Seòmar agus comataidhean

My conclusion is this. We have had enough—

Thank you, Presiding Officer.

Let me get into my flow a wee bit.

The energy and cost of living crisis has reminded us how vulnerable devolution leaves us. The public sector pay increases were budgeted for when inflation was at 3 per cent, but it is now at 10 per cent, and it will probably rise. Of course, people rightly look to protect themselves and their dependents from this economic tsunami, and the Scottish Government is right to try to meet the demands, but we must all accept—although Opposition parties seem to think that we have a forest of money trees—that, with a fixed budget and very limited borrowing powers, money will be cut from other budgets. Devolution must wait for this unelected Prime Minister to, perhaps, give the devolved Governments so-called handouts.

Importantly, the crisis exposes the fragility of the UK economy under the stewardship of the Tories and their successive—although not successful—Prime Ministers and the stark limitations of devolution.

The UK economy was always built on the sands of consumerism and credit. Energy, wind power and tidal power have not really financially benefited Scotland or the UK. Those turbines in the Borders are not Scottish built—they are probably Danish—and the energy from our natural resources was hawked off to international companies, as happened in the 70s with the oil. Even the retail energy companies are owned by a Spanish group for Scottish Power and by the French state for EDF Energy.

In the 70s—this is an important history lesson—inflation flew off the Richter scale by more than 23 per cent, while oil revenues flooded the UK Treasury. Not a penny was saved for a rainy day; every one was used to prop up a failing UK economy. Norway, by contrast, set up Statoil—still more than 60 per cent state owned—and saved that unexpected energy bonus in the Norwegian pension fund, which is now in credit in trillions. The UK banked nothing.

UK debt is more than 100 per cent of gross domestic product. If it were a business, it would be filing for bankruptcy. Add Brexit to that—I say to Liz Smith that my reference was to a report by the UK In A Changing Europe think tank on the impact of Brexit on the economy—and it perhaps explains partly why we are at the bottom with regard to inflation, apart from Russia. We have the highest inflation rate of the G7. Those are hard lessons for Scotland, and they have to be learned.

Here is the bigger picture.

To ask the Scottish Government what impact inflation, energy prices and interest rates are having on housing costs in Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale. (S6O-01327)

In the Deputy First Minister’s statement, we were reminded that the bulk of benefits are reserved to Westminster, in particular the state pension. Incidentally, I do not think that that is a benefit—it is an entitlement.

Forty per cent of those who are entitled to pension credit do not claim it, and it has been like that for over a decade. Pension credit is a gateway to other benefits, so that saves the Treasury billions. As the UK Government is not pushing those claims—that may be deliberate—what can the Scottish Government do, despite the matter being reserved, to help Scottish pensioners claim their entitlement, which makes such a difference to so many?

Independent reports have indicated that Brexit has increased food prices by 6 per cent and that sterling has lost 10 per cent of its value, which has impacted on imports. Does Liz Smith agree that Brexit has had that effect? Does she agree with those independent reports?

Convener, I think that I will be in touch with Mrs Carlaw on that one.

Could the committee get in touch with the Scottish Animal Welfare Commission to see whether it has a more specific timetable? What is in your briefing suggests that it is rather casual in what it is saying just now.

Yes. I would like to add a bit, because there is a distinction to be made from dogs being microchipped, which happens for a variety of reasons—it is compulsory and makes it easier to impose dog control notices and so on. Cats are a different kettle of fish. I do not know why I mention fish with cats, but there we are. The issues are welfare of cats and responsible ownership.

If I can, I will briefly tell you a very short story, convener. Many years ago, my son went out in the garden and found a cat in the pouring rain under the bushes. We had two cats of our own at the time, and we brought it in. We kept it safe overnight, but it was obvious that the cat was very ill. We took it to the vet, who said that it was a very old cat and that it had kidney failure and was dying. My son and I burst into tears, so the vet asked, “How long have you known the cat?” We said, “Twenty-four hours.” It did not matter.

The point of the story is that the owner would never have known what happened. Cats often disappear to die. My own cat did that; it went down into the garden and I found it later. They go away from the house.

From the point of view of an owner, if a cat is injured, killed on the road or just disappears to die quietly away from its normal place, which is natural for a cat, it is very upsetting for the cat owner to never know what happened.

It is the same when cats adopt another household, which has been known to happen. They just wander off and decide, “The food’s better here; I think I’ll stay.” Again, if they were microchipped, at least the owner would know where they had gone.

I am not obsessed with cats—let me make that plain—but I think that the issue is terribly important. I commend the various cat charities. If you get a rescue cat like Mr Smokey—who is very famous, of course—the Scottish Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals charges you to have the cat neutered, which they usually are not, and to have the cat microchipped. It is a welfare issue and it is about responsible ownership.

From the Government’s response, I see that the Scottish Animal Welfare Commission says in its July 2021 work plan that

“potential areas of work in the medium term”

are

“to consider welfare aspects of microchipping domestic cats, compulsory neutering of cats and outdoor cat controls”

and so on. It seems to me that that is a light touch in respect of potential areas to consider. I ask the committee to consider writing to the Scottish Animal Welfare Commission to see whether it proposes anything more solid. I appreciate the other matters that the convener raised, about scanning and so on.

As I understand it, there should be no cost to the public purse. If an animal is taken to the vets and it is not known whose it is, it could be scanned and the owner found. The main thing would be that owners would have to bring details for the microchip up to date if they were to move.

Finally, if you have a cat flap—I am not advertising any manufactured devices—that identifies microchips, your cat can get in and out of the house and no other cats can come in. Mr Smokey has that protection from any invaders: only he can get in and out using the cat flap, and I am sure that he is very happy with that.

There is a range of things that I would like to see being made compulsory. Every time you talk about cats, people smile at you, but many of us love the wee devils. Thank you.

Does the First Minister agree that the unionist Opposition in here has nothing to do with the mandate and nothing to do with the argument that now is not the right time? It is actually saying, “Never”, defending a permanent veto by one partner nation to prevent another partner nation from simply exercising its right to choose its constitutional future. In those circumstances, does the First Minister agree that the Opposition parties in here should be ashamed of themselves? [Interruption.]