Official Report 736KB pdf
Deputy First Minister Responsibilities, Economy and Gaelic
Good afternoon. The first item of business is portfolio question time, and the first portfolio is Deputy First Minister responsibilities, economy and Gaelic. Given our busy programme this afternoon and into the evening, I make the usual, but more impassioned, plea for brevity in questions and in answers.
Transmission-related Job Opportunities
To ask the Scottish Government, regarding the potential impact on regional economies and employment, what assessment it has made of the extent to which projected transmission-related job opportunities are dependent on the consenting outcome for proposed overhead line projects within the current network upgrade programme. (S6O-05058)
The Scottish Government is committed to a just transition to net zero, which will bring opportunities across Scotland’s economy, including from the network upgrade programme. Our “Green Industrial Strategy” sets out how the Scottish Government helps businesses and investors to realise the enormous economic opportunities of the global transition to net zero.
To give one example, a paper by the University of Strathclyde estimates that up to 80,000 jobs would be required by 2035 in electricity networks and related infrastructure. Scottish ministers consider each proposal for consent case by case, including the potential economic benefits.
Earlier this week, it was revealed that more than 10,000 people have objected to plans for more than 350 monster pylons between Kintore in Aberdeenshire and Tealing in Angus, yet Gillian Martin was quoted in the United Kingdom Government press release thanking Scottish and Southern Electricity Networks for its investment in Scotland. It is absolutely unacceptable that she gets to play judge, jury and executioner on pylon decisions when she has clearly already made up her mind. It is even more outrageous that she will not listen to the concerns of campaign groups but is happy enough to cosy up to SSEN.
Is it not the case that in order to meet the green jobs target, those mega pylons, which most of my constituents do not want, have to be approved, which thereby makes a total mockery of our planning and consultation process?
I am not quite sure where to begin in answering that question, because there are a lot of comments there that simply do not stack up.
First, I cannot believe that a Conservative member is saying that he does not welcome SSEN investment in Scotland to the tune of billions of pounds. He must be one of the few people in Scotland who takes that approach, because that investment is very important. It is important first and foremost for consumers, especially in the light of the local storms that we have seen in Scotland over the past few weeks. We need a robust transmission infrastructure and electricity networks—[Interruption.]
Mr Lumsden!
That investment is therefore important to ensure that the network is robust, as well as in helping us to move to net zero and ensure that we can deploy Scotland’s massive renewable energy potential—-
You have made up your mind.
Mr Lumsden, we need to listen to the questions and we also need to listen to the responses.
I call Clare Adamson for a supplementary.
To what extent will the proposed overhead line project support Scotland’s net zero journey and the future of our energy security in clean, renewable power?
The upgrade of the network and decarbonisation of the power system across these islands is incredibly important to ensure that we can take advantage of our massive renewable energy potential and secure all the jobs that will come with that, as well as achieve our net zero aims, which is very important for our future generations and the future of the planet. Over and above that, there are massive opportunities that can be secured.
Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (Business and Regulatory Impact Assessments)
To ask the Scottish Government, regarding the potential impact on businesses and the economy, what steps it is taking to ensure that business and regulatory impact assessments properly reflect the real-world impact of new policies on small and medium-sized enterprises. (S6O-05059)
We are continuously improving how we work with business through impact assessment and engagement to hear businesses’ views directly and to understand the impacts when we make key decisions. It is vital that new policies take account of small and medium-sized businesses’ real-world experiences, and we continue to ensure that that is the case. We have made significant progress with our refreshed business and regulatory impact assessment template and guidance, which has been co-developed with business.
Given that ministers approved an impact assessment that included only two accommodation providers operating below the VAT threshold and therefore failed to reflect the reality that is faced by small businesses, which make up the backbone of Scotland’s accommodation sector, does the Deputy First Minister at the very least accept that the current issues around introducing a flat-rate visitor levy could have been avoided if ministers had done their jobs properly and provided a robust, representative BRIA in the first place?
