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 8 of 9.
“Finlay Carson: Can Ariane Burgess tell me what impact assessment her Green colleagues have made regarding the knock-on effect of having a pause in the industry, or has that just been asked for on a whim? Ariane Burgess: I will go on to outline that. My greatest concern is for our communities, which are dependent on that industry and will be left with nothing when it collapses in the face of climate change. The Government claims that it has made considerable progress since 2018, but how can we possibly share that optimism when the evidence tells us a different story? With rising sea temperatures driven by climate change, the days of salmon farming in Scotland as we know it are numbered. The latest Marine Climate Change Impacts Partnership report says that warmer waters mean that mortality is going to increase in our farms.”
“Scotland’s seas are being sacrificed for profit. Beneath the surface of our lochs and waters, the salmon farming industry leaves a trail of pollution, suffering and harm to our coastal communities. That is not the Scotland that we want to hand over to future generations. When the committee published our report, we laid out a clear and urgent call for action to protect our seas and marine life and the people who depend on them, but the Government’s response has been little more than empty words and half measures. My views are made clear in our committee’s recommendations: we must pause expansion and new farms until the industry cleans up its act. That is not about shutting the industry down; a pause would give us the time to strengthen regulations, protect our environment and safeguard Scotland’s international reputation.”
“The uses of language and other incidents to which the member referred have happened within the chamber and in committee meetings, and they are therefore not a matter that falls within the responsibility of the corporate body. The Parliament’s standing orders say that “Members shall at all times conduct themselves in a courteous and respectful manner and shall respect the authority of the Presiding Officer” or, in committee meetings, the convener. Legislation Team (Resources) 6.”
“However, just this year, their rights to access public services, seek support following rape or abuse, work in the public sector, serve on public bodies and even be mentioned in schools—in short, merely to exist in the public realm at all—have been challenged in this Parliament on no fewer than 10 separate occasions. We have a duty of care to all who work in the building. Would those completely disproportionate attacks on a group with a characteristic that is protected under the Equality Act 2010 be tolerated in connection with any other marginalised group? Jackson Carlaw: I refer the member to my response of a moment ago, which is the corporate body’s response and attitude to the issue.”
“The corporate body opposes all forms of unlawful discrimination and will take a zero- tolerance approach to and appropriate action against any individual displaying such behaviour. As part of that, staff can access an independent support service, including advocacy support, to help them to address any concerns and to seek an appropriate resolution. The corporate body’s commitment to all staff, including LGBTQ+ staff, is long-standing and non- negotiable. Ariane Burgess: According to the most recent census, trans people make up less than 0.5 per cent of Scotland’s population.”
“To ask the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body what measures it is taking to support any LGBTQ+ staff whose welfare may be negatively impacted by any increase in the use of language in the chamber and committees that may be perceived as trans-exclusionary. (S6O-04479) Jackson Carlaw (Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body): The corporate body takes its duties under health and safety legislation seriously and has a range of measures in place to promote good mental health and wellbeing for all staff. Those include regular discussions between managers and staff, during which welfare concerns can be discussed and resolved. Staff can also access the free and confidential employee assistance programme, which provides a range of support, including access to counselling.”
“The Government also needs to ensure that the new Clyde and Hebrides ferry contract puts islanders and workers front and centre, and it must not consider raising fares until a new and improved fleet and service are up and running. Overall, I would like the Government to put islands and rural communities first when it comes to infrastructure and public service design. If we get that right for islanders and rural communities, we will get it right for urban communities. 15:13”
“Everyone should have freedom of movement, but the unreliability of ferry services confines people. The Scottish Greens have worked hard to deliver ferry services that work for, rather than against, islanders. In the budget, we got the Scottish Government to expand free ferry travel to under-22s on northern isles interisland ferries, and we pushed for ferries to remain in public hands, so that they operate for the benefit of the Scottish people instead of shareholders. We also made the case for investment in all-electric ferries, and we are pleased that the Government has followed through on that. The Government needs to ensure that the new fleet that it is procuring is delivered on time and on budget and, most of all, is of a high enough quality to meet the demands of west coast crossings.”
