Ariane Burgess
Scottish Green Party · Scotland
“I want to briefly mention an issue that is connected to what David Barratt said about a national emergency briefing. In January, the UK Government published its national security assessment on global biodiversity loss, which states: “Collapse impairs an ecosystem’s ability to provide vital services including clean water, food production,…”
“In my rural and island communities, it is sometimes really hard for people to even find a bus. We need the clean heating systems that our EU neighbours have enjoyed for decades. We also need a thriving natural environment, which will be the key in supporting us to adapt to climate change.”
“The Scottish Greens campaigned on the idea of an agricultural transition insurance fund—we want to see £500 million of the agricultural budget put into it, because farmers need certainty. We are now in unknown territory when it comes to what we are doing in respect of our land use.”
“I sat on two committees in the previous session—the Rural Affairs and Islands Committee and the Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee— that scrutinised the climate change plan, and we heard evidence from countless stakeholders that they did not feel confident that there was an adequate delivery plan in place.”
“We must support farmers to move to nature-friendly, regenerative farming. Those pioneers have moved away from nitrogen use, they understand soil biology and they are choosing smaller herds and mob grazing. We have legislated for regenerative agriculture, but we do not have the underpinning training.”
“I started working on climate change and nature restoration in New York City in the 1990s. When I came back to live in Scotland, I was heartened, because I had arrived in a country where the people, through the Parliament and the Government of that time, had recognised the science-based evidence on climate change.”
The complete record
Every one of 413 lines we hold for Ariane Burgess, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 9.
“They know what they need to do, but they need Government funding to bring about action at a local level. People throughout the public sector are ready to take action. They just need the Government to give them the funding to support them to take it. 17:17”
“I want to briefly mention an issue that is connected to what David Barratt said about a national emergency briefing. In January, the UK Government published its national security assessment on global biodiversity loss, which states: “Collapse impairs an ecosystem’s ability to provide vital services including clean water, food production, and climate regulation.” That is another blue light flashing quickly and brightly that shows that the Government should move even more swiftly. When the Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee considered the climate change plan in the previous parliamentary session, one thing gave me hope when I thought, “How the heck are we going to do this?” As well as the pioneering farmers, the other people who give me hope are the people in local government who have already rolled up their sleeves.”
“We must support farmers to move to nature-friendly, regenerative farming. Those pioneers have moved away from nitrogen use, they understand soil biology and they are choosing smaller herds and mob grazing. We have legislated for regenerative agriculture, but we do not have the underpinning training. As I said to the minister in the previous parliamentary session, and as I will continue to say to him, we need a skills pipeline in regenerative agriculture so that we can bring new entrants into the system and support existing farmers to transition with confidence. The training must be farmer led and based on farm clusters. We cannot footer around with sporadic funding from the knowledge transfer and innovation fund; we need that pipeline.”
“The Scottish Greens campaigned on the idea of an agricultural transition insurance fund—we want to see £500 million of the agricultural budget put into it, because farmers need certainty. We are now in unknown territory when it comes to what we are doing in respect of our land use. We need to give farmers the certainty that if they take action, and it fails, they will still have support to take forward work on land use. One thing that I noticed in the rural support plan, which I need to look at in more depth, is that it seems to indicate that food production is one thing and nature restoration is something else—two separate streams of activity. However, I have met pioneering farmers who give me hope, because they recognise that there is a stacked function—the methods that they use to grow food will allow nature to regenerate.”
“In my rural and island communities, it is sometimes really hard for people to even find a bus. We need the clean heating systems that our EU neighbours have enjoyed for decades. We also need a thriving natural environment, which will be the key in supporting us to adapt to climate change. Every sector of the economy and society will have to play its part. Critically, as has been stated by numerous colleagues this afternoon, we need to see rapid action in transport, in heat and buildings and in agriculture. I will focus some more comments on agriculture, having just had a fantastic two days at the Royal Highland Show. We have the Agriculture and Rural Communities (Scotland) Act 2024 and the rural support plan, and we know that agriculture and land use play a vital role in the work that we need to do to bring down our emissions.”
