Seòmar agus comataidhean

To ask the Scottish Government, regarding any impact on its energy policy and strategy, and in light of reports that Torness nuclear power station is due to close by 2030, what its response is to the United Kingdom Government’s new fusion strategy, which aims to deliver thousands of jobs and long-term energy security. (S6O-05690)

What estimate has the Scottish Government made of the direct financial losses to East Lothian resulting from the closure of Torness nuclear power station, including the projected reduction in high-skilled employment, the impact on local supply chain businesses and the anticipated fall in business rates and revenues to support local public services—or has it not yet done so?

I ask members to note my entry in the members’ register of interests.

As we come to the conclusion of today’s debate, I rise to offer the full support of Scottish Labour for the Restraint and Seclusion in Schools (Scotland) Bill. At its heart, the bill is about dignity, rights, protection and transparency for some of our most vulnerable children. The purpose of the bill is to minimise the use of restraint and seclusion and to ensure that such practices are used only as a last resort and only when there is an immediate risk of harm. The bill will place a statutory duty on ministers to issue national guidance, to set consistent national training standards and to require the recording and reporting of all such incidents to parents and guardians, ending the unacceptable inconsistency that has persisted across Scotland for too long.

The case for the bill was driven by families, campaigners and organisations that refused to let experiences remain unseen. Reports from the Children and Young People’s Commissioner Scotland, “No Safe Place: Restraint and Seclusion in Scotland’s Schools”, and Enable Scotland, “In safe hands?”, have made clear the scale of the challenge and the lack of proper systems for reporting and accountability. The findings are reflected in the fact that Scotland has fallen behind other United Kingdom nations, particularly Northern Ireland, in providing a clear statutory obligation to protect children in schools.

The bill is a culmination of more than a decade of uncompromising advocacy by individuals such as Beth Morrison and Kate Sanger, who fought not for personal recognition but to ensure that no other family would experience what they had to go through. Their tireless campaigning alongside the children’s commissioner, Enable Scotland, the National Autistic Society and others has ensured that children’s voices and their rights are now central to this legislative approach.

The Parliament should be in no doubt that the practices that we are legislating for are serious intrusive interventions that must be governed by robust rights-based and trauma-informed standards. That is what the bill will do. It will establish a clear legal duty, requiring all instances to be recorded and communicated to parents and ensuring that staff have access to high-quality training that is aligned with national best practice.

I will touch on a couple of contributions before I close. The first was from Douglas Ross, who has just sat down. It is always a pleasure to follow Douglas Ross. I note his incredibly useful confirmation that one of my party’s members attended a Conservative group meeting and will file that away.

As a wise parliamentarian, Douglas Ross acknowledged those who support us here. In this case, it was the non-Government bills unit, but there are many people around us who allow us to do our jobs. I will dwell on the comments he made as convener of the Education, Children and Young People Committee, because it is a tribute to him that he saw, in that committee, the ability to fulfil a role that is crucial for committees in a unicameral Parliament. Those who return in the next session could do a lot worse than to look at some of the reactions and strategies that the convener chose to use to hold the Government to account and consider the legislation that came before the committee.

Finally, I pay tribute to Daniel Johnson, whose determined and principled leadership has brought his member’s bill to its final stage. It seems that he is getting quite good at member’s bills, so let us see what the election brings, in the hope that he will be working on a Government bill next time.

15:41

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. My app failed to connect in time. I would have voted yes.

Our seventh report deals with miscellaneous and minor amendments, particularly one proposed by the Constitution, Europe, External Affairs and Culture Committee, which recommended the removal of references to “the EU” from standing orders, because such references are now outdated.

The other items contained in the report relate to guidance that will be published by officials and will take effect from the start of the next session, if agreed tonight.

I move,

That the Parliament notes the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee’s 7th Report, 2026 (Session 6), Standing Order rule changes – Miscellaneous and minor amendments (SP Paper 1032), and agrees that the changes to Standing Orders set out in the Annexe of the report be made with effect from 11 May 2026.

I am absolutely certain that the minister’s future will be massively successful.

It is a pleasure to speak in the debate. I thank Fulton MacGregor not just for bringing the motion to the chamber but for all his work throughout this parliamentary session on a crucial matter. Stage 3 of the Children (Care, Care Experience and Services Planning) (Scotland) Bill last week shone a light on some of the most incredible people in our communities. Tonight’s debate allows us to shine a very specific light on a much smaller but very important group that sits within that community.

I agree with much of what the motion calls for, and much of what we have heard from David Torrance and Roz McCall. There is a call for data collection and to look at national adoption practices, with the understanding that adoption is not just a snapshot in a person’s life. When a child is put up for adoption, which often happens at a very early age, their experience is carried throughout their life. Just as parents continue to feel responsibility for birth children, communities should feel responsibility for all their members. Adoption goes on, although it changes and develops. With young people who have been adopted, some challenges that were not apparent early on often become more apparent at a later stage.

I whole-heartedly agree with the point in the cross-party group’s report about seeking a clear definition of adoption breakdown. Again, it is crucially important, both for those who adopt and for adoptees, to understand what we mean by adoption breakdown and how it can be anticipated, as issues becomes more apparent, to try to prevent breakdowns before things go too far.

In my short contribution, I want to concentrate on the report’s call for a review of adoption allowances to enable applications to be made throughout the course of adoption as family circumstances change and as children’s needs change and emerge. In that very small area, I have had a significant amount of casework relating to the challenge that our system throws up—it is almost a postcode lottery. We need an understanding in local authorities of what the expectation is and what the guidance suggests should happen.

