Paul Sweeney
Scottish Labour · Scotland
“The single point of contact pilots that we have embarked on are making a significant difference in ensuring that people get the ability to discuss their treatment anxieties and their support. We have invested £2.5 million to expand the reach of that programme across Scotland.”
“As a member of the Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee, I welcome the news on the proposed legislation, which is very welcome. Indeed, it is something that has been long hoped for.”
“It is more precise than conventional radiotherapy, and the team behind the trial in England has begun the process of establishing it in Scotland.”
“I thank Mesothelioma UK for continuing to raise awareness each year through action mesothelioma day. On 3 July, the Scottish Government will proudly show our support by lighting up in blue St Andrew’s house and Victoria Quay in Edinburgh to get behind the go blue for meso campaign.”
“There is an awful lot to be recognised in terms of holding people to account, which has been a feature of this campaign over time. The Scottish Government confirms its commitment to continue to stand alongside those who are affected by mesothelioma, to ensure that they receive the compassionate care and treatment that they require at ever…”
“The fact that there are such abandoned factories and that the people who enter them—whether for urban exploration or whatever else—do not understand the risks that they are exposing themselves to is a difficulty that we must overcome.”
The complete record
Every one of 813 lines we hold for Paul Sweeney, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 11 of 17.
“As passenger numbers continue to grow across the network, it must be a socially responsive railway, and it must invest in and enhance services for communities such as those that I represent, which use the Maryhill line. I am confident that it will do so. 12:55”
“The abolition of peak rail fares can make an important contribution to the efforts to secure a greater frequency of services in my local communities. Making rail fares more affordable across the board, be it through peak fare abolition or through other ScotRail initiatives such as kids for a quid or club 50, builds commuter confidence and loyalty in our publicly owned rail network. I hope that we will see more journeys being taken more often. That will build on the strong progress of ScotRail. In 2023-24, there were 81.2 million passenger journeys on ScotRail services, which represents an increase of 27 per cent on the previous year. However, the potential is clear, with numbers still being 16 per cent lower than in 2019-20.”
“Following my campaign, an all- year-round service on Sundays was secured for the benefit of my constituents, and it has made a real difference. However, I note that the frequency of services on the Maryhill line during the week, outwith the rush hours, is still to return to pre-Covid levels. The services are hourly during the day. If there is a single cancellation for whatever reason—it is not always ScotRail’s fault; often, it is due to Network Rail—it is often not practical, and it is certainly not desirable, for people to wait another hour for the next train. The frequency of the service used to be every 30 minutes. ScotRail tells me that, as passenger numbers continue to recover, it will continue to look at running a 30-minute service on the line once again. Can we have that as soon as possible, please?”
“I welcome the strong cross-party support for the abolition of peak fares, as well as the strong support from trade unions such as the National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers and the Transport Salaried Staffs Association, and from business, including from the Scottish Retail Consortium. At the start of my speech, I said that my constituents require an accessible, reliable and affordable rail service and that the abolition of peak fares sits at the heart of that. ScotRail timetables must also meet the needs of commuters. When I was first elected, securing a rail service on the Maryhill line seven days a week was a major campaign effort of mine. There used to be a Sunday service only on the four Sundays before Christmas.”
“I say that it has a “potential” role because, unless we significantly drive up the number of commuters who would otherwise take a car for their journeys but who take the train instead, the contribution that our rail network can make to our climate aspirations will not be maximised. Decarbonising our railway is vital, and the Scottish Government is currently investing heavily in it. I am keen to hear from the minister how he will monitor the impact of the permanent abolition of peak rail fares. Such monitoring and analysis must be done over the longer term, with no rush to judge the impact over the short term. This is a long-term, strategic approach.”
“The measures that our Scottish Government has taken have made, and continue to make, a real difference for many in the face of the cost of living crisis. I will not reel off all the other policy initiatives, but, needless to say, the abolition of peak rail fares by the Scottish Government is a key contribution to helping rail users during the cost of living crisis. I very much hope that it will assist my constituents who have felt priced out of using Scotland’s rail network at peak times. The abolition of peak fares also has the potential to play a crucial role in Scotland’s contribution to tackling our climate emergency and achieving our net zero ambitions, which I have just referred to.”