“I sat on two committees in the previous session—the Rural Affairs and Islands Committee and the Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee— that scrutinised the climate change plan, and we heard evidence from countless stakeholders that they did not feel confident that there was an adequate delivery plan in place. This five-year parliamentary session is our last chance to get it right. We need bold climate change action. I welcome the cabinet secretary’s focus on that, but we have to bring about a secure transition that is just and fair, that delivers for the people of Scotland and that delivers greener, more affordable futures. Well-paid jobs in renewable energy have been talked about over the past five years—we need to see more work on that. We need accessible public transport—where is that happening on the ground?”
“Why, six years on and less than four years until 2030, am I hearing from countless people who know what is at stake that the urgent change that we need to see is not happening fast enough? I admit that we have done an incredible amount of work on energy, but there are other areas in which we need to move at a much more rapid pace. We have heard from MSPs across the chamber—Sanne Dijkstra-Downie, Heather Anderson, David Barratt and Duncan Dunlop all talked about the wildfires and floods that demonstrate that we need to take critical action. I heard the cabinet secretary talk about this being the parliamentary session of action and the fact that we have a climate change plan.”
“I started working on climate change and nature restoration in New York City in the 1990s. When I came back to live in Scotland, I was heartened, because I had arrived in a country where the people, through the Parliament and the Government of that time, had recognised the science-based evidence on climate change. It is good to hear the cabinet secretary recognise that in the chamber today, and I have heard it from colleagues across the chamber. In 2019, the Parliament unanimously declared that there was a climate emergency. Doing so was supposed to lead to an increase in the roll-out of net zero policies, such as better buses, safer active travel and retrofitting our homes to make them warmer and cheaper to heat.”
“Today, coastal communities and marine experts gathered outside the Parliament to demand urgent action to protect Scotland’s precious marine environment. Last year, the Scottish Government delayed a consultation on the implementation of management measures for marine protected areas and priority marine features. That capped off a decade of delays to protecting our seas from overfishing and environmental damage and to meeting legal obligations on achieving a good environmental status for our seas. Will the First Minister heed the calls from Scottish coastal communities and urgently consult on the introduction of protections to restore our marine environment and allow for greater local control?”
“It was good to hear the cabinet secretary say in his opening remarks that there will be work on service standards, potential ownership reviews and so on, but we absolutely need to see action on this matter in this parliamentary session. We must see results, and the Greens and I will certainly keep an eye on the issue over the coming months and years. 16:10”
“We also have an incredible opportunity to reduce car dependency, as that will help meet our climate targets, an issue that we discussed at great length in the previous session. We need to stay on course to meet them. Addressing this issue will require giving councils real powers of full franchising and municipal ownership. For a start, we must have a minimum service standard. Buses must be an essential part of our public infrastructure; as others have said, they must be a joined-up form of transport. Buses, ferries and trains must all be connected, so that people can start their journey on one mode of transport and work through other modes in order to arrive at their destination. The Highlands and Islands pilot has been extraordinarily successful, and I welcome its roll- out to other parts of Scotland.”
“When the Government chooses to act on something, we get results. The problem, though, is that we might have cheap fares, but in some cases we have no, or infrequent, buses. If there is no bus, people cannot get to work, to hospital or to watch football. People need to feel confident about choosing to use the bus. When they are standing at the bus stop in the pouring rain, they need to know that the bus is going to show up. We need changes to the system. We need to move away from the private cherry picking that leads to services being cancelled out of the blue, people being stranded and communities having to spend weeks and months fighting to get the service brought back. Even if it does return, it might be less frequent. Along with affordable buses, we need reliable buses. They matter, as they get people to work and create confidence.”