“A person on Lewis, who was trying to do the right thing for the planet by using public transport to get to work, ended up losing several hundred pounds on buses and a hotel because a technical fault with the MV Loch Seaforth meant that they could not get to the mainland. Crofters cannot get their animals off the islands as a result of last-minute cancellations. The failings of west coast ferry services highlight the underinvestment and the complete lack of regard for the human rights of people who live on the islands. Everyone should have access to food, but ferry cancellations mean that islanders face empty shelves. Everyone should have access to healthcare, but a lack of ferry capacity means that people cannot make vital health appointments.”
“I am frequently contacted by constituents about the poor communication and relentless disruption that they have to endure. Vessel faults and breakdowns prevent islanders from heading to the mainland, ferries are assigned to routes that they are not properly suited to, and entire services are cancelled at short notice because of poor management decisions. The consequences of those failings have been severe for the people I serve. A hospitality business owner in Tiree has lost thousands of pounds because a lack of capacity has stopped them from shipping in fresh produce and has prevented tourists from getting to the island.”
“Likewise, I welcome the acknowledgement in the Government’s amendment that islanders have been subjected to too much disruption, but I am concerned that it makes no reference to the planned fare hike, which is completely inappropriate given the current state of ferries and the fact that household finances are still recovering from a major cost of living crisis—a crisis that has hit islanders harder than most. I also applaud some of the points that are expressed in the Tory amendment, especially the point that our island communities face an “existential” threat from historical underinvestment in ferries and harbours. As a result, those communities have been treated like second-class citizens. One of the biggest issues faced by the island communities that I represent is the unreliability of the ferry services that they receive.”
“I am grateful for the opportunity to discuss ferries in the chamber. They are crucial to the people I represent across the Highlands and Islands, so it is vital that islanders’ concerns get a proper airing. The motion that we are debating contains sentiments that I applaud, such as the call for the Scottish Government to rethink its decision to hike fares by 10 per cent and the call for island communities and workers to be at “the heart of decision making”.”
“The deals have not only undermined our nation’s primary food producers, but have exported our carbon emissions to countries that produce food using methods that pay little heed to animal welfare or the environment. With greater control over the direction of Scotland’s food and drink policy, the Government and the Parliament could change the state of affairs and move to a system that would deliver not only for our environment and climate, but for the people of Scotland. The Deputy Presiding Officer: We really do have no time in hand. Members will need to stick to their speaking allocations. I call Beatrice Wishart. You have up to six minutes. 15:15”
“That has left farmers operating on wafer-thin margins and has created a farcical situation that sees public subsidies being passed through farmers to private supermarket chains that turn over billions of pounds a year. We have legislated for farmers to move to regenerative and sustainable agricultural systems, which are the very practices that will enable them to face the huge climate change challenges that we and they will face in the coming decades. Yet, with wafer-thin margins, it is no wonder that they are hesitant to move to those practices. The UK Government also has much to answer for due to the trade deals that it has signed.”
“That is why I have been calling on the Government to introduce an immediate pause on fish-farm expansion, so that we can send a clear message to businesses, our export partners and the people of our nation that Scotland will not allow those who show complete disregard for our environment and communities to operate within our borders. Fish farming is not the only threat to the wellbeing of Scotland’s food and drink sector. Brexit has created labour shortages and reams of red tape. At the same time, the UK Government continues to cede control over food policy to the supermarkets—an approach that has already led to decades-long races to the bottom on price, quality and variety.”
“The industry and the multinational corporations that run it do not have Scotland’s best interests at heart—they operate solely in the interests of their shareholders. When it comes to job creation, in my region only 253 full- time roles have been created over the past 35 years. Along with that, fish farms wreak environmental destruction that harms other marine sectors and our coastal communities. Allowing fish farms to continue their business as usual is simply not an option. If we want Scottish exports to continue to be viewed as quality products that are produced to high environmental and animal welfare standards, we need to act now to cut the high levels of pollution, sea lice and fish mortality that those farms produce. On mortality alone, no other farming sector would accept that level of loss, and neither should we.”
