Paul O'Kane
Scottish Labour · Scotland
“It is clear that any ban on phones will have to involve young people. They will have to help to co-design it and they will have to be at the heart of how we implement it—we should not forget that in the debate. There are already myriad discussions about how we might do that.”
“That is why we have advocated for a national charter on behaviour and standards and national leadership on discipline in schools, to empower headteachers to set out consequences, look at the issue of community partners such as campus cops and restore the relationships that now do not exist in many local authorities.”
“I am pleased to contribute to the debate, and in doing so, I thank Pam Gosal for bringing the issue to the chamber, and I wish her well. Pam was one of the first MSPs I met when I was elected to this place; we were in the same little group on the first day.”
“I am sure that many of us who watched the first day of proceedings in 1999 never thought that we would sit in the chamber and help to form the next part of the story of the Scottish Parliament.”
“Her work with me and others across committees on drug deaths and drug harms was very important. I hope that we will all continue to focus on that in the next session of Parliament. She can be assured that her contribution in that space is very valued. I also pay tribute to you, Deputy Presiding Officer.”
“Given that it is the last day of the parliamentary session and that we are about to enter an election period, colleagues will expect some politics from me. It is clear that the Government has failed to grip these issues during this session.”
The complete record
Every one of 463 lines we hold for Paul O'Kane, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 9 of 10.
“We have had no answers from members on the SNP back benches about what decisions they would have taken in the UK budget in order to deliver that settlement for Scotland. Indeed, SNP MPs did not even go to vote for that budget. It is important to put that on the record as we begin our conclusions this evening. The second point that it is important to take from this process and from this debate is that the budget was always going to pass. There has been a huge effort on the part of the First Minister and Government ministers to pretend otherwise. At times they have engaged in a level of amateur dramatics that would have rivalled a pantomime—I am glad that Mr Cole-Hamilton got his wish for pantomime season to be extended—and we have seen that repeated in the chamber this afternoon.”
“I will close for the Scottish Labour Party in this stage 1 debate on the budget. Throughout the budget process, a number of things have become clear, and those have been further clarified this afternoon. First, as we have heard, this budget is possible only because the UK Labour Government delivered record investment— the largest block grant in the history of devolution, which added £5.2 billion to Scotland’s budget. We have heard much commentary on that this afternoon, and there seems to be a disagreement between the back and front benches of the SNP in this chamber. We heard a cautious welcome of that money from the Scottish Government; the finance secretary said that it is a step in the right direction. However, from the back benches, we heard it tutted at and called “charity” or “handouts”.”
“That is why the Scottish Government is also funding a number of digital inclusion projects through the voluntary sector. That is an important part of this. I understand that a banking hub is to be introduced in Bishopbriggs and I will absolutely ensure that the member’s wider concerns are conveyed to the bank. Ambulance Crews (Mental Health Absences) 3.”
“In addition to the communities that Pam Gosal mentioned, in places including Barrhead and Bishopbriggs in my region, the Bank of Scotland has the last remaining branch on the high street and so is the last bank in the town. Does the minister recognise the particular pressure and disadvantage that is put on local communities by there being no banks left in their areas? Although I understand that the Scottish Government cannot compel banks to keep branches open, will he impress on the Bank of Scotland, in his discussions with it, the importance of access to cash in those communities? Richard Lochhead: I will certainly ensure that that happens. I share the member’s concern that, as technology moves apace and people turn to digital banking in greater numbers, there is a danger that other people are left behind.”
“Mr O’Kane wants employability support to be put in place for members of the public in Scotland, and so do I. I am going to vote for it, and I hope that he and his colleagues will, too. The Presiding Officer: I have received 25 requests from members who wish to ask constituency and general supplementary questions. If members are concise, we will be able to get through more questions and involve more members.”
“Given our confidence that the budget will be passed by the Parliament, as a consequence of our agreement with partners in the Parliament, we are able to give early certainty to employability schemes in Scotland, which they did not have last year, given the financial challenges that we faced. There will be much more certainty about the roll- out of employability programmes from 1 April, and the Deputy First Minister and the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government are giving such assurances to organisations around the country. I know that Mr O’Kane is deadly serious about tackling child poverty, and he knows that I am, too. That is where I get a bit concerned about where parliamentary discourse has got to, because there is a budget to be voted for.”