“Mr Doris has extolled the benefits of the Maryhill line, which is a fantastic piece of infrastructure that was, of course, extended under the previous Labour Government. However, does he agree that it is badly in need of further upgrading, including electrification and an increase in frequency, so that we have turn-up-and-go frequencies and do not need to rely on timetables? Bob Doris: I confirm that I am continuing to press to make sure that the Maryhill line is either electrified or is made carbon neutral in some other way, in order to meet our net zero aspirations and build resilience into the line. Of course, there should be a half-hourly service on that line. I will return to that later in my speech.”
“In it, there is an underlying concern that I think it will be important for us to address, which is that, by accepting the situation, we have not suddenly found fault with the Jewish community and there is not a need for additional security for the community. It is important to understand why. When I attend Yom HaShoah commemorations each year in my constituency, the names of those who were massacred in the Holocaust, belonging to almost every family in the community in Eastwood, are on the screen. Those families live in fear of that reality as they see the prosecution of events in the middle east. Our duty is to ensure that that community—and all our communities in Scotland—remain safe and free and are treated fairly and with respect.”
“That is chilling, because it implies that the actions of 7 October were justified and have brought about a successful outcome. I think that we should all be concerned by that, irrespective of the view that we might come to in the debate. Patrick Harvie rose— Alex Cole-Hamilton: Will the member take an intervention? Jackson Carlaw: I need to make some progress. I thank Neil Bibby for drawing the distinction that I asked for by not equating or conflating the current Administration in Israel with the entire people of Israel or, indeed, the entire Jewish community. I have the letter that I know the First Minister has received in response to the meeting that he and Mr Robertson had on Monday.”
“Does the member recognise that the polarisation that was driven by the current Prime Minister of Israel was a key element in the collapse of the Oslo accords? Jackson Carlaw: I have just recognised that there was an intransigence on all sides that stopped them from finally implementing an agreement that would have taken matters forward. It was not an intransigence from one side; ultimately, the accords collapsed because the negotiations between the lead parties could not be supported by the communities that they represented. Mr Cole-Hamilton also said that there should not be a reward. One of the chilling things that I heard over the summer was a representative of the Palestinian people saying that “one of the fruits of October 7” was the decision of Governments to unconditionally recognise the state of Palestine.”
“I have also indicated that there were maritime orders in the pipeline, and we will be able to give more information on that in the near future. We will continue to work with the owners to look for other opportunities to get the plant back up and running, but it is worth recognising that it is only through the work of the Scottish Government and Scottish Enterprise that the plant is still capable of fulfilling those orders, as it has been supported through this period of time. Grangemouth Cluster 8.”
“I am sure that the minister will welcome the fantastic news on Sunday that Scotland—by which I mean Glasgow—has won the biggest shipbuilding export order in this country’s history, with five type 26 frigates going to Norway. However, the frustration is that, as it currently stands, no Scottish steel plate will be able to be supplied to that programme unless we can get Dalzell back up and running. Will the minister give an assurance that he will do all that he can to get it back up and running, so that we can get steel plate from Scotland into those fantastic Scottish frigates? Ivan McKee: I give that assurance. As I have said, we have been working extensively with GFG on the potential for new orders.”
“We must act urgently on all those measures because, ultimately, our constituents are suffering as a consequence of the present situation. Let us get on with finding practical solutions to stem the flow. The Deputy Presiding Officer: I invite Jenni Minto to respond to the debate. 18:21”
“In concert with our activity in relation to dentists, could we expand the role of dental therapists to increase overall capacity when it comes to routine check-up activity and, potentially, baseline dental treatment, such as fillings? Those are all practical measures that could be delivered. We must concern ourselves with the glut in the number of available training posts. About 6,000 overseas dentists are waiting for General Dental Council registration; they cannot sit the exam, and some have been waiting for up to four years. The chief dental officer in Scotland was exploring with the royal colleges the idea of setting up a separate route for dental training registration in Scotland, but I do not know whether that has been progressed.”