I will respond to those points with the seriousness that the issue requires. I am conscious that businesses across the local authority areas that are considering introducing a visitor levy are very conscious of the impact that it might have on them. It is a decision for local authorities. On the primary issue of whether the levy should be a flat rate or a percentage rate, the decision was based on consultation responses. As the responsible minister, Ivan McKee is engaging extensively with the Scottish Tourism Alliance and many others to understand the impact that the visitor levy will have on businesses, which is exactly in line with the comments that I made in my first answer about the importance of taking the views of businesses on board.
Does the Deputy First Minister agree that the policy that is most detrimental to businesses, charities and the public sector is Labour’s damaging hike in employer national insurance contributions? That tax on jobs is stifling growth and investment, and it has already cost 90,000 jobs across the United Kingdom hospitality sector alone. Will she therefore again urge the chancellor to change course in the upcoming UK budget?
We know that what Kenny Gibson has just set out is factual because of the direct engagement that we have had with the businesses, third sector organisations and public sector organisations that he has cited. Not only did the national insurance contribution increase hit employers, particularly those with lots of employees, but it was a surprise for many of them, because the increase was not in any of Labour’s manifestos. It is the surprising nature of the increase as well as the negative impact of it that has caused so much damage.
Computing Science Teachers (Technology and Digital Sectors)
To ask the Scottish Government what its position is on any potential impact of the recently reported decline in the number of computer studies teachers on employment in the technology and digital sectors. (S6O-05060)
We recognise that delivering high-quality computing science education is important to Scotland’s technology and digital economy. Although we do not hold data on the direct link between teacher numbers and employment in the sector, we are taking action to attract more students into teaching computing.
We are funding a pilot at Aberdeen university to support students with relevant higher national diploma qualifications to undertake further study to become computing science teachers. We established Scottish Teachers Advancing Computing Science to support teachers and, by the end of this financial year, we will have invested over £1 million in it. That fulfils key recommendations of Mark Logan’s 2020 “Scottish Technology Ecosystem Review”, which the Government commissioned and which was aimed at improving the talent pipeline for high-growth businesses. We also continue to offer bursaries to career changers to train in hard-to-fill subjects, including computing science.
The right technology and computer skills will be crucial to the future success of Scotland’s economy. That is true for South Lanarkshire, which hosts a great deal of infrastructure that supports the use of artificial intelligence. However, if we mirror the national trend across Scotland, we see that there has been a decline in the number of secondary computing science teachers in South Lanarkshire over the past five years. What is the Scottish Government doing to reverse that worrying and damaging trend?
Mr Russell highlights an important issue for the future of Scotland's technology sector and the future of our society. In my opening remarks, I outlined a number of investments that are taking place to reverse the situation. I will also take this opportunity to commend Skyscanner. Members may have seen the recent news that a number of Skyscanner staff are undertaking teaching qualifications. For part of their week, they work for Skyscanner and for the other part of the week, they are in classrooms, inspiring the next generation of software engineers. That is a first-class, inspirational initiative that has been taken by Skyscanner, and it shows that employers have a role to play as well.
Scotland’s technology sector has more than doubled in size over a 10-year period, so it is going in the right direction. Many of the businesses in the technology sector tell me that they are in Scotland because of the talent pipeline, so they are able to find the talent. However, the member is quite right that the measures that I outlined in my initial answer are extremely important for ensuring that we have more computing science teachers in Scotland’s schools.
The minister will be aware that, in 2022, the Scottish Government invested £1.3 million in refreshing computing science for pupils. Can the minister provide the Parliament with an update on the funding and on what progress it has supported so far?
The member is correct: in 2022, we made available £1.3 million for schools to bid for additional equipment to transform their teaching of computing science with updated physical computing devices and all the resources that have to go with that, giving them the flexibility to choose equipment that would best suit their needs. I am proud to say that that funding has supported 304 secondary schools across Scotland. Much more needs to be done, but I hope that that gives the member some examples of the progress that has been made.