“Ariane Burgess: We have heard about the shortage of time, and I have quite a lot to say. I apologise. I cannot, however, stand here today and say that all the primary food producers in my region fill me with pride. My region hosts the single biggest risk to the reputation of Scottish food and drink— fish farms. The UK and Scottish Governments are willing to support that industry with taxpayer money—£17 million since 2021, according to a report in the Daily Record today—and they do that no matter how much pollution the industry produces or how much ecological damage it causes, and despite the appalling animal suffering that it creates. The industry’s arguments always boil down to the economic good that industrial-scale farming supposedly brings.”
“The sector also has a major role to play in tackling the climate and nature emergencies, which is why the Scottish Greens have repeatedly called for multiyear funding that would help to deliver what is set out in the Good Food Nation (Scotland) Act 2022, implement a food production skills pipeline and support the transition to regenerative production methods. I am incredibly proud that, as we have heard already, we have a thriving array of food and drink businesses and initiatives across Scotland. A couple of examples that I can think of are Grampian Graziers in Aberdeenshire and the Orkney Cheese Company, both of which do fantastic work to produce high-quality food while acknowledging the environment and animal welfare. Tim Eagle: Will the member take an intervention?”
“The motion and the Labour amendment appear to be contradictory on the issue, and it has not been cleared up in my mind in the debate so far. Although I believe that the UK Government needs to be more respectful of Scottish produce, I point out that food and drink bring many things to the table besides economic benefits. Not only are food and drink key to our survival, but they are a cultural glue that binds us all together. Food and drink are vital to the health of the nation, and a well-nourished population would take the strain off the national health service. If it is managed properly, sharing out the many benefits of food and drink production across Scotland could stop rural depopulation.”
“I begin by extending my best wishes for the future to the cabinet secretary in the light of her announcement that she will step down next year. It has been a pleasure to work with her to ensure a thriving future for our rural communities. I look forward to continuing to do so in the time that we have left. I welcome the opportunity to discuss Scottish food and drink. I support the acknowledgement in the Government’s motion that the sector is important to rural and island communities and the idea that food and drink play a key role in Scotland’s global reputation. I also support Labour’s amendment, especially because it identifies the need to fill skills gaps and recognises the importance of people to the food and drink sector. However, I would welcome clarity on what is happening on whisky designation, because we have not heard that yet.”
“To ask the Scottish Government what its response is, regarding any potential impact on the environment, to reports that Mowi Scotland, a multinational fish farming company, has purchased Sanda Island in Argyll and Bute. (S6O- 04365)”
“Let us get this right—not in five years, not after another price hike, but now. 16:28”
“It has brought back peak fares, which the Scottish Greens scrapped when we were in government, and it is hiking fares by 3.8 per cent in April. The Government asks why more people are not choosing the train. The real question that it should be asking is: why are we making it harder for them? We need real action: no fare increases this year; a permanent end to peak-time rail fares; simple integrated ticketing across all public transport; electrification and dualling of the Highland main line and other lines so that trains can compete with driving; and investment to move freight on to rail. Climate action is not about telling people what to do; it is about making the right choice—the easiest choice. Let us stop punishing the people who want to take the train and treating rail like a luxury when it should be the obvious affordable option.”
“The bottom line is this: if we do not get more people on to public transport, we will not hit our climate targets. Audit Scotland has already said that Scotland is unlikely to meet its goal of cutting car use by 20 per cent by 2030. Why? Because we are not making rail a real alternative to driving. Nowhere is that picture more stark than in the Highlands and Islands. Right now, the Highland main line is still mostly single track. That means that a journey from Inverness to Edinburgh can take more than three and a half hours, which is the same amount of time as in the Victorian era. Driving is faster. If we are serious about growing our economy, creating jobs and tackling climate change, we need to make fares affordable and improve journey times. Instead of supporting that, the Scottish Government is doing the opposite.”
“How about a tourist staying in Aberdeen who wants to go to Inverness? To make a day trip worth it, they will have to pay £70, which is £32 more than the off-peak fare. In all those cases, Presiding Officer, you would hardly begrudge them driving, if they have the option, or not travelling at all. Let us imagine the alternative. With affordable fares, more people travel, which means busier high streets, more customers in shops, cafes and businesses, and more access to jobs. If rail is reliable and affordable, people can take up work further afield without the financial pressure of running a car. There is also more tourism, as visitors can choose trains over rental cars, spreading tourism and spending beyond the central belt. More people using rail means more revenue to invest in infrastructure improvements.”