“Does the First Minister recognise the importance of supporting people into secure, well- paid work? Given the cuts to employability services over recent years, what is his Government doing to reverse the trends that are outlined in the report? The First Minister: Those are important questions. As the Government’s “Bright Start, Best Futures” strategy indicates, the way to tackle child poverty is through a combination of measures, such as the provision of direct payments, as in the case of the Scottish child payment, or through the provision of employability support, childcare support or transport support, all of which are part of the Government’s budget proposals. On economic inactivity, the Government is safeguarding funding for employability schemes.”
“The Joseph Rowntree Foundation’s report is, of course, serious and sobering, as it is every year. It shows that the child poverty rate in Scotland is static at 24 per cent, which means that 250,000 children are in poverty. The First Minister and I have previously had constructive debates on the matter, and it will not be lost on him or members across the chamber that the current rate means that we are seriously off course with regard to meeting the statutory child poverty targets that are set by the Parliament. The report also highlights that a higher than average proportion of working-age adults are unemployed or economically inactive and that households in Scotland in which someone is in work took home a lower level of earnings than the UK average.”
“To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on its stated commitment to end charges for non-residential care by the end of the current parliamentary session. (S6O-04268)”
“Walls of prejudice like homophobia, racism, sectarianism, xenophobia should be cast aside. I see people in the future being more kind and understanding to each other, understanding of themselves and what they can do to help those around them. I want the people around me to have a better understanding of what it means to be open-minded. I hope that people can display more empathy and sympathy for each other. I hope that people can begin to understand that, with a little bit more consideration of others, we can start to make our collective experience of life a little bit easier and more pleasant.” 17:49”
“The future must be guided by us but it must be in the hands of young people, so, in closing my speech, I will give space to words that I heard at the Glasgow reform synagogue on Saturday from a young man called Ben Bland, who I think summed up the challenge of the present age but also the hope for a better future. He said: “The future nowadays seems bleak, the news and social media are playing an important part in this, creating division and sowing the seeds of hatred, directed at those least deserving of it whilst lauding praise to those who deserve it even less. So, here today, I want to make the effort to turn away from it, looking inward for my vision, my hope for the future. In it, I see barriers of prejudice built between themselves and taken down, with olive branches extended.”
“That has been brought into sharp focus recently by many research studies that show that too many young people in our country cannot name Auschwitz or any other death camp and do not have a grasp of what happened in the Holocaust. The theme for this year’s Holocaust memorial day is “take action for a better future”. For me and for many others, that must be a future in which the horrors of the Holocaust and subsequent genocides are taught and are known by all, so that the words “never again” have a chance of having meaning. I agree with Jackson Carlaw about paying tribute to the work that is done across Parliaments and Governments to ensure that that happens.”
“Tonight, we also remember the subsequent genocides that have occurred in Cambodia, Rwanda, Bosnia and Darfur and all those who give testimony and who support the commemoration of those genocides. Tonight, we reflect on the 30th anniversary of the genocide in Bosnia, and I want to pay particular tribute to Beyond Srebrenica, the organisation that does so much work to educate people about what happened in Bosnia, what happened in Srebrenica and how we learn from that and move forward. As we have heard, and as I am sure that we will hear in further contributions from members this evening, all this work is vital, particularly as survivors of the Holocaust pass away and it falls to all of us to help to tell those stories. Antisemitism, Holocaust denial and the distortion of fact are on the rise.”
“For a long time, many of them did not speak of their experiences in the Holocaust, but, later in life, many of them chose to do that. They chose to tell their story, as they have told me, so that future generations would know about the horrors and the inhumanity but also about the amazing stories of the resilience, the resistance and the righteousness of others. I pay tribute to the many organisations that support and have supported survivors to keep those stories alive and to ensure that education continues. Those organisations include the Holocaust Memorial Day Trust, the Holocaust Educational Trust, Gathering the Voices, vision schools Scotland, the Anne Frank Trust and many others; I know that many colleagues will speak of their work this evening.”
“Millions of Jewish people, Roma and Sinti people, LGBT people, disabled people and others were murdered. As we have also heard this evening, when you stand in the watchtower at Birkenau, it is hard not to be absolutely horrified by the sheer scale of a place that was designed by human beings for the systematic murder of other human beings. Over many years, I have had the great honour of meeting people who are survivors of Auschwitz- Birkenau and survivors of the Holocaust. As Jackson Carlaw alluded to, many of them came to Scotland after the horrors of the war ended and lived their lives just down the road from where I am sitting this evening. They went about their lives and made a huge contribution to post-war Britain. Many of them gave themselves in public service and helped to build up our communities.”