“The fare for travelling from Wick to Inverness went from £31 for a single to £2, and the fare from Inverness to Elgin went from £15 to £2. The pilot is incredible, radical and life-changing, and people in the region are embracing it. I am delighted that the pilot was rolled out in the Highlands and Islands. The Greens have been calling for an island and rural community-first approach, so let us try things out there. I want us, during this parliamentary session, to try things out in our rural and island communities and not leave them as afterthoughts, as has so often been the case in the past. Having solved the affordability issue in the Highlands and Islands, we are now looking to roll the pilot out across the rest of Scotland. However, as we have already heard in the debate, issues with reliability have not been solved.”
“Not to overegg it, but the Greens very constructively negotiated the £2 single bus fare cap pilot in a previous budget. It was an incredible example of constructive negotiations, and an example of how we will seek to work throughout this parliamentary session. I am proud that the pilot was rolled out in the Highlands and Islands, which is the region that I represent. We know from data from April, provided by Highland Council, that the number of fare- paying passengers increased by 25 per cent during the first month. That is incredible. People are transforming the way that they move around at remarkable speed. When I was out and about in March and April talking to people, the pilot was one of the things that they wanted to tell me about—and why not?”
“We will make sure that we continue with direct payments. We have been able to give payments early to growers, in particular where active farming is happening. Of course, active farming must be sustainable farming, and the agricultural and land management sectors, by virtue of managing our land, have not just the biggest responsibility but the biggest opportunity to assist us in getting to net zero and improving the environment for everyone. They also create hundreds and hundreds of jobs, particularly in rural Scotland, including the area that Ariane Burgess represents.”
“I welcome the cabinet secretary to her role, which brings together climate action and rural affairs. The cabinet secretary mentioned the important role that our farmers and crofters must play in reducing emissions by increasing tree planting and peatland restoration. Today’s figures show that progress is being made, but it is only a starting point, and land managers need long-term certainty to plan their business activity. Will the cabinet secretary set out how large and small land managers across Scotland will be supported to scale up climate-friendly actions such as tree planting and peatland restoration? Gillian Martin: I thank Ariane Burgess for her good wishes. I look forward to continuing to work with her on this most important of areas. I know how passionate she is about it, as am I.”
“To ask the Scottish Government, in light of the growing number of people swimming in Scotland’s waters and the United Kingdom Government bringing forward a Clean Water Bill, what consideration is being given to introducing equivalent legislation in Scotland. (S7O-00019)”
“It is about ensuring that those who want to own their own home—home ownership is not for everyone—get additional support to be able to do so. It will also allow those people to move out of private rented or mid-market rent accommodation, which will allow someone else to get into a different part of the affordable housing system. The fund is important for first-time buyers, but we must also recognise the flexibility that it can give the housing market in order to support mid- market rent, the private rented accommodation sector and social housing. That is another important part of the scheme.”
“Although I share the cabinet secretary’s ambition for homes, I have concerns. Evidence from previous help-to-buy schemes is that they make properties less affordable, not more. An evaluation by the London School of Economics found that a scheme in London caused a 6 per cent rise in house prices, with no increase in supply at all. The average deposit for a home last year was more than £43,000, so the scheme would still require the buyer to find more than £30,000. Does that not risk providing help to those who are already better off, as we have seen in previous schemes? Shirley-Anne Somerville: No, I do not think that it does. I go back to one of the points that was alluded to in my visit this morning.”
“On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I pressed my button in error, so that can be disregarded. The Presiding Officer: I am afraid that we cannot do that, unfortunately. The vote has been recorded already. Apologies, but that is the rule.”
“I, Ariane Burgess, do solemnly, sincerely and truly declare and affirm, that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to His Majesty King Charles, his heirs and successors, according to law. Nam bheachdsa, tha muinntir na h-Alba uachdarail. Tha mise Ariane Burgess, gu sòlaimte is fìrinneach a’ cur an cèill agus ag innse gum bi mi dìleas agus fìor umhail do A Mhòrachd An Rìgh Teàrlach, a oighreachan agus a thànaistean, a rèir an lagh.”
