Meeting of the Parliament

Meeting date: Thursday, December 22, 2022

Official Report 1299KB pdf

---

Point of Order

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I appreciate that we have up to 20 days in which to submit corrections through the Official Report corrections mechanism. However, today, I seek to correct an entry of mine on 31 May 2017, and to correct entries on behalf of former Conservative member Jamie McGrigor on 30 September 2009 and 23 September 2010. On those dates, we inadvertently repeated statistics that related to Scotland’s wind potential, which we had heard from Scottish Government ministers.

We are now acutely aware that those statistics are incorrect. Parliamentarians and members of the public were misled by Scottish National Party ministers and members into thinking that the figures were true, and I am appalled that I have inadvertently used incorrect figures on the record. We did not receive the briefing from officials that the figures were never sourced, unlike SNP ministers, who were told that multiple times. Therefore, we seek to correct the record. Personally, I will think twice before ever again trusting anything that this SNP Government says.

Although we are happy to correct the record, I note that numerous other offending SNP members are not as forthcoming. In fact, they still come to the chamber repeating the false claim that the figures were at one time true and are now just outdated.

Given that outstanding blight on the Parliament’s Official Report, Presiding Officer, do you feel that the current correction mechanism is working? What parliamentary process is available to members who wish to contribute to reforming that mechanism to ensure that MSPs and ministers are held to a higher standard than they are at the moment?

Thank you, Mr Carson. As you know, that is not a point of order. If there are things that you think require addressing in the standing orders, I would suggest that you write to the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee about that. It is not something on which I can offer any ruling.

---

Health and Social Care

We move on to portfolio questions on health and social care. Again, any member wishing to ask a supplementary question should, during the relevant question, press their request-to-speak button or, if they are joining us online, place RTS in the chat function.

---

General Practice (Grampian Local Medical Committee)

To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to the letter it received from the Grampian local medical committee stating that “General Practice continues to be scapegoated as a profession in order to mask the failings of the Scottish Government”. (S6O-01716)

I have been explicitly clear that any suggestion that general practitioners have not been seeing people face to face because they did not want to is false. It is a dangerous assertion. We know that GP practices are working at capacity. Without expecting more work from our GPs, we need to examine how access arrangements for patients can be improved—many members across the chamber have written to me about that. To that end, I have set up a general practice access group. The group is establishing high-level core principles to support and enhance patients’ experience of accessing the right care at the right place and at the right time.

We are committed to investing £170 million a year to help to grow the multidisciplinary teams in GP practices and to further increasing the number of GPs in Scotland. We remain committed to delivering our target of 800 new GPs by 2027.

It is good to hear that the numbers should be going up, because the latest figures show that, excluding trainees, the number of GPs fell in the past year. The ones who remain are more likely to work part time.

Last week, the chairwoman of the Royal College of General Practitioners in Scotland said that, within the current crisis of workforce shortages, intolerable workload and worryingly low morale in mental health, GPs are firefighting, and many worry that they are no longer working in safe conditions and cannot continue.

It is clear that the cabinet secretary has lost the dressing room. Will he now apologise to our GPs for the mess that he has created, and give our GPs the best Christmas present that they could hope for and resign?

That is brave from a Conservative member, given that the number of GPs in Scotland, if we exclude trainees—as he has asked me to do—is 83 per 100,000, which is higher than the 63 per 100,000 in Conservative-run England. He may, therefore, want to have a word with his colleagues. I would love to be able to invest even more in primary care. What is holding us back this financial year has been his Government’s economic mismanagement of the public finances, which has meant that my budget is worth £650 million less.

When it comes to scapegoating our healthcare workers, the member is astonishingly brave to come up with that a day after his colleague Stephen Barclay shamefully said that healthcare workers were making

“a conscious choice to inflict harm on patients”.

Douglas Lumsden and his Tory colleagues should hang their heads in shame.

There are a number of supplementary questions. Again, I will try to get through as many as possible, but they will need to be brief—as, indeed, will the responses, cabinet secretary.

I would like to hear the cabinet secretary’s view of the content of a report published by the think tank Nuffield Trust, which warns that Britain’s departure from the European Union has made things worse for recruitment strategies in health and social care, while NHS Scotland claims that, since Brexit, it has been restricted in recruiting foreign staff to fill vacancies. [Interruption.] What progress has been made to recruit more GPs to Scotland?

I heard Douglas Lumsden and the Tories moaning and groaning again during Gillian Martin’s important question. There is no doubt at all that the folly of Brexit has caused significant damage not only in the NHS but, importantly, in social care. If members do not believe me, they should feel free to listen to the contributions and the expertise of those in the national health service and the social care sector. Gillian Martin has given us a flavour of their views.

I have launched a recruitment drive to attract GPs to move to Scotland and, in particular, to our rural, remote and island communities, where we know that there are areas of challenge. We have also funded the excellent Scottish graduate entry medicine—ScotGEM—programme, with an emphasis on recruiting GPs. Since 2018, we have established 55 places, increasing to 70 this year, as well as an additional 85 places on GP track courses.

Between the Conservatives’ folly of Brexit and the Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer insulting the overseas workers in our NHS, it is clear that the Scottish National Party is the only party in government that will not only welcome overseas workers to our NHS but value them.

Answers will have to be shorter from now on.

