Skip to main content
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 4 May 2021
  6. Current session: 13 May 2021 to 21 January 2026
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 550 contributions

|

Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]

Portfolio Question Time

Meeting date: 10 December 2025

Alexander Stewart

Audit Scotland has warned that councils are under severe financial pressure this year, with community facilities and local services already being cut back. Community groups tell us that they simply do not have the capacity to take on more. Does the cabinet secretary therefore accept that relying on community-led initiatives is not a substitute for properly funded local government?

Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]

Social Security Spending

Meeting date: 10 December 2025

Alexander Stewart

We need to have a discussion about universality in benefits. We have already spoken about the SNP’s light touch when it comes to keeping records on benefits, and that is a vitally important matter. We want to see the economy grow and we want to get people off benefits and into the job market, so that they can prosper and move forward.

The amount spent on adult disability payment is the largest of all the devolved benefits and is the biggest contributor to the SNP’s overspend in that area. By 2029-30, ADP alone will cost Scottish taxpayers £770 million more than the equivalent UK benefit would have.

Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]

E-bikes and E-scooters (Antisocial Use)

Meeting date: 9 December 2025

Alexander Stewart

I thank my colleague Sue Webber for bringing this important debate to the chamber. Her motion highlights the growing problem of the dangerous and antisocial use of e-bikes and e-scooters, and I welcome the fact that Parliament finally has the opportunity to debate the issue. The dangers that we are seeing from these vehicles are becoming a frequent concern in many communities. Members are quite right to highlight that they are hearing about many such issues from concerned constituents.

It is true that the problem appears to be worse in our large cities—Edinburgh, Aberdeen, Dundee and Glasgow—but it is also clear that the problem is not confined to urban areas. Concerns have been raised repeatedly across my region about these vehicles, in areas such as Clackmannanshire, Stirling, Fife and Perthshire.

Earlier this year, a 19-year-old was arrested after a collision involving an e-bike in the village of Fallin, in Stirlingshire. Accidents are happening regularly, and individuals are requiring medical attention. We often hear reports of these vehicles being ridden dangerously along pavements and paths, and—as we have heard this evening—the riders wear balaclavas or face coverings to conceal their identity.

Despite the fact that it is illegal, as we have heard from other members, these vehicles are becoming an increasingly common sight on our streets and pathways.

In the previous decade, we became used to seeing motorised scooters being used for crime, including in drive-by thefts and vandalism. Those scooters were small, manoeuvrable and fast, and they were easy to get hold of and to get rid of. For many criminals, they were an ideal partner in crime. E-bikes and e-scooters are smaller and more nimble to manoeuvre, and they are better able to be modified, which makes them even more dangerous and fearsome. Naturally, that means that it is even harder for the police to deal with them, and they are sometimes difficult to trace. Vehicles have to be designed in a better way to ensure that we manage that.

There are areas—across many constituencies and regions, as we have heard—that are quickly becoming known for these problems. A tough approach from Police Scotland is needed to tackle the issue. In some cases, it will also require innovation from Police Scotland, because new technology often calls for new approaches. I look forward to hearing whether the minister, along with Police Scotland, is considering any new approaches to tackle the issue.

As Sue Webber’s motion highlights, Police Scotland’s approach should include seizing these vehicles permanently, without giving them back; we do not want them to be returned. The use of CCTV in crime hotspots also has a role to play. I am aware that the Scottish Government has been encouraging further anonymous reporting of these vehicles through the Crimestoppers service. That is also a valuable tool, but further measures have to be put in place to ensure that there are tough consequences for these individuals if they are using e-scooters and e-bikes. Local police must be allowed to tackle the issue in the way that they see fit, in order to manage their communities.

As I have said, we also need political leadership on the issue. The bikes can move at excessive speeds, and they run the risk of starting battery fires. They are dangerous to our communities and to individuals.

In conclusion, the onus is on the Scottish Government and Scottish National Party ministers to come up with a detailed, comprehensive action plan and to ensure that Police Scotland is given the resources that it needs to take those actions. The public are demanding action to keep communities safe, and it is our important responsibility, as MSPs, to provide that. It is high time that people were listened to and that a plan was delivered and acted on.

18:28  

Meeting of the Parliament

International Day of Persons with Disabilities

Meeting date: 2 December 2025

Alexander Stewart

I am pleased to speak in the debate, and I thank Pam Duncan-Glancy for bringing this important issue to the chamber.

The international day of persons with disabilities reminds us of our collective responsibility to uphold the rights, dignity and wellbeing of disabled people across all areas of life and all aspects of society. It is important that Parliament acknowledges this day, and I congratulate Pam Duncan-Glancy and the societies, groups and organisations that all play a part.

I welcome the UN’s chosen theme for this year, which is fostering disability-inclusive societies for advancing social progress. That theme reflects a simple truth, which is that the whole of society benefits when we support disabled people to thrive by removing barriers and widening access for them.

When I engage with organisations in my region, including employment services and third sector groups, it is clear just how much those organisations, and individuals with disabilities in the area, contribute to the communities that they work in every day and ensure that those communities thrive.

Pam Duncan-Glancy’s motion rightly speaks about some of the challenges that disabled people continue to face. Those challenges include barriers to accessing education, securing stable employment and accessing public services, which remains difficult for disabled people.

Of all those challenges, employment remains one of the most significant. From 2013 to 2019, we saw positive change on that issue, and the proportion of disabled people in employment increased from 43 to 54 per cent. Despite some progress, however, we know that the disability employment gap remains stubbornly high. Recent figures have shown that the disability employment rate is 53.1 per cent, which is nearly 30 percentage points lower than the rate for those who are non-disabled. We also know that employment rates for disabled people fell during the pandemic, and that, overall, the proportion of disabled people in employment has not increased since 2019.

