter for the fund trustees, and the member is perfectly placed to make direct representations to those members.

Murdo Fraser (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

Tens of thousands of Scottish workers are currently employed in the oil and gas sector, and this Parliament is meant to represent the whole of Scotland. Does the member not agree that it would send an unfortunate message from the Parliament’s corporate body, on behalf of the Parliament, if we were to divest ourselves from a sector that is responsible for supporting so many Scottish families and their jobs and livelihoods?

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I think that these questions are a bit wide of the mark, Ms Dugdale, but it is up to you to say whether you think so, too.

Kezia Dugdale (Labour, Lothian)

I simply remind the member that that is beyond the scope of the responsibilities of the corporate body, and I refer him to his own party’s representative on the fund.

Parliamentary Events (Equality of Access)

Elaine Smith (Labour, Central Scotland)

3. To ask the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body how it ensures equality of access for those wishing to hold parliamentary events onsite. (S5O-03395)

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

Any organisation can hold an event at the Scottish Parliament as long as it fulfils the SPCB’s agreed criteria for member-sponsored events, including the completion of an event request form and securing a sponsoring member for an event that all members will be invited to attend.

If the event meets the criteria, it is allocated accordingly, and an events officer works with the event organiser to ensure completion of all the planning, organisation and delivery of the event.

To ensure equality of access for member-sponsored events, there is no charge for venue hire or for the Parliament’s audiovisual equipment, such as plasma screens with built-in personal computers. However, any hired-in services—for example, catering or additional audiovisual equipment such as a public address system and video recording equipment—are charged back to the event organiser.

Elaine Smith (Labour, Central Scotland)

I am thinking of events beyond those that are organised through the events team. In my first speech in the Parliament, 20 years ago, I promoted the need for an accessible Parliament building with a crèche, an arena for trade and industry exhibits, innovative recess schemes for young people and a resource for community groups. Some of that has happened, but I did not expect the creeping commercialisation of events, which is pricing people out of using the building unless they can get corporate sponsorship.

Is the SPCB aware that the costs that are associated with additional necessary equipment—such as microphones and a PA system, which are needed to assist the hard of hearing and allow access to an induction loop—are prohibitive for many organisations and MSP-sponsored events? Will the SPCB look at removing such barriers, in line with the Parliament’s founding principles, which emphasise accessibility and equality of access?

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

I agree entirely that a founding principle of the Parliament is accessibility, on which we have a strong track record. I am interested in the specifics of Elaine Smith’s concerns if they relate to a particular incident.

The committee rooms are all fitted with induction loops, and the members room has a mobile induction loop although, for obvious reasons, we would not necessarily want to have that on permanently. Support is there for events, and it is not unreasonable for the Parliament to draw a distinction between member-sponsored events and other activities that take place. It is right for the costs that are incurred to fall on the event organiser, and that does not necessarily inhibit the accessibility of the Parliament, which has a fairly proud record of hosting a wide range of events in any given year.

Maurice Corry (Conservative, West Scotland)

We get poor information technology support to run cross-party group meetings. On several occasions, CPG members have had to scurry around to try to find a technician—not long ago, I had to haul somebody off a line at a bus stop and beg him to come back in to sort out an IT issue, because we had two presentations to see. That does not represent the Parliament well to the people we encourage to come to CPG meetings. What will the corporate body do to ensure that CPG conveners have the confidence that we can reliably deliver presentations for people who come in for our meetings?

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

It is important to point out that cross-party groups have access to Parliament facilities such as rooms and the IT equipment in those rooms, but it would be a step beyond what is reasonable to provide parliamentary staffing to support CPGs. That has never been provided and the Parliament has never met the costs of running CPGs, which sit distinct from member-sponsored events. The technology should be made available, but we cannot get into making staff available.

Maurice Corry is right that, when staff are on hand, they are invariably more than willing to help out. However, it is incumbent on the organiser of a CPG event—whether that is the convener or the secretariat—to identify IT needs in preparation for the event and ensure that the equipment is there and is functioning properly. I am aware that issues sometimes arise with password access, but that is about the CPG’s preparation rather than about asking the Parliament to go beyond what it does at the moment to support CPGs.

Claudia Beamish (Labour, South Scotland)

Will Liam McArthur take back to the corporate body that, if we have the equipment, we need the support? A lot of marginalised communities, groups and individuals come to a wide range of CPG meetings. To be frank, I am disappointed by the response that the equipment is there—we are not all IT experts, and I have been put in the same position as Maurice Corry in the past. I ask Liam McArthur to take that back to the corporate body, please.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

I am happy enough to ask the corporate body to reflect further on the matter. I am not sure whether Claudia Beamish is asking the corporate body for a fundamental rethink of our relationship with CPGs. If we go down that track, there is a risk that we will end up in a situation where we are not only providing IT support but supporting the groups in the same way that we support member-sponsored events. That has a whole series of consequences that Claudia Beamish may wish to reflect on.