“For a moment, Presiding Officer, imagine yourself in the shoes of my constituent. You need to get to work. It is rush hour. You check the train price—it is way more expensive than off peak and there is no flexipass option. You prefer the train: it is the right thing to do for the climate and it is less stressful than driving. You can catch up on emails or you can take a moment for yourself, and you do not have to worry about parking. It should be the easiest choice, but when rail fares keep rising, how are you supposed to afford that choice? People in my region face that cost benefit dilemma weekly. A worker in Elgin has to pay £24 for a peak return, which is 52 per cent more than if they were travelling off-peak. A nurse in Oban going to training in Glasgow will pay £54, which is more than a third more than the off-peak alternative.”
“We also need joined-up thinking from the Government and the marine directorate that is based on proper engagement with all those who rely on and enjoy our seas. Inshore management needs urgent reform, marine protected areas need protection and low- impact fishers must be given the support that they need to flourish. Damaging fishing practices need to be halted in areas where they lead to a loss of fish stocks, and the roll-out of remote electronic monitoring measures must be sped up across all fleets.”
“That type of bad governance has also led to a steep decline in the number of fishers and fishing vessels. The Government’s statistics show that, in 2023, there was an 8 per cent year-on-year reduction in the number of fishers, most of whom—more than 200—were islanders. That is fuelling depopulation in those areas, pulling families apart and damaging our nation’s economy instead of bolstering it. What can we do about that? Continuing with extraction at all costs is simply not an option if we want our seas and coastal populations to teem with life. What is needed is for the Government to abide by the law and ensure that it is working towards good environmental status whenever it makes marine decisions.”
“That approach is not only ruining unique, precious ecosystems along Scotland’s magnificent coastline; it also risks the future of the fishing industry, marine tourism and, by extension, coastal communities. The failure to view those interests as a single whole has already had a negative impact. Overfishing and harmful fishing practices, as well as a lack of effective marine planning, have led to a drastic decline in fish stocks. For example, Clyde cod, which was once a staple of west coast chippies, has practically disappeared. A lack of inshore management measures and poor monitoring practices means that the safeguards that are intended to protect the species are all but worthless. Clyde cod continues to be caught as bycatch by trawlers, which means that that unique type of cod has been unable to recover.”
“The Government seems to be content to contravene its own policy and legal obligations. For example, MSPs have been told that fisheries management is “not a national or regional marine planning matter.”— [Written Answers, 19 December 2024; S6W-32232.] However, the reality is that, under the Marine (Scotland) Act 2010 and the national marine plan, fisheries management is very much in scope. The Government also has a legal duty to balance the needs of economic actors with those of the environment, communities and other marine users. That makes sense, because neglecting any one of these elements damages the others. However, the Government has been ignoring that legal requirement and has been prioritising the needs of the current extraction-based economy above all else.”
“I welcome the opportunity to speak about Scotland’s fisheries, particularly given that—as my colleague Beatrice Wishart pointed out—the annual end-of-year fisheries debate has disappeared from the calendar. I urge all parties to come together and reinstate that debate, which would give this crucial topic the public airing that it deserves. I have met with fishers from Shetland to the west coast and other parts of Scotland’s coast. I have been on board their vessels and have seen with my own eyes the dangers that they face. I am also aware of how fragile the industry is and how it struggles to attract young people. An annual debate not only allows us to cover those issues; it also allows Parliament to scrutinise the Government’s actions, which have been lacking in recent times.”
“The Deputy Presiding Officer: I call Finlay Carson on behalf of the Rural Affairs and Islands Committee. 16:01”
“We recognise the challenges that councils face, and we are frustrated that although the need for such change is widely accepted, there is limited evidence, with few exceptions, of such a shift happening. Effective political leadership is needed to achieve a decisive shift towards preventing poor outcomes instead of having to deal with their consequences. We welcome the Government’s recognition of that. However, that recognition can be only a first step, and we hope that there will be more evidence of concrete actions being taken over the coming year. I welcome the improved degree of progress in the past year between the Scottish Government and COSLA. It is my sincere hope that, by this time next year, we will be able to reflect on further progress having been made on this important work.”
