Michael Marra
Scottish Labour · Scotland
“I thank Jack Middleton for bringing the debate to the chamber. Its subject is of widespread concern, and will impact significantly on communities across the north of Scotland and in my North East Scotland region.”
“Indeed, the decline of quality local journalism that is embedded close to people is a tragedy. As many local newspapers face increasing issues with sustainability, it has become more, rather than less, important for the biggest companies and corporations to ensure that their journalism is rooted in communities.”
“More broadly, I believe—Jack Middleton has touched on some of this—that the decision is an act of surrender to what is a wildfire of commoditised fear that is weaponised by tech oligarchs to purposely undermine real freedom in pursuit of power and profit.”
“Although it is a commercial decision from STV, backed by the regulator to this point, it is also the latest example of what is becoming an ever- growing list of services being centralised away from communities in Scotland. Those in the north- east and further afield have, over the years, seen the same situation before.”
“The absence of regional journalism will only hasten that process, and whatever we might think, collectively, about the barrier and where the balance should sit, local people should have that accountability and the opportunity to make their case about where power is situated.”
“I welcome the hard work that Our Union Street is doing to re-energise Union Street and the centre of Aberdeen. The project is working along with partners to bring together a shared vision of the future of the city centre.”
The complete record
Every one of 754 lines we hold for Michael Marra, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 14 of 16.
“I am conscious of the time, but this week’s announcement in the budget of the provision of additional funding to the SFC for the purpose of supporting institutions such as the University of Dundee is a clear sign that the Government is prepared to support provision of assistance that will enable the SFC to help the University of Dundee through its immediate challenges, and afford it breathing space to shape a recovery plan that is credible in terms of delivery. The SFC will assess matters further as the information that I mentioned earlier comes forward. The Deputy Presiding Officer: A number of colleagues want to ask supplementary questions, so they will need to be brief. On the back of that latest response, the minister’s answers will need to be a bit briefer, too.”
“Equally, it is important that the picture that emerges is entirely accurate, and that the proposed recovery plan has the potential to restore the university to a sustainable position and minimise redundancies, as far as possible. The plan should also seek to ensure that the institution’s significant contribution both to the local economy and to the overall higher education and research offer in Scotland is maintained.”
“Can the minister lay out clearly what figures he has seen that led his Government to announce that particular sum of money to Parliament on Tuesday? Graeme Dey: Right now, it is difficult to be definitive on the way forward for the University of Dundee, for a variety of reasons—not the least of which is the finalising of the financial recovery plan, which, as I indicated, the SFC will consider. The SFC is actively engaged with the institution on receiving, in the first instance, a high-level and working draft that can be examined. I understand absolutely the frustration and anger of staff and students about the time that it has taken to provide transparency on the scale and nature of the financial problems, how they arose and how it is proposed that they will be addressed.”
“The Funding Council will undertake detailed expert analysis of the university’s financial recovery plan once it is finalised, and will provide advice to the Scottish Government on the next steps to support the university. Mr Marra will, of course, be aware that the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government set out the Government’s commitment to support our universities, including the University of Dundee, with £15 million of financial transactions that will be available to the SFC. Michael Marra: What Parliament and the people in Dundee really need to know is the status of the £15 million loan that was set out in the chamber by the cabinet secretary. From my engagements with the university, I know that that money will not touch the sides of the black hole.”
“To ask the Scottish Government what recent discussions it has had with the Scottish Funding Council regarding the University of Dundee. (S6O- 04372) The Minister for Higher and Further Education; and Minister for Veterans (Graeme Dey): Along with my officials, I have been in regular contact with the Scottish Funding Council on the situation at the University of Dundee. In recent weeks, I have also met the senior management team at the university. I fully understand that this is an anxious time for staff and students, but it is imperative that the university brings forward a robust financial recovery plan and that it does so in close and on- going engagement with staff, in line with fair work principles.”