“I thank Jackson Carlaw for securing this annual debate, and for the partnership working that he has undertaken with me in helping to organise Holocaust memorial day commemorations in the Parliament this week. I urge members to attend the commemoration event on Thursday evening. I know that it is important to many people across Scotland that we mark Holocaust memorial day, but, in particular, I know how important it is to the Jewish community, the majority of whom live in East Renfrewshire—as I do and as Jackson Carlaw does. It really is an honour to represent them, along with Jackson Carlaw. As we have heard, this year, we mark 80 years since the liberation of Auschwitz-Birkenau. It was the largest of the Nazi death camps, where murder was carried out on an industrial scale simply because people were different.”
“That is what I will be invested in going forward.”
“Can she outline clearly a process for the SPS to deal with ligature risks across the estate and a timeline for doing so? What capital investment will support that work? Angela Constance: The total investment in the Scottish Prison Service for the new financial year will be in excess of £881 million, in both resource and capital. I am, of course, realistic and am aware that additional actions always have a cost, in terms of both resources and people. I expect some of the actions that I outlined in my statement to happen either immediately or urgently. I have given a commitment to come back to Parliament in March, when there will be further detail on the timelines. I am acutely conscious that it is all very well to commit to action and implement recommendations, but that has to go hand in hand with a full and detailed implementation plan.”
“My thoughts today are with the families whose lives can never be the same. Katie Allan grew up in East Renfrewshire, as I did, and we have all heard that she did so in a family, a school and a community where she was loved and had the fullness of her life and potential ahead of her. The findings should make us ashamed that Katie, William and so many others were failed. The cabinet secretary knows that Katie’s family has fought for a long time for investment in safer cells, and particularly the removal of ligatures. She knows of the backward steps that they have experienced and of their battle to access information. However, I note the clear recommendations that have been made on that issue and the cabinet secretary’s agreement in principle with them in her statement.”
“The member raised an important point about the need to continue to challenge such errors, which is why there is continuous improvement and investment in Social Security Scotland’s digital systems to reduce the number of manual workarounds and to improve the IT systems. That work continues. On the whole, the expenditure related to how Social Security Scotland administers social security compares well with the cost to the DWP. It does not cost more for Social Security Scotland to deliver the benefits, but it delivers them in a more humane fashion. Food Insecurity 8.”
“Shirley-Anne Somerville: I thank Mr O’Kane for his question, because that is one of the areas in which we have to challenge ourselves to continue to do better. Part of the area that we need to work on is our reliance on the material that comes from the DWP. For example, are errors made because people are not due universal credit but are told that they are, so they receive the Scottish child payment? There is integration between the two systems, which means that we have to check for official error at every stage. We also check that for benefits that are only in Social Security Scotland’s remit.”
“The cabinet secretary and I have discussed in committee our changing demographics, the demand-led nature of social security and the fact that it is vital that social security operates flexibly, with efficient systems to reduce waste. We need to be sure that spending on information technology systems, overpayments and errors is as minimal as possible in order to free up money for the funding that goes into our constituents’ pockets. Given that, how does the cabinet secretary respond to recent reports that overpayments of £1.1 million in just three months were written off as official errors by Social Security Scotland? What action is she taking alongside the agency to make sure that we focus on reducing that waste and fraud in order to protect social security claimants?”
“In addition, the UK Government has made commitments to taking clear action to ensure that maladministration of that kind cannot happen again. Those actions include working with the ombudsman to develop a detailed action plan for the report, setting clear and sufficient notice of any future changes to pension age—[Interruption.]”
“I also highlighted my desire for a response to be made and, indeed, my support for that response to include a redress scheme. That had to be fully considered in line with the different recommendations that the ombudsman outlined in their report. Therefore, I recognise the disappointment at the fact that the UK Government has not taken to the UK Parliament the PHSO’s recommendations on compensation. Along with Labour colleagues, I have been clear that, although steps have been taken to recognise maladministration, the UK Government could go further. However, it would be remiss not to recognise that the UK Government has finally acknowledged that maladministration occurred— something that the previous UK Government refused to do—and has offered an apology on behalf of the state for that maladministration.”
