Seòmar agus comataidhean

I want to speak to this group of amendments, given the importance of having a review. I thank members for all their amendments on the matter. We considered them all, because reviewing the act and the zones will be important to the legislation’s success. If we can carry out a review within reasonable timeframes and with reasonable collection of data, that will ensure the legislation’s on-going effectiveness.

We support amendment 10, as we believe it to be reasonable and manageable. We also support amendment 11, which changes the timing of the review from five to three years. It is a reasonable adjustment and recognises members’ contribution to reviewing this important piece of legislation.

Does what you are talking about require a culture change, or does it require training or legislative change? What do we need to do to make that happen?

I do not disagree with that at all. What I am asking is how we make that happen. We talk about it a lot, but how do we make it happen for people?

I am interested in hearing about internal processes; you have already touched on some of that and given some good examples of where you have started to try to work together, with an understanding that that will take some time.

We have heard some evidence from users and other professionals in the field indicating that that is not happening across the board—work is slow, although it is picking up pace. How will it be ensured that eligibility criteria for self-directed care are higher up the agenda for teams working on the ground, and that action is actually being taken?

The latest data from Public Health Scotland shows a shocking 21 per cent gap in the uptake of bowel cancer screening between the most-deprived areas and the least-deprived areas. Does the minister accept that health inequalities are a blight on Scotland and does she also accept that this Scottish National Party Government is not doing enough to close that divisive health inequality gap?

That is the reason why I fight every day—while there are children in poverty, we should all accept that we must do more, so I do not understand why SNP members suggest that we should not be doing more.

The Government must listen to what experts are telling us. Last week, the Poverty and Inequality Commission published a damning report that laid bare the SNP’s progress on tackling child poverty. Progress has been slow and the Government is not predicted to meet its child poverty targets. I welcomed the fact that the Deputy First Minister accepts the report and says that she will take those recommendations seriously and use them as the basis for how we proceed to tackle the issue.

Today, families bring up their children in a Scotland where the richest continue to own the wealth while those from our most deprived areas work on low wages to create it. We must do something about that. In a modern, inclusive and progressive Scotland, that is what we need to do. I believe that we can do it and that change can come. I say to the Parliament again—in saying this, I look to the SNP benches—that we have to think about what we can do, what the Parliament can do and what the Government can do. We should lead with the message that it is only when every child does well that we will all do well. That would be a good message to put out in Scotland.

I have a particular ask, which I believe that the Government could achieve, on the issue of free school meals eligibility. I have raised the issue in the chamber on a number of occasions. We are waiting for the Government to meet its commitment to roll out free school meals, and we have heard about the challenge that it seems to be having in doing that. I have been working with charities such as Aberlour, which has talked about how we can quickly help families who are struggling. It believes that expanding free school meal eligibility is one tangible action that could make a real difference to those who are living in poverty. That is a change that could be made relatively easily.

It is my view, as it has been the view of everyone who has spoken in the debate, that the overarching priority of the Scottish Parliament should be to tackle, reduce and eradicate child poverty. Child poverty is a huge challenge that our country faces. It limits the opportunities of children in every town, and it deepens the inequalities that already exist in our society from the second that a child is born. It should shame us all that child poverty remains as prevalent as it is in our country today.

Week in, week out in the chamber, we discuss the modern, inclusive and progressive Scotland that we think exists, but the shocking reality is that, according to the most recent estimates, child poverty levels increased in 2022-23, with 260,000 Scottish children now living in poverty. That is nothing short of a national disgrace, and we must redouble our efforts to address it.

Such figures represent more than just a number; they represent the dark and difficult reality for so many children and their families across Scotland. The situation is unjust and unacceptable, and we in this Parliament must do all that we can to fix it.

I will make this statement because I believe that it is core to the way in which people are treated in this country. I have made it clear previously, and I make it clear once again, that I deplore the Tory Government’s attack on working-class people. In my view, the Tories are the friends of the rich and show no interest in redistributing wealth to those most in need. I accept that political decisions that are made in Westminster affect what happens in Scotland, but, as I often say in this Parliament, we must be honest about what we can do and what our responsibilities are in Scotland.

John Swinney, Humza Yousaf and Nicola Sturgeon all promised—quite rightly—to eradicate child poverty, but those promises to young people and their families have been broken. We have presided over virtually static child poverty rates since 2014, and we all need to acknowledge that.

I was going to go on to say a similar thing.

I encourage the Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice to respond on that issue in her closing remarks. We have brought the issue to the chamber a number of times, and I have written to the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills on it. That is a real change that could be made now. I ask the Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice to consider working across portfolios to get the measure in place as quickly as possible.

I do not have much time left, but I want to say that I hope that members will support the sentiment of Labour’s amendment around working people and making sure that work pays. Labour has a clear plan for delivering a new deal for workers, which would make a big difference in helping people to come out of poverty.

My final words on the matter are that, to do something, we need to have the political will. I ask the Government to have that political will and to look at what more we can do. I thank the Government for agreeing to work across parties to get this right. No child should live in poverty.

To ask the Scottish Government what its position is on what role local authorities have in preserving the heritage and culture of the areas that they serve. (S6O-03518)

Local authorities across Scotland, including Scottish National Party-run councils, are being forced to make savings in areas such as libraries, cultural centres and key heritage sites as a result of year-on-year real-terms cuts to their budgets by this Government. If it values the role that local authorities play in preserving the heritage and culture of the areas that they serve, why does the Scottish Government keep passing budgets that deliver brutal cuts to councils, putting heritage and culture sites across the south of Scotland and the rest of the country at risk?