Seòmar agus comataidhean

I am happy to take that point. Politicians have tried to dress that up and to pretend that we can have both consistency and local decision-making, but one—either more centralisation and consistency, or more localisation—must be prioritised.

We must also seriously consider the cost of a national care service. If there are consequentials from Westminster, that will be well and good, but the service must not be funded by national insurance increases. NI is a regressive form of taxation that kicks in for the lowest-paid workers some £3000 earlier than income tax does. Income tax is by no means perfect, but it is more progressive, with those who are better able to pay more doing so. In contrast, increases in NI hit the less well-off people hardest. The Convention of Scottish Local Authorities has said that the national care service is a “distraction”. I do not agree with that. However, the service will come at a cost that we must tackle.

It was difficult to prepare my speech with little knowledge of what would be in the First Minister’s statement. I will mention one or two other issues.

The proposed gender recognition bill is likely to be interesting. People’s views on that subject are very polarised and I am not sure whether we can find middle ground that we can all agree on, or whether it is inevitable that one side will defeat the other. I hope that we in Parliament can handle the bill in a civilised way. We dealt with same-sex marriage quite calmly within Parliament, even if feelings were running high outside it. I hope that we can do the same again.

Some of us have signed up to the Royal Society of Edinburgh’s Young Academy of Scotland’s charter for responsible debate, which talks about debates being informed, respectful and inclusive. Although we can disagree on issues such as self-identification, I hope that we can accept that there is a range of views and that we can be respectful even when we disagree.

I look forward to debate and discussion on many other topics that were raised in the First Minister’s statement. There is to be a consultation on the “not proven” verdict. I hope that one of the options will be to have two verdicts: proven and not proven. I welcome the fireworks bill, which will help the Dogs Trust at its base in my constituency. Dogs—and some people—experience a terrible time with fireworks.

I also welcome the minimum income guarantee and, of course, a referendum on Scottish freedom.

It is great to be back after the summer recess; I look forward to a busy year ahead. The programme for government offers us many opportunities. I look forward to getting more into the detail in the coming months.

We will hear from the Government in due course. The Government, along with the council and trade unions, has put a lot of effort in. I am not aware that there is more that the Government can do, but we will hear its responses to the points that Mr Sweeney made.

Some years ago, Pladis was offered support to relocate in Glasgow. Scottish Enterprise and Clyde Gateway were involved in that, and the Government and the council have strengthened that offer in recent weeks.

The galling thing is that all of this has been happening at a time when the Scottish food and drink sector has been doing very well. Even within the biscuit sector, we see Tunnocks, Walkers and Border Biscuits doing well, while Baxters and AG Barr have been other success stories. We know that Scottish food produce is of a high quality and often commands a premium price on world markets, as is the case with salmon and whisky. One disappointment for me has been that McVitie’s has consistently refused to brand its goods from Tollcross as Scottish. I guess that that makes it easier to package all the biscuits in the same way, but the company has missed a trick there.

Another significant factor is that McVitie’s was not under Scottish ownership with a Scottish headquarters. Being a Scottish company does not guarantee that there will be no problems and no closures. We know that other Scottish businesses have had to cut costs and trim staff. However, when the HQ is in Scotland, it means that there is generally a stronger commitment to continuing here and to supporting the local employees and outside contractors. It also means that the jobs here will tend to be of a higher quality than if the factory was just one among many branches. It therefore seems to me that one of the lessons we can take out of the situation is that we must resist more strongly the takeover of Scottish companies. I accept that that will not apply in every case, but it should be our assumption that it is better to keep HQs in Scotland unless there are specific reasons to do otherwise and not just make the shareholders a fast buck.

United Biscuits was listed on the stock exchange in 1948. Such a listing is sometimes seen as a sign of success, but it is also a sign that control has been lost and that the link with the business roots has largely gone.

There was an excellent article in The Herald in May this year by Martin Stepek of the Scottish Family Business Association. He argued that we need to look at other ways of succession for family businesses, such as selling to their employees.

I hope for the best for the employees of McVitie’s at Tollcross. If the Government can do anything, that will be great and we will all support it, but I also hope that the Government and Scottish Enterprise will take on board the need to keep more business headquarters in Scotland.

It is incredibly disappointing that Pladis is refusing to change its position, which is likely to mean the loss of 468 jobs in the east end of Glasgow. In some cases, that will mean two or more wage earners in one family losing their jobs, so the financial implications for some will be huge.

I understand that there is also criticism of the redundancy packages that have been offered. I am sure that the GMB and other unions will be pressing Pladis on that, and I am sure that we will all want to help them if we can. I certainly trust that Jobcentre Plus, Skills Development Scotland and other public agencies will support those who lose their jobs.

I broadly accept that the biscuit and snack market is very competitive and there is probably overcapacity. Younger people do not seem to be eating biscuits as much as my generation did. When I have a Rich Tea, Ginger Nut or Chocolate Digestive with my coffee, I notice that younger staff who work for me tend not to do so. Therefore, it was highly likely that Pladis would have to close some factories, and I suspect that Tollcross might not be the last. In practice, Tollcross was competing with the other Pladis plants. I know that the Government, council and unions did not want to say this, but the reality is that, if we were to save Tollcross, it would be because another factory in Manchester, Liverpool or Carlisle was to close instead.

For many years, it has been clear that the Tollcross factory was not being invested in, so most of us have been half expecting its closure for a long time.

Does Rachael Hamilton accept that the most damaging nationalism and ignoring of farmers has been through Brexit and the Conservative Party?

Can the First Minister say anything about the Government’s thinking on face coverings, moving forward? I am thinking particularly about schools—there was a suggestion that face coverings would be used in them for a limited period—places of worship and perhaps sports stadia, where people are sitting outside.

Is the member arguing that we should have given less to the NHS and more to local government?

The First Minister has already mentioned booster or third jags. Can she provide any more information about that? For example, are we going to be using pharmacies more, as we do with flu jags? Depending on which vaccine we use, are there sufficient supplies available?

There has been a lot of discussion about the need for a third jag or booster, perhaps some time in the autumn, but many people in developing countries have not yet had access to any vaccine whatsoever. How do we get the balance right between protecting our population and caring for the rest of the world?

We understand that United Kingdom food and drink exports to the European Union were down by 47 per cent in the first quarter of this year, and that Scotland’s gross domestic product could fall by £9 billion by 2030. After Covid, should the people of Scotland have a choice between a disastrous Tory Brexit and friendly relations with all European nations?

Does Jackie Bailie agree that, all the way through the pandemic, we have kept hoping that things would be finished quicker than they were, and that problems such as new variants or shortages of vaccine have arisen? Is it not wiser to leave the other six-month period in place?