Davy Russell is right to raise a serious issue about the decline in computing science teachers. It is an issue that we have known about for years. I welcome the measures that the minister has set out; whether they will arrest the decline, we will have to wait and see. Is the minister open to more innovative ideas—for example, looking at potentially paying higher salaries to attract teachers into computer science and other hard-to-fill areas of teaching—given its importance to the needs of our future economy?
It is important that ministers always remain open to new, innovative ideas. The member highlights some potential ways forward. I have referred to the fact that we have already given some extra bursaries to those who want to change their careers, to encourage people to come into teaching computing science and some other subjects.
In the past, we have looked at innovations; going forward, it is important that we stick to the principle that we are always looking for innovative ideas to address what, as the member says, is an important issue for the future of Scotland’s economy and our society.
British Sign Language (Parity of Treatment)
To ask the Scottish Government what its position is on whether British Sign Language receives parity of treatment with Gaelic within its languages portfolio, in light of evidence given by stakeholders to the Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee, as part of its inquiry into the British Sign Language (Scotland) Act 2015, that, although BSL plans are delivered locally by listed authorities, strong national co-ordination, oversight and dedicated funding are still essential if the aims of the act are to be met. (S6O-05061)
The Scottish Government recognises BSL as one of Scotland’s languages. Since the BSL (Scotland) Act 2015 came into force 10 years ago, Scotland has been the first country to implement a free national video relay service for BSL users and, with the new service, we will pilot the use of video remote interpreting for the first time.
The Education (Scotland) Act 2025 places a statutory duty on Qualifications Scotland to
“have regard for the needs and interests of ... those who are receiving, or wish to receive”
education through both BSL and Gaelic, across its functions. We will continue to work with the BSL community and its representative organisations to focus on improving outcomes for BSL users in Scotland, including through the “British Sign Language National Plan 2023-29”.
Deaf women are more than twice as likely as hearing women to experience domestic abuse. In the north-east, local stakeholders report that BSL services remain seriously underresourced, with limited interpreting capacity and little dedicated funding for specialist support. Given that Gaelic and BSL are both the Deputy First Minister’s responsibility, does she accept that that failure of national co-ordination and investment has left deaf women in particular at greater risk, and that equality means nothing without the resources to make it real?
I thank Tess White for that question. At the top of my answer, I say that I would be happy to engage with any of Tess White’s constituents and any deaf women in her constituency who have raised those matters, because the statistic that she references is one that requires us to sit up and take notice.
There are several routes to improving BSL provision. Tess White will be aware of the new service that we have been piloting for video remote interpreting. She will also be aware of SignPort, the new app that has been launched with Scottish Government funding, which will develop interpreter booking facilities to make them easier to use.
The third thing that I want to highlight is the importance of local BSL plans. Tess White talked specifically about the north-east, although I imagine that the statistic that she gave applies right across the country. It is important to make sure that local plans are robust. We have recently awarded one-year funding and an in-principle commitment to year 2 funding for a BSL network to share best practice and advice with listed authorities on the delivery of their local plans. That will ensure that, in her own constituency area, there is a plan that is robust and can deliver the services that are required.
Tourism Sector (Impact of New Taxes)
To ask the Scottish Government what discussions the economy secretary has had with ministerial colleagues regarding the impact on the tourism sector of any new taxes or regulation. (S6O-05062)
Tourism is one of Scotland’s key growth sectors, and the Scottish Government is committed to working with the tourism sector to create a resilient, sustainable, accessible and inclusive tourism economy for the future. It is a measure of the sector’s importance that I am in regular contact with the sector, as are many of my ministerial and Cabinet colleagues. There is a Cabinet sub-committee on investment and economic growth, and as part of our on-going bilateral engagement on policy development work, including on taxation and regulation, we look at all those issues and their impact on tourism and hospitality.
Yesterday, The Herald reported that the new visitor levy has already forced accommodation providers in Edinburgh into a position in which they are breaking the law, with Booking.com and Airbnb being unable to apply the Government’s five-night cap correctly. The Scottish Bed and Breakfast Association described the situation as “ridiculous and unacceptable”.