“The committee welcomes the legislation, but recognises that it is unlikely that all councils will benefit equally. Some may decide not to introduce a levy at all. We look forward to considering the findings of the planned consultation on the potential cruise ship levy. We also note the recently published consultation on a general power of competence for councils. That is, again, a long-standing request from COSLA. We look forward to discussing the plans for that with the cabinet secretary in due course. The committee is agreed on the urgent need for transformational change in councils. We must move towards a preventative approach to deliver on outcomes. We regret the slow pace of change over the 13 years since the Christie commission reported.”
“The Verity house agreement also expresses an ambition, wherever possible, to provide multiyear certainty to councils. The committee recognises the challenge, as the Scottish Government receives only single-year settlements from the Treasury. Therefore, we welcome the UK Government’s plans to reinstate the spring spending review this year, which will trigger multiyear funding and three-year funding to be reviewed every two years. The committee looks forward to receiving a further update from the Scottish Government on its plans after the spending review. We also await the publication of the 2025 medium-term financial strategy with interest. We are interested in the opportunities for councils to raise more of their own revenue, notably through our consideration of what became the visitor levy.”
“I stated last year that the different spheres of government “must agree a common understanding of the figures and how best to present them, so that we can focus on outcomes for our communities, not debate different interpretations of figures.” —[Official Report, 1 February 2024; c 72 and 73.] It is pleasing that there is evidence of such progress. Ring fencing and directive spend has also previously been the subject of disagreement between COSLA and the Scottish Government. Therefore, the committee welcomes the cabinet secretary’s confirmation that, since the Verity house agreement, £1.5 billion of funding has been de-ring fenced. We hope that that will afford councils greater flexibility to deliver on key priorities for their distinct communities across the country.”
“It is pleasing to see that some of that increase has been passed to councils, representing a 4.7 per cent real-terms increase compared with last year’s budget. However, although any increase to Scotland’s budget is to be welcomed, we are mindful of concerns about potential costs to the Scottish public sector of the increase in employer national insurance contributions. We would welcome further updates from the cabinet secretary once the Treasury has provided final figures. It is pleasing to see that, after years of disagreement between the Government and COSLA about the interpretation of budgetary figures, COSLA’s response to this year’s budget has been relatively positive. There appears to be greater consensus between local and central government about what the figures actually mean.”
“The committee has repeatedly stressed the importance of agreeing to a fiscal framework for local government and I concluded my remarks in the debate last year by stating: “We cannot be here again, next year, saying the same things.” Although the fiscal framework has not been agreed to in time to fully inform this year’s budget process, we were delighted to hear from the cabinet secretary that she hopes to publish it next month. We very much look forward to discussing it with the cabinet secretary and COSLA. I turn to our pre-budget letter and the cabinet secretary’s response to it. The UK Government stated in its autumn budget that the Scottish Government would receive an additional £3.4 billion through the operation of the Barnett formula.”
“As the cabinet secretary said, it represents “a journey, not a destination.” —[Official Report, Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee, 21 January 2025; c 2.] Its efficacy could only become apparent when there was clear evidence of a new collaborative approach between the two spheres of government. There can be little doubt that its ambitions had yet to be fully realised during last year’s budget process. Indeed, in my contribution to the debate in the chamber last year, I spoke of the importance of significant further progress being made in the coming year.”
“I am pleased to speak in the debate on behalf of the Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee. Our pre-budget scrutiny focused on the sustainability of local government finance; however, the Verity house agreement and its vision of a more collaborative approach to delivering shared priorities for the people of Scotland has remained a constant thread throughout our work. I intend to reflect on progress on that in relation to the budget. The committee has monitored developments on the new deal for local government throughout the parliamentary session, and we are pleased that the Verity house agreement was published in June 2023. However, although we very much welcomed the agreement, in many ways, it was just a starting point.”