General practice is not alone in being undervalued by the Government. Yesterday, we learned that members of Royal College of Nursing Scotland have overwhelmingly rejected the latest pay offer. Of course, nurses also work in GP surgeries. They have faced years of real-terms pay cuts that have pushed their colleagues out of the profession and put patient safety at risk. Will the cabinet secretary wake up to the fact that his workforce plan has failed and that he has lost the confidence of NHS workers across Scotland? Will he give a commitment now that he will not impose the pay deal and will reopen negotiations tomorrow?

Scottish Labour’s lack of self-awareness is astonishing. For the second week in a row, the Conservative-run NHS in England is seeing strikes in the country in which it is in government, whereas here in Scotland there are no strikes. Yet Ms Baillie suggests to the Scottish Government that it has somehow lost the dressing room.

That is so complacent.

Ms Baillie speaks from a sedentary position, but she might want to listen to what the British Medical Association said about her colleague, Wes Streeting, who attacked NHS workers. It said:

“It was not so long ago that Mr Streeting and the Labour Party were clapping healthcare workers for their contributions during the pandemic. So to hear them now accusing staff of a something for nothing culture and potentially supporting a further real-terms pay cut will leave many staff extremely concerned.”

Labour MP Diane Abbott responded by saying:

“Inch by inch Wes [Streeting] is trying to push for a privatised/insurance based NHS all in the name of ‘reform’.”

It is a shame that Scottish Labour Party members could not join their colleague Diane Abbott in calling out Wes Streeting’s insulting remarks about healthcare workers.

Ms Baillie and Mr Lumsden, I have invited you to ask questions. You have done so, but you have then sought to interrupt the cabinet secretary as he is trying to respond to them. Can we have a bit of respect, please?

Dear, oh dear. The cabinet secretary is in victim mode again—yet he has been telling nurses not to be patronising. The Brexit referendum was a national one, which the SNP does not seem to fully understand.

There are 23 fewer qualified GPs than last year and a 9 per cent drop in GP practices, while whole-time equivalent consultants are down by 14.3 per cent and we have double the number of vacancies for consultants than you claim. What new plans do you have to help to recruit GPs? Your flimsy recovery plan simply does not cut it.

I remind Dr Gulhane to speak through the chair.

Imagine a Conservative member coming here to lecture us on how we should be treating NHS healthcare staff when his colleague in England said that healthcare workers are consciously inflicting harm on patients. You cannot even stand up for yourself, let alone stand up for our healthcare workers. [Interruption.] Through the chair, I say to Sandesh Gulhane, “Have some self-respect yourself.”

We are taking five actions to help with GP recruitment. The first is that an active GP recruitment campaign is under way. Secondly, we have managed to have a record year for our GP specialist training fill rate. Thirdly, as part of the 2021-22 programme for government, we committed to increasing medical school places by 100 per annum, and we are doing that. Fourthly, we have the ScotGEM programme that I mentioned.

The fifth—this is not in our gift, but perhaps Sandesh Gulhane can help, with the minimal influence that he has with the United Kingdom Government—there have been calls on the UK Government to ensure changes to pensions, which are disincentivising GPs. Perhaps he can use his minimal influence with the UK Government to get some change in that respect.

I apologise to members whom I have not been able to bring in for supplementaries, but we have to move on to question 2.

---

General Practitioners (Estimated Shortage)

To ask the Scottish Government what its position is on British Medical Association Scotland’s reported estimate that Scotland is approximately 1,000 short of the required number of whole-time-equivalent general practitioners. (S6O-01717)

We would be keen to see the BMA’s evidence base for that estimate. As I have said, we are making good progress against our commitment to increasing the number of GPs by 800 by the end of 2027. The number of GPs has increased by almost 300 since 2017, when the target was first announced, and we now have a record 5,209 GPs working in Scotland. The increase in GP headcount will help deliver an increase in GP whole-time-equivalent capacity, too.

The number of GPs required to meet capacity depends on a number of factors, including the size and shape of the team around them. Although GP headcount is how we measure our commitment, both sets of data are important and, as I have said, we will continue to work with the BMA on this.

In recent weeks, I have met several GPs across East Lothian, and they have expressed concern about the increasing pressures that they are facing in their practices and the impact of the Government’s cuts on their ability to meet capacity. First, will the cabinet secretary take what these clinicians are saying seriously? Secondly, they talk about practices that are patient-oriented and which have continuity of care. Such an approach has numerous benefits, not least in shortening the time that GPs need to read about the patient who is seeing them. Does the cabinet secretary support such a model, and how is he supporting it with regard to the interaction between GP practices and health boards?

I thank Martin Whitfield for his helpful follow-up question. I am, of course, aware of the pressures that his GP colleagues in East Lothian have raised with him; indeed, barely a week or month goes past when I am not interacting regularly with GPs. I might well pay a visit to the GP practices in East Lothian.

However, it is exactly because of those issues that the member has raised, not just on patient access but on time with patients, that I have set up the GP access group. GPs are, of course, part of that group, and I want a patient representative to be on it, too. Nobody doubts how hard GPs work, and I have said as much to GPs and will say it again in the chamber: GPs are working unbelievably hard. However, I think that the hybrid model of face-to-face and telephone or video consultations should continue and should be embedded.

That said, I get representations on this from across the chamber; in fact, I got representations from Monica Lennon at committee yesterday, when she made the point that some people are still struggling to see their GPs face to face. That is true right across the country, and anything that we can do to improve that situation while working with GPs will be good not only for people’s confidence in general practice but for the public in general.