“It might also be worth considering the gap in relation to emergency treatment. We know that NHS remuneration for an emergency item is just £20.80, but the private fee for the same treatment is approximately £130. Bridging the gap in the remuneration for emergency treatment could assist in bringing about a change in behaviour. Additional preventative measures, such as building on water fluoridation and considering issuing enhanced fluoridated toothpaste to over- 50s, could represent an opportunity to improve general public dental health. We should look at the training pipeline. There are about 150 training posts for dentists every year, but the number that is available for dental therapists is restricted—there are only 40 a year.”
“When dentists leave, there is very little incentive for them to return to NHS dental practice—the business model simply does not make sense, and they are certainly getting plenty of customers, because those who can afford to pay will push their way to the front. It is the people who are left behind who we really need to concern ourselves with. Members have referred to a number of potential solutions. I do not think that anyone here has a desire to simply comment on failure; we are all eager to find solutions, because we all have a stake in this. Solutions that have been suggested by the profession and members include the mobile dental facilities that Ms Harper proposed for South Scotland—I know that NHS Tayside operates one such facility, and perhaps there is more to be done in that regard.”
“It is also about protecting a person’s ability to consume and enjoy food and retaining jaw structure so that, throughout a person’s life, they can recognise themselves in a mirror—that is actually a public health matter, as it helps to maintain good mental health. Good healthcare is a vital part of a holistic approach to medicine, and it must be available for everyone in regard to dental treatment. We have heard about a number of rather shocking cases. Mr Rowley described a shocking case concerning his constituent, and it is disgraceful that, when trying to register, she was left in such a situation. Although the Government has taken measures such as reforming the pay system, which may have had a marginal effect, we are still seeing a clear trajectory towards an exit from NHS dentistry.”
“The well-off go private while the less well-off fall through the gaps and are left behind. That is against everything that the NHS was set up to achieve. In Scotland, oral health has too often been treated as a nice thing to have rather than an essential part of preventative healthcare. We choose to celebrate genuine successes in public health such as Childsmile—a programme that was set up under the previous Labour Government in Scotland and has continued under the current Government—while ignoring the fact that more and more of those who call Scotland their home are missing out on essential dental care. Oral health care is not just about addressing pain when it is experienced or keeping plaque at bay; it is about early detection of many conditions that are critical to whole-body health, such as diabetes.”
“I thank my friend Mr Rowley, a member for the Mid Scotland and Fife region, for presenting this important motion on the terrible state of NHS dentistry in Fife, which I was pleased to sign. We have heard a series of passionate speeches from across the chamber about patients—our constituents—who have been forced to go private for their care or who cannot access dentistry at all and are left to languish. We know that, increasingly, many of Scotland’s citizens are having to rely on our underresourced public dental service for routine care that, just a few years ago, they would have been able to get routinely from an NHS-registered practice. We see that situation playing out across Scotland, especially in places such as Fife. NHS dentistry is quickly becoming a thing of the past.”
“The significant levels of asylum decision making by the UK Home Office are putting significant pressure on Scottish local authorities, not least Glasgow City Council. The challenges that arise are not the fault of refugees, who continue to be valuable members of our communities and who will be treated respectfully. The issue lies at the door of the UK Home Office, and I ask Paul Sweeney to support me and Susan Aitken, the leader of Glasgow City Council, as we call on his colleagues in the UK Home Office to manage their asylum processes more reasonably and to back them with more money. That is required to make sure that the system works well for those who are seeking asylum and for others on housing waiting lists. The Presiding Officer: There is much interest in this statement. I would be grateful for concise questions and responses.”