“I have heard, as members across the chamber will have, a variety of experiences that I believe deserve to be accounted for and heard today, as well as a variety of views on what is required to achieve the redress that I think that everyone would want to see. I have also heard a variety of views on the report that we are debating and the subsequent issues. In the time that I have available to me, I will focus my comments particularly on the PHSO report. When I last spoke on this matter in the chamber, the PHSO report had been received by the previous UK Government but had not been responded to. I outlined in that debate that it would fall to any incoming Government to deal with the detail in the report and to respond.”
“I will begin, as I have done in debates in which I have spoken on this topic in this chamber in my four years in Parliament, by acknowledging all the WASPI women, including those who are in the gallery today and those we represent in our regions and constituencies. In doing so, I offer them my respect for the work that they have done over many years of campaigning. Indeed, like colleagues across the chamber, I have had the opportunity to speak to many impacted constituents and WASPI campaigners over the years. I have listened to their views and experiences of what has happened to them, the impact that those issues and decisions have had on their life, and to what they feel is an appropriate remedy for them in terms of their circumstances.”
“I move, That the Parliament calls on the UK Government to compensate Women Against State Pension Inequality (WASPI) women as recommended by the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman. The Presiding Officer: I call Paul O’Kane to speak to and move amendment S6M-16160.1. 14:47”
“I said at the beginning of this speech, in front of the brave WASPI campaigners who are in the gallery today—and the many who, I am sure, are waiting to see what happens in our votes—that this Parliament can send a clear and united message to the UK Government. I hope that all members can reach agreement on this topic, as we have done in the past. I also hope that the new UK Government stops and listens and finally does the right thing by standing up and acknowledging that it owes those women so much more than just an apology. Surely it is time that they are provided with a fair compensation package at the earliest possible opportunity, so that those women who have been affected finally see their compensation being paid and amends starting to be made for the mistakes of the UK Governments of the past.”
“That is the right thing to do, but let us be clear that the key powers that make a real difference to energy costs remain with the UK Government—it should act. The WASPI campaigners have repeatedly handled themselves with the highest levels of dignity, as they face setback after setback. When the report was published by the ombudsman, there was finally a tangible positive outcome, and the Parliament came together to recognise that. We rightly called on the UK Government to act on the report, to acknowledge the maladministration and, importantly, to act to deliver and provide a fair compensation package. The election of a new Government brought some optimism, but unfortunately that optimism has faded away along with the promises.”
“The cabinet secretary’s remarks completely fail to acknowledge the UK Labour Government’s commitment to the pension triple lock—a commitment that I hope she shares and that we have debated before in the chamber. Does she share my concern that the Conservative party seems no longer to support the triple lock, which is protecting people’s pensions? Shirley-Anne Somerville: I share any concern about the triple lock being diminished. Quite frankly, however, Mr O’Kane’s party is in Government now and he needs to take responsibility for the winter fuel payment and for the WASPI women. The Scottish Government has already set out our plans to deliver universal support to pensioners from next winter through the pension age winter heating payment.”
“To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on the development of the changing places toilet fund. (S6O-04201)”
“The Scottish Government, along with energy providers, is getting on with that work—to the benefit of the UK Government, which should be doing that work. We will get on and do that work; however, once we have that working group and its recommendations, the UK Government better get on with delivering that.”
“Until there is certainty about the totality of in-year consequentials, then I am sorry but I do not think that it is sensible for the Government to start talking and putting money out the door. That is the difference between being responsible about the public finances in Scotland, and what Mr O’Kane is asking me to do. I go back to the point that I made to Liz Smith and note that the budget for next year has not yet passed. If Mr O’Kane wishes to see money going into the fuel insecurity fund, perhaps that—as well as mitigation for the two-child cap and the introduction of universal payments—might tempt him off the fence and away from abstaining and cause him to actually vote for the budget. The best way to support people who are having difficulty with energy costs, however, is the social tariff.”
“Does the cabinet secretary agree that that move was regrettable? Will she confirm whether the Scottish Government has looked at the option to revive that fund in line with calls from this side of the chamber and campaigners? Shirley-Anne Somerville: The reason that the figures in today’s statement are already in the public domain is because we regularly produce and publish statements. I am here today because I was asked whether the Government could give this statement, and here I am, delivering it. I genuinely do not get why Paul O’Kane is surprised that the figures are already in the public domain; he usually complains that we do not publish enough information. In relation to the £41 million, again, we are going over old ground, but let us go over it again, one more time.”