Again, there is a lot of interest. I want to get all the supplementaries in, so again I must ask for brief questions and responses.

What impact have George Osborne’s pension changes had on GP numbers over the past decade, given how many have felt compelled to retire as a direct result of them?

As briefly as possible, please, cabinet secretary.

I do not have the exact numbers in front of me, but I say to Kenny Gibson that this is one of the key issues that GPs up and down the country raise with me. Regardless of where they are, GPs ask for pension changes.

In fairness to the UK Government, some changes have been made but, as Kenny Gibson has rightly said, they have been too little, too late for many GPs. There are further changes that the UK Government could make—and which it is, I understand, consulting on—and I urge it to do the right thing. After all, although GP recruitment is important, there is no point in filling up a leaky bucket. Retention is really important, too, and pension changes should be able to help in that respect.

The problem is that the Government has been in denial for many years about the number of GPs. Many in the chamber were warning that the Scottish Government needed to up recruitment, but it failed to act at the time. As a result, the crisis in primary care is solely down to the Scottish Government being asleep at the wheel. What new measures is the cabinet secretary going to take? Far too many patients in my constituency cannot even get through on the phone, let alone get an appointment.

I do not agree with the member’s characterisation of the situation; indeed, the figures do not bear it out, either. Excluding trainees, Scotland has 83 GPs per 100,000, which is vastly higher than other parts of the UK—not by a small margin, but by quite a significant one—and it is a demonstration of our recruitment record.

I have given a list of things that we are already doing. On the challenges with access, there is no doubt that numbers of GPs will play a part in that, but there are things that can be done to improve access to GPs right now. That is why I set up the GP access group. GPs and patient representatives will be part of that and, as it meets and gives me recommendations, I will ensure that Willie Rennie and the rest of the Parliament are kept updated.

Earlier this month, the BMA’s GP committee noted that Labour was guilty of demonising GPs who are trying their best to deliver care. What steps is the Scottish Government taking to engage constructively with our health trade unions to ensure that being a GP remains an attractive career choice with a manageable workload?

I take our relationship with health trade unions seriously. It is why, for the second week in a row, we are the only part of the country where there are not strikes. I do not take that for granted. It is because of meaningful discussions and negotiations with the trade unions and, as I hope is recognised, the Government.

I will continue that engagement. I will ensure that my door is always open to meaningful dialogue. Neither I nor the Government will stand up to demonise our health workers in the way that, I am sad to say, we have seen from the Conservative Party and from Wes Streeting in the Labour Party, too.

---

Air Pollution (Impact on Mental Health)

To ask the Scottish Government what the impact of air pollution is on mental health. (S6O-01718)

The relationship between air quality and health is complex and it is uncertain what impact air pollution has on the mental health of individuals. There is an emerging body of research that indicates an association between air pollution and an increased risk of mental illness. There is also some evidence to suggest that air pollution is associated with altered brain function and structure, the implications of which are not yet clear.

It is important to point out that air pollution targets are being met across the vast majority of Scotland, although pollution hotspots are still present in some cities and town centres. Work with local authorities and other partners is under way to address those hotspots as quickly as possible, such as the introduction of low-emission zones in our four largest cities.

The Scottish Government takes air pollution very seriously and is in regular contact with the Scottish Environment Protection Agency—the independent regulator—concerning its regulatory role in relation to industrial sites in Scotland.

Researchers at Washington DC’s American University studied the impact of fine atmospheric particulate matter concentrations and suicide levels over seven years. Conclusive results showed a direct link between depression, suicide and atmospheric pollution, even when an area is polluted for a single day. That is probably because an inflammatory response to particulates in the brain disrupts the pathways that regulate mood. Given those findings, what further steps will the Scottish ministers take to tackle air pollution?

I will take a look at that research from the American University in Washington DC.

The strategy “Cleaner Air for Scotland 2: Towards a Better Place for Everyone”, which was published in July 2021, sets out how the Scottish Government will, with partners, continue to deliver air-quality improvements over the next five years. It contains more than 80 actions across health, place making, transport, public engagement and industrial emissions.

Levels of the main air pollutants have declined significantly in Scotland over the past three decades. That has been achieved through tighter regulation, improved fuel quality, cleaner vehicles and an increased focus on sustainable transport. All of that has happened but, nonetheless, our vision and aspiration is for Scotland to have the cleanest air in Europe.

Given the growing body of evidence, does the minister agree that the situation is a public health emergency and that we need to take a public health approach, as has been advocated in greater Manchester by Labour mayor Andy Burnham under the Marmot review? Will the minister take a look at that along with Maree Todd?

As I said in my initial answer, there is an emerging body of research. We will continue to monitor that and act accordingly.

Question 4 was not lodged.

---

“Ask Them About Suicide”

To ask the Scottish Government what help it is providing to suicide support services, including SAMH and its recently launched campaign, Ask Them About Suicide, ahead of the festive season. (S6O-01720)

In September, the Scottish Government and the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities published a new suicide prevention strategy, called “Creating Hope Together”. The strategy aims to reduce the number of suicide deaths while tackling the inequalities that contribute to suicide. It is supported by the programme for government commitment to double annual funding for suicide prevention to £2.8 million by 2025-26.

