Seòmar agus comataidhean

Will the member take an intervention?

I refer members to my entry in the register of members’ interests as a member of Unite the Union and a lifelong activist in the trade union movement.

I join the majority of Parliament in condemning a disgraceful piece of legislation—the Strikes (Minimum Service Levels) Act 2023. We should be united in our opposition to cheap power grabs and we should speak with one voice against the UK Government’s increasingly hostile and archaic agenda against workers. I am sure that it will not be long before the Scottish public let it know exactly what they think of that and of the dreadful way in which it treats the ordinary people of this country.

Trying to stifle legitimate democratic engagement and workers’ representation across the UK is the kind of thing that we would expect from an authoritarian Government that is desperate to cling on to power. However, I fear that that is not far from what Sunak’s Tories really are. The public will speak in 2024, and the Tories’ attempts to force through unworkable and unjust legislation will not change that. If they think that the problems in our society are caused by trade unions merely asking for a fair deal for workers, they are not opening their eyes at all. Public services, including our health services and our railways, are seriously underfunded, so all that they are saying is a smokescreen to stop people noticing the problems in our society that are caused by the dreadful Tory UK Government.

We cannot ban our way out of productivity and healthcare crises. We have to build something with the people who work in such fields at our side. I whole-heartedly agree with the Scottish Government that the Strikes (Minimum Service Levels) Act 2023 is designed to undermine legitimate trade union activity. In fact, I would go further and say that the intention is to destroy such activity and to ensure that generations to come do not have effective trade union representation.

That is why I am pleased that the Scottish Government has assured us today that there will be no minimum service level agreements or work notices in Scotland. That commitment is very welcome. I am sure that it is particularly welcomed by ScotRail and Caledonian Sleeper, which are important services that are owned and controlled by the Scottish Government.

In Scotland, we have a proud and noble history of workers’ struggles. There is indeed a struggle. It is even called “the struggle”. Sometimes, there is a struggle within our own labour movement, as has been discussed. However, that struggle pushes us to go further and to come together as trade unionists. I therefore ask the trade unionists on the benches opposite me to come together with us on the issue. In other times, we have stood together on picket lines to ensure that workers’ rights are upheld. We will stand at any chance to do that. I therefore ask members to support the Scottish Labour amendment.

I think that the minister was in the chamber when I made my speech. We are trying to come to some agreement. I could stand here and say that my son has lived his entire life under an SNP Government and that I am not sure that he is getting the delivery of education that he deserves. However, we are asking that we come together and agree on something that would make a big difference in the short term. Will the minister join us on that point?

To ask the Scottish Government what value it places on the role of trade unions in delivering and sustaining a wellbeing economy. (S6O-02863)

Trade unions have campaigned for the immediate implementation of safe staffing legislation in the national health service; they have fought against funding cuts to the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service; and they have fought to rid our schools of violence. However, on each of those points, the Government has let them down. If the cabinet secretary truly values the contribution of trade unions and considers fair work to be a key principle of a wellbeing economy, why is the Government overseeing a falling employment rate, a widening gender pay gap, a declining employee voice and a reduction in secure contracts?

The cabinet secretary mentioned having appointments close to home. Given the countless stories of patients being asked to travel long distances for appointments—particularly in rural health board areas, where the necessary transport infrastructure is often not there—what is the Scottish Government doing to ensure that appointments are offered in communities, close to home, to reduce the number of missed appointments?

Midwives are telling me that obesity and the closely linked diabetes trends are creating a more complex workload and demanding greater expertise to ensure that mothers are provided with the best possible care. Does the First Minister agree that any action that the Scottish Government is taking to address the impact of obesity on the national health service must include the experience and expertise of front-line workers such as midwives, who will be able to contribute to the development of strategy and its subsequent delivery?

I am very interested in the notion suggested in the evidence of trying to recruit people from the area. Indeed, I have had some discussions with NHS Education for Scotland on that. If you were to give us one or two pieces of advice, could you tell us, first, what the stumbling block might be? Since I have been elected, I have been asking how we move forward and I cannot find out what the stumbling block is in that respect.

Okay.

I thank Martin Whitfield for his intervention. I am going to try to make progress if I can. Much as I would like to continue discussing what a change will come in Scotland and across the UK next year, in 2024, it is my job in this place to hold this Scottish Government to account.

I have no doubt about the Scottish people’s ambition for Scotland to be a world leader in both legislation on, and the realisation of, human rights, and I have no doubt about the Scottish Government’s ambition. In that regard, I want to mention the minister. I have a great deal of respect for her and I believe that there is a lot of intention there. Where we disagree is on whether the Government has stepped up in 16 years to actually achieve the things that we should have achieved. As I have often said in the chamber, acknowledging when we have not done something is really important if we are to move intention into action. As my colleagues have mentioned, however, there is no real acknowledgement of that in the motion, which is partly why we have to debate it.

I am running out of time because we had some excellent discussion about what a Labour Government will bring in 2024.

Has the Government asked itself what it has done? Has any of the inaction been because it has not done things that it should have done? Has it listened to the disabled people we are keen to represent? Has it created change?

I will finish with a quote. The Scottish Human Rights Commission said of the Scottish Government:

“we believe that the evidence on the progress assessments demonstrates starkly the implementation gap between intentions and good laws and policy and the implementation that could change lives on the ground.”

I believe that members across the chamber want to change lives on the ground.

I hope that I will have more time in the future to go through some of the other points that I wanted to make.