“Glasgow City Council estimates that, this year, almost half of all homelessness cases in the city will involve people who have been granted asylum in other dispersal cities, such as London, Belfast, Birmingham, Manchester and Liverpool, which will create an overspend of £66 million by next year. Will the cabinet secretary review the suspension of local connection rules, while retaining exemptions for particularly vulnerable groups such as domestic abuse survivors, given the immediate and urgent housing pressure in Glasgow? Màiri McAllan: I thank Paul Sweeney for that question. We keep all the means by which we respond to homelessness under review, but I confirm today that we have no intention of rolling back the changes that this Government put in place in respect of local connection.”
“I welcome the cabinet secretary to her new role. As she observed, Glasgow has a long and proud history of welcoming those in need, including thousands of people who have sought asylum through the Home Office’s dispersal programme since it started in 1999. However, in 2022, the Government removed the local connection rule for homelessness applications, including those that are made by refugees. That measure was taken in good faith to allow homeless people greater autonomy to control their lives, but, however well intentioned, it has inadvertently increased pressure on Glasgow’s homelessness services. Last year, more than one in 10 homelessness applications came from asylum seekers who had been granted refugee status outside Scotland and who then moved to Glasgow, as a local connection is not required.”
“Ultimately, the corporation of the city took over the system in 1894. It took over the Glasgow subway system in 1923 and, in 1924, it launched a motor bus service across the city. The service provided 30 routes that covered more than 100 miles and served more than 50 million passengers a year. That was an amazing achievement, and Scotland—Glasgow—was a world leader in municipal public transportation. How have we let things get to the point where we are now a laggard in the UK rather than a leader?”
“Another 4.5 per cent could be added to Scotland’s GDP if our transport system was optimised and at a level that was competitive with our European city equivalents. The situation illustrates a truism that goes back to the point that we need to relearn the lessons of 100 years ago. There has been a 40-year failed experiment in the deregulation and privatisation of the public transport system. It was a century ago last year that Glasgow first introduced motor buses under the corporation of the city. That was at an apex in Glasgow’s municipal socialism, which started with the public transport system. The system was privately run when it began in the 1870s. Under the Glasgow Street Tramways Act 1870, a private operator was to take on a 22-year lease to operate and develop the city’s tramway system.”
“The process has been unacceptably slow and inadequate, and I hope that the minister is hearing that there is a consensus across the region that the continued situation is unsustainable and socially unjust. That is ultimately what has come across in the debate. I enjoyed Mr Doris’s remarks—I wish that he had had another minute to continue. Ultimately, we come back to the point that social justice is at the heart of the issue that we face with our bus system in Glasgow. Glasgow represents 20 per cent of the Scottish economy yet, according to the Centre for Cities, it is underperforming economically compared with similar European cities by about £7 billion a year in gross domestic product. That is the equivalent of the entire oil and gas industry in Scotland.”
“I thank my colleague Patrick Harvie for lodging the motion, which I was pleased to sign, for this members’ business debate. I recognise the excellent work that Get Glasgow Moving has done over the past decade or so. Along with the associated better buses for Strathclyde campaign, its work has driven the public-spirited effort to improve buses across our city. The message that goes out loud and clear to the Government from all those who have been elected, across the chamber, to represent the people of greater Glasgow is that we demand speedy and immediate improvement to the regulations on bus franchising so that we can get on with franchising without further delay.”
“I have long supported and called for private bus services in South Lanarkshire to be moved into public ownership to avoid the issues that I have outlined are impacting my community and to allow for joined-up thinking and planning in relation to the network. Currently, bus services are at risk of being reduced or completely cancelled at relatively short notice, with little or no meaningful consultation. Under franchising, such decisions would fall to a local transport authority, which would have a responsibility towards, and would be accountable to, the communities that it serves. 17:02”
“At my request, First Bus has now committed to undertaking further studies to see whether, should the 65 be withdrawn, alternative routes could be created to serve the communities that stand to lose out. Unfortunately, First Bus has advised that that will not be a quick process and that nothing is guaranteed, so I will continue to do what I can to urge First Bus to maintain the number 65 route. One of my major concerns about the process is the fact that constituents do not seem to have a formal role to play in opposing timetable changes or service cuts. Of course, they can lodge complaints or raise issues with their elected representatives, but I am keen to learn from the minister whether bus users can play a more formal role in relation to any changes that are proposed by bus companies. How can we make that happen?”