“Highlands and Islands communities must see the delivery of a rural housing revolution, more affordable homes, more social housing and more long-term empty properties coming back into the community. We want to ensure that every community has access to essential banking, childcare and public transport, including free bus travel, which is already enjoyed by half of Scotland’s population. We also want to tackle escalating land prices to democratise land. Scotland’s rural communities are the backbone of our nation, and the Scottish Greens will do all that we can to give them the best possible future. 14:14”
“I am incredibly proud of what the Scottish Greens have delivered so far, but I am also aware that more still needs to be done. I am deeply concerned about the impact that Donald Trump’s reckless attack on Iran will have on the cost of living. Energy costs look set to soar, which will hit people across the Highlands and Islands who already face a price premium. The cost of fuel is also likely to rise, which will affect everyone from fishers to community pharmacies that deliver vital prescriptions. The Scottish Greens will continue to be there for folks in the on-going crisis. Looking further ahead, we want to instigate proper investment in the future.”
“We were also there for renters in the aftermath of the Covid pandemic, when we were instrumental in bringing in a rent freeze and a ban on arbitrary evictions, both of which were key promises in our 2021 manifesto. I have also been supporting the agricultural sector, securing funding for a sustainable farm and food skills pipeline that will support the transition to regenerative growing practices and give more young people opportunities in that crucial sector. I urge the Government to follow through on that work. On top of that, I have supported market gardeners, working to set up a support scheme that would ensure that crofters and other small- scale producers are funded based on what they deliver rather than the size of their holdings.”
“Throughout this session, the Scottish Greens have delivered for people across the Highlands and Islands. On transport, we have scrapped peak fares for rail passengers, as well as those for islanders on NorthLink ferries. We have introduced a £2 bus cap across the Highlands and Islands and secured consultation on cruise ship levies that will help to reduce pressure on port towns and island communities. On housing, we have ramped up availability and affordability by winning multiyear funding for community housing projects, getting more money into the rural and island housing fund and implementing tougher council tax rules for second homes. Tenants are better off thanks to Green wins from the Housing (Scotland) Act 2025, including long-term rent controls and stronger protections against no-fault evictions.”
“The lack of availability of affordable accommodation is a real concern, and I share the view that we need to boost connectivity across the region. As the motion notes, those factors are key to strong communities and the Scottish Government must handle them with nuance. I disagree, however, with its diagnosis of the challenges that rural and island communities face. For example, increased regulation of the visitor economy will help to fix housing shortages and support local authorities to deliver the various services that the motion states are downgraded. The reason for services being on their knees can be traced back to 14 years of Tory austerity at Westminster and historic underinvestment in rural Scotland long before the Scottish Parliament existed.”
“I thank Jamie Halcro Johnston for bringing this debate on rural issues to the chamber. Before I contribute to it, however, I would like to pay tribute to several members who will not be back in May. It has been a pleasure to work with Mairi Gougeon on various key pieces of legislation during this session. I thank her for being so constructive and personable during our discussions, and I wish her all the best for the future. I also thank Oliver Mundell and John Mason for their years of public service in the Parliament and to the people they represent. I also thank Beatrice Wishart—I name-checked her yesterday, too—for her championing of Shetland and, in particular, our shared interest in fixed links. Today’s motion raises several key points that I agree with.”
“That will allow for better, fairer access to justice in this area—something that can only improve outcomes for everyone, not just for those with the deepest pockets. My stage 3 amendment, which will see land access guidance updated for the first time in two decades, and the minister’s amendment to review the operation of the Scottish Land Court— something that I pushed for at stage 2—will ensure that the new jurisdiction works as effectively as possible in the years to come. To wrap up, the Scottish Greens support the bill, but we want to see further reform in the next session of Parliament to ensure a viable future for crofting for generations to come. 17:18”
“Although I understand that the bill is not the place to resolve carbon offsetting issues, I urge the next Government to commit to investigating that issue through primary legislation to allow crofters and other land users to work with full confidence. That is not an endorsement of the carbon offsetting system—instead, it is an acknowledgement that the system exists and needs regulating in the interests of fairness, community wealth building and democratising Scotland’s land. Part 2 of the bill is a sensible idea in principle and will give crofters, as well as other stakeholders, a clear destination for their legal cases. It is especially pleasing to note that the new Scottish Land Court will have jurisdiction over access rights.”