On IT support, we have all been in situations at the start of meetings where passwords have not been put in correctly and there have been glitches in the system. All that does is re-emphasise the need to ensure that, in the preparation for such events, consideration is given to the IT requirements.

Parliament staff are more than willing to provide whatever support they can, but requiring parliamentary staff to be here and on hand to provide on-going support for CPGs that can go on until fairly late in the evening would put a strain on parliamentary staff and on parliamentary resources, which would have consequences that Claudia Beamish may want to reflect on further.

Government Business and Constitutional Relations

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

The next item of business is portfolio questions on Government business and constitutional relations. I remind members that questions 1 and 8 have been grouped together. I will therefore call question 1 and its supplementary, and then question 8 and its supplementary. If members wish to ask a further supplementary to either of those questions, they should press their request-to-speak buttons after question 8 has been asked. In fact, they can do so during question 1—I am not bothered either way.

Referendums (Scotland) Bill

Bill Bowman (Conservative, North East Scotland)

1. To ask the Scottish Government what progress it is making with the Referendums (Scotland) Bill. (S5O-03374)

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

The Referendums (Scotland) Bill was introduced to the Parliament on 28 May. The Finance and Constitution Committee has been designated as the lead committee for the bill, and it will consider its timetable.

Bill Bowman (Conservative, North East Scotland)

The bill gives Scottish ministers the power to call referendums and to set referendum questions, a power that United Kingdom ministers do not have. Why do Scottish ministers need those powers?

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

I think that Mr Bowman’s question is based on a slightly false premise. The idea that the Scottish Government decides upon something and that that is an end to it is simply not the case.

In the first instance, the framework bill will be scrutinised by the Finance and Constitution Committee, as I have just said. Given that its membership comprises Adam Tomkins and Tavish Scott among others, I am in no doubt whatever, seeing the glint in Mr Tomkins’s eye—

Adam Tomkins (Conservative, Glasgow)

Oh, yes.

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

Well, there we go. I am in no doubt whatever that the scrutiny will be intense, as indeed it should be. As with any bill, the Referendums (Scotland) Bill will be open to amendment. Parliament is currently taking on the role of debating and approving the rules and procedures for Scottish referendums to ensure that the framework commands public confidence that referendums will be fair and open and in line with established best practice.

In the second instance, if the bill passes, it would thereafter be a matter for Parliament, as well as for Scottish ministers, to decide whether it is appropriate to hold a referendum on a particular topic.

Graham Simpson (Conservative, Central Scotland)

8. To ask the Scottish Government under what circumstances it would consider using the provisions in the Referendums (Scotland) Bill. (S5O-03381)

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

A standing framework for referendums is a normal and reasonable thing for a Government and Parliament to have at their disposal. Wh

en ministers bring forward proposals for a referendum, it will be for Parliament as a whole to decide and vote on those matters.

Graham Simpson (Conservative, Central Scotland)

I am sure that the minister wants to maintain that the bill is about referendums in general and not independence in particular. Can he say what questions other than independence Scottish ministers think should be determined by referendum in Scotland?

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

In the years to come, this Government, or any Government, can bring forward questions in a referendum.

Let us be absolutely clear about this: it is for the Scottish Parliament, not Tory politicians at Westminster, to decide whether there should be an independence referendum in Scotland. That position is consistently supported by a clear majority of people in Scotland, and it is time that the Tories started supporting this Parliament, instead of undermining it.

Claire Baker (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

The citizens assembly has been framed as a space for open discussion and balanced debate, but how can that be possible when the Government has introduced a referendum bill and has thereby so clearly indicated what it sees as the inevitable conclusion of the assembly’s discussions? How can we have meaningful debate about Scotland and the UK’s constitutional future when there are clear implications for other nations?

In addition to those questions—

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Well, not too many additions.

Claire Baker (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

It is a very slight addition. What plans does the Government have to involve the UK in discussions in the citizens assembly agenda?

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

The citizens assembly will run parallel to the process and, as far as I have seen, the approach has been widely welcomed, by most people. I repeat the point that Mr Russell made and ask all parties and wider Scotland to get involved and help to shape the assembly. That is in the interests of all of us.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Question 2 was not lodged.

United Kingdom Government Constitutional Policy

Alasdair Allan (Scottish National Party, Na h-Eileanan an Iar)

3. To ask the Scottish Government what impact it anticipates the appointment of a new Prime Minister will have on its relations with the United Kingdom Government on constitutional policy. (S5O-03376)

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

The Scottish Government hopes that whoever becomes Prime Minister will begin to treat with respect the views of this Parliament and the people of Scotland on the issues that are raised by Brexit and beyond.