Does the minister accept that whatever discussions took place within Government clearly failed? Would he also agree that, if that is how the poorly thought-out and poorly implemented new tax affects Edinburgh, owners of small B and Bs and guesthouses across my Highlands and Islands region have every reason to fear how the Scottish National Party’s visitor levy will damage their already fragile and under-pressure tourism economy?
Of course, many local authorities are considering raising the levy to inject investment back into the local visitor economy and thereby bring benefits. That is why 21 out of 27 European countries have some kind of occupancy tax in their jurisdictions.
The concerns in Edinburgh should be communicated directly to the local council by those who are affected. However, we continue to engage constructively with the sector at all times. My colleague Ivan McKee is involved in leading those discussions with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities and industry representatives. In the same way that we have done in the past, we will continue to listen to them in the future.
We know that taxes on overnight tourist stays are common across Europe and the rest of the world. Given that Scotland is an exceptionally popular tourist destination, can the minister say more about the opportunities that are presented by the visitor levy to support our economy and to ensure that Scotland retains its place as a global leader in tourism?
That gets to the heart of the debate about a tourism levy. Given that we all want to have a sustainable tourism sector, we must ensure that the infrastructure and other issues that are affected by tourism are addressed. Many Governments throughout Europe have put in place some kind of tax or levy to address such issues.
As the minister who is responsible for tourism, I regularly speak to people in the sector, many of whom support the levy. Of course, they have questions about its implementation, and they want any new flexibilities to address that. I have no doubt that those debates will continue, but many people are supportive of the visitor levy, because they recognise that the fact that Scotland is a very popular tourism economy brings pressures and that we need investment to address some of those pressures.
I say to the minister, with all due respect, that the answers that he has given have been about the principle, but the issue concerns a point of detail in the legislation. Providers in Edinburgh are concerned that they are breaching the law because the amount that they will have to charge will be different from the amount that they are advertising.
Ivan McKee has written to spokespeople across the Parliament and to members of the Economy and Fair Work Committee and the Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee about a proposed expedited bill. Is that bill ready to go? Will it address the issue that has been highlighted? Can we have a statement on the issue? It is fast becoming the case that there is no clarity on what the Government’s position is.
The short answer to that is, of course, yes. The member referred to the fact that the Minister for Public Finance has already written to the other parties on the subject. We will keep that communication going.
In the meantime, as I said in my previous answer, anyone who is affected by the issue that the member raises should speak directly to the City of Edinburgh Council. However, the backdrop is that many discussions continue to take place between the Scottish Government, COSLA and the relevant sectors.
Given that the minister and his colleagues are desperately trying to find a legislative solution to the problem that I think that many would accept that they have created in respect of a flat fee, will he join me, in the interim, in encouraging those councils that are presently consulting on a tourism levy to pause those exercises so that they do not find themselves facing the same problem that the City of Edinburgh Council is facing?
The member must not get away with rewriting history here.
What happened at the time was that there was a consultation on the levy. The people who responded to the consultation were listened to and the legislation was brought forward. However, now, in 2025, further flexibilities are being asked for and, once again, the Government is listening to those affected. That sounds to me like a good way forward, and it counters the member’s suggestion that we completely ignored the sectors on the issue in the past, which is not the case. It was consulted on at the time. However, it is now 2025 and we are looking for further flexibilities, as requested by the sectors.
Question 6 has been withdrawn, and question 7 was not lodged.
Clyde Mission
To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on progress towards delivering the Clyde mission, including what its impact has been on the local economy and job creation. (S6O-05065)
We are providing support to the Clyde mission in three main ways. First, the Clyde mission fund provided £13 million towards a range of projects that have created and sustained more than 600 jobs, supported more than 250 businesses and levered more than £8 million in further funding. Those projects include Renfrewshire active travel.
We have also committed £1.5 million to identify priority actions and locations for investment, with work already under way by the Glasgow city region team. The team is also developing plans for the heat decarbonisation fund, which is expected to launch later this year and to which we have committed £25 million.
