Seòmar agus comataidhean

The committee considered some of the areas that have been mentioned by Michelle Thomson. She was an original member who left for a bit then came back. We took evidence on capacity building for local communities, and on green ports.

I welcome the opportunity to open the debate on behalf of the Economy and Fair Work Committee. I highlight the committee’s two just transition reports, focusing on the Grangemouth area, and on Moray and the north-east of Scotland. I thank all those who contributed their views, the witnesses who gave evidence and the community groups and representatives who met us. I also thank the Just Transition Commission. Its briefings during the inquiries were invaluable and its publications support members’ on-going understanding and scrutiny.

We know that economic transformation is needed to support industry to reduce emissions, phase out polluting sectors, transition to greener jobs and meet net zero targets. We want the process of transformation to create opportunities for new skilled jobs, innovation and investment, but the process also presents risks for workers and communities that rely on emissions-heavy industries and sectors.

The definition of a just transition is important if we are to be able to recognise that it has been achieved. The committee heard a number of interpretations of a just transition, and we advised that, in providing a definition, the Scottish Government should establish

“clear and measurable targets for success.”

The just transition lab in Aberdeen has created a set of indicators, including not only traditional measures but social and community impact measures of a just transition.

In both inquiries, we heard about the crucial importance of communities not being left behind as the industrial transition takes place. In both inquiries, the affected communities called for improved transport links, quality housing and investment in their towns. The communities recognised the impact of changing industry and what that could mean for them. There was clear desire not to repeat the mistakes of the past. Coherent plans must be drawn up in collaboration with communities, and there must be resources to support that.

Although two reports are up for debate, recent announcements from Grangemouth have accelerated its need for a just transition. Our first report was on the Grangemouth industrial cluster. We concluded our report hardly weeks before Petroineos announced the closure of the oil refinery in 2025.

One of the remaining large industrial sites offering significant employment, the Grangemouth refinery has been one of Scotland’s largest manufacturing sites, employing almost 2,000 people. Petroineos has said that its activities in Grangemouth account for around 4 per cent of Scottish gross domestic product. However, that is not sustainable. Parliament has signed up to ambitious targets to reduce emissions. The industrial site at Grangemouth accounts for around a third of total emissions from companies in Scotland, and Friends of the Earth Scotland states that it is responsible for 9 per cent of Scotland’s overall emissions.

The committee published its report in June last year. At that time, recognising the inevitability of change at Grangemouth, the committee reiterated the importance of the Scottish Government setting out a clear vision in a just transition plan. In its response to the committee’s report, the Scottish Government referred to its 2022-23 programme for government, stating that it sets out

“a clear mandate to deliver a Just Transition Plan for the Grangemouth Industrial Cluster”,

and that that commitment is reiterated in its 2023-24 programme for government. The committee is therefore disappointed that the plan is still awaited.

The Scottish Government has committed to bringing forward the plan by the end of this year. However, while we have been waiting for that plan, a transition that looks pretty unjust is happening before our eyes. The committee did not anticipate, so soon after its inquiry, the announcement by Petroineos that the refinery would cease operation with the loss of hundreds of jobs. Although it is recognised that, if we are to achieve a shift to a low-carbon economy, Grangemouth in its current form has a shortened life expectancy, the sudden announcement of the refinery’s closure was a shock.

During the committee’s inquiry, Petroineos declined to give evidence to us, despite a number of invitations and a visit to the site. During our work, the committee was not made aware of the company’s plans for the refinery to close in the timescale that it has laid out.

I acknowledge that, following the announcement last November, Petroineos accepted an invitation to attend the committee, and attended in December. At that time, there were hopes, certainly among politicians and workers, that operations could continue beyond next year to allow more time for a green alternative to be established at the site. However, last month, it was announced that the refinery will close next summer, with the loss of 400 jobs, and, undoubtedly, with many more job losses in the wider supply chain. Converting the site to an import terminal will safeguard some of the workforce but with significantly fewer jobs than currently exist.

Against that backdrop, it is even more important to highlight the committee’s work and to emphasise how crucial it is that the Scottish Government has a meaningful just transition plan for the Grangemouth area. Recent remarks by the Just Transition Commission are sobering. In July, it said:

“the current path will not deliver. The limitations of collective efforts to date are nowhere more clearly in evidence than at Grangemouth, which presents an acute challenge for applying a just transition approach, given the central role of a privately owned company and foreign state-owned enterprise”.