“I also thank the minister and his officials for their constructive approach in meetings about the bill. Turning to the specifics of part 1, despite the overall lack of ambition in the bill, some welcome progress has been made on giving crofters the right to put land to environmental use and ensure a fairer balance of rights between the crofting community, the public interest and landlords and estates. I trust that those changes will allow crofters to do their bit for Scotland’s nature and climate and enable landscape-scale change so that we meet our biodiversity and emissions reduction goals, with biodiversity in particular being key to ensuring that our nation remains resilient in the face of global ecosystems collapse. My concern is that it is unclear who is entitled to the financial benefit of that vital work.”
“Key elements that are missing include tighter regulation of the market in tenancies to make crofting more accessible; a scheme to create more crofts on public land; and moves towards a Scotland-wide expansion of where crofting can take place. We must ensure that the next Government uses the review of crofting legislation that Tim Eagle and I secured to deliver the much- needed solutions to those issues in order to secure crofting’s future. I express my thanks to the stakeholders who have worked with me on the bill. The Scottish Crofting Federation and Community Land Scotland have provided excellent support on part 1. Ramblers Scotland and the Environmental Rights Centre for Scotland have also been very helpful in proposing amendments, and it has been good to collaborate on making meaningful changes to part 2.”
“Crofting is a vital part of Scotland’s cultural and social heritage, as well as its future. It is a social and economic glue that holds rural and island communities together, offering us a template for low-impact land management that, if adopted more widely across Scotland, could help us to meet the major challenges presented by the climate and biodiversity crises, support fair access to land and food and provide an antidote to rural depopulation. Although I am pleased that stakeholders are largely happy with the bill’s contents, it must be said—as other members have done already—that the bill is something of a missed opportunity. It has been in the pipeline for a decade, and yet what we have before us today is fairly technical, and not the ambitious reform that crofters have been crying out for.”
“It reflects learning and engagement, and it helps to ensure that the visitor levy can work as intended to support communities, protect places and sustain Scotland’s tourism offer for the long term. I look forward to seeing other tourist-type levies in the next session of Parliament, including the cruise ship levy and, potentially, a point-of-entry levy. On behalf of the Scottish Greens, I am pleased to support the bill. 16:21”
“It allows authorities to reinvest in infrastructure, services and the quality of the visitor experience. By giving councils flexibility in how the levy is structured— whether as a percentage or a flat rate—the bill strengthens their ability to do that in a way that reflects local circumstances. Ultimately, the bill is about fairness and sustainability. It is about fairness because it is reasonable to ask those who benefit from tourism to contribute to maintaining what makes Scotland special. It is about sustainability because, if we do not invest in our infrastructure and environments now, we risk undermining the very assets on which tourism depends. The bill is a sensible step forward.”
“At the same time, we should be clear that Scotland remains an incredibly attractive place to visit, which is something to celebrate. Tourism brings jobs, supports local economies and connects people to our landscapes, culture and communities. However, it also brings costs, which are currently borne disproportionately by local communities and local authorities. That is where the visitor levy plays a vital role. Until now, those offering accommodation—from hotels to short-term lets—have benefited from Scotland’s appeal without there being a direct mechanism to contribute to the upkeep of the very places that attract visitors in the first place. The levy begins to address that imbalance. It is not about deterring visitors; it is about sustaining the places that they come to experience.”
“The passage of the original legislation was a missed opportunity, because the pressures that led to the policy have not gone away—if anything, they have intensified. If we had started from a co-design approach in the first instance, perhaps we could have identified, during the process of passing the 2024 act, issues such as the third-party booking issue. Across Scotland, many of our most cherished places are experiencing the strain of success. From the streets of Edinburgh to the communities in Skye and beyond, increased visitor numbers are putting pressure on local infrastructure. Roads are deteriorating under heavier use, particularly with the rise in car travel and camper vans. Public spaces, facilities and services are being stretched.”