I welcome the progress outlined by the Deputy First Minister, but can she say more about how the Clyde mission is helping to ensure that new economic opportunities along the Clyde are inclusive and benefit local communities, particularly in areas that have historically faced economic disadvantage?
The master plan work that is under way will further identify inclusive economic opportunities along the Clyde. That will be supported through the £25 million heat decarbonisation fund contributing up to 50 per cent of total project costs to ensure tangible investment in local communities. The fund application process that is being developed by Glasgow city region will also take into account community benefits such as the number of jobs that are created for local residents and linkages to local employability programmes and community-led projects, in order to maximise the economic impact of the Clyde mission.
That concludes portfolio questions on Deputy First Minister responsibilities, economy and Gaelic.
There will be a brief pause before we move to the next portfolio to allow members on the front benches to change over.
Finance and Local Government
Scottish Income Tax (HMRC Analysis)
To ask the Scottish Government what its position is on the validity of His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs’s analysis of Scottish income tax statistics, including the July 2025 outturn publication. (S6O-05066)
The Scottish Government continues to have confidence in the validity of HMRC’s outturn statistics. The 2023-24 outturn confirmed a positive net position of £730 million, which was the largest contribution to the Scottish budget since the devolution of income tax. Scottish income tax grew strongly, by 12.7 per cent, between 2022-23 and 2023-24, and 2.6 percentage points faster than the rest of the United Kingdom. We will continue to work closely with HMRC to ensure the effective administration and collection of Scottish income tax.
I thank the cabinet secretary for indicating that she has full confidence in HMRC. Will she now acknowledge that the most up-to-date statistical evidence that is available from HMRC demonstrates that the majority of taxpayers in Scotland pay more income tax than people elsewhere in the UK, which is contrary to the persistent claims made by Scottish Government ministers in the chamber?
First, it is disappointing that Liz Smith did not welcome the very positive net position that I outlined and the growth in Scottish income tax revenues. [Interruption.] It seems a shame that no good news can ever be welcomed by members on the Tory benches.
In relation to her question, let me explain to Liz Smith that, at each budget, we set the starter and basic rate bands at such a level that more than half of taxpayers are expected to pay less in the year ahead than they would pay elsewhere in the UK. It is inevitable that earnings growth will be different to that forecast. [Interruption.] However, setting policy based on official, independent forecasts from the Scottish Fiscal Commission is the correct approach to take. The same approach is taken by the Office for Budget Responsibility. As is set out in the tax strategy, we will uprate the starter and basic rate bands by at least the rate of inflation for the lifetime of this Parliament.
I encourage members to request a supplementary question instead of shouting from a sedentary position.
The SFC has estimated that the Scottish National Party Government’s income tax policy choices since devolution will raise up to an additional £1.7 billion in 2025-26 compared with what would have been the case if we had matched the UK Government’s tax policy. Can the cabinet secretary provide assurances that the Scottish Government will continue to deliver a progressive approach to taxation, enabling Scotland to spend more on the things that matter most, such as protecting and improving our national health service and lifting children out of poverty?
Our income tax policy choices carefully balance the need to support households while raising revenue to invest in public services. That investment enables us to provide a range of supports that are not provided in England by the UK Government, such as the Scottish child payment, free prescriptions and free access to higher education. It is for Opposition parties that propose tax cuts to explain which public services they would slash and run down to pay for the tax cuts that they frequently call for.
Questions 2 and 3 were not lodged.
Public Service Reform Strategy
To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on the progress being made against its public service reform strategy. (S6O-05069)
The Scottish Government published its public service reform strategy in June 2025, setting out our approach to delivering more efficient, preventative and joined-up public services. I provided an update on the public service reform programme to the Finance and Public Administration Committee on 9 July 2025. Early activity includes the establishment of the PSR board, the delivery of an invest-to-save fund worth up to £29.9 million and the holding of a summit with more than 140 public service leaders to focus on progressing live efficiency programmes.
The Scottish Government remains committed to providing further updates to the Parliament every six months in order to ensure continued transparency and accountability in the delivery of the programme.