There has to be greater direction and leadership in the bodies that have been established to support the transition locally. There has been confusion over the role of the Grangemouth future industry board. Although the board now has broader membership and is ministerially led both by the Scottish and UK Governments, one of its key roles is to implement plans that are still being prepared. Change is under way but plans risk being out of date before they are published.

Following last month’s confirmation that the refinery will cease operations next year, the committee acknowledges and welcomes the announcement from both Governments of a support package that is focused on local investment and employment support. However, there is an urgent need for a long-term plan. The Scottish Government’s advisory body, the Just Transition Commission, has emphasised the need for effort to be

“adequately resourced and approached as an urgent priority of national importance”.

The Economy and Fair Work Committee echoes that call.

In addition, delays in bringing forward Scottish Government strategies, such as the energy strategy and the just transition plan, regional just transition plans and the climate change update plan, have been frustrating. Delays have an economic impact on business, investor confidence and community action.

Following the committee’s work on Grangemouth, we turned our focus to a just transition for the north-east and Moray, and in particular to the Scottish Government’s just transition fund. The north-east is home to Scotland’s oil and gas production, generating significant economic activity and energy supply, and the sector supports 65,000 jobs in the region. I thank Aberdeen City Council, the Aberdeen arts centre and the Port of Aberdeen for hosting the committee, and I thank all the community activists and members who took the time to share their views.

In 2021, the Scottish Government established a 10-year, £500 million just transition fund specifically for the north-east and Moray. The Scottish Government has no other region-specific fund, either for the Grangemouth area or for any other area, and we wished to scrutinise the effectiveness of that fund.

The stated aim of the fund was to identify

“key projects, through co-design with those impacted by the transition to Net Zero, to accelerate the development of a transformed and decarbonised economy in the North East and Moray.”

During our inquiry, we heard concerns about the future of the fund. A total of £12 million was allocated to the fund during the current financial year, in comparison with £50 million last year. We recognise the Government’s stated commitment to the fund, but there are questions over the fund’s sustainability, given its current reliance on financial transactions.

There were also concerns about the type of funding and how accessible the fund is, especially to not-for-profit and community organisations. The use of financial transactions presents restrictions and constraints for many applicants. The committee supported calls for the Scottish Government to look further at the possibility of multiyear funding to allow for longer-term planning and certainty. It also supported calls for a mix of sustained revenue and capital funding, with sufficient revenue funding to support capacity building in communities to access the fund.

Skills featured in both inquiries, and the committee reiterates its concerns about the 24 per cent cut in the employability budget—concerns that were echoed by the Fair Work Convention at committee yesterday. The suspension of the flexible workforce development fund and the decrease in apprenticeships are also concerning.

The committee recognises the need for greater focus on developing and reskilling our current and future workforce for the transition, and calls on Government to provide greater focus and direction in that area, and for there to be greater coherence across Government to that end.

Both inquiries were concluded before the United Kingdom general election, and we now have a new Westminster Government. In those inquiries, and in the other work of the committee, we have recognised the scale of investment that is required and the need to leverage finance.

We await the impact of GB energy, and I urge the Scottish Government to work co-operatively with the UK Government on the significant challenges that we face in achieving a just transition. I recognise that the cabinet secretary shares that view.

I look forward to the rest of the debate. On behalf of the Economy and Fair Work Committee, I move,

That the Parliament notes the conclusions and recommendations contained in the Economy and Fair Work Committee’s 4th Report, 2023 (Session 6), Inquiry into a Just Transition to net zero for the Grangemouth area (SP Paper 405), and its 4th Report, 2024, (Session 6), Inquiry into a Just Transition for the North East and Moray (SP Paper 556).

I, too, thank David Torrance for bringing this debate to the chamber, which gives us a welcome opportunity to highlight Fife College’s 125th anniversary and to celebrate the college and its students and staff.

I imagine that the members’ restaurant will be busy tonight, as professional cookery and hospitality students from Fife College are hosting a dining event in the Holyrood room. Collaborating with the in-house kitchen and front-of-house teams, students from the college will be involved in all aspects of the event. I look forward to dining there later this evening.

Today, the college has been taking part in the Fife university and higher education fair at the Carnegie Conference Centre. Our colleges and their staff play a vital role in Scotland’s education system. This year, Fife College guaranteed an offer of a place to all eligible school leavers in Fife who had submitted an application on time, promising to help every school pupil who met the minimum entry requirements to find a course that suited their individual circumstances in order to help them to achieve their potential.

The strength of colleges lies not only in their provision for school leavers, but in the fact that they provide a route back to education and learning for many people. The 125th anniversary of Fife College is a significant milestone, and we are rightly celebrating the opportunities that have been provided to, and the achievements of, the thousands of students who have been educated there.