While we recognise the progress, there is a lot of work to do. We have to ensure that much more work is done. For example, we need to ensure that workplaces are genuinely inclusive, that disabled people have access to the correct support and that employers are able to make any necessary adjustments to enable them to work.

The previous United Kingdom Government doubled spending on the access to work programme between 2016 and 2024, and that provision helped to deliver employment support for more than 67,000 individuals in 2023-24. As we go forward, it is important that there is a continued commitment to supporting disabled people to seek work where possible, so that further progress can be achieved.

Inclusion should be not just an aspiration but an essential part of a fairer Scotland, which we all want to see. It is therefore important that we ask the Scottish Government to continue to engage constructively with Parliament’s forthcoming disability summit. I look forward to seeing what can be achieved from that.

The United Kingdom Government also has a key role to play in the process, as most aspects of equalities and employment law are still reserved matters. We must ensure that UK-wide disability rights legislation remains robust and effective and that Governments work together to make employment practices more inclusive. Disabled people deserve a system that works for them across all parts of the United Kingdom and at all levels of government.

In conclusion, I hope that members on all sides of the chamber can work together to make that vision a reality, because disabled people want nothing more than for the Parliament to work with them to achieve the goals that they rightfully deserve to reach.

17:24  

Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]

First Minister’s Question Time

Meeting date: 27 November 2025

Alexander Stewart

Forth Valley royal hospital maternity service in Larbert is the latest maternity service to receive a damning report from an unannounced inspection. The report highlighted that mothers were being put at serious risk and that some had to wait up to 62 hours to be induced. What is the Scottish Government doing to ensure that lessons are learned from the report and that safeguards are put in place to protect mothers and their unborn babies as a matter of urgency?

Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]

General Question Time

Meeting date: 27 November 2025

Alexander Stewart

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on its just transition plan for the Mossmorran petrochemical site. (S6O-05209)

Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]

General Question Time

Meeting date: 27 November 2025

Alexander Stewart

Four hundred employees and contractors face redundancy at Mossmorran, but the transition plan that the Scottish Government promised in early 2025 has still not materialised. Instead of there being a blame game between both Governments, when will the Scottish Government take responsibility for protecting the sector and end its presumption against oil and gas in order to prevent job losses in the oil and gas sector supply chain?

Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]

Economy

Meeting date: 26 November 2025

Alexander Stewart

Today’s UK budget appears to be another missed opportunity to tackle the biggest challenges standing in the way of the economic growth that Scotland should be capable of.

A strong workforce is vital for effective economic growth. However, as our motion highlights, there is currently an alarming decrease in economic activity across Scotland. Unemployment has increased over the past year, and a fifth of working-age Scots are economically inactive. Those are far from just statistics; that inactivity means missed opportunities, stalled ambition and lost growth.

To be clear, that is a problem created by both of Scotland’s Governments. The UK Labour Government’s jobs tax is already costing jobs and livelihoods. One in five businesses are claiming that they have already cut jobs due to the national insurance hike. A third of businesses are saying that they plan to cut jobs in the coming months. At the same time, Labour’s Employment Rights Bill will only make it more difficult to provide employment. Instead of strengthening our labour market, the bill risks making hiring more complicated and more expensive. It is little wonder that the Federation of Small Businesses, the Law Society of Scotland and the Confederation of British Industry have raised concerns about the proposals. There is little use in increasing job security if the reforms risk decreasing the number of jobs that are being created and becoming available. Any chancellor who is serious about creating growth should urgently reconsider those anti-business reforms.

Meanwhile, here in Scotland, the SNP’s high-tax agenda has meant that the Scottish tax base has not had the growth that it should have had. Despite having significant powers in relation to employability, the SNP has chosen to prioritise welfare reforms.

As our motion highlights, the welfare budget is rapidly spiralling out of control. The total budget is set to reach more than £9 billion by 2030, which is over £2 billion more than the block grant allocation for social security. The UK Government has already tried, and failed, to control welfare spending earlier this year. As it stands, the Scottish Government has no plan for how to address those spiralling costs—and does not seem to be interested in creating one.

Our motion rightly speaks about the risks in some taxes that threaten opportunities, and the importance of dealing with those risks. We should be backing working households and working people. At the same time, we need to address the spiralling welfare costs that are consuming ever-higher amounts of both the Scottish Government and UK Government’s budgets. We need to deliver reforms that mean that, where possible, people get into well-paying jobs, while ensuring that we target support for people who need it the most. That also means creating more jobs and making sure that there are no anti-growth taxes such as those brought in by the Labour Government.

If the political will existed to do that, members on the Conservative benches would stand ready to work with either Government to ensure that we improve and that those reforms take place. For now, the onus rests on both of Scotland’s Governments to do what is needed to place Scotland firmly on the path to sustainable growth. Doing anything else would be an abdication of responsibility.

16:31  

Meeting of the Parliament

First Minister’s Question Time

Meeting date: 20 November 2025

Alexander Stewart

Mindless vandalism and antisocial behaviour on Stagecoach buses in my region are at a crisis point. Those mindless acts endanger lives, damage vital transport services and cause significant disruption for the communities that rely on those services. What action will the Scottish Government take to protect drivers, passengers and the wider communities?

Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]

Portfolio Question Time

Meeting date: 19 November 2025

Alexander Stewart

The Stirling and Clackmannanshire deal is a 10-year programme, and we are now operating in year 6. The Government promised that 5,000 jobs would be created. In June, it celebrated and defended the creation of only 82 jobs and claimed that projects were still at an early stage. Does the Deputy First Minister really think that, six years on, people in Stirling and Clackmannanshire will find that explanation anything but disappointing? Real progress and real job opportunities for the people of Stirling and Clackmannanshire are needed.