Skip to main content

Language: English / Gàidhlig

Loading…

Seòmar agus comataidhean

Official Report: search what was said in Parliament

The Official Report is a written record of public meetings of the Parliament and committees.  

Criathragan Hide all filters

Dates of parliamentary sessions
  1. Session 1: 12 May 1999 to 31 March 2003
  2. Session 2: 7 May 2003 to 2 April 2007
  3. Session 3: 9 May 2007 to 22 March 2011
  4. Session 4: 11 May 2011 to 23 March 2016
  5. Session 5: 12 May 2016 to 5 May 2021
  6. Current session: 12 May 2021 to 12 November 2024
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 376 contributions

|

Meeting of the Parliament

Ukraine

Meeting date: 26 September 2024

Alexander Stewart

I am grateful for the opportunity to close the debate on behalf of the Scottish Conservatives. There has rarely been a time in the Parliament’s 25-year history when it has been more important to have a clear message on external affairs. When it comes to Ukraine, the message from members on the Conservative benches could not be clearer: we stand with Ukraine; the Parliament stands with Ukraine; and, along with the rest of the United Kingdom, Scotland stands with Ukraine. I hope that that message can be understood as clearly today as it was in February 2022.

Thinking back to that time is a stark reminder of how much uncertainty lay ahead. For the first time in decades, we were witnessing a land war in Europe. All too quickly, we became used to seeing images of shattered and broken cities; of civilians fleeing from their homes in fear and trepidation; and of Russian missiles devastating whole communities every day. Perhaps naively, many of us assumed that those images belonged to the Europe of the 20th century. Yet, all of a sudden, we found ourselves seeing such images in 2022. Two and a half years later, we are still seeing them.

As we debate the issue, I believe that we can be proud of the United Kingdom’s response to the conflict so far. Total military aid has reached £7.8 billion, including £3 billion in support this financial year. Russian forces have lost more than 3,000 tanks, and British anti-tank missiles have no doubt played a key role in that. Meanwhile, operation Interflex has allowed the United Kingdom to train more than 45,000 Ukrainian troops, and I am pleased that the scheme will continue throughout 2025. At the same time, Scotland can be proud of the fact that, since the conflict began, more than 27,000 Ukrainians have been settled in Britain with a Scottish sponsor, which is a massive achievement.

None of us wants to see anything other than a continuation of the fighting spirit of Ukraine and the Ukrainian people—and we have seen that fighting spirit time and time again. Despite how well Ukraine has been able to stand its ground against the Russian offensive so far, the future of the conflict remains uncertain. Reports suggest that the Kremlin is still unwilling to hold genuine peace talks. Meanwhile, President Zelenskyy continues to send a message of hope and positivity. During his visit to the United States this week, he stated:

“we are closer to peace than we think.”

We all hope that that is the case.

Today, President Zelenskyy has presented his victory plan in the White House, and he has talked about that being a path to a “diplomatic way out” of the war, which is also to be welcomed. At the same time, we must understand the complexities of achieving that. I will not be alone in hoping that President Zelenskyy is right about much of that.

Just as with previous debates on the issue, there has been no shortage of important contributions from members across the chamber this afternoon. I will mention some of them.

The cabinet secretary spoke about solidarity and the need to be strong. She also spoke about the community spirit that has been evident across Scotland, and the ability of Scotland and Ukraine to support one another through partnerships in both business and culture. That whole idea of working together and supporting each other has been, and continues to be, crucial.

My colleague Meghan Gallacher spoke about Ukraine’s right to democracy, the country’s culture, the children who have suffered and the individuals who are paying the price for the war day to day. Although those who are here in Scotland are secure, every day, they see and hear what is happening in their homeland, and that is distressing for them.

Paul O’Kane spoke about our common sense of purpose in supporting Ukraine, which is very important. He referred to the need to enhance our support and to supply resources and manpower, and to hold open a door for Ukrainian people. We need support mechanisms in place for our councils and for our communities and community groups.

Political consensus is very important. Alex Cole-Hamilton referred to speaking with one voice, which is vital. Our unity and solidarity defines us. We must ensure that we, as individuals and collectively, put out that message of solidarity for the future.

Stephen Kerr made an eloquent speech, as we have heard him do many times before. He talked about the positive response and the support from the British armed forces, but he also mentioned the fact that, despite the current sanctions, a back door to Russian trade has been left open. Diplomatic and economic support has been put in place, but we need to be in it for the long haul, defend ourselves and stay the course. Those are vitally important messages that we need to get across.