Through strong links with both local areas and workplaces, and through relationships further afield, Fife College students are offered a broad educational experience that will help them to prepare for the world of work while ensuring that they get the most out of their time in education. The completion of the new campus in Dunfermline next year should provide another opportunity for partnership working with high schools, and I look forward to the official opening.

Fife College runs one of the most substantial modern apprenticeship programmes in Scotland, and it has partnered with more than 189 employers, with apprentices in the engineering, construction, automotive, plumbing, gas engineering and life sciences sectors all beginning their journeys there. In August, the college welcomed a record intake of 350 first-year modern apprentices. That includes a record number of engineering modern apprentices, and the college has worked with 43 employers to provide opportunities for local engineers to earn while they learn, which is an important aspect of college learning.

One of the college’s key partners is Babcock, which delivers advanced manufacturing and shipbuilding in Rosyth. The company will take on 400 apprentices over the next four years, and Fife College is, this year, providing 48 apprentices as part of its intake. The college also has other partnerships, including with the RES Group, which runs the Earlseat Wind Farm just outside Coaltown of Wemyss. It will support 125 local apprenticeships in the renewables sector across the lifetime of the wind farm.

The motion recognises

“the launch of a new 125th anniversary scholarship programme to ‘empower and support’ students in their educational journey”,

building on

“relationships with institutions in the USA”.

As Annabelle Ewing highlighted, the college already provides support through the Adam Smith scholarship, with around 30 scholarships available each year. Those are funded by a range of companies, individuals and organisations, including Shell and Diageo, Ian Rankin and the Russell Trust. The scholarships provide cash for resources such as laptops, software and books, as well as offering mentoring and placement opportunities in the UK and abroad. As Alexander Stewart highlighted, the George Lauder bursary in particular continues the legacy of the college’s founding benefactors by offering a valuable opportunity to study and live in the US for the summer that is fully supported, including food, travel and accommodation.

Another important aspect of student life is the social experience, and the Fife College Students Association works hard to support students in their classes and skills development as well as in their social life through sports, societies and events. This week, various freshers events are taking place, as well as a party to celebrate 10 years of the association.

I was delighted to attend the college’s end-of-year showcase at the Glen pavilion in Dunfermline, which was a chance for me to see some of the students’ impressive work on display, and to talk to some of them about their experiences on their courses. From computer games to drama, there was a real range of work on show. I was also pleased to attend the college’s creative industries graduation in Kirkcaldy, where it was great to see the students celebrate and have all their hard work recognised.

I am pleased that, this evening, we are able to celebrate this anniversary and recognise the hard work of all Fife College staff and students, past and present. I wish them the very best for their continued success.

This afternoon’s debate is an opportunity for us as a Parliament to reiterate our commitment to supporting Ukraine and its people as they continue to fight against the illegal and unprovoked invasion of their home by Putin’s Russia. When Russia launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, it escalated the existing conflict, with devastating consequences. Among the fatalities, thousands of civilians, including children, have been killed, and millions of Ukrainians have been displaced from their homes and have fled the country, which has created Europe’s largest refugee crisis since world war two.

Every day that the war continues, the number of casualties and the amount of damage increase. In the media, we hear about war fatigue—sadly, we are getting used to the images and reports that once shocked us. We must continue to be shocked and appalled by what is happening. That it has endured for so long should only strengthen our response, rather than allowing us to stop paying attention.

Many Ukrainians have come to Scotland to seek refuge. This afternoon, we recognise the work of the many organisations, local authorities and individuals who have supported them in doing so. We pay tribute to all those Scots who took Ukrainian refugees into their homes and helped them to find the support that they needed. Ensuring that they were able to access housing, education, healthcare and other services was an important part of allowing people from Ukraine to live as normal a life as they could.

In Mid Scotland and Fife and across Scotland, people stepped up and welcomed Ukrainians into their homes and communities. Through the sponsorship scheme, thousands of families came to the region, and many are still living and working in our communities. An important part of making them feel welcome was the provision of social opportunities by groups such as the one at Forthview parish church in Dalgety Bay. When people arrived from Ukraine, the church was a place for them to meet and to get practical support, and a number of Ukrainian families regularly met there.

Although they have now moved on from host families to their own tenancies, the Dalgety Bay ladies continue to meet and, as Meghan Gallacher recognised earlier, their stories were highlighted as part of refugee week in June, when the church hosted an exhibition about their lives before and after the Russian invasion, with photographs to demonstrate the impact of war on Ukrainian people.