When Theresa May came to office, she said that the Scottish Government would be “fully involved” in Brexit discussions. She then proceeded to ignore the Scottish Government, dismiss votes in this Parliament and disregard the overwhelming majority in Scotland for remaining in the European Union. It should be said that a pretty similar level of disdain has been shown to Wales.

The Scottish Government is always ready to co-operate and work jointly on the basis of equality, respect and trust, but the Tories, instead of treating us as an equal partner, have treated Scotland with contempt, and the on-going horror show that is the Tory leadership contest suggests that the situation will get worse, not better.

Alasdair Allan (Scottish National Party, Na h-Eileanan an Iar)

The person who today came to the top of the leader board to be Prime Minister has previously indicated his disdain for public spending in Scotland, and one of his competitors—the one who is favoured by the Scottish Conservatives’ leader—has gone as far as to call the very existence of the Scottish Parliament an act of “constitutional vandalism”. Is Westminster’s respect for the Scottish Parliament’s role buried or merely dead?

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

Indeed. I think that the people of Scotland can see through the arrogance that underpins what comes out of the Tory leadership election. Ruth Davidson’s favoured candidate says that he will not “allow” the people of Scotland to make the choice about their future, even as he and other Tory leadership candidates prepare to take Scotland over the cliff edge of a catastrophic no-deal Brexit. That is perhaps one reason why, in the European Parliament elections, the Tories received less than 12 per cent of the vote in Scotland.

It is not just on the constitutional issue that the Tories are treating Scotland with contempt. Boris Johnson wants to give the highest earners south of the border a huge tax break, paid for in part by a tax increase for people in Scotland. That demonstrates why, more than ever, Scotland’s future needs to be in Scotland’s hands.

Adam Tomkins (Conservative, Glasgow)

Intergovernmental relations are currently under review; the review is being led by the Cabinet Office, at the heart of Whitehall. I do not know what the review’s conclusions will be, but if the review recommends that United Kingdom intergovernmental relations be placed on a statutory footing, will the Scottish Government support that recommendation and, if so, does it follow that, in the Scottish Government’s view, disputes about intergovernmental relations should become questions of law for resolutions in the Supreme Court?

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

Mr Tomkins is getting a little ahead of himself as to where we are on this. He is right to say that there is a review of intergovernmental relations. However, I say gently to him that I am involved in some of the Brexit work on behalf of this Government, and it is every bit as bad on the inside as it looks from the outside. Therefore, in the first instance, we need to find a way forward that is not dictated by Westminster but mutually agreed across all the Administrations in the UK. If we can find agreement on that, we might make progress, but we are a very long way from that.

Legislative Programme 2018-19

David Torrance (Scottish National Party, Kirkcaldy)

4. To ask the Scottish Government what progress it has made in implementing its 2018-19 legislative programme. (S5O-03377)

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

Of the 12 bills that were announced in the year 3 legislative programme, three have already been passed. Of the remainder, six are currently going through the parliamentary process; they have been joined by the Referendums (Scotland) Bill. The other three will be introduced ahead of the next programme for government.

However, as I noted when I discussed the matter with the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee recently,

delivery of all Government legislation is subject to the potential impact of the unwelcome requirement to divert resources to prepare for a no-deal Brexit.

It is worth noting that, earlier this year, the progress of a number of bills was paused because of Brexit. In addition, relatively recently, in a spirit of co-operation, the Government has agreed to requests from the Equalities and Human Rights Committee, the Rural Economy and Connectivity Committee and the Environment, Climate Change and Land Reform Committee that they be granted timetable extensions because of their desire to take further evidence on bills or to manage workload pressures. Despite all of that, we anticipate that 14 bills will secure royal assent throughout the course of 2019, which will be one more than in 2018.

David Torrance (Scottish National Party, Kirkcaldy)

The minister will be aware of the claim by Tory members that the Scottish Government needs to get on with the day job. For the benefit of the Tories, perhaps the minister could highlight some of the legislation that the Scottish National Party Government has had passed since it was elected in 2016.

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

I think that I would incur the Presiding Officer’s wrath if I were to list all the legislation that has been passed since 2016—

Adam Tomkins (Conservative, Glasgow)

Go on!

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

I will give a taster, particularly for Mr Tomkins.