I am delighted about the involvement with the Ukrainian community from those in the Parliament. For example, the cross-party group has supported, and continues to support, work in that regard. Claire Baker talked about truth and transparency, which is vital. The way in which the messages go out—how they are put across—to the nations of the world is important. We need to have spirit—that is vital.

On the day that the war started, Parliament held a debate in the chamber, and all parties sent a clear message of solidarity and support for Ukraine. Back in February 2022, we refused to write off the Ukrainian people in their fight against Putin. Today, in September 2024, we still refuse to do so, and we will fight their corner to ensure that the Ukrainian people are supported.

As nations the world over have said, there can be no suggestion of anything other than providing full support, and no wavering in that support. We must be clear that we will stand by the Ukrainian people for as long as it takes. Once again, I pay tribute to the schools, health organisations, businesses, communities and social enterprises that have provided support—

Meeting of the Parliament

Ukraine

Meeting date: 26 September 2024

Alexander Stewart

I am happy to do so.

Meeting of the Parliament

Retail Crime and Antisocial Behaviour

Meeting date: 19 September 2024

Alexander Stewart

I am pleased to be able to speak in the debate, and I commend and congratulate my colleague Sharon Dowey on bringing this important issue to the chamber. Retailers play an increasingly important role in communities across the country and are the lifeblood of many sectors of our economy. We can all agree that it is unacceptable for those working in retail settings to find themselves subject to any kind of abuse.

Unfortunately, as we have heard from many speakers in the debate, the reality is that abuse is continually happening the length and breadth of the country and the motion rightly highlights those alarming trends.

Earlier this year, a report from the Scottish Grocers’ Federation found that 100 per cent of retailers reported an increase in shoplifting in the past year, and 99 per cent said that it happened daily in their stores. The report also found that the cost of the crime was up to £12,000 per store, totalling £62.9 million across Scotland during a year. Perhaps the most shocking statistic was that 92 per cent of stores reported that violence against staff occurred at least once a week.

Clearly, it is a serious problem and serious action and solutions are required. In recent years, the implementation of the Protection of Workers (Retail and Age-restricted Goods and Services) (Scotland) Act 2021 has been a welcome step; but it is only a step. Under the act, more than 10,000 incidents have already been reported to the police since August 2021, which shows the scale of the problem that we are facing. However, more needs to be done to ensure that the perpetrators are prosecuted. As we have already heard, there need to be consequences. Despite Police Scotland identifying the person responsible in 60 per cent of cases, only 11 per cent of those result in a conviction. On top of that, the SGF has highlighted that the lack of response from the police and the lack of confidence that retailers have in them is affecting the situation. It found that 90 per cent of retailers believe that the response to shoplifting is unsatisfactory or insufficiently delayed. There should not be delays; there should be consequences for these actions.

The low conviction rate shows that we are not addressing the problem in the right way, and 75 per cent of retailers say that they are unlikely to report incidents to the police because of it. That is having a massive effect on the sector and the individuals who work in it. The true extent of those crimes is not clear as the raw data is not being uncovered. Although the legislation is there to protect workers, which is a step forward, much more needs to be done.

For example, the motion speaks about the Scottish Retail Consortium’s call for greater focus on retail crime from Police Scotland, and for the Scottish Government to take the issue much more seriously. We cannot tolerate a situation in which the police are unable to investigate supposedly minor incidents of shoplifting simply because of a lack of resources from the Government. Instead, we should be aiming for a system that does not hesitate to support individuals who report or have experienced shoplifting.

For the individuals who are working in retail up and down the country, and those who suffer the reality of it each and every day and week, a no-tolerance approach to retail crime and abuse is the least that they deserve. We should support them in that.

13:32  

Meeting of the Parliament

Portfolio Question Time

Meeting date: 18 September 2024

Alexander Stewart

SNP Government cuts have led to a 14 per cent reduction in Scotland’s public libraries, with the public library improvement fund addressing only a fraction of the funding problems that they face. What specific action will the cabinet secretary take to address the on-going impact of those cuts, beyond the scope of that fund?

Meeting of the Parliament

Portfolio Question Time

Meeting date: 18 September 2024

Alexander Stewart

HMP YOI Stirling’s inspection report found positive aspects of good practice at the prison, but a number of design flaws were indicated. We all already know about the issues that that has created for the neighbourhood, including noise. What action will be taken to mitigate as far as possible the difficulties that the residents are facing and the impact that the prison is having on their community?