“As we have heard today, that support has not gone away— there is still a passion for us to move in that direction—so it is deeply disappointing that Parliament has not seized the opportunity today to put a ban on such cruel training tools into law. However, I am grateful to Christine Grahame for her constructive proposal that the Government brings draft regulations to the Rural Affairs and Islands Committee during this parliamentary session, so that we can bring a ban forward. 17:44”
“I hope that more puppies being brought to a vet early on will mean that hidden health problems can be addressed early and that the alarm will be raised if illegal breeding is suspected. My Green colleague Ross Greer has used the bill as an opportunity to press for a ban on aversive training tools, such as electric shock collars and prong collars. The British Veterinary Association considers shock collars to cause significant welfare harms to dogs, and the SSPCA describes them as “a cruel and counterproductive practice”. Instead, those bodies stress the need for reward- based training methods. Calls to ban such devices have previously garnered support across the chamber.”
“With the bill’s passing, there will now be important safeguards in place to prompt prospective owners to consider what contact information a breeder or seller has provided, how old the puppy or dog is and its health records. To some, those may sound like obvious steps, but, with puppies in high demand, unscrupulous sellers can rush people into a quick decision, particularly when puppies are sold online. The important role that vets play in addressing the problem has also been made clear. Like the SSPCA, vets see at first hand the impacts of low- welfare breeding and the stress that that causes to dogs as well as to their owners. I am pleased that the minister has taken on board my suggestion that the code of practice asks prospective owners to register with a vet as soon as they prepare to welcome their new dog home.”
“The SSPCA is on the front line of caring for animals that have been neglected and abused in the boom of the low-welfare puppy trade, and it has rescued more than 260 puppies from the illegal trade since 2020. During our scrutiny of the bill, the committee heard evidence that it can be hard to spot puppies that have been raised in poor conditions. Indeed, I have spoken previously about constituents in my region who discovered, to their horror, that their rental property had been used as a front to sell puppies that had been raised in pitiful conditions. Unsuspecting buyers did not know that the sellers did not live at the property.”
“I, too, congratulate Christine Grahame on her work in bringing the bill to Parliament. The bill is a testament to her tireless dedication to championing the welfare of animals in this Parliament. As stakeholders have noted, there has been a rise in the impulse purchasing of dogs in recent years. That surge in demand has driven an increase in puppies being bred, sometimes in the most appalling conditions. Because dog breeding is a multimillion-pound industry, it attracts those who wish to exploit people for profit. During evidence taking, the committee heard about the trade’s links to organised crime. Increasing public awareness of the illegal side of the trade is an important step in ending puppy farming and in fostering responsible dog ownership. The bill aims to achieve exactly that, and I am pleased that it has reached the final stage.”
“If I could have the minister’s assurance today that that requirement will, indeed, be included in the code of practice, I will consider not pressing amendment 19 to a vote. I fully support Ross Greer’s amendments. 16:00”
“Amendment 19 would require the code of practice to ask those who are acquiring a dog whether they have identified a veterinary practice for their dog’s care. I lodged a similar amendment at stage 2, and I thank the minister and Christine Grahame for the constructive support that they showed during that discussion and, again, ahead of today’s debate. Regular vet check-ups are a key part of responsible dog ownership, from puppyhood to old age. Vets provide advice and rapid treatment in an emergency—for example, by providing out-of- hours care—and a check-up can identify health issues that arise due to negligence by the breeder. The issue is an important one to raise with prospective dog owners before they acquire a dog, and I am keen to see it reflected in the code of practice.”
“As Professor Angela O’Hagan says in the report, while some communities may be remote, “their access to human rights should not be.” 13:15”
“We must see more support for capacity-building organisations so that communities have support to meet their own housing needs; we must see councils adopting facilitation and supportive approaches to help communities to meet those needs; and we must see the Scottish Government provide the right level of funding to ensure that we exceed the 10 per cent target. Although construction is important, it must go hand in hand with turning existing empty properties into homes. We can make three restored empty properties for the price of one new build. Let us become a retrofit nation and solve this crisis. As an MSP, I consistently raise those vital issues and offer solutions. I hope that the damning findings of the SHRC’s report focus hearts and minds at all levels of government.”
“Although the Government has recognised the issue to some extent, its housing targets are not on track to reduce homelessness. We heard earlier from Emma Roddick what that can bring about in people’s lives. Of Scotland’s population, 17 per cent is rural, yet the Government’s target aims to build only 10 per cent of affordable homes in rural areas. The report shows that there are not enough small, cheap-to-run properties as it is and, judging by current activity, the situation will not improve any time soon.”