Although other places have been left paralysed by Brexit over the past few months, this Parliament has got on with the day job. Seven bills—the Health and Care (Staffing) (Scotland) Bill, the Age of Criminal Responsibility (Scotland) Bill, the Vulnerable Witnesses (Criminal Evidence) (Scotland) Bill, the Human Tissue (Authorisation) (Scotland) Bill, the Fuel Poverty (Targets, Definition and Strategy) (Scotland) Bill, the South of Scotland Enterprise Bill and the Census (Amendment) (Scotland) Bill—have completed their stage 3 consideration since the beginning of last month, and two more bills are set to follow suit before the end of this month. As I said, we are getting on with the day job.

Brexit (Impact on Immigration)

John Mason (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Shettleston)

5. To ask the Scottish Government what recent consideration it has given to the impact of Brexit on immigration. (S5O-03378)

Ben Macpherson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Northern and Leith)

It is increasingly well known that migration is crucial to Scotland’s future prosperity, and that any reduction would damage our public services, labour market, demographic profile and local communities.

The independent report from the expert advisory group on migration and population that was published in February this year stated that the United Kingdom Government’s immigration proposals could lead to a 30 per cent to 50 per cent reduction in net migration to Scotland over the next two decades, which would lead to a decline in our working-age population of up to 5 per cent.

The Scottish Government has consistently made it clear that freedom of movement and all the advantages that it brings should be allowed to continue in Scotland. The Scottish Parliament increasingly needs additional powers to tailor migration policy to meet Scotland’s needs.

John Mason (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Shettleston)

I wonder whether the minister has seen the NFU Scotland news release dated 4 June, which is headed, “Shortage Occupation List Review Falls Short on Industry Labour Requirements”. That applies to the requirements not only of the agricultural sector but to those of other sectors. The news release states:

“While the Review notes issues raised by NFU Scotland and others, it has produced no practical suggestions on how to resolve them.”

President Andrew McCornick is quoted as saying that the Migration Advisory Committee’s report

“does nothing to address existing or future post-Brexit labour requirements”.

Does the minister have any thoughts on that?

Ben Macpherson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Northern and Leith)

Absolutely, I do. NFU Scotland is right to be concerned about current and future migration policy. The MAC’s review of the shortage occupation list related to the current system, which covers only graduate roles. Although it was never going to provide all the answers to the sector’s needs, the return of vets to the shortage occupation list is a welcome step.

I welcome the acknowledgement by the MAC, the Home Secretary and the Scottish Conservatives that the current immigration system is not working for all parts of the UK, but it is incredibly frustrating that, overall, the MAC and the UK Government continue to disregard the concerns that have been raised by key Scottish stakeholders, such as the NFUS. It is also evident from what the MAC has produced that the shortage occupation list is not a panacea.

Taken together, all that is confirmation that it is time for Scotland to have a tailored migration policy that could allow a more flexible approach to be taken to support our nation’s economic, social and demographic needs.

Jamie Greene (Conservative, West Scotland)

The minister is probably aware that, according to National Records of Scotland, the biggest contributor to population growth in Scotland is inward migration from the rest of the UK. What steps is his Government taking to protect and encourage inward migration from the rest of the UK?

Ben Macpherson (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Northern and Leith)

The Scottish Government is working to support delivery of all areas of public service in order to make Scotland as attractive a nation as possible. At the moment, our attractiveness is being damaged by the Brexit process.

However, it is interesting that net migration to Scotland from the rest of the UK has, in recent years, been consistently positive—we are attracting more people from the rest of the UK to come and live here than are going in the other direction. As Graeme Dey stated in a previous answer, that is further evidence that the Scottish Government is delivering and getting on with the day job, and that Scotland is becoming more attractive. The biggest barriers to our attractiveness are Brexit and the immigration policies of the UK Government. We all need to work together to oppose those policies, which would have such a negative demographic effect and a negative effect on our economy in the short term.

Brexit (Trade with United States)

Emma Harper (Scottish National Party, South Scotland)

6. To ask the Scottish Government what its position is on the potential impact on Scotland of President Trump’s recent comments regarding Brexit, including it being an opportunity to strengthen trade between the United States and the United Kingdom. (S5O-03379)

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

The United States is an important trading partner for Scotland, and already accounts for 17 per cent, or £5.5 billion, of our international exports. We do not need to leave the European Union to trade successfully—and on terms that we consider to be appropriate to our values—with the US

The UK Government is keen to pursue a post-Brexit trade deal with the US, but the Scottish Government is fundamentally opposed to any deal that would lead to a reduction in environmental and safety standards, or that would expose our public services, including the national health service, to market forces. Accordingly, we will oppose any such deal and take every step that we can take to make sure that that does not come about.

Emma Harper (Scottish National Party, South Scotland)

When he was on his state visit last week, Donald Trump made clear his view that our NHS and agriculture sector should be part of any post-Brexit trade deal. Does the minister share my concerns about those comments? Does he agree that we in Scotland must do all that we can to ensure that we do not get hormone-injected beef and chlorinated chicken, and that big pharmaceutical companies do not have a negative influence on our healthcare system and our animal welfare standards?