I thank the minister for that update. A key pillar of the strategy is prevention—intervening in such a way as to mitigate negative outcomes for people while dramatically reducing demand for expensive acute or crisis services. After 40 years of working in the public sector, I whole-heartedly agree with that objective. However, there are many barriers to creating a truly preventative system. Will the minister outline what progress has been made in removing those barriers? What action is being taken to review current budgeting processes that can, in themselves, be a barrier to shifting resources to preventative spend?
Audrey Nicoll is absolutely right. First, it is important to recognise that Scotland has a good track record in delivering successful preventative interventions. Alongside the PSR strategy, we published a document that set out our learning from 25 years of preventative interventions. Nonetheless, the strategy absolutely recognises the long-standing barriers to delivering a truly preventative system, including the moving of resources around that system. In response, we have within the strategy dedicated workstreams on understanding demand drivers and on preventative budgeting. That includes redesigning how we track, identify and report preventative spend and how we adapt budget processes to enable resources to move around portfolios and services.
Giving evidence to the Finance and Public Administration Committee last month, the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government said that the Government was committed to reducing civil service numbers, stating that a 20 per cent reduction in the number of people working directly for the Scottish Government over the next five years was reasonable and “more than achievable”. Will the minister recommit to that 20 per cent reduction in head count and say how the Government intends to lose one in five members of its workforce?
In addition, is it not time for ministers to scrap their presumption against compulsory redundancies, which, according to civil service insiders, means that those with talent take voluntary redundancy packages while, often, those who know that they could not find a job elsewhere sit pretty and are shoehorned into roles that they lack the ability or skills to do?
I recognise the huge talent and skills that exist in Scotland’s civil service. It supports all of the policy agenda that we take forward across a wide range of ministerial portfolios. However, I reconfirm that the Government is committed to delivering on that 20 per cent reduction—4 per cent year on year—over the next five years. That sits comfortably below the attrition rate, so we can do it through tighter controls on recruitment. The permanent secretary and the executive team of the civil service are signed up to that.
On compulsory redundancies, the member should go and read what the relevant policy says.
Older People (Independent Living)
To ask the Scottish Government how much it will allocate in its forthcoming budget to support older people to live independently in their local communities. (S6O-05070)
The Scottish budget for the next financial year is still to be set in the context of significant financial challenge across the public sector, with multiyear spending plans due to be published on 13 January 2026. The Scottish Government remains committed to supporting the adult social care sector, with additional funding of almost £1.2 billion provided to social care since 2021-22.
Communities across Aberdeenshire are already struggling, with elderly and disabled people bearing a disproportionate burden of council cuts, and they are now worried about what is to come. They have already seen the closure of sheltered housing despite well-documented evidence of need and the desire to keep such housing open. Indeed, when spaces were available in Cuminestown, applicants were told that it was full. Social care staff are stressed and overworked, with many leaving the sector, leaving home care support needs unmet.
What assurances can the cabinet secretary give the individuals, families and communities who are affected by those cuts? How will the Government ensure that other public services, such as the already stretched national health service, will not have to pick up the pieces when things fall apart?
First, I say to Maggie Chapman that we have record levels of funding for the NHS and local government. Local government has prioritised social care in relation to the funding that it provides and that each local authority allocates. However, that is not to say that we do not recognise the pressures. Demographic changes continue to be a challenge, as do all the other pressures related to inflationary costs, and that means that we need to do things differently.
I believe that the funding of third sector organisations is often a cost-effective way of providing good-quality services, particularly for our most vulnerable. In the spending review, I am committed to looking at whether we can give multiyear envelopes, particularly to third sector organisations, to ensure that they have the continuity of funding and certainty that will help them to provide those much-needed services.
Primary Care (National Health Service Budget)
To ask the Scottish Government whether, as part of setting its forthcoming budget, it will commit to allocating 10 per cent of the total NHS budget to primary care, in light of reported concerns regarding a 6 per cent real-terms reduction in spending on primary care since 2021-22 and underinvestment being a key driver of general practitioner practice closures, recruitment challenges and increased pressure on hospitals. (S6O-05071)
As is set out in the service renewal framework in June, during the next 10 years, we want to expand capacity in primary healthcare so that more people receive the right care in the right place at the right time. That means using our resources differently and deploying more of them over time in primary care and community settings.