The new 10-year strategy and first action plan will build on the strong partnership model that underpinned the delivery of the previous action plan, called “Every Life Matters”. The partnership model involves third sector mental health partners leading delivery of key elements of Scottish Government-funded activity. Over the past four years, that has included Government funding for the Scottish Association for Mental Health to develop the social movement United to Prevent Suicide and to deliver a range of national suicide prevention campaigns, including FC United to Prevent Suicide and the better tomorrow campaign.

We greatly value the role and contribution of all third sector partners across Scotland that are working nationally and locally to prevent suicide, and we look forward to extending our partnership approach as we deliver the new strategy.

SAMH’s campaign encourages everyone to simply ask the question, “Are you thinking about suicide?” if they are concerned about a loved one. Does the minister encourage anyone who is concerned about a loved one to ask the difficult yet simple question, “Are you thinking about suicide?” to allow them to seek further support?

I agree with Evelyn Tweed that we should all be alert to suicide in our communities and ask anyone who is struggling with their mental health the question, “Are you thinking about suicide?” By asking that crucial question, we show care and compassion, which can help people to talk more openly about their feelings. It also creates a space in which to discuss reaching out for further support and advice.

I call Carol Mochan for a brief supplementary.

In the absence of Jim Fairlie’s debate on male suicide this week, it is important to recognise that 75 per cent of the people who died by suicide in 2020-21 were male and that a high proportion of those males were young and from a more deprived area. Every death by suicide is a tragedy—it means a life lost and a family grieving a loved one. It is abundantly clear that we need a strategy that not only promises but delivers.

How will the Scottish Government work with organisations that have close links to large groups of young men, such as football clubs—there is Kilmarnock Football Club, in my area, and Ayr United in South Ayrshire, which is in my region—to ensure that we continue to make progress together towards fully removing the stigma of talking about mental health and suicide, particularly among the young male group?

I recognise the issue’s importance, but we will have to have shorter supplementary questions, in particular, as well as shorter responses.

I will be very quick. I hope that we will have the opportunity to debate Mr Fairlie’s important motion. As I have said before in the chamber, football clubs have a big role to play here. In recent times, I have been to St Mirren for a suicide prevention day, which was very worthwhile for the community. There is also the changing room—extra time programme, which we run in association with clubs and SAMH.

---

Forth Valley Royal Hospital

I remind members of my entry in the register of members’ interests.

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on the actions taken in Forth Valley royal hospital following its escalation to stage 4 of the NHS Scotland national performance framework for governance, leadership and culture. (S6O-01721)

This week, I met Christine McLaughlin, who chairs the assurance board, alongside the external support team. The assurance board is providing direct monitoring and support to Forth Valley, but the onus is on the national health service board to commit to and deliver improvement.

It is important that we allow NHS Forth Valley the opportunity to deliver immediate and tangible improvements in the coming weeks. In my statement to Parliament last month, I committed to writing to members before the end of the calendar year. I have signed off that response, so, if it has not come to members yet, it certainly will come later today.

I thank the cabinet secretary for his answer. The escalation to stage 4 is long overdue, but this escalation is focused at a very senior level. That may be where the change needs to begin, but what about support for workers on the front line? The failures have had a massive impact on them, leading not simply to low morale but to burnout, anxiety and depression. Cabinet secretary, on your watch, those health workers are on their knees, with many leaving the service altogether.

I have been told that, just last weekend, one nurse at the Forth Valley Royal hospital was left on her own with responsibility for 37 patients—37—which is over four times more than the recommended safe limit. When is action finally going to be taken by this Government to give assurance not just to the leadership but to the patients and to give assurance and support to the poor bloody infantry who are working on the front line this Christmas?

To be clear, the assurance process and the improvement plan associated with the escalation framework are not just for the management or, indeed, for the board. We expect to see those improvements, and we will monitor the situation. We will, of course, ensure that those improvements percolate from the top right the way through to those who are on the front line.

I will not go into detail about some of the challenges that health systems right across the United Kingdom are facing, as we do not have the time, but we can try to take care of the wellbeing of our staff, and one way of doing that is by making sure that they are paid well. That is why I will continue to engage meaningfully with our trade unions, and that is why we have put that record pay deal on the table.

I have committed to meeting the whistleblowing champion at Forth Valley. I think that there is a strong role for whistleblowing to play right across our national health service. I have not been able to meet the whistleblowing champion yet, but I intend to do that early in the new year.

We are at 25 minutes and we have two other questions in the Business Bulletin. I want to get supplementary questions in. These portfolio questions are important, but the questions will need to be short and the answers need to be shorter.

The cabinet secretary must be familiar with the very critical report that lays bare a culture of bullying and intimidation in Forth Valley NHS. That is admitted by the senior management, and the hospital is now in special measures. There must be a question of competence and confidence, so why has no one resigned or been sacked? Why does the cabinet secretary continue to have such confidence in those who have managed to make such a fine mess of things?

The escalation framework is there for a reason. It is important that we are able to escalate Forth Valley in the circumstances, but I think that it would be reasonable to say to the board—and I think that any reasonable person would understand this—that we expect an improvement plan, that we will hold the board to account for that improvement plan and that, if we do not see that improvement, there will be another level of escalation.

I would implore Stephen Kerr to look at the improvement plan. We will have everything published on our website so that it is transparent, open and there for people to see. Let us then make sure that we are collectively holding NHS Forth Valley to account. Ultimately, that is my responsibility, of course, and I give the member a guarantee that I will be doing that.