Meeting of the Parliament

Portfolio Question Time

Meeting date: 12 September 2024

Alexander Stewart

To ask the Scottish Government, in light of reports of almost 10,000 children living in temporary accommodation and 110,000 households on the waiting list for affordable social housing, what progress it has made towards providing those affected with safe and affordable accommodation. (S6O-03702)

Meeting of the Parliament

Portfolio Question Time

Meeting date: 12 September 2024

Alexander Stewart

Scotland continues to be in the grip of a devastating housing emergency and, despite the Scottish Government’s commitment to tackle that national crisis, there has been a 10 per cent increase in households becoming homeless compared with last year. Every 16 minutes, a household becomes homeless and, every day, 45 children become homeless. What does the minister have to say to those thousands of people who have nowhere to call home?

Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]

Police (Ethics, Conduct and Scrutiny) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 10 September 2024

Alexander Stewart

I am grateful for the opportunity to speak in this stage 1 debate on the Police (Ethics, Conduct and Scrutiny) (Scotland) Bill.

Scotland’s brave police officers play a hugely important role in keeping our communities safe. Those individuals work in some of the most challenging circumstances imaginable. They are often forced to put their own safety at risk in order to support others and do their job effectively. No one would question that police officers deserve our utmost gratitude and respect.

At the same time, given the important role that police officers play in keeping our country safe, it is right that they are held to the highest professional standards. Indeed, public trust in our police depends on that being the case. Public trust also depends on there being a robust and transparent complaints system, so that any perceived abuse of authority can be challenged reasonably and fairly.

I was a member of Tayside joint police board for 15 years when I was a councillor, and I had the privilege of serving on the complaints sub-committee. I saw many of the issues that are being raised here today at first hand.

We can see that the current system is far from perfect. In her report, Dame Elish spoke about the current police complaints system being “inaccessible” to the public. That is a major issue if that is to be believed and is the case.

It is important for us to understand the range and complexity of complaints. When taking evidence on the bill, the Criminal Justice Committee heard from several witnesses who felt let down by Police Scotland’s professional standards department, including one witness who said:

“the system needs to be changed completely ... It should be scrapped, reset and replaced with something completely new”.—[Official Report, Criminal Justice Committee, 17 April 2024; c 25.]

If that is the case, that sounds alarm bells as to what the public think when they are dealing with that department.

Many MSPs will have dealt with constituents who have felt let down by the process, which has failed to engage with them and address their concerns. I have been assisting a constituent who has navigated the police complaints process for more than two years. After feeling that police officers had turned a blind eye to his concerns, he proceeded with a lengthy complaint-handling review. At the end of that ordeal, he now feels exhausted and frustrated by a complaints system that he believes let him down. It is not transparent, and it should be fixed. I have no doubt that other members across the Parliament will have heard similar stories. We have heard from members about such cases already this afternoon.

The Conservatives welcome the proposed new legislation, which seeks to make improvements. There will be support for that from across the chamber if that is truly going to be achieved. That is why it is vitally important that the bill delivers genuine change, instead of just appearing to bring change. It is obvious that, in its current format, the bill will not deliver on some of the bold objectives that we want it to fulfil. We welcome changes such as the introduction of a Scottish police barred list, as well as the closing of loopholes such as those that allow officers to avoid investigations by retiring or resigning.

The Criminal Justice Committee’s report highlights that, overall, the bill is unlikely to improve the time that it takes to deal with complaints, which is one of the biggest problems with the current system.

The Scottish Police Federation has highlighted that the proposed code of ethics is likely to have no noticeable effect on overall police standards. Again, that is concerning. For my constituent, and for many others who have felt let down by the current system, the reforms in the bill are a missed opportunity.

A number of concerns have been raised around the bill’s cost implications, and some of those have been expressed during the debate. Since the financial memorandum was published, entirely new costs have been introduced for some aspects of the bill. For example, there are revised costs of more than £1.5 million for one-off Police Scotland training costs.

Given that, it is hardly surprising that the Finance and Public Administration Committee has accused the Scottish Government of providing figures that it already knew were inaccurate. Inaccurate figures should not be being provided at this stage.

I welcome the fact that the justice secretary has confirmed that an updated financial memorandum will be provided by stage 2, but that should have been provided, as far as possible, at stage 1. At the same time, it is disappointing to hear that the bill’s costs could still rise even further, which my colleague Russell Findlay spoke about in his opening remarks.

The important work that is carried out by the police across Scotland requires significant authority, but that, in turn, requires accountability. We all recognise that. It is important that the system that is in place to hold police officers to account is transparent, fair and robust, and that the public have confidence in it.

The bill makes a lot of the right noises about making improvements and tackling issues in some of the areas that I have mentioned, and it ticks some of the boxes that individuals and organisations have talked about in relation to its general principles. However, it has a long way to go to deliver the reforms that many people want.

I hope that, as the bill progresses, there will be an opportunity for genuine reform, so that we can have real change.