I am the convener of the cross-party group on Poland, which has strong links with the Ukrainian community in Scotland, and I welcome both the establishment of a cross-party group on Ukraine and Colin Beattie’s contribution this afternoon. In the weeks following the invasion, the CPG on Poland heard from the Polish and Ukrainian consuls in Scotland. I recognise the important role that the Polish consulate and community have played and are playing in supporting Ukrainians in Scotland.

The CPG on Poland recently hosted elected members of the Polish Senate, and we discussed the key role that Poland is playing in supporting people who had to flee Ukraine. Poland is a key military supporter of Ukraine, has a security deal with the country and has reiterated support for Ukraine defending itself. However, that is much more than a security arrangement. By May 2022, 3.5 million Ukrainians—53 per cent of those who fled the country—had crossed the border into Poland. The welcome and solidarity that they had from Polish people has been reflected in the response that we have seen from the Polish community here in Scotland.

We are focusing on the domestic response to the war in Ukraine, the support that we are providing to Ukrainians who have come to the UK for protection and safety and the resilience of the Ukrainian people during this horrendously difficult time. In that context, I will mention the BBC World Service.

Sources of trusted journalism are now completely or partially blocked in about 75 per cent of countries around the world. Global conflicts and tensions are now accompanied by the easy spread of disinformation and propaganda. The BBC World Service plays a vital role as an independent, accurate and trusted broadcaster, and it is primarily funded by the UK licence fee. In 2010, the previous UK Government made a hasty decision to transfer responsibility for funding the service from the then Foreign and Commonwealth Office to the BBC licence fee, but it partially reversed that decision in 2016, which led to an increase in staffing and activity. I hope that the new UK Government will affirm a commitment to the service and recognise its vital role as a national asset.

The BBC World Service broadcasts in Ukrainian and Russian. Although it has been banned in Russia since 2022, following the invasion of Ukraine, because of its drive to report on the realities of war, to accurately record the number of fatalities on both sides and to report international reactions, it still broadcasts into parts of Russia, where it is an important source of information. While Putin pursues a war of aggression on the ground in Ukraine, there is also a communications war and a battle over who owns the narrative.

Patrick Harvie spoke about the manipulation of the Russian people and the lies that they have been told. It is important that trusted sources of information can get into the country, but Russian journalists have been forced to leave while we know that the Russian media is expanding and making big investments around the world. We must be alert to that increasing threat to truth and transparency.

As part of the UK, we have provided military support and aid, training for personnel and economic and diplomatic support to allow Ukraine to defend itself in this conflict, while we have offered a place of refuge for those who have been displaced. We have heard many examples today of how Ukrainians have been welcomed into homes and communities across the country. Scotland and its people have responded with an open heart to those who are experiencing the devastation of that conflict, and we must keep offering our support as this terrible war continues.

Across Mid Scotland and Fife, patient lists are closed and waiting lists are extensive. When asked about future prospects, one dentist told me:

“There is no single event on the horizon which gives hope for the future of NHS dentistry. I am not sure it will survive five years.”

As the minister recognises, there seem to be particular issues with recruiting and retaining practitioners in Fife. Will the Government take further action such as expanding the support for rural and deprived areas or introducing incentives for practitioners, and particularly new graduates, to work in particular parts of the country?

To ask the Scottish Government how it is improving access to national health service dentistry for patients in the Mid Scotland and Fife region. (S6O-03743)

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on what discussions it has had with Harland & Wolff regarding the future of its construction yards at Methil and Arnish. (S6T-02099)

I thank the cabinet secretary for that update. I urge her to continue the talks, particularly with the trade unions, because this is not the first time that those who are employed at the Methil yard have faced this level of uncertainty. The yards have a skilled and dedicated workforce, including a number of apprentices, and the hope and the aim is that they will continue working under new ownership. What reassurances can the cabinet secretary offer to the workers? What is the Government doing to ensure that such opportunities continue to exist in the longer term?

I welcome the cabinet secretary’s comments about working with the UK Government. If the yards are to have a future, it is important that the Governments continue to work together.

The Methil yard has huge potential and is of strategic importance to Scotland delivering on its net zero ambitions, but it faces limitations in relation to infrastructure investment. The yard is owned by Scottish Enterprise. Has the Government carried out an evaluation of the yard and of what could be done to help it to be more viable and compete on an international basis?