“Instead, the cabinet secretary seems to have announced simply the plugging of gaps that were created by real-terms cuts in the previous budget. We have had no detail since that statement on the practical measures to deploy the funding. Will the cabinet secretary therefore outline how much of that funding is already out of the door and how many people it is supporting? Finally, the cabinet secretary is aware that we have called for those consequentials to be used to reinstate the fuel insecurity fund as an alternative mechanism to target those who are most in need. Freedom of information responses have shown that, when the Government made the decision to cut that fund, fuel insecurity partners expressed great concern that they could no longer “deliver innovative measures that were taking people out of crisis situations”.”
“I thank the cabinet secretary for advance sight of the statement. The cabinet secretary and colleagues have said much in recent weeks about the impact of winter pressures and cold temperatures, but today’s statement appears to be old numbers put together in a new way to suggest that the Scottish Government is taking action on those issues; perhaps that is why it was pre-briefed to the media. I want to ask the cabinet secretary about this, because we have had this conversation in the chamber before. Scottish Labour has been calling for a package of measures to support people this winter from that £41 million consequential that the Scottish Government received from the household support fund, which the cabinet secretary said did not exist.”
“I believe the principle is that this chamber, and not the media, should be the place where statements are made, so I would appreciate your guidance on the matter, Presiding Officer. The Presiding Officer: Members are well aware of my expectation, in line with long- established guidance, that, when a ministerial statement has been scheduled, the content of that statement must first of all be shared with this Parliament. I have not had an opportunity to look into the matter that Mr O’Kane raises, but I will certainly do so. I will pick up where I was regarding the next item of business, which is a statement by Shirley- Anne Somerville on the winter heating payment. The cabinet secretary will take questions at the end of her statement, so there should be no interventions or interruptions. 14:23”
“On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I seek your guidance regarding the statement. It appears that, once again, the content of a statement has appeared in the media before the statement has been made to Parliament—indeed, I note that the Scottish Government appeared to have an embargoed press release on its website at one minute past midnight. I raise that because this is not the first time that issues such as the winter heating payment and broader matters have been pre-briefed to the media. If the Government contends that no detail in the statement was not already in the public domain, that begs the question of what point there is to having the statement at all.”
“I move amendment S6M-16003.3, to leave out from first “notes” to end and insert: “agrees that child poverty should be a national mission for the Scottish Government and more widely across the Parliament, but deeply regrets that, after almost 18 years of a Scottish National Party (SNP) administration, there are 30,000 more children in poverty; acknowledges that child poverty rates across the UK have risen under the economic mismanagement of the previous UK Conservative administration; recognises that Scotland has its own legally binding child poverty reduction targets, which the SNP administration is likely to miss, despite successive First Ministers declaring action on child poverty to be a priority; acknowledges an additional £5 billion of investment in Scotland as a result of the UK Labour administration’s Budget; regrets that the SNP administration has had to use its draft Budget for 2025-26 to correct many of the mistakes that it made in its Budget for 2024-25; is deeply concerned by the Scottish Government’s decision to cut measures that act as barriers to poverty; agrees that there is a need to take a multi-faceted approach, and therefore welcomes the work of the UK Labour administration to strengthen workers’ rights, review universal credit, build a fairer social security system, and deliver a pay rise for 200,000 of the lowest-paid people in Scotland with a genuine living wage; welcomes the establishment of a cross-government Child Poverty Ministerial Taskforce by the UK Government; encourages the Scottish Government to work collaboratively to tackle the root causes of poverty across Scotland, and recognises that, to end poverty, action needs to be taken to get the economy moving, to get public services working, and to create more, decent well-paid jobs.” 15:35”
“One budget will not make the difference—that is clear—and the opportunity to take a new direction on those issues has not been and will not be taken by this Government. Only a new Government in 2026 can provide that.”
“It is clear that health, education and housing are all issues in which the Scottish Government has, after all that time in Government, failed to make the substantive changes that are required to tackle the root causes of poverty. It is clear that we must take a rounded view of poverty in all its facets. It cannot be for just the social security system to support people. It has to be about good work, well- paid jobs, support to get into work, a national health service that is there when people need it, and the family support that people require through social work and other council services. All those things are important, and they need to be backed up by a strong social security system that is there when people need it.”
