Seòmar agus comataidhean

Ronan, regarding the Crown Estate’s leasing role, are there any community engagement or community benefit mechanisms associated with those decisions, and are there calls for a community benefit mechanism?

Dr Shucksmith, are there ways that local engagement could be improved, during consenting and throughout the lifetime of the development, to deliver the social contract that is envisioned by the Griggs review?

Does the new pilot process reduce opportunities for local and community engagement by streamlining or reducing the timeframes for consenting? I will go to Mark Harvey first.

—that even with the limited powers that we have, we can create positive change. Imagine what we could achieve with the full powers of independence. We are not saying that we will be perfect—no country is perfect—

We are saying that we deserve to control what we do in the country in which we live, and to have a chance to flourish.

No, I have taken enough.

Scotland has the potential to be a global leader in renewable energy. We are generating more than 113 per cent of our electricity needs from renewable sources but, once again, the ties to the union hold us back. Instead of being rewarded, we are penalised. We pay higher transmission charges to access the UK’s grid, which is an injustice that holds us back from fully capitalising on our green energy potential.

Let us not talk only about economics; we must talk about the kind of society that we want to be and about a future in which no matter someone’s background, culture, or identity, they can live freely and without fear, in which we can dismantle the barriers of ignorance that hold so many back and in which we can build a nation that is rooted in fairness and opportunity for all.

Ten years on, I am now a grandmother, and I often see the world through my posterity’s eyes—the opportunities of a global community and an open, dynamic future for Scotland. More than 60 per cent of our young people support independence, because they understand that it is not just necessary but normal to control our own future. With that stat, we see that it is no longer a question of if—the Conservatives do not like to hear it—but when. Our young people are leading the way, showing us that Scotland’s future lies beyond the limitations of the union. They are ready for a Scotland that is confident, outward looking and free to make its own choices on the world stage.

Scotland has the resources, the talent and the determination to succeed. The SNP Government has shown, time and again—

When I have popped my head into my sons’ bedrooms, I have heard accents from around the globe—from the United States and places all over Europe and Asia. They are all coming together, connected by a community that they have built online. They live in an online world that is international, inclusive and full of possibilities that reach around the globe. However, every time I hear those voices, I am reminded that my children are growing up in a smaller, more insular Brexit version of Britain, which is disconnected from the opportunities and relationships that once felt within reach. It is an international embarrassment.

That was not the future that I fought for in 2014. I was a stay-at-home mum. My daughter was older and had left home at that point, but I was still juggling the care of five neurodiverse sons and volunteering in my community. I was not a politician, but I cared deeply about what kind of Scotland my children were going to inherit.

As the independence referendum approached, I was appalled by the negativity of the no campaign, and we can see some of that reflected today. I could not understand why anyone would think that we were not capable of standing on our own two feet. The implication that we needed outside help to succeed was an insult that stuck with me. It was not just me—it offended many others who knew that our nation’s potential was far greater than the fearmongers would have us believe.

Since then, the UK Government has built nothing but a house of cards. Meanwhile, over the past 10 years, we have seen what the SNP Government has done with our limited powers of devolution. It has built our house on a rock and laid the foundations of a better, fairer Scotland through policies such as the Scottish child payment, which is lifting thousands of children out of poverty; the protection of free university tuition; free prescriptions and personal care; and the building from scratch of a social security system that is rooted in dignity, fairness and respect.

Those were not just policies; they were acts of resilience that prepared us for the storms that were ahead and which we face now. The decision, which Scotland did not make, to pull us out of the European Union brought chaos to our economy. Tory austerity, which is now Labour’s, has eroded our public services and left families struggling.

Because we built those foundations and used our devolved powers wisely, we have been able to shelter our people from the worst of it, but we can only do so much. It is Westminster’s choices that have driven up the cost of living, decimated our ties with Europe and plunged Scotland into uncertainty, but let us be clear that this is not where our story ends.

Here is the deal with this: we are told that the union is there to help and support us, and that it has broad shoulders, but where have those broad shoulders been? Slopey, more like.

Concern has been expressed that setting up a disability commissioner could divert resources from work in other areas, such as the Scottish Government’s new disability equality strategy. The FPAC has said that it believes that

“the funding for new supported bodies would be better spent on improving the delivery of public services ‘on the ground’, where greater impact can be made.”

How do you respond to that?

Good morning, and welcome to the 18th meeting in 2024, in session 6, of the Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee. We have received apologies from Marie McNair.

Our first agenda item is consideration of two negative Scottish statutory instruments. I refer members to paper 1.

Are members content with the instruments?

Members indicated agreement.