---

Social Care Workers (Support)

To ask the Scottish Government what specific measures are being taken to support social care workers during the cost of living crisis. (S6O-01722)

There are more than 1,200 social care providers across Scotland, with local authorities being responsible for providing or commissioning services.

Local authorities and health and social care partnerships will want to ensure that they provide appropriate support to social care workers. In addition, the Scottish Government is committed to improving fair work practices across the social care sector: over the past year, we have increased pay from £9.50 per hour to £10.50 per hour, and we will further increase the rate to the real living wage next year. We continue to work with stakeholders to secure improved terms and conditions, including improved sick pay and maternity and paternity pay.

I thank the minister for that answer, but does he agree with me that, this winter, the situation facing social care workers—who have, for too long, been underpaid and undervalued in our society—is another example of why they cannot afford to wait for a national care service before they see real improvement in their working conditions?

That is why we are not waiting for the national care service to be up and running to improve pay and conditions. As I pointed out, we will raise pay again to the level of the real living wage, which is not the case in either England or Wales, where social care workers are on the minimum wage.

Beyond that, this week, along with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, we published our statement of intent to help to improve conditions. One of the conditions that I want to see being improved very quickly indeed is maternity pay, because I believe that it is extremely unfair, in this day and age, that there are women out there who are not entitled to maternity pay. That is one of many things that we will be doing before we get to the national care service.

---

North-east Hub Health and Care Centre

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on the new North East Hub Health and Care Centre in Parkhead, Glasgow. (S6O-01723)

Construction started on 28 March 2022. The construction programme is on schedule and the hub is planned to be completed in two phases—July 2024 for the main building and August 2025 for the car park. Following handover of the first phase, there will be an eight-week equipping and transition period before patients move to the new hub.

It is encouraging to see the building, which is just around the corner from my office, going up fairly rapidly. Once the hub is operational, will that mean that fewer patients have to travel to Stobhill from the east end of Glasgow? Travelling to Stobhill by public transport is not easy.

As briefly as possible, cabinet secretary.

I share John Mason’s excitement about the project. If anybody has not seen the concept behind the Parkhead hub, I encourage them to do so.

The short answer to the question is that, yes, it should result in a reduction in the number of patients who travel to Stobhill. The hub will have a space for outpatient clinics and the delivery of enhanced treatment and care that are tailored to the community. That should result in fewer trips to Stobhill.

That concludes portfolio questions on health and social care.

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I seek your guidance on the courtesy that members should show when they ask a question on a portfolio. Should they stay in the chamber and not leave until questions on that portfolio have ended?

The member is entirely correct, as befits the convener of the relevant committee. Members should extend that courtesy to all other members and to ministers. I am not sure whom the member is referring to, but that is the correct position. Thank you for that helpful clarification.

---

Social Justice, Housing and Local Government

The next portfolio is social justice, housing and local government. If a member wishes to request a supplementary question, they should press their request-to-speak button during the relevant question or enter RTS in the chat function online.

Question 1 is from Stephanie Callaghan.

Sorry, Presiding Officer, I do not have anything here. There has been a bit of confusion with my papers. I apologise.

Ms Callaghan, you have question 1, but it might be that you wish to withdraw your question. Perhaps you could confirm.

I am sorry. There has been a bit of confusion, as I did not have my question with me, but I have it now.

---

“The Cost of a Child in Scotland in 2022—update”

To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to the Child Poverty Action Group report, “The Cost of a Child in Scotland in 2022—update”. (S6O-01724)

I welcome the report’s recognition that our policies are making a major contribution to families. We have allocated almost £3 billion this financial year to help to mitigate the cost crisis. More than £1 billion of that support is available only in Scotland, including the Scottish child payment, which has been expanded to eligible six to 15-year olds and increased to £25 per child per week. Our budget confirms our commitment to tackling child poverty.

The report rightly notes the harmful impact of United Kingdom Government decisions, and we will continue to urge the UK Government to tackle the cost crisis on the scale that is required.

What continuing discussions are we having with the UK Government about getting the support to children across the UK and encouraging it to follow Scotland’s lead?

I recognise Stephanie Callaghan’s point. A recent Scottish Government analysis highlighted that, if key Westminster welfare reforms were reversed, it could put £780 million into the pockets of Scottish households and lift 70,000 people, including 30,000 children, out of poverty in 2023-24.

The Scottish Government stands by its call to the UK Government to increase universal credit by £25 per week and extend it to the means-tested legacy benefits, to end the benefit cap, the two-child limit and, while they are at it, the rape clause, to provide additional support with fuel bills, and to match our ambitions in tackling child poverty by introducing an equivalent to our game-changing Scottish child payment.

---

Domestic Abuse Services (Guidance)

To ask the Scottish Government what guidance is in place for local authorities commissioning domestic abuse services. (S6O-01725)

The commissioning of domestic abuse services is a matter for local authorities. However, the Scottish Government strongly encourages local authorities to utilise the joint Convention of Scottish Local Authorities and Scottish Women’s Aid guidance on good practice in commissioning specialist domestic abuse services. Through delivering equally safe, we fund the Improvement Service and Safelives to work with local violence against women partnerships to build and grow the capacity and capability of local services across Scotland.