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

I absolutely share those concerns; indeed, I suspect that the vast majority of MSPs in the chamber share them.

This Government will do all that it can to ensure that a trade deal with the US does not end up downgrading, or deviating from, the safety and environmental standards that we currently benefit from as members of the EU. We are also strongly opposed to anything that would open up our NHS or any other part of the public sector to unwanted interest from businesses that are looking to privatise those services.

We said clearly in our paper, “Scotland’s Role in the Development of Future UK Trade Arrangements—A Discussion Paper”, which was published last August, that we expect this Government and this Parliament to have a proper role and substantial involvement at all stages of the process of negotiating future trade arrangements. That would be the only way to make sure that Scotland’s interests are protected. We reiterated that position in the specific context of a trade deal with the US, in response to the UK Government’s consultations on future trade agreements last November.

Brexit (Impact on Glasgow)

Johann Lamont (Labour, Glasgow)

7. To ask the Scottish Government what discussions it has had with Glasgow City Council regarding the impact that Brexit could have on the city. (S5O-03380)

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

Ministers and officials regularly meet representatives of all Scottish local authorities, including Glasgow City Council, to discuss a wide range of issues, including preparations for Brexit, as part of our commitment to working in partnership with local government to improve outcomes for the people of Scotland.

Mike Russell last met the leader of Glasgow City Council, Councillor Susan Aitken, along with the leaders of Scotland’s six other cities, on 21 May.

Johann Lamont (Labour, Glasgow)

I am sure that the mini

ster agrees with me that Glasgow is the powerhouse of the Scottish economy. He will be aware that a report in 2016 by Glasgow City Council, the Glasgow economic leadership board and the Glasgow Chamber of Commerce outlined the scale of the economic challenge of Brexit for the city. What joint working has been done to implement the report’s recommendations? Will the Scottish Government finally commit to ensuring that Glasgow gets its fair share of the £90 million that the Scottish Government was given to address the dangers of a no-deal Brexit, in order to secure jobs in and the economic prosperity of the city of Glasgow?

Graeme Dey (Scottish National Party, Angus South)

We have been here before, with the member. I will outline exactly what is happening between the Scottish Government, the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities and the seven cities. The Cabinet recently agreed to grant a request from the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities for local government to be given an extra £1.6 million to help it to prepare for EU exit. Each council—I stress that this was, again, at COSLA’s request—received £50,000 to fund the appointment of a Brexit co-ordinator. Officials have written to local authorities to advise how that money will be paid.

Close working with councils continues. As I said, as recently as 21 May, Mike Russell, the Cabinet Secretary for Government Business and Constitutional Relations, met city leaders, including the Glasgow City Council leader, to discuss Brexit. The issues that were discussed included the need for reassurance for immigrants who are thinking of coming to Scotland—because Brexit is already affecting key sectors—and the identification of priority projects ahead of further much-needed detail on the United Kingdom shared prosperity fund being provided by Westminster. Mr Russell offered to meet the cities and others to explore the options around that fund and Brexit when things become clearer. There is no lack of co-operation between the Scottish Government and local authorities.

If Johann Lamont wants to play a constructive part in minimising the impact of Brexit on Glasgow and the rest of Scotland, perhaps she could have a word with the Labour MPs who yesterday conspired with the Tories in Westminster to deny Parliament there the opportunity to block a no-deal departure from the European Union, which would be catastrophic for Scotland—including Glasgow.

Disclosure (Scotland) Bill

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

The next item of business is a statement by Maree Todd on the Disclosure (Scotland) Bill. The minister will take questions at the end of her statement, so there should be no interventions or interruptions.

Maree Todd (Scottish National Party, Highlands and Islands)

The Scottish Government is committed to policies that balance public protection with the right to move on from past offences. Those are not contradictory aims; both can be achieved.

Since November 2016, when the Deputy First Minister announced the review of Scotland’s disclosure regime, we have engaged extensively with stakeholders to achieve that balance. Last summer, following pre-consultation engagement with over 300 individuals and organisations and an online survey that generated more than 800 responses, we undertook the statutory public consultation on disclosure, which was distributed widely to stakeholders, including all organisations registered with Disclosure Scotland. The consultation received 353 responses from a broad cross-section of Scottish life, including individuals, charities, sports associations, advocacy groups and private sector businesses.

The views and experiences that respondents shared provided vital insight into ways in which the disclosure regime, including the PVG—protecting vulnerable groups—scheme, can be improved. Those with whom we engaged consistently highlighted the value of the service and the safeguarding that it provides. However, they stressed a real need to make it more proportionate and simpler to use. From the outset, the Government intended to capture the best ideas in striking a new balance between delivering a fairer disclosure regime and strengthening the ability to protect the most vulnerable in society.