“The member makes the very important point that there is no way to fully view the coherence of the greater Glasgow bus system, because the information about the money that routes make and which routes are losing money is not available. We can address that issue, along with control of the farebox, only through franchising. Does she agree that, ultimately, franchising is the only solution to the problem? Clare Haughey: I will come on to that point later in my speech, but the long and the short of it is yes, I do. Yesterday, I met First Bus to relay my and my constituents’ concerns about the changes, and I left the company in no doubt about my opposition to the removal of what is a vital service that links together communities in my constituency such as Springhall, Fernhill, Cathkin, Whitlawburn and Halfway.”
“Returning to the LCM, I repeat my welcome of the minister’s approach to this issue. It is a complex one. There are areas that are reserved, and there are areas that this Parliament and the Scottish Government rightly have an involvement in. I congratulate the Scottish Government on the way that it has handled the matter and on its interaction with the UK Government. For the sake of time, I will leave it there— although, interestingly, I understand that we might have a fascinating members’ business debate brought by Mr Kerr after our return from recess. 15:22”
“[Interruption.] The question that he must address, which the bill does not address, is what deterrent will stop them from putting their money and their lives in the hands of those wicked people. Martin Whitfield: I am not going to make categorical assumptions about what groups of people choose this route— Stephen Kerr: Oh! Martin Whitfield: If the member will be patient—[Interruption.] I am conscious of time; I apologise, Presiding Officer. I am not going to make sweeping assumptions about groups of people who are taking their life in their hands. With regard to the gender of the people who are coming over—although I do not necessarily accept the diagnostic that the member claims—I suggest that those people might feel an obligation to flee their country because of their own sexuality, or whatever, and are seeking safety.”
“That is a truly appalling decision for individuals to have to take. What frightens, scares and annoys me is those other humans who see these people as a way to profit. Very complex financial arrangements can be made, in which families in effect borrow money from moneylenders at exorbitant interest rates, with the expectation that, if the individual makes the journey safely, they will reimburse the family. We have an entire dark economy working on that model. Stephen Kerr: I hope that Martin Whitfield, who is a realist, will recognise that the vast majority of the people on the dinghies are young men. They are, in a sense, almost undoubtedly economic migrants.”
“Will Martin Whitfield take an intervention? Martin Whitfield: Yes. Paul Sweeney: I thank my friend for giving way. He makes a salient point about the misbelief that, if someone is to claim asylum, they are obligated to claim it in the first safe country through which they travel. Often, people are moving towards the UK for very human reasons, such as their ability to speak English or in order to reconnect with their families and relatives. There is a very human story behind that journey in many cases, as we know from our constituency casework. Martin Whitfield: I will pick up on one of the phrases that the member used in that intervention—the “human story”. We are talking about human beings and their travel and the situation that leads them to decide that they can no longer stay in the country of their birth or where they live.”
“We have provided additional investment in mental health. This year, mental health spending will reach around £1.5 billion. In the past five years, direct spending by the Scottish Government has increased from approximately £117 million to £270 million. We are working towards the target that Mr Sweeney mentioned. We are very close to meeting the target of 10 per cent of health spending being spent on mental health and 1 per cent being spent on CAMHS by the end of this parliamentary session. As I have already indicated, I am preparing to engage with health boards to work constructively in partnership with them to ensure that those targets are realised.”
“Will he finally fulfil the Scottish Government’s promise that it would spend 1 per cent of the national health service budget on CAMHS by the end of this parliamentary session, so that we can get children and young people the support that they need, where they need it? Tom Arthur: Again, let me be crystal clear: the assertion—it is an assertion—that individuals are being moved off the CAMHS waiting times list is incorrect. The CAMHS waiting times list is for people with significant mental health conditions. Individuals who co-present as neurodivergent and as having mental health conditions will be on that list, but CAMHS is not the appropriate pathway for a neurodevelopmental diagnosis. The CAMHS statistics reflect that, and they are accurate. The data is transparently provided on the Public Health Scotland website.”