Last year’s fostering and adoption statistics show that children who are going through the adoption system face significant delays, with some waiting for six months or longer. That goes back to matters that I raised when talking about the Children (Care, Care Experience and Services Planning) (Scotland) Bill last week about permanency and decision taking. We cannot overstate the challenge that our young people feel if they do not have a settled environment in which to live.

Teachers and parents have knowledge of Maslow’s pyramid of needs. Sitting right at the bottom of that is the need for a home, a family and security. Without those, children are unable to develop the skills that others do not even know that they are developing, because they are in a sort of flight or fight mode for far too long. We have an opportunity to build on the excellent work that the minister and the Government have done with regard to the bill. The Government that will come after the election needs to build on that.

I reiterate the point that I made last week that far more experienced politicians could learn from the minister’s approach of reaching out. Drift and delay in the development of young people are massively important issues. However, the report speaks to the fact that, if we listen to the voices of adoptive families, to the children and to the practitioners, we can ensure that this often forgotten group of children are given the tailored support that they need and deserve.

19:23

The last few motions before us today are the final motions from the committee designed to put the standing orders book in its best possible state for the next session.

The first motion, regarding the sixth report, relates to cross-party groups. We have had some challenges this session with the compliance of cross-party groups. Following a consultation, we propose extending the period of re-registration for cross-party groups, which will allow members to have a better understanding of what their workload is like before they commit to CPGs.

We also propose the introduction of a limit to the number of CPGs of which an MSP can be a member or office bearer.

Finally, we are also introducing some new deadlines for the provision of information about CPG activities, in the hope that they can more easily be complied with. The purpose behind that is to enable the CPG system to be sustainable, so that both members and external stakeholders can benefit from the valuable work that CPGs do.

I move,

That the Parliament notes the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee’s 6th Report, 2026 (Session 6), Code of Conduct changes – Cross-Party Groups (SP Paper 1017), and agrees that the changes to the Code of Conduct set out in Annexe A of the report be made with effect from 11 May 2026.

Any members who are paying particular attention will understand the challenge that the Constitution, Europe, External Affairs and Culture Committee has with regard to the post-European Union landscape. We are suggesting an extension until 2 October 2026, which is a temporary rule change to continue the committee’s remit so that the issue can be looked into at the start of the next session and to ensure that, in the future, the committee is appropriately titled and its work appropriately defined.

There are some minor rule changes, which clarify conflicting interpretation as to the locations in which committees can meet.

I move,

That the Parliament notes the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee’s 10th Report, 2026 (Session 6), Standing Order rule changes – Miscellaneous and minor amendments (SP Paper 1052), and agrees that the changes to Standing Orders set out in (a) Annexe A of the report be made with effect from 1 April 2026 and (b) Annexe B of the report be made with effect from 11 May 2026.

I sense members’ relief that this is the final motion that I will speak to tonight. It comes under section 15 of the Lobbying (Scotland) Act 2016.

I will take a moment to put on record my deep thanks to colleagues across the chamber who sat on the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee during this session, in what were some challenging times. I thank the clerks, the Scottish Parliament information centre, researchers and all who supported the committee over the session—thank you.

The modifications in the motion relate to the communications that clerks can give to registrants to provide updates, notices and reminders. They also introduce the use of an email address rather than a postal address, to ensure that information can be passed on. Members may wish to note that updated parliamentary guidance on the act is being prepared and will be published by the lobbying register team. It will be of incredible interest to all members who return in the next session.

As is required by the act, the Scottish ministers were consulted on the proposed resolution and the updated guidance. They had no comments—for which I am grateful.

I move,

That the Parliament, in exercise of the power conferred by section 15 of the Lobbying (Scotland) Act 2016 (“the 2016 Act”) makes The Lobbying (Scotland) Act 2016 (Modifications) Resolution 2026 and—

(a) resolves that with effect from the day after the first dissolution of the Parliament following the day on which this Resolution is made the provisions which are contained in paragraphs 1 to 4 of this Resolution shall come into force; and

(b) notes that in accordance with section 48(1) of the 2016 Act the Parliament has consulted the Scottish Ministers.

I sense members’ relief that this is the final motion that I will speak to tonight. It comes under section 15 of the Lobbying (Scotland) Act 2016.

I will take a moment to put on record my deep thanks to colleagues across the chamber who sat on the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee during this session, in what were some challenging times. I thank the clerks, the Scottish Parliament information centre, researchers and all who supported the committee over the session—thank you.

The modifications in the motion relate to the communications that clerks can give to registrants to provide updates, notices and reminders. They also introduce the use of an email address rather than a postal address, to ensure that information can be passed on. Members may wish to note that updated parliamentary guidance on the act is being prepared and will be published by the lobbying register team. It will be of incredible interest to all members who return in the next session.

As is required by the act, the Scottish ministers were consulted on the proposed resolution and the updated guidance. They had no comments—for which I am grateful.

I move,

That the Parliament, in exercise of the power conferred by section 15 of the Lobbying (Scotland) Act 2016 (“the 2016 Act”) makes The Lobbying (Scotland) Act 2016 (Modifications) Resolution 2026 and—

(a) resolves that with effect from the day after the first dissolution of the Parliament following the day on which this Resolution is made the provisions which are contained in paragraphs 1 to 4 of this Resolution shall come into force; and

(b) notes that in accordance with section 48(1) of the 2016 Act the Parliament has consulted the Scottish Ministers.