“The Scottish Government has worked with industry to understand where the original legislation could be improved and how it could operate more effectively in practice. That kind of collaboration and co-design is welcome, because it has strengthened the approach to Scotland’s visitor levies. It was also good to hear positive feedback from stakeholders during stage 1 of the Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee’s evidence. However, it is important to reflect on how we arrived at this point. There were opportunities for a more constructive approach during the passage of the original legislation. Instead, there was outright resistance from some quarters to the principle of a visitor levy altogether.”
“This amendment bill is, at its heart, a technical piece of legislation that will make what we put in place through the Visitor Levy (Scotland) Act 2024 more workable on the ground. In particular, it will give councils greater flexibility by adding the option of a flat rate alongside the percentage model that is already available. That matters, because Scotland is not one place. The pressures that are faced in central Edinburgh are not the same as those in Skye or in our smaller towns and rural communities. Local authorities need tools to respond to those differences, not a one-size-fits-all approach. It is also worth recognising that these changes have come about through positive engagement.”
“Rhoda Grant: I seek to withdraw amendment 36, given the reassurances that the minister has put on the record that the resumption will not be used against crofters and that they will have adequate protection. Amendment 36, by agreement, withdrawn. Amendment 37 not moved. 17:00 Section 11B—Requirement for proposed crofter to be aware of duties Amendments 38 to 41 moved—[Rhoda Grant]— and agreed to. After section 11B Amendment 42 moved—[Rhoda Grant]—and agreed to. Section 14A—Common grazings: acquisition of shares with croft Amendments 7 to 9 moved—[Jim Fairlie]—and agreed to. Section 15—Common grazings: unattached shares etc. Amendments 10 to 12 moved—[Jim Fairlie]— and agreed to. The Deputy Presiding Officer: The question is, that amendment 13 be agreed to. Are we agreed? Members: No. The Deputy Presiding Officer: There will be a division.”
“Even if that project gave crofters 80 per cent of the financial benefit, amendment 37 would not allow the resumption application to be authorised. That is where the problem lies. I assure Rhoda Grant and other members that I recognise and have genuine sympathy with the issues that they have raised, but I hope that she will accept that we should not take such a significant step without first considering all of the consequences and how they might affect not only the croft owners but the crofters. We will be considering that very carefully as part of the further review. The Deputy Presiding Officer: I call Rhoda Grant to wind up and to press or withdraw amendment 36.”
“I, too, am genuinely concerned about that, but there is particular concern from crofters who want to take up such opportunities through grazings committees and joint ventures. We are committed to ensuring a balanced approach that protects the rights of the owner and the crofter and, as part of the review, we will very carefully consider whether the law on resumption needs to be updated. Many resumption applications are made with the consent of the crofter and are for the good of the croft and the crofter. If we were to prevent landlords from resuming the land on the grounds that they might receive financial benefits, as amendment 37 would do, we would prevent crofters from receiving a share of the benefits of a consented project.”
“That could include, for example, the sale of carbon credits. It is very important that we protect crofting from the carbon market. I move amendment 36. The Deputy Presiding Officer: As no other member has sought to speak, I call the minister. Jim Fairlie: First, I must ask Rhoda Grant not to press amendment 36 or move amendment 37. However, I just want to set out some context with regard to resumption. Current legislative provisions on resumption ensure that crofters are compensated for any loss of land, and they also entitle crofters to 50 per cent of the value achieved by the resumption. The Land Court can reject the resumption application, especially if it is opposed by crofters. I am aware of renewed concern about resumption in the context of the increased opportunities and incentives from peatland restoration and tree planting.”
“Rhoda Grant: Amendment 36, which is similar to my amendment 188 at stage 2, was lodged ahead of Alasdair Allan’s amendment to new section 50ZA of the 1993 act, as inserted by section 18 of the bill, to add protections for crofters. However, I still believe that amendment 36 is required, as resumption can take from a crofter their land and work. Surely, if that happens, it must be in the public interest rather than in the interest of the landowner alone. Resumption must not happen for spurious purposes. Amendment 37 is similar to amendment 47 in my name and relates to financial benefit. The amendment would protect crofters in a scenario in which a landlord attempted to take back a croft to benefit from the financial gain arising from activities carried out on the croft by the crofter.”