Yesterday, the Scottish Government introduced the Disclosure (Scotland) Bill, and I take this opportunity to update Parliament on how the bill will deliver that balance. We must ensure that safeguarding the vulnerable in society continues to be at the forefront of our minds. We must never forget the reasons why the service is so important. The bill will deliver a range of reforms to the protection of vulnerable groups, ensuring a world-class service in protecting the public from those whose past conduct makes them unsuitable to carry out regulated roles with children and adults.

It is widely recognised, in the light of past tragic events, that there is a need for additional scrutiny of a person’s background if they want to work with vulnerable groups or in other sensitive roles. The intention behind the bill is for the focus to remain on having a system of robust disclosure checks for roles that involve such access. However, we recognise that the safeguarding purpose must be balanced with people’s legal right to have appropriate protection of their privacy and, indeed, the ability of people with convictions who now lead law-abiding lives to move on from their past. I believe that the bill achieves that.

The Disclosure (Scotland) Bill must be seen in the context of the wider Government strategy to make positive change to the justice and disclosure systems. That journey, which started with the Management of Offenders (Scotland) Bill and the Age of Criminal Responsibility (Scotland) Act 2019, continues with the proposals in the Disclosure (Scotland) Bill. If enacted, the legislation will represent a transformational improvement in the position of those who seek to move on from their past behaviour. The Government has been committed to ensuring that all three pieces of legislation are designed together for that larger purpose.

The bill contains provisions to introduce a mandatory PVG scheme for people who carry out regulated roles with children or protected adults. Although many organisations treat it as such, the scheme is not currently mandatory, which has made it difficult for individuals and employers to understand their responsibilities and legal duties under the current legislation. There is overwhelming support among stakeholders for the proposal, the need for which was also recognised by Parliament’s Health and Sport Committee, which concluded that there is a “compelling case” that the scheme be mandatory for those who work with children in sport.

We will simplify the process for determining what roles must be included in the PVG scheme. The public perception is that the current system is too complex, and we need to develop a system that makes the process easier, to ensure that the scheme focuses on those who hold power and influence over children and protected adults.

Our engagement with stakeholders has highlighted areas in which safeguarding can be improved, and we have sought to address those issues in the bill. We will provide better protections for individuals who employ or engage the services of another individual in a personal capacity—for example, those who arrange self-directed care. We believe that such provisions complement strengthened referral arrangements for Police Scotland and new referral powers for local authorities and will enable individuals who employ others to have even greater protections.

The bill will allow Disclosure Scotland to impose public protection conditions on scheme members who are under consideration for barring. Since the PVG scheme was enacted, there have been cases in which the ability to impose such conditions would have benefited safeguarding. Our engagement has supported that view, with organisations telling us that having that ability would assist them when they are managing risk in such situations.

As a Government, we aim to focus public services on creating a more successful country, with opportunities for all in Scotland to flourish. That includes creating a strong, sustainable workforce and making sure that no one faces unnecessary barriers to gaining opportunities. Of course, there will always be people who, given their past behaviours, will not be suitable for certain roles, which is why we need the disclosure regime. Disclosure Scotland will continue to identify such individuals and ensure that they are legally prevented from carrying out a regulated role.

However, we must give extra consideration to people who have found themselves involved in the criminal justice system during childhood or adolescence. That is especially true for care-experienced individuals, who we know are more likely to come into contact with the criminal justice system and end up with a criminal record. It is widely recognised that having a criminal record can significantly impact on future life chances and outcomes for young people, including access to education, training and employment. Their opportunities and horizons can be severely limited.

The Age of Criminal Responsibility (Scotland) Act 2019 ensures that harmful behaviour by children under the age of 12 cannot be criminal. However, the provisions that are laid out in the 2019 act change only the position for children under that age. We are learning more and more about the impact of trauma and adverse childhood experiences on life chances. We have to do more, not only to prevent such experiences from happening in the first place, but to limit the damage that is done to individuals, families and communities in the long term. The bill aims to address that issue by providing a system that takes into consideration the context surrounding childhood offences. The consultation strongly supported the idea that disclosure of such information should remain a possibility, but only after careful and informed consideration of its necessity for public protection.

Although it is vital to consider the impact of the changes on safeguarding functions and on people with convictions, the majority of certificates that Disclosure Scotland sends out will not contain any criminal history information. We want to simplify the system to make it accessible and easy to use for all, and to take a user-centred approach for individuals who access disclosure and for the employers with whom they need to share their information.