The new £531 million GP package, which was agreed this week, is part of that. The forthcoming budget will allocate funding to the Government’s priorities of the day, and the published budget will set out the spending plans for the coming financial year.
I declare an interest as a practising NHS GP.
One in six Scots are on NHS waiting lists, with many facing unacceptable waits to see their GP, yet our grandstanding First Minister boasts about spending millions overseas, when junior doctors are thinking of striking. The Scottish National Party has consistently underfunded GPs in primary care, even though that is where 90 per cent of patient contact occurs. Hundreds of millions of pounds in Barnett consequentials are not being spent on our health service.
Will the cabinet secretary take seriously the importance of GPs and follow Scottish Conservatives’ calls for 10 per cent of the total NHS budget to be allocated to primary care and give the NHS the full Barnett consequentials that it deserves?
We have, for many years, passed on all resource consequentials to the NHS. We set that out many years ago as our policy, and that is what we have delivered.
Waiting times are coming down and we have more GPs. However, the problem that Sandesh Gulhane cannot get away from is that the Tories’ tax policy is going to cost around £583 million. That is £583 million less for the NHS, including general practice, and £583 million less for social care. The Tories cannot come here asking for more money when their tax policies mean less money for public services.
Local Authorities’ Implementation of Scottish Legislation
To ask the Scottish Government what engagement it has had with local authorities regarding their implementation of Scottish Government legislation. (S6O-05072)
In line with the Verity house agreement principles, the Scottish Government is committed to working in partnership with local government in the development and implementation of any new statutory obligations that impact on local authorities.
As with any organisation that is separate from the Scottish Government, it is for each local authority to ensure that it meets any legal obligations that it is subject to. There are a number of independent organisations and bodies that help to ensure that councils comply with their statutory obligations, including the Care Inspectorate, the Scottish Housing Regulator and the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman.
Many constituents have contacted me regarding South Lanarkshire Council’s poor implementation of pavement parking prohibitions legislation. They tell me that, compared with other local authorities that have in place systems such as interactive maps of street assessments or clear accessible means to request an exemption, South Lanarkshire Council’s procedures and processes are opaque.
Fines have been handed out to my South Lanarkshire constituents since March, and, as I understand it, the street assessment process is still on-going—nearly two years on from when the council should have been able to enforce the ban. Does the cabinet secretary agree that local authorities must ensure that residents have full transparency over council practices and guidance on implementing Scottish Government legislation if those measures are to be enforced fairly and effectively?
I agree with Clare Haughey that transparency in those matters is crucial. She will appreciate, of course, that enforcement is not a matter for which the Scottish Government is responsible. That, of course, rests with local authorities. I share her view that it would be very welcome if local authorities were to act on the concerns that she raises, and I am very happy to have a follow-up discussion with her on the matter.
At the point where legislative requirements are imposed on local government, we pass a financial resolution and local government is given the funds to cover the costs. Has the Scottish Government done any analysis of how the costs of implementing that legislation have varied from the financial memorandum and how it has tracked the burden on local authorities on that basis?
Mark Griffin raises a reasonable point. We would expect the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities to raise those issues with us. If there is a change in the implementation of any legislation that is passed by this Parliament and there is a cost to local government that had not been foreseen, COSLA is pretty quick to raise such issues with us. I would expect COSLA’s role to be to make us aware if there is a particular issue of concern with any piece of legislation. If Mark Griffin wants to write to me with more details, I am happy to follow that up with COSLA.
I call Rachael Hamilton to ask question 8.
Years of damaging Scottish National Party cuts to local authority funding and Labour’s pernicious national insurance increase have created the perfect storm for the future of local community services.
Ms Hamilton, I do not think that that is the scripted question.
Oh, I am so sorry. I have the first bit now.
That might have needed a spoiler alert.