I and other colleagues consistently raised concerns when North Lanarkshire Council tendered its domestic abuse services contract, contrary, in my opinion, to the COSLA-approved guidance. Despite the council’s stated commitment to continue partnership working, Women’s Aid groups continue to provide more specialist support than the new council service, but without local authority financial support.

My office has been made aware of a number of vulnerable women who have fallen through the cracks of the council service and are now being supported by Women’s Aid. I sought to raise those concerns face to face with the leader of North Lanarkshire Council, but he has declined to meet me on the issue. Will the minister meet me and representatives from Motherwell and District Women’s Aid so that we can ensure that survivors of domestic abuse are afforded agency and choice in the provision of specialist support and refuge, with no woman and child left behind in that process?

We want to ensure that the funding that is provided works most effectively to improve outcomes for those using violence against women and girls services across Scotland. That is why we commissioned an independent strategic review of funding to tackle violence against women and girls, which will report in mid-2023.

Any services that are commissioned should be done through a trauma-informed process, and we are aware of the funding situation in North Lanarkshire regarding services to tackle violence against women and girls. The Scottish Government cannot interfere with local authority autonomy and procurement procedures, but we continue to encourage local authorities to follow the procedures and guidance that are in place in the joint COSLA and Scottish Women’s Aid guidance that I mentioned earlier.

I would be more than happy to meet the member and anyone else who is concerned about those services.

West Dunbartonshire in my region recorded the second-highest number of domestic abuse incidents per 10,000 of population in Scotland in 2021-22. That number sits at around 161 incidents per 10,000 of population, despite West Dunbartonshire Council increasing its spend on domestic abuse services by more than 10 per cent in the past five years. How is the Scottish Government supporting local authorities such as West Dunbartonshire that suffer the highest rate of domestic abuse to increase their capacity to support victims of domestic abuse and tackle this appalling crime?

I recognise the points that Pam Gosal has made. Our delivering equally safe fund is providing £19 million per year to support 121 projects from 112 organisations that focus on early intervention and prevention, as well as support services. Of that, £14 million is being provided to the Women’s Aid network in Scotland over two years, supporting secondary prevention of domestic abuse across Scotland through supporting services and informing policy.

Over the period 2021 to 2023, the delivering equally safe fund is providing £2 million to support the roll-out of the safe and together model, which it is providing training on across 11 local authority areas—I am not sure whether West Dunbartonshire is one of them, but I will find out—and a further £1 million to be spent towards the Cedar project, which is a group model that works for children who have experienced domestic abuse. Some £209,000 of funding is going to Safelives to develop our multi-agency risk assessment conference for high-risk victim-survivors. I commend that work to Pam Gosal for her interest, and I can give her more information if she seeks it.

Additionally, we fund the domestic abuse and forced marriage helpline, and through our victim-centred approach fund, we support Edinburgh Women’s Aid, Fife Women’s Aid, Western Isles Women’s Aid, Angus Women’s Aid and Dumbarton District Women’s Aid, with a total of £1.3 million over three years. I am happy to speak to and meet with Pam Gosal to discuss that further.

There is a supplementary from Beatrice Wishart, who is joining us online.

How will the Scottish Government ensure, in any guidance or discussions that it has with local authorities that are commissioning domestic abuse services, that local situations within authorities are taken into account, so that services, particularly in island and rural areas, have local knowledge and understanding of those island and rural communities?

Beatrice Wishart will be aware of the independent review that Leslie Evans is working through. She is looking at all aspects across Scotland, including our rural and island communities. Her reports and recommendations will be published in summer 2023. That will allow us to see what the funding landscape is across the whole of Scotland.

In addition, I am working very closely with the new chair of the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities community wellbeing board, Councillor Maureen Chalmers. We had a development day a few weeks ago with all of the services across Scotland to develop our new approach to the equally safe strategy. That approach is not about chucking out equally safe and starting with something new; it is about looking at what works and where the gaps are. Some of our focus is on provision of that across rural services, as well as looking at primary prevention.

I would be happy to meet Beatrice Wishart and talk to her this summer about some of the recommendations that come from the Leslie Evans review.

---

Short-term Let Accommodation (Licensing)

To ask the Scottish Government when it plans to review the legislation on licensing of short-term let accommodation, in light of the reported unintended consequences for existing providers that have emerged. (S6O-01726)

The licensing scheme seeks to ensure that short-term lets are safe and well managed. We do not believe that there will be adverse consequences. We are working with local authorities to resolve any implementation concerns that have been raised since the scheme went live in October.

On 7 December, we announced plans to extend the transition period that existing hosts have to apply for a licence by six months, in recognition of the economic circumstances of the cost crisis. The Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice, Housing and Local Government is therefore considering the timing of the review and will update Parliament in due course.

I thank the minister for his response, but I can give him an example of an unintended adverse consequence right now. My constituents at the Homelands Trust, in Fife, which is a small charity based in Lundin Links, run a facility providing respite breaks for people with disabilities and life-limiting conditions and their unpaid carers in four purpose-built, physically adapted properties.

Because of the rising demand for their services, my constituents are building five new accessible lodges, with 34 bed spaces for people with disabilities, which are due to be completed early next year. However, they cannot apply for a licence to operate the properties until they are completed, and then Fife Council has up to nine months to issue the licence. That means that potentially they might not be able to take any guests into that accommodation for another year. They have incurred the costs, but they cannot generate any income from the new properties for, potentially, nine months after they are completed.