Our intention is to use a responsive digital first system that is better suited to those who prefer to carry out their business online. We are moving away from the slow and onerous paper-based system by increasing the extent to which applicants and employers can engage digitally with Disclosure Scotland.

Continuous engagement has been vital in shaping the bill that is now before Parliament. We will continue to listen to and engage with Parliament and members of the public to develop the best way to implement the proposals in the bill.

The Scottish Government is committed to ensuring that clear training and guidance materials are developed as we transition to any new provisions. As I previously stated, the aim of safeguarding must remain the focus of the disclosure system. Several of the proposed reforms will complement and improve the safeguarding tools afforded by the current regime.

Today, we will publish the Government’s response to the consultation analysis. The response has been provided to the Scottish Parliament information centre and will be sent to all key stakeholders, including every organisation registered with Disclosure Scotland. The response sets out the policy intent of the bill clearly and simply.

I commend the bill to the Parliament and look forward to constructive engagement in the months ahead. I would be happy to answer questions from members.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I have about 20 minutes in hand for questions.

Elizabeth Smith (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

I thank the minister for prior sight of her statement and put on record the fact that I am a member of the PVG scheme.

The Conservatives support the main thrust of the bill. It is right that we do all that we can to ensure that the PVG system works well and is as simple as possible to use. We are broadly supportive of the bill’s aims.

I have two questions for the minister. First, on making the system mandatory, how many more adults will become members of the system in comparison with the current system and what discussions have taken place between the Scottish Government and key stakeholders to measure the additional costs to organisations that choose to pay the £59 PVG fee?

Secondly, on page 17 of the Scottish Government response to the analysis, there is an acknowledgment that the transition from the current membership arrangements to the new system will

“pose challenges”

and will

“require a careful consideration of fairness”.

Will the minister comment on those specific challenges and what the Scottish Government is doing to address them?

Maree Todd (Scottish National Party, Highlands and Islands)

I thank the member for that question and I welcome the broad support for the bill.

The member asked about the additional costs resulting from the mandatory nature of the scheme. The reason why we are making it mandatory is because there have been incidents in the past when we realised that it was not clear whether someone needed to be disclosed. As a result of those incidents, we realised that it was important to make it mandatory. The Scottish Parliament, through the recommendations of the Health and Sport Committee, also agreed that it should be mandatory.

As well as making the scheme mandatory, we are putting a five-year limit on membership—at the moment there is lifelong membership. The costs will balance out. At the moment, 1.2 million people are criminal-record checked daily. We suspect that there are hundreds of thousands of people in the system who currently have daily criminal record checks, for whom it is not necessary because they are not performing regulated roles.

I apologise, but I have forgotten the first question that the member asked, so perhaps she could repeat it.

Elizabeth Smith (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

My first question was specifically on the costs to organisations of the system being mandatory. As the minister knows, some organisations pay the £59 fee instead of the individual—[

Interruption

.]

The second question was on the statement on page 17 of the Scottish Government response, which says very clearly that the change from the old model to the new one may

“pose challenges”

and

“require a careful consideration of fairness”.

I am looking for some details on those challenges and on what the Scottish Government will do to address them.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Mr Gray, do not mump in my ear. It is very distracting and puts me off balance. We will get there—you will get your chance.

Maree Todd (Scottish National Party, Highlands and Islands)

Many organisations, such as in health and education, already see the scheme as mandatory, so I do not think that there will be an extra cost for them. They will make decisions about whether they will continue to pay or whether individuals must pay for themselves—that is for them to work out.

On the complexities, the bill is very complex and technical and it will take a great deal of effort and engagement to work out how it will be implemented. That will be on-going; there has been a great deal of stakeholder engagement thus far, which we will continue.

Pauline McNeill (Labour, Glasgow)

Labour strongly welcomes the bill. We recognise that a lot of work has gone into getting it right and balancing robust protection for our children and young people with an easy-to-navigate system of disclosure that will allow people to get on with their jobs and others to continue with their voluntary work.

I whole-heartedly welcome the long-overdue proposal to recognise that minor offences that were committed in a person’s youth should not necessarily be used in assessing their suitability for working with children.

Will the minister consider what support voluntary organisations may need because of the switch to the mandatory requirement? We want to make sure that there will be support. My biggest concern is that the minister did not mention in her statement a critical part of the change, which is the suggestion in the published document that there will have to be a renewal every five years. Will the minister confirm that that is still the intention and say why it was not mentioned in the statement? Will she consider whether five years might be thought, by some, to be quite a short period, and will she give a commitment to Parliament that, if that is the case, she will probe the issue to make sure that it does not become a barrier to people having their certificates renewed?

Maree Todd (Scottish National Party, Highlands and Islands)

I broadly welcome the support for the bill, which I was pleased to hear about. We will certainly provide good training and awareness, so that the voluntary sector is able to navigate the new system well.