I start by thanking the Criminal Justice Committee for its work on the bill and for the thorough report that it has produced. Although the committee has backed the bill, it has expressed concerns about whether the reform that it seeks will make sufficient improvement to the police complaints system, the culture within policing and the confidence of the public about police complaints being dealt with effectively.

Concerns need to be addressed as the bill progresses, so this afternoon’s debate is an opportunity to focus on where improvements can be made.

Other members will talk more about the approach of the police or about their legal understanding of the bill, but I will focus my remarks on what it seeks to do to improve the experience of victims and the public more generally.

The bill needs to be looked at in the wider context of work to improve the police complaints and conduct systems, but that also means that we need to consider the environment in which the legislation will operate. We need to consider the system as it stands, public opinion of the service and the experiences of those who have gone through the processes that have been in place up to this point.

Before I move on to the committee’s report and recommendations, I will speak briefly about Sheku Bayoh, who died in police custody in 2015. After more than nine years since his death, the public inquiry into the circumstances surrounding it is ongoing, and his family and friends are still seeking answers about what happened, as they continue to cope with the impact of their loss. They were not treated well immediately after Sheku’s death, and experienced a lack of information and engagement during a time of trauma and distress, which unfortunately continued as investigations went on. Through the process, his family lost faith and confidence in the police investigation and in the ability of the PIRC. It is with their experience in mind that I have read the committee’s report and its recommendations.

It has been recognised and endorsed across the chamber that the vast majority of police officers and staff are honest and hardworking in what can be very challenging roles, but it is also true that there has been unacceptable conduct and behaviour from a minority within the service. When it comes to the oversight role of the SPA, there needs to be confidence that, when such behaviours occur, robust measures are in place to deal with them. The committee heard evidence of unacceptable practice in Police Scotland, but why such practice was not identified and addressed by the SPA, and what is changing to ensure that others will not have the same experience, are not clear.

The public need to have confidence that the culture in policing is being addressed. Since the Angiolini review, steps have been taken to improve police complaints and conduct, and the bill is one aspect of that. However, as the report states, it is hard to have a definitive view on what stage of progress things are at or on whether the provisions in the bill will sufficiently improve the experience for the police or the public.

The duty of candour needs to be more than a symbolic gesture. There is a perception, which is expressed in the report, that the police have each other’s backs, and that there is a working environment in which it is difficult to admit mistakes or to call out inappropriate behaviour. We need to think about how the duty will do more than the existing requirements to address that. That underlines why the legislation has to sit within a broader cultural shift. Without tackling that, it is difficult to see what will change.

I welcome the fact that the evidence highlights work such as Police Scotland’s “Policing Together” programme, which recognises the need to enable a more open environment that allows for early intervention. I recognise that the Angiolini review called, as part of the conduct regulations, for a duty of co-operation that would apply if officers were called as witnesses. However, the Scottish Government has said that that would not be free-standing. In line with the committee’s call, I would like further information on why that will not be introduced, particularly in the light of the evidence from the PIRC in support of it.

I will touch on some of the other aspects of the bill that could have positive impacts for the public. In allegations of misconduct where a police officer resigns or retires during investigations, a case has to be made for those processes to be concluded. We need to consider the public expectation that, in instances of gross misconduct, a conclusion has to be reached.

The committee noted broad agreement in the creation of a Scottish police advisory list and the Scottish police barred list, which would bring consistency with other forces and improve vetting. Publishing the barred list, but only allowing relevant organisations to have access to the advisory list, as is the case in England and Wales, could provide some reassurance in terms of protection and accountability for the public.

The committee was not able to agree on whether gross misconduct hearings should be held in public. It has called on the Scottish Government to set out the case for that. Lady Elish Angiolini is in favour of those hearings being held in public and pointed to the importance of transparency around any abuse of power, as well as to similarities in other professional proceedings. I accept that concerns about privacy have been raised, but there should also be safeguards in place. We should remember that we are talking about cases of gross misconduct. If we are serious about improving transparency and assuring the public, an approach of that kind could help.

Finally, on complaint handling reviews, the bill would allow the PIRC to carry out a review without a request by the complainer, Police Scotland or the SPA, if that were in the public interest, and it could make recommendations to which the SPA and the police would be required to respond.

We know that some victims’ experiences of the PIRC have not been positive. The committee heard evidence of a lack of transparency from the PIRC when it comes to reporting the outcomes of reviews, including in relation to the time that has been taken and understanding the decisions that have been reached. In considering the bill at this stage, we must ensure that there is transparency around both that process and the publication of information. Making everyone concerned aware of any relevant review, and of whether the outcome will be made public, would be welcome steps.