I assume that that is an unintended consequence of the legislation. How will the Scottish Government address what is a very real problem for a small charity that is trying to help people with very serious issues?

If the member wants to write to me or the cabinet secretary about any specific local instance, I am sure that we can look into the details of that situation and get back to him.

However, it is clear that the licensing scheme is intended to address the very real consequences of an unregulated market, which have involved issues ranging from antisocial behaviour to a lack of safety, for either the community or people who use short-term lets. Responsible operators have absolutely nothing to worry about, because they are already managing to achieve high standards. We should all want to raise the sector up to those standards as we continue to work with local authorities around their wider powers on planning.

Again, if the member is unhappy, I would urge him to write to me or the cabinet secretary about the specific local situation.

Also in Fife, the council is suggesting that it will not be possible to utilise the control area powers until 2024, after the licensing provisions are fully in place. Does the minister believe that it is necessary to wait that long, and did he envisage that control areas could not be delivered until after the licence scheme was in place?

As the measures were being developed, there was significant debate across the Parliament and a growing understanding that those are separate provisions. The licensing scheme is principally about safety and standards, whereas control areas, which are local authority planning powers, have more to do with provision and ensuring that properties are not lost as homes due to being siphoned off by people running, in effect, hotel businesses. It is understandable that the schemes operate separately and are used for different purposes. I am sure that all local authorities seek to strike the right balance in how they use the powers in future.

Question 4 has not been lodged.

---

Community Housing Associations

To ask the Scottish Government what discussions it has had with the Scottish Housing Regulator regarding the future of community housing associations. (S6O-01728)

We have regular engagement with the independent Scottish Housing Regulator on how it contributes to supporting the delivery of our national outcomes.

We very much value the diversity of the housing association sector in Scotland. One of the key strengths of community housing associations is their unique position in delivering local, democratically accountable housing and services. We want a Scotland in which everyone can play a full part in society, with empowered communities that are able to shape their individual and collective futures. Community housing associations have been doing that for decades in many parts of Scotland and will continue to do so.

The minister might not be aware, but Reidvale Housing Association in Dennistoun in Glasgow, one of the oldest community housing associations in Scotland, is currently under threat of being railroaded into a merger against the wishes of residents and the wider local community, with members of more than 40 years’ standing being hounded off the management committee and co-opted members being brought in to gerrymander decisions that are critical to Reidvale’s future. To date, there has been utter intransigence on the part of the Scottish Housing Regulator, and the residents have lost all confidence in the process and the willingness of the regulator to help them. Will the minister look at the case of Reidvale with a view to pausing any tender process for a transfer of undertakings? Will he commit to working with me on a cross-party basis, with residents and with fellow Glasgow parliamentarians, to ensure that that vital community housing association remains rooted in its local community?

I thank Paul Sweeney for his very sincere concern about the issue, and I am sure that I or the Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice, Housing and Local Government will be happy to engage with him on it.

The Scottish Housing Regulator is of course an independent regulator of social landlords, and its statutory objective is to protect the interests of service users and tenants. It uses its powers to monitor, assess, report and intervene, where appropriate.

I am aware of the situation in relation to Reidvale. The management committee has commissioned options on its future and has agreed to a recommendation to seek expressions of interest from organisations that wish to become a transfer partner. However, it is important to recognise that the proposed transfer will not proceed unless it is supported by tenants in an independent ballot. Therefore, the community has the final say.

Again, I look forward to further opportunities to engage with Mr Sweeney on the issue.

---

Local Government (Jobs and Services)

To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to reported warnings from the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities that local government job losses are “inevitable” and that services will have to be reduced. (S6O-01729)

Nobody underestimates the challenges that public services face, but the Scottish Government has increased local government funding by more than £1 billion this year, and the 2023-24 local government settlement will provide a further increase of more than £570 million compared with the budget in 2022-23, which includes an extra £39.4 million to support day-to-day services in Aberdeenshire.

We are building flexibility and autonomy into how budgets can be spent, but a more fundamental shift is required, as the Deputy First Minister has said. He has invited council leaders to work with the Scottish Government and other partners to design our services around the needs and interests of the people and communities of Scotland. That is how we will deliver sustainable public services in partnership.

I thank the minister for that answer, but he may want to review it, because the Fraser of Allander Institute said that the funding that was allocated to local government in last week’s budget was equal to a 4.9 per cent real-terms decrease, based on spending last year, while the Institute for Fiscal Studies has accused the Scottish Government of overstating the spending increases by comparing spending next year with last year’s budget without taking into account in-year rises. In Aberdeenshire, that will mean that non-statutory functions of the council, from providing school crossing patrollers to maintaining our bridges, will be at risk. Does the minister agree with those statements?

As the member will be aware, the Scottish Government’s budget has been impacted very detrimentally, to the tune of £1.7 billion, by the inflationary pressures that were caused by the previous Chancellor of the Exchequer’s mini-budget in the autumn. In such challenging circumstances, in which we face the most challenging budget settlement since devolution, we will provide in the budget for 2023-24 a local government settlement of £13.2 billion, which, as I have stated, is an increase of more than £570 million since the passing of the Budget (Scotland) Act 2022.

As well as that additional spending for local government, there is also spending on our work together on shared priorities. It is important that we keep those shared priorities in mind.