“It is very easy for the minister to declare a job well done when the list is being reduced not by successfully getting children and young people the help that they need, where they need it, but by creating additional lists. We know that several health boards now count initial assessments as treatment. For a target to be useful, it must be permanent, measurable and rigorous. The Government has proven that the CAMHS waiting times target does not fulfil any of those objectives. It is unethical and, ultimately, futile. Some children are now having to wait years for the treatment that they so desperately need. Does the minister agree that it is simply not acceptable, in a country such as ours, to have waiting times that are measured in years?”
“I welcome the minister to his new role in Government and thank him for providing early sight of his statement. I was dismayed by one aspect of his statement in particular—the claim that “incorrect assertions” had been made that young people are being moved off waiting lists to meet the CAMHS waiting times target. Many members across the chamber will agree that it is a matter of fact, not assertion, that that is happening—that is exactly what we are seeing across Scotland. Children are being moved off the CAMHS lists to different pathways that often have indefinite waiting times. The minister’s remark struck me as being a bit of Orwellian doublethink.”
“Those are the issues that we are trying to grapple with. I am grateful for the tone of Paul Sweeney’s question and note that he said that he backs the efforts of both Governments—that is helpful, and I am grateful for it.”
“In some ways, it can be said to be an attempt to catch up with the Procurement Reform (Scotland) Act 2014, as that placed a sustainable procurement duty on public bodies that means that, before they carry out a regulated procurement, they must consider how the procurement process can “improve the economic, social, and environmental wellbeing of the authority's area … facilitate the involvement of small and medium enterprises, third sector bodies and supported businesses in the process, and … promote innovation”. The rest of the UK is bound by the same international agreements on procurement as Scotland is, and, in common with the rest of the UK, Scotland cannot legislate to allow for discrimination in favour of domestic bidders at the expense of other bidders with which a relevant trade agreement applies.”
“In addition, will the Deputy First Minister take cognisance of the quality concerns that have been raised by bus operators in Scotland, such as McGill’s Buses and First Glasgow, around ADL’s electric vehicle products compared with their Chinese equivalents? Will she consider how we can establish a kaizen group involving the operators, Scottish Enterprise and the Scottish manufacturing advisory service to provide assurance and restore confidence in ADL’s products? The Presiding Officer: I remind members of the requirement to use a virtual background when participating remotely. Kate Forbes: The UK Government’s Procurement Act 2023 introduced some reforms to procurement procedures in the rest of the UK.”
“We are all behind the Scottish Government and the UK Government as they try to save bus manufacturing in Scotland. On the point about the forward order book, which is all that matters now, section 12 of the UK Procurement Act 2023, which was commenced in February this year, requires that contracting authorities “must have regard to the importance of … maximising public benefit” when awarding contracts, which is much stronger than the Procurement Reform (Scotland) Act 2014, which only requires authorities to consider social value. Will the Deputy First Minister consider how we can strengthen the language in the 2014 act?”
“The need for sure ethical safeguards for defence export sales should not be met at the expense of the need to build up our defence industry. We are an island nation and we need a navy. The Deputy Presiding Officer: You need to conclude. Paul Sweeney: That is fairly axiomatic. The Deputy Presiding Officer: Thank you, Mr Sweeney. Paul McLennan will be the final speaker in the open debate. 16:46”
“The message that is going out to more than 4,500 people who work in shipbuilding in Glasgow and the west of Scotland needs to be much more positive and supportive of that industry and must recognise the immense value and wealth that it creates for our country. Although the Government explored those opportunities for diversification, its industrial policy is so incoherent that it is actually driving commercial shipbuilding opportunities away rather than in. Immense opportunities exist to work in collaboration across the industry. Indeed, I chair the cross-party group on maritime and shipbuilding—which several members attend— where we are looking at those opportunities. It would be helpful if the Government made its defence support policy much better and much more rational instead of reactionary.”