With regard to the five-year limit, Pauline McNeill will have heard me say to Liz Smith that more than 1.2 million people are members of the PVG scheme and undergo criminal record checks daily. That is not necessarily proportionate, because many of them no longer require that criminal record check or are not working in regulated roles. There is a huge cost associated with those checks, and we think that hundreds of thousands of people who are members of the scheme no longer need to be. It is important to provide an easy way to exit the scheme, and we think that the five-year limit is an appropriate balance. However, that will be a matter for the scrutiny of the bill as it passes through Parliament.

John Finnie (Green, Highlands and Islands)

I lend Scottish Green Party support to the general direction of travel.

There are a couple of mentions of simplification in the bill, and the statement included the comment that

“the public perception is that the current system is too complex”.

The public may well be largely unaware of the system unless they have been directly involved with it. Is there a danger that simplification will be seen as weakening? What steps will the Scottish Government take to reassure the public that the system will remain robust?

Maree Todd (Scottish National Party, Highlands and Islands)

Simplifying the system will make it more robust because it will make it easier for people to engage with it and there will be greater clarity about which product is required. A number of simplifications are included in the bill: all the disclosures will be issued under one act; the number of disclosure products will reduce from 10 to four, which will reduce confusion; and the implementation of digital services will modernise and radically simplify the disclosure system. That means that somebody will not have to decide which disclosure product to look for before they apply; they will be able to go to a website and it will guide them to the appropriate disclosure product for the role that they will be performing. All those measures will strengthen protection because they will make the system much simpler for people to use.

Members will remember that the concept of regulated work has caused some confusion in previous years, so another great simplification is that the bill will allow us to refocus the membership of the PVG scheme on those who possess power over children and protected adults instead of using job titles to determine membership.

Alex Cole-Hamilton (Liberal Democrat, Edinburgh Western)

I am grateful for the early sight of the statement, and

I offer the broad support of Lib Dem members for the bill.

Given that we, as parliamentarians, have regular access to vulnerable groups through case work and that we sometimes have access to young people through school work experience, will the minister take the opportunity that the bill offers to extend the disclosure scheme to parliamentarians and key members of staff who have regular unsupervised contact with vulnerable groups?

Maree Todd (Scottish National Party, Highlands and Islands)

Members can certainly consider that as the bill progresses through Parliament. As I said in my response to John Finnie’s question, one of the simplifications in the bill is the removal of the concept of regulated work, so that a person’s need to be a full member of the PVG scheme relies not on their job title but on whether there is a power imbalance and whether the person holds power over children or vulnerable groups.

I am more than happy to assess whether parliamentarians fall into that category as the bill progresses through Parliament.

Rona Mackay (Scottish National Party, Strathkelvin and Bearsden)

I am pleased that the bill will build on the progressive reforms that are being taken forward in the Management of Offenders (Scotland) Bill, which the Justice Committee has been scrutinising. Does the minister agree with the research evidence that clearly shows that people’s having to continue to relive an offending past damages their chances of being able to move on and contribute meaningfully to society?

Maree Todd (Scottish National Party, Highlands and Islands)

Yes, I whole-heartedly agree with that. For most offenders, the passage of time and the adoption of a crime-free lifestyle provide a basis for their accessing work and making a greater contribution to society. However, we recognise that the situation can be very difficult for employers. That is why I encourage employers who are wary of employing people with convictions to sign up to release Scotland and to avail themselves of the training that Disclosure Scotland offers to help them to understand how to evaluate convictions better.

Some people have offending backgrounds and past conduct that make them wholly unsuitable for roles with vulnerable groups or valuable assets. The disclosure system aims to protect the vulnerable in a very strong way but not to lock out from good employment all those with convictions, because we know that good employment reduces reoffending.

Alison Harris (Conservative, Central Scotland)

I declare that I am a member of the PVG scheme.

Can the minister guarantee that any online upgrade to the disclosure system will be implemented smoothly and that it will simplify the system enough to reduce the number of people who are dissuaded from applying for roles?

Maree Todd (Scottish National Party, Highlands and Islands)

We are intensely focused on the digital programme, and we are confident that the system is at an appropriate stage and will be completed in time for the delivery of the new services.

Our transformation programme continued throughout 2018-19. Disclosure Scotland’s new PASS—protecting and safeguarding Scotland—technology platform began to process applications in June 2018, and, by the end of March 2019, it had taken in excess of 78,000 applications, with 45 per cent of all disclosures being channelled through that new service. Some 16,000 customers have given us feedback on PASS, and 96 per cent of them are very satisfied. That high level of satisfaction demonstrates how well we have listened to our customers and what they have told us they need as the new service has been developed.