Seòmar agus comataidhean

It was just if you had one or two things that you would like us to put forward as ideas to change the system at that very first bit.

I thank Emma Roddick for bringing the debate to the chamber, and I welcome her contribution. The idea that stood out in it and that has motivated me for my entire life is that we live in a poor society with some very rich people in it.

The wealth divide across the UK, including in Scotland, is absolutely shocking.

Emma Roddick is right to highlight the scale of income inequality in the UK relative to that in other countries in Europe. That has undoubtedly been exacerbated by the Tory-made cost of living crisis, which has made the poor poorer while multimillionaires record eye-watering profits. We cannot get away from that. There are eye-watering profits to be made and there is money in the system. We hear about that every day, and it is something that we must challenge. Wealth can and should be redistributed, and there are acknowledged fair, just and green ways to do that.

In my view, the Scottish Government has not shown the necessary determination. We have had delays in land reform, poor industrial relations with teachers and a lack of movement on regressive forms of taxation such as the council tax. We know that 20 families in Scotland own as much wealth as 30 per cent of the rest of the population, and that is unacceptable.

I do not believe that the Scottish Government has shown enough will. It has done things around the edges, and that is what we talk about in this Parliament. However, I hope that I can get some solidarity around the work that we need to do, to make sure that the Scottish Parliament does everything that it can. Emma Roddick and other members know that my point is that, if we believe that that gap is unjust, the Scottish Parliament must do everything that it can to fight for a better economic structure out there in the wider UK and world.

I wonder whether Christine Grahame might mention some of the other things that Labour Governments have done. It is only fair to acknowledge that, in terms of the way in which we treat workers, the fact that we have good terms and conditions is because of what Labour Governments have done. It would only be fair for her to acknowledge that the SNP does not do everything that it commits to.

I hope that Paul McLennan understands that we agree on a lot of points. I wonder whether he would accept that, sometimes, some of the back benchers in this Parliament have to stand up to the Government if we really want to get the full benefit of the things that we can do in the Scottish Parliament.

The member may know that I attended the same event, which gave us some excellent food for thought about how we might move the economy forward and how we might encourage people and communities to be part of what we might describe as business, but which, through community wealth building, lets them be in charge of their own areas. Members will know that I am extremely positive about those ideas. The example was given of North Ayrshire Council leader Joe Cullinane. He has taken steps that I view as bold, but, in his view, he is just being fair about how we should run the economy for communities.

Where Emma Roddick and I disagree is that, in my view, leaving the UK is not the way to reduce income inequality. I suggest that delivering a Labour Government at Westminster—which would repeal anti-trade-union legislation, invest in services and communities and offer fairer jobs to people—would be a better way to achieve solidarity in how we run communities in the UK. Those jobs would be well-paid jobs in which workers, unlike under the current Scottish and UK Governments, would be treated with the respect that they deserve.

Indeed, before the cost of living crisis, the cost of living in more rural communities was already substantially higher than it was in their urban counterparts, yet the Scottish Government has continued to do little for those communities. Yesterday, Emma Roddick and Fergus Ewing highlighted that the Highlands have been deprived of transport links that they were promised in relation to connectivity around the A9.

It is good to join the committee. I will pass on your best wishes to Paul. I have nothing to declare at this time.

I am interested in whether the witnesses have specific recommendations from the groups to which they have spoken. Are there two or three specific points that everybody agrees would be helpful?

I am very supportive of that point. A lot of constituents who contact us on this issue are very distressed. There is a lack of urgency in providing that information, which might give people direction and comfort. It is important that we are strong on the fact that we have had delay in this area for far too long.

I am very supportive of the comments that have been made. I would particularly support getting some feedback from organisations such as Scottish Women’s Aid, because that might give some weight to the fact that, as you say, convener, it does not seem sensible to wait for four years to implement such urgent legislation.