“Given that, clearly, Russell Findlay has some kind of idea that we, on this side of the chamber, should all be listening to about how to reduce child poverty, deal with the issues and invest in public services, perhaps Stephen Kerr and colleagues might tell us how they would pay for and support public services, because they did not do so as they drove them into the ground during their 14 years. Presiding Officer, I am very conscious now that I have taken a number of interventions, and I will bring my remarks to a peroration. It is clear that we need to take action across our public services in order to reduce child poverty.”
“Stephen Kerr: Does Paul O’Kane accept that many economists—in fact, the majority of economists—predict that, because of the national insurance increases that are being brought about by Rachel Reeves, there will be increased business failure and rising unemployment? How on earth does that help with any aspect of poverty—least of all, child poverty? The Deputy Presiding Officer: Mr O’Kane, please start to bring your remarks to a close. Paul O’Kane: I will, Presiding Officer.”
“I was coming on to speak about the down payments that have been made to tackle those issues at the UK level: the raising of the minimum wage, the introduction of the biggest upgrade of workers’ rights in a generation, and the change to the debt repayment levels for people who are on benefits, which will ensure that those who are struggling with debt keep more universal credit payments and is part of the wider work of the UK child poverty task force and the strategy across Government. I hope that all those interventions are supported by the First Minister and the Government. As I have said, I am disappointed that there is no cognisance of them in the Government’s motion. I give way to Stephen Kerr. The Deputy Presiding Officer: Be brief, Mr Kerr, please.”
“I did not want the Conservative Government to be elected, and I did not want Russell Findlay’s support of Liz Truss and others over that 14-year period to be brought up here today and lectured about as though it was some kind of triumph. However, it is clear that work to fix the foundations and make a change has begun and will continue under the Labour Government. Stephen Kerr: Will the member give way? Paul O’Kane: I will, in a moment.”
“I accept that point, but does Mr O’Kane not have to accept that the madness of 14 years of austerity, which essentially reversed the very good work that was done by the previous Labour Government in reducing child poverty, has contributed to making our challenge a great deal harder? Paul O’Kane: First, I say to the First Minister that it feels longer—like 30 years, perhaps—that the SNP has been in power. Perhaps I should have paid more attention in the maths classes that I attended as he was setting out his first budgets. On his substantive point about Tory austerity in those 14 years, I campaigned against that ardently.”
“I am disappointed that the Scottish Government did not see fit to recognise that in its motion. There have also been other welcome down payments on tackling child poverty at a UK level, which I will speak about after I have taken an intervention from the First Minister. The First Minister: I am grateful to Mr O’Kane for giving way for a second time. I point out to him that we will only have 20 years of an SNP Government if we win the 2026 election, which I fully intend to do. On a point of consensus, I welcome that we are in an improved position on the public finances because of UK Government decisions.”
“Indeed, in its report last year, the Poverty and Inequality Commission said that progress has been “slow or not evident at all” and it predicted that it is now “improbable” that those legally binding child poverty targets will be met. We must reflect on that, because we are almost at the 20-year mark of the SNP having the levers that I spoke about. We have to be honest: one budget is not going to provide the change of approach and direction that is required to meet the scale of the challenge before us. I put on record Scottish Labour’s pride in and clear support for the UK Labour Government’s ending the era of austerity and ensuring that there is additional money coming to the Scottish Government. The investment of £5 billion into the Scottish Government’s budget is vitally important and should be recognised.”
“He has had those wide-ranging levers of power for almost two decades, including as finance secretary, as education secretary and as Deputy First Minister before he came to the office that he now holds. We must consider that, despite the three First Ministers in my short time in this Parliament and four across the SNP’s almost 20 years in Government all stating that child poverty is the top priority, the most recent estimates show that 30,000 more children are in poverty now compared with when the SNP came to power in 2007. On the First Minister’s point about the legally binding targets, alarm bells are ringing with regard to where he has had the power to make changes.”
“I will say more on the targets and my concern about the Government’s leadership on them, given that the Government has the tools, the powers and the levers to drive much of that, as I progress in my speech. The First Minister: Will Mr O’Kane take an intervention? Paul O’Kane: If Mr Swinney allows me to make a little progress, I will allow him back in. The point that I was moving on to make is about the length of time that we have spent looking at the issues. The Government has set its motion in the context of the budget. For many months, the First Minister and his front bench sought to project the budget as though it was the first budget of a new Government. However, in 2025, we enter the 18th year of the SNP Government being in power. Indeed, the current First Minister started passing budgets when I had not long left secondary school.”