Scottish Borders Council (Sport and Leisure Facilities)
To ask the Scottish Government when it last met with Scottish Borders Council, and whether issues regarding the future of local facilities, including the potential closure of up to 30 sport and leisure facilities, were discussed. (S6O-05073)
Here I was anticipating a really positive question from Rachael Hamilton. I will not get my hopes up.
Scottish ministers regularly meet councils, including Scottish Borders Council, to discuss a range of issues of mutual interest. Ministers have also committed to regular meetings with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities presidential team to discuss key priorities and issues for local government. The Scottish Government recognises the critical role of community sport and leisure facilities across Scotland and provided a record local government settlement in 2025-26 of more than £15.1 billion, which is a real-terms increase of 5.5 per cent and which helps local authorities to support their local priorities.
A combination of Labour’s pernicious national insurance rises and SNP cuts to local authorities have had a particularly damaging effect on local services. Last week, the spending watchdog the Accounts Commission published a report highlighting the impact of those cuts to culture and leisure services. In the Borders, libraries, sports facilities and museums are focal points for communities that provide health, wellbeing and leisure benefits. Will the cabinet secretary commit to mitigating the risk of closures and the deepening of inequalities that might result from the cuts, and will she bring forward a fair funding settlement for local authorities in the next budget?
According to the Accounts Commission, for the past three years, we have provided local government with a real-terms increase, which is a fair settlement that supports its local priorities. In addition, this financial year, we have increased culture sector funding as a step towards investing at least £100 million, none of which Rachael Hamilton voted for in the budget. I make the point that I made earlier: if Rachael Hamilton wants more money for culture or for local government, she must address the point that the Tories want to cut public services by £583 million by their unfunded tax policies. They cannot come here asking for more money when, by their own admission, there would be £583 million less for public services under those policies. It does not add up.
It is a bit rich for us to hear about economics from the party that brought us Liz Truss.
The issue of the potential closure of leisure facilities is entirely a matter for the Tory-led council in the Borders. At its meeting this week, the council was supposed to review those issues, but it has postponed that process until 10 November. Does the cabinet secretary agree that that is dreadful and that it increases the anxiety of all the workers and the people who rely on the facilities?
Yes, I do. We provided Scottish Borders Council with an additional 6.2 per cent compared with 2024-25, which was higher than the average increase for local authorities. The member makes a number of very good points, and I would be happy to meet her to discuss the matter further, if she so wishes.
If the SNP is funding councils properly, can the minister say why SNP-run Dumfries and Galloway Council is consulting on a package of cuts that includes removing music tuition from pupils and closing leisure centres and which could result in citizens advice bureaux being entirely defunded across Dumfries and Galloway?
That question is not related to Scottish Borders Council, but I call the cabinet secretary.
Whether it is Scottish Borders Council or Dumfries and Galloway Council, there has been a real-terms increase to local government funding, which Craig Hoy voted against in the budget. He would have provided no money to local government, because he voted against the budget. As he is the architect of the £583 million Tory tax policy, he has to explain how much he would cut from Dumfries and Galloway Council to pay for those unfunded tax cuts. I think that he needs to go back to school on tax policy and public sector funding.
That concludes portfolio questions.
On a point of order, Presiding Officer. Six SNP MSPs were selected for portfolio questions today, but only three questions were lodged, giving Opposition parties less opportunity to scrutinise the SNP Government. If SNP MSPs cannot be bothered to do their job and lodge questions, is there any way that the Presiding Officer can allocate the opportunity to ask questions to Opposition MSPs instead, so that we can hold this rotten SNP Government to account?
I thank Mr Lumsden for advance notice of his point of order, which is not a point of order.
I share his concern about the number of questions that are not lodged. I observe that that is not unique to one party, but, as Mr Lumsden says, it deprives members of an opportunity to ask questions. I simply reiterate the plea that has been made by the Presiding Officer to all members to ensure that, if they put their names in the ballot for a question, they are able to ask it.
We will have a brief pause before we move to the next item of business to allow the members on the front benches to change position.
Air adhart
Maternity Services (Safety)