---

Children and Young People in Poverty (Support)

To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to ensure that children and young people in families experiencing poverty are supported throughout the Christmas holiday period. (S6O-01730)

The Scottish Government is taking a number of actions, including the payment to around 145,000 children of this month’s bridging payment, which will be doubled to £260. That means that eligible families will receive up to £650 this year in bridging payments. In addition, we are providing £21.75 million to local authorities in 2022-23 to support families who are eligible for free school meals during school holidays.

Tackling child poverty is a national mission, and we are using the powers and resources available to us to support families. That includes delivery of our transformative Scottish child payment to all eligible children under 16. That payment was increased to £25 per week from 14 November.

I welcome the minister’s response. I know that he will agree that no child or young person should experience holiday hunger at Christmas or lack access to nutritious food as a result of poverty, at any time of year.

Can the minister reassure me that the Scottish Government is satisfied that local authorities and third sector organisations have access to all the resources that they might need to ensure that no child or young person will experience holiday hunger over the festive period? I would like to suggest a new year resolution. Will the Government redouble its efforts to expand universal free school meals to pupils in primaries 6 and 7 and those in secondary schools in 2023?

I thank Monica Lennon for that important question. Of course, the Government, along with its partners and local authorities, is applying itself to the task of supporting families, young people and households who need support across the Christmas period. That support will extend into the next financial year. As part of the budget, £22 million will be invested in providing meals to children who need them most during the school holidays. We will also invest an additional £16 million of resource and £80 million of capital to fund the expansion of free school meals to all primary 6 and 7 pupils who are in receipt of the Scottish child payment as the next step in fulfilling the commitment to universal provision in primary schools. That is on top of the £442 million that has been allocated for the Scottish child payment.

I pay tribute to Monica Lennon, who has been one of the most active MSPs in promoting the devolved Scottish benefits. Many of her constituents and, indeed, many of all our constituents will benefit from that extra provision for the Scottish child payment.

I welcome Scottish Government interventions such as the Scottish child payment that are completely unique to Scotland. However, given the fiscal constraints of devolution and the damaging impact of Tory welfare policies, is it not the case that it is simply not possible to go as far as we would like to go to eradicate child poverty here in Scotland while the key levers are held at Westminster?

Unfortunately, as Christina McKelvie said earlier, the impact of UK Government policies is hampering our efforts to tackle child poverty. In addition to the damage that has been caused by UK Government welfare policies over several years, the chancellor plans to bring a further 600,000 people who are already working into a sanctions regime. We know that a sanctions regime for universal credit does not work.

While the UK Government’s policies are, unfortunately, pushing people into hardship, the Scottish Government is taking all the actions that it can to tackle child poverty. Our budget prioritises the Scottish child payment—I have already mentioned that it has increased to £25 per week—and has invested £428 million to upgrade all devolved benefits.

---

Families Experiencing Poverty (Support for Life-sustaining Equipment)

To ask the Scottish Government what discussions the social justice secretary has had with ministerial colleagues regarding the support available to families experiencing poverty, including as a result of rising energy costs when a seriously ill child relies on life-sustaining equipment at home. (S6O-01731)

Every week, ministers discuss how we are assisting, and can assist, the people of Scotland during the cost of living crisis. As I said in response to Mr Briggs at the Social Justice and Social Security Committee last week, no seriously ill person should have to worry about their finances at such a difficult time, which is why some patients using haemodialysis or oxygen equipment at home are already accessing financial support. We will continue to work with health boards to ensure that, as far as possible, those people who require support are able to access it.

Our child winter heating assistance benefit is only available in Scotland and automatically paid to families of around 25,000 children and young people. It has recently been paid out to help people with energy bills. As I have said, recipients have begun to receive the payment of £214.10 in recent weeks.

I have raised these issues with the minister on a number of occasions. We know the additional cost that families are facing, especially those families who are caring for people with long-term, terminal conditions. I welcome some of the work that the minister outlined, but it is clear that we need to see more done and to collectively go further.

The minister has already agreed to meet me in the new year. Would he agree to consider where the Government could develop additional support around care at home or hospital at home services to help meet those costs? It is clear that for the 5,000 families with children with a life-limiting condition, we need to see an additional support package around energy costs. Will the minister look to take that work forward in the new year on a cross-party basis?

As Mr Briggs is aware—I said so to him last week—I recognise his work on raising awareness of the issues experienced by households that are caring for somebody who is either terminally ill or disabled. On several occasions, he and stakeholders have proposed a number of different initiatives in relation to both the current benefit system and new benefits, such as Scottish carer’s assistance, as we continue to develop them.

There is merit in our assessing those proposals, but we also need to consider the financial circumstances. I look forward to engaging with Mr Briggs on what is both doable and affordable in the years ahead.

Given that energy pricing and the majority of welfare powers are reserved to the UK Government, what more does the cabinet secretary think that the UK Government should be doing to provide support to vulnerable families?

We have called several times on the UK Government to target additional support to those people who are already struggling. That support should include a £25 uplift in universal credit, which should be extended to means-tested legacy benefits, and, of course, an end to the benefit cap and the two-child limit.

We will continue to press the UK Government to undertake those changes and use all the levers at its disposal to tackle that emergency at the scale that is required. That includes access to borrowing, provision of benefits and support to households, VAT on fuel, taxation on windfall profits, and regulation of the energy market. We hope that the UK Government will do more in the new year.

That concludes portfolio questions on social justice, housing, and the local government. There will be a very short pause to allow front-bench teams to change positions before the statement.