Seòmar agus comataidhean

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. My app has now refreshed and I believe that my vote has been recorded. Thank you.

To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government’s response is, regarding any potential impact on its fair work agenda and the night-time economy in Scotland, to the new United Kingdom legal framework that has come into force requiring employers to pass all tips, gratuities and service charges on to workers. (S6F-03439)

I, too, heartily welcome the move. Employers should never seek to profit from tips that are given to hard-working staff.

I note that, under the new legislation, workers will still need to pay tax on their tips. Does the First Minister share my indignation that His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs appears to exempt politicians from paying tax on gifts from donors, despite requiring my constituents to pay tax on gratuities in other sectors? Does he agree that that represents a clear inequity that the Labour Government should amend?

Ireland’s and Scotland’s population sizes are comparable, but Ireland maintains nearly 90 diplomatic representations worldwide and Scotland has nine.

Despite the economic catastrophe of Brexit and the damage that has been done to international relationships following it, there is still a record number of foreign direct investment projects in Scotland, underpinning its position as the top-performing area in the United Kingdom outside London, which it has maintained for the ninth consecutive year. Does the cabinet secretary agree that that represents value for money, as is demonstrated in the Constitution, Europe, External Affairs and Culture Committee’s report on the value of our international offices?

Unfortunately, the first thing that Labour did to address the £20 billion hole that it found—although everybody told it that it was there in the first place—was to put the burden on the poorest people, such as pensioners. What about taxing the rich? What about putting the burden on those with the broadest shoulders?

I have spoken many times in the chamber during challenge poverty weeks, and I am very disappointed that my calls this year are pretty much exactly the same as those that I have made in previous years, because there has been no change with the new UK Government.

Back in 2019, figures showed that, across Lanarkshire’s seven Westminster constituencies, more than 6,500 families were affected as a result of not receiving benefits for more than 22,300 children because of the two-child limit. In the Motherwell and Wishaw and Coatbridge, Chryston and Bellshill constituencies, that equated to 16 per cent of the children who lived there. As Mr Adam so eloquently said, we are talking about children who are living in poverty in our constituencies.

That policy was imposed, and Labour used to campaign against it. The Labour Government has now voted to keep it and to cut the winter fuel payment for pensioners. People wanted change, but they have got a changeling. It looked like Labour and sounded like Labour, but it is packed full of Tory austerity and Tory values.

No, I will not take another intervention.

The Labour Party used to value universalism. It is the party that introduced the national health service, free at the point of use, that introduced child benefit as a universal benefit and that introduced the universal state pension, adopting the Beveridge report principles.

Our pensioners have been poorly served by successive Westminster Governments. Analysis by the OECD shows that we have the 11th-highest retirement age of the 28 European countries that it studied, and the poorest pensions, compared with a lot of our European neighbours. That is simply not a sustainable position.

Analysis by the Institute for Fiscal Studies that was published last week concluded that removing the two-child limit is

“the single most cost-effective policy for reducing the number of children living below the poverty line”.

Social security remains the most effective lever to lift children out of poverty.

I have heard today that we do not keep our promises, but we have done so. We still have universal free prescriptions, universal free tuition and universal support for childcare, in the 1,140 hours of free childcare that we give to parents. It is beyond belief that I am having to try and persuade Labour colleagues of the value of universalism and how we should look after those who are most vulnerable in our constituencies.

The Scottish Government welcomes every citizen in this country—it welcomes them with the baby box. At the same time, Labour has forgotten the values of universal benefits, which involve the values of our country and how we treat our citizens. By bringing in means testing for the winter fuel payments, Labour has turned round and said to our pensioners that they are no longer valued in that way.

Labour could also have considered the fact that our citizens in Scotland pay a higher standing charge than other people in the UK. We pay a higher standing charge than people in London, and we have a colder climate than people in London. Labour’s policy will therefore disproportionately affect Scotland’s pensioners. I do not see that as a value of the Labour Party that I remember from when I was growing up. I can see that, while Westminster is making decisions for the people of Scotland, we are always going to be disproportionately affected by those decisions and that the only way for us to fully attain our ambitions in relation to the values that we have for Scotland and universalism is for us to become an independent country.

This week, in my constituency, I mark challenge poverty week by hosting what we call the community action network, which brings together all the organisations in our area that are helping people in poverty—from food banks and churches to third sector organisations that deal with people with addictions, people in recovery, families that have carers and disabled people’s families—to ensure that we are all working together for the common purpose of making a difference in our communities. It would be really good if we could feel that there are people here in this chamber who, with us, want to make a better life for our citizens.

Will the minister provide further information on the implementation of the minimum unit price increase and how it is anticipated that it will help to reduce alcohol harm?

I apologise for being late to the chamber.

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on what assessment it has made of the impact of Brexit on Scotland’s food and drink sector. (S6O-03783)

The Association of Independent Meat Suppliers—AIMS—has warned that failures in

“veterinary oversight and inaccuracies in certification processes are leaving UK businesses ‘at risk of economic loss, waste and an increasingly unmanageable burden of bureaucracy’.”

We know that the way back to the full benefits of the EU is with independence, but the Tories promised fewer trade barriers, no diminution of food standards and lower costs, while Labour remained silent on Brexit.

Does the minister agree that the United Kingdom Government must seek a new deal with the EU that reflects the wishes of the people of Scotland and gives us the benefits that are enjoyed by our Northern Ireland counterparts?