In conclusion, Presiding Officer, we welcome the bill and want to see it progress, but it must progress through the provision of real opportunities, not missed opportunities, by the Scottish Government.

15:57  

Meeting of the Parliament

Police (Ethics, Conduct and Scrutiny) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 10 September 2024

Alexander Stewart

I am grateful for the opportunity to speak in this stage 1 debate on the Police (Ethics, Conduct and Scrutiny) (Scotland) Bill.

Scotland’s brave police officers play a hugely important role in keeping our communities safe. Those individuals work in some of the most challenging circumstances imaginable. They are often forced to put their own safety at risk in order to support others and do their job effectively. No one would question that police officers deserve our utmost gratitude and respect.

At the same time, given the important role that police officers play in keeping our country safe, it is right that they are held to the highest professional standards. Indeed, public trust in our police depends on that being the case. Public trust also depends on there being a robust and transparent complaints system, so that any perceived abuse of authority can be challenged reasonably and fairly.

I was a member of Tayside joint police board for 15 years when I was a councillor, and I had the privilege of serving on the complaints sub-committee. I saw many of the issues that are being raised here today at first hand.

We can see that the current system is far from perfect. In her report, Dame Elish spoke about the current police complaints system being “inaccessible” to the public. That is a major issue if that is to be believed and is the case.

It is important for us to understand the range and complexity of complaints. When taking evidence on the bill, the Criminal Justice Committee heard from several witnesses who felt let down by Police Scotland’s professional standards department, including one witness who said:

“the system needs to be changed completely ... It should be scrapped, reset and replaced with something completely new”.—[Official Report, Criminal Justice Committee, 17 April 2024; c 25.]

If that is the case, that sounds alarm bells as to what the public think when they are dealing with that department.

Many MSPs will have dealt with constituents who have felt let down by the process, which has failed to engage with them and address their concerns. I have been assisting a constituent who has navigated the police complaints process for more than two years. After feeling that police officers had turned a blind eye to his concerns, he proceeded with a lengthy complaint-handling review. At the end of that ordeal, he now feels exhausted and frustrated by a complaints system that he believes let him down. It is not transparent, and it should be fixed. I have no doubt that other members across the Parliament will have heard similar stories. We have heard from members about such cases already this afternoon.

The Conservatives welcome the proposed new legislation, which seeks to make improvements. There will be support for that from across the chamber if that is truly going to be achieved. That is why it is vitally important that the bill delivers genuine change, instead of just appearing to bring change. It is obvious that, in its current format, the bill will not deliver on some of the bold objectives that we want it to fulfil. We welcome changes such as the introduction of a Scottish police barred list, as well as the closing of loopholes such as those that allow officers to avoid investigations by retiring or resigning.

The Criminal Justice Committee’s report highlights that, overall, the bill is unlikely to improve the time that it takes to deal with complaints, which is one of the biggest problems with the current system.

The Scottish Police Federation has highlighted that the proposed code of ethics is likely to have no noticeable effect on overall police standards. Again, that is concerning. For my constituent, and for many others who have felt let down by the current system, the reforms in the bill are a missed opportunity.

A number of concerns have been raised around the bill’s cost implications, and some of those have been expressed during the debate. Since the financial memorandum was published, entirely new costs have been introduced for some aspects of the bill. For example, there are revised costs of more than £1.5 million for one-off Police Scotland training costs.

Given that, it is hardly surprising that the Finance and Public Administration Committee has accused the Scottish Government of providing figures that it already knew were inaccurate. Inaccurate figures should not be being provided at this stage.

I welcome the fact that the justice secretary has confirmed that an updated financial memorandum will be provided by stage 2, but that should have been provided, as far as possible, at stage 1. At the same time, it is disappointing to hear that the bill’s costs could still rise even further, which my colleague Russell Findlay spoke about in his opening remarks.

The important work that is carried out by the police across Scotland requires significant authority, but that, in turn, requires accountability. We all recognise that. It is important that the system that is in place to hold police officers to account is transparent, fair and robust, and that the public have confidence in it.

The bill makes a lot of the right noises about making improvements and tackling issues in some of the areas that I have mentioned, and it ticks some of the boxes that individuals and organisations have talked about in relation to its general principles. However, it has a long way to go to deliver the reforms that many people want.

I hope that, as the bill progresses, there will be an opportunity for genuine reform, so that we can have real change.

In conclusion, Presiding Officer, we welcome the bill and want to see it progress, but it must progress through the provision of real opportunities, not missed opportunities, by the Scottish Government.

15:57  

Meeting of the Parliament

Portfolio Question Time

Meeting date: 5 September 2024

Alexander Stewart

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on the dualling of the A9. (S6O-03676)