“I will speak to Edward Mountain’s amendments 48, 49 and 50. It is a helpful step for everyone who is involved with common grazings that ministers should consult with experts to achieve better guidance. That is a useful backstop to amendment 26, to which the minister has already spoken, and which we will get to in group 8. Getting the timing right is important. I appreciate the intention behind Edward Mountain’s amendment 50, which is one that the Green Party is likely to support. The Deputy Presiding Officer : I invite Alasdair Allan to wind up and to press or withdraw amendment 6. Alasdair Allan: I press amendment 6. Amendment 6 agreed to. After section 10A The Deputy Presiding Officer: Group 5 is on resumption. Amendment 36, in the name of Rhoda Grant, is grouped with amendment 37.”
“To ask the Scottish Government, regarding its environmental strategy and responsibilities, what evaluation it has made of the UK Government’s “National security assessment on global biodiversity loss, ecosystem collapse and national security”, published in January 2026. (S6O-05678)”
“Amendment 35 agreed to. Amendment 36 moved—[Natalie Don-Innes]. The Deputy Presiding Officer : The question is, that amendment 36 be agreed to. Are we agreed? Members: No. The Deputy Presiding Officer : There will be a division. The vote is closed.”
“Although the Scottish Government has not directly taken that forward, the approach may present a loss of capacity if we are not careful. That is the last thing that any of us wants. What safeguards will ministers have in place? If the bill causes organisations to move away from Scotland, who will pick up the need for that additional capacity? Natalie Don-Innes: I think that Mr Briggs has answered that question himself. We have seen the challenges that are faced by the Welsh model, so the Scottish Government has taken a different approach to try to ensure that we do not see a mass exit from the market. The situation will be monitored to ensure that there is balance and that we do not see a mass reduction in providers, so that we can ensure that children and young people are supported as they should be. I will make no further comments.”
“Roz McCall: Although we totally accept that profit should play no part in residential care, we have some concerns about the group of amendments, in that we need to make sure that there is no reduction of provision in Scotland. There is a real concern that looking into parent organisations could have unintended consequences in the sector and lead to a reduction in that provision. As a result, we do not support amendments 36, 37, 140 and 41. Natalie Don-Innes: I will respond briefly to Roz McCall’s points, because we have actively considered that challenge. The Government has taken a gradual and incremental approach, to try to ensure that that does not happen. I assure members that that has been a key consideration. Miles Briggs: The evidence that we took at committee demonstrated some of the concerns about the Welsh model.”
“Martin Whitfield: Amendments 138, 140 and 143 would provide scope for the Scottish ministers to add other persons to the list of entries of those who are subject to a profit limitation requirement. I thank the minister and Government officials for their co-operation and assistance in developing those amendments, which, as the minister said, build on stage 2 amendments. Given the dynamic and evolving nature of the care sector, it is important that the bill provides flexibility to ensure the effectiveness of the profit limitation requirements that are set out in section 8. Profiting on the backs of children in care has no place in Scotland. In order to fulfil the Promise, we must ensure that we can address new challenges that will be thrown up for the Parliament and the Government to deal with.”
“As is already defined in section 9, the provisions would include service providers in Scotland that are registered as charities in other parts of the UK. Amendments 139 and 142 are consequential and would ensure that the rest of the provisions continued to operate as they should, given that the charities will still be subject to information requirements. I am grateful to the minister for assisting in relation to amendment 141. I thank the minister for her confirmation of support and I ask other members to support those amendments, which would ensure that charities were not subject to unnecessary burdens, while the bill’s provisions on information gathering were enabled to operate as intended. I confirm that I will not move amendments 2 and 3, which sought to achieve the same effect as the other amendments.”