“We could, of course, go into detail about public procurement reform and the need for support to increase ferry production, but that is perhaps off the topic of the debate. I encourage the Government not only to reflect on the emerging consensus—the reality of geopolitics in Europe, the need for security, the need to defend our country—but to recognise the immense contribution of shipbuilding in Glasgow and the wider Clydeside area, which is still the region’s largest manufacturing employer. Quite frankly, some of the comments from back benchers, which cast aspersions on the industry, were absolutely disgraceful. The facilities are not bomb factories and the funding cannot come from the largesse of those companies alone. The Government should engage and be proactive with and supportive of those industries, not dismissive of them.”
“In the past, the Government in Scotland has supported our shipbuilding industry. For example, a £360,000 grant was provided for the applied shipbuilding skills academy at Scotstoun, which is a great asset not just for BAE Systems but for the country’s wider shipbuilding ecosystem. When I worked at BAE Systems, we regularly collaborated with Ferguson Marine—indeed, the only thing that is keeping Ferguson Marine operational today is subcontract work on the fabrication of steel units for the type 26 frigate programme. It is rather ironic, therefore, that the Government’s amendment to today’s motion is about diversification away from defence at a time when the Government is engaged in precisely the opposite—it is increasing its dependence on defence work to sustain commercial shipbuilding activity on the Clyde.”
“A recent example was the Government denying Rolls-Royce a support grant to establish a naval welding centre at the Scottish Government- supported National Manufacturing Institute in Inchinnan and to replenish the space at Rolls- Royce that has been vacant for some years since the end of the maintenance, repair and overhaul activity. That was a huge opportunity for high- value manufacturing development in Scotland, but the Scottish Government spurned that opportunity to crowd in investment in an area that desperately needs it. I am really grateful that the UK Government has stepped in to offer alternative grant funding to ensure that the project goes ahead, but that should provide the Scottish Government with a reality check on its position. We need those industries and we need to support them.”
“That is never more the case than through our shipbuilding industry, in which I worked prior to my election to the Parliament—indeed, I believe that I am the only serving parliamentarian in Scotland who has a background in the shipbuilding industry. I also had the opportunity to serve as a Scottish Enterprise account manager for two years, during which time I worked with businesses—mainly, small and medium-sized enterprises—across the aerospace, defence and marine sectors in Scotland. Therefore, I have a fairly deep understanding of the potential of Scotland’s defence and maritime industries, and I am increasingly concerned by the hostility that is expressed towards them by the Government.”
“It is a pleasure to speak in the debate, and I second the amendment in the name of my colleague Mr Johnson. It is a very sensible amendment and I encourage the Government to support it in full, as Stewart McDonald, the former SNP defence spokesperson, has indicated it should. He provides cogent analysis that we can have an ethical policy on arms export sales—there is cross-party consensus in that regard— notwithstanding the need for serious and robust investment in this country’s defence capabilities. Ultimately, that is what this debate is about. Scotland contributes a great deal to the UK’s defence and to NATO’s defence collectively.”
“The Deputy Presiding Officer: That concludes the debate on addressing Scotland’s medical and nursing workforce crisis. There will be a brief pause before we move to the next item of business, to allow front benches to change. Lomond Banks Planning Application”
“We mentioned the inflow and pressure on training. Sixty-six per cent of nursing students have considered dropping out due to cost pressures. That is a massive waste of human potential and public resource. We need to develop the workforce plan. The Government has had 18 years of incumbency in which to develop it. It is shocking that it is only now getting around to proposing getting together. The time has run out. We are less than a year away from the next election. The point of getting together to work it out has passed. The point of being held to account is now here. I hope that the people of Scotland, including the clinicians of Scotland—the people who work in our NHS every day—will hold the Government to account for its abject failure to meet the needs not just of that workforce but the whole population of this country.”