“Throughout the debate this afternoon, and when the finance secretary and her colleagues attempt further game playing ahead of decision time, let us remember: when it came to the question of whether austerity should be ended and whether an additional £5.2 billion should be delivered for our NHS and our schools, what said the SNP? Well, the nine SNP MPs voted no. You cannot just will the ends; you must will the means. Labour has got on and delivered for Scotland. We on the Labour benches will not stand in the way of Labour’s record investment reaching the front line of public services. After years of Tory austerity and SNP incompetence, a funding boost is needed badly, but we know that there is no plan from the SNP Government to use that money to deliver lasting change and a new direction for our NHS, our schools and our local services.”
“In October, the chancellor delivered the most progressive, redistributive budget in a generation, with record funding for Scotland in the largest budget settlement in the history of devolution. Let us be clear: the only reason we have that additional £5.2 billion is that, last July, we elected a UK Labour Government with Scottish Labour MPs at its heart, making the case for Scotland. The only reason that the measures that are set out in today’s budget are possible is that Labour moved decisively to end austerity, to rebuild the public finances and to invest in public services. Labour brought forward a budget to end austerity; the SNP lined up with the Tories to vote against it. Meanwhile, the SNP in Holyrood is hailing the spending of the money that the SNP in Westminster refused to vote for.”
“Far too much of it is more of the same from the SNP. More of the same will not deliver more NHS appointments or cut waiting times. More of the same will not improve attainment in schools or solve the funding crisis that is besetting our higher education sector. Shona Robison: Will the member take an intervention? Michael Marra: Not at the moment. There is none of the reform required to improve our public services and bring real change to communities across Scotland. Although our UK Labour Government this week delivered an extra 2 million NHS appointments ahead of schedule, Scotland’s NHS remains in perpetual crisis and, without intervention, terminal decline.”
“Rule 9.16.7 of standing orders dictates that Parliament must agree to a resolution before stage 3 proceedings of a budget bill can begin. As such, Scottish Labour will support the rate resolution this afternoon. With an additional £5.2 billion added to Scotland’s budget, this is the largest budget in the history of devolution. That is only possible because of decisions taken by the UK Labour Government to raise revenue and invest in public services. We will not stand in the way of this budget, because we want Labour’s record investment to have a chance of reaching the front line of public services. Instead of seizing the opportunity to transform Scotland’s public services and set a new direction for our country, the budget would correct some of the most egregious and recent SNP mistakes.”
“The A9 remains something of a Sisyphean task for this Government, although, to be fair to Sisyphus, at least he was doing something. Further, the replacement of HMP Barlinnie is now costing 10 times the original estimate, NHS capital projects are frozen, with no clarity for patients or staff about when major projects will even begin, and the Scottish Government’s capital spending plans—first promised in December 2023—have still not materialised. Crucially, the manner in which those things are done is hugely important, but actually doing them would be a start. The Deputy Presiding Officer: I advise members that we are looking into the reason for the sudden increase in light in the chamber. Hopefully, we can resolve that. 13:09”
“The non- profit-distributing model is a variation on that core principle, and it has to be said that the SNP Government’s involvement in those public-private arrangements dwarfs that of the previous Scottish Executive on the basis of longevity alone. No SNP member can credibly claim that the dealings of this Government with the private sector have been trouble free. From Ferguson’s shipyard to the Lochaber smelter and the disastrous mishandling of the administration of the deposit return scheme, which has resulted in a private company suing the Scottish Government, the taxpayer is on the hook for hundreds of millions of pounds. We also have to think about this Government’s chronic failure to deliver major capital projects. [Interruption.] I see that I am shedding some light on the chamber at the moment, for everybody's benefit.”
“The UK Chancellor of the Exchequer has unequivocally confirmed that there will be no return to PFI during her tenure. I have seen the reports that are referenced in the motion, but the chancellor has been quite clear about that. As Mr Gibson pointed out, the Treasury is dealing with a time of constrained public finances, for different reasons than those that pertained at the time of the advent of the UK Labour Government in 1997. We have to make sure that we can get public finance off the ground in order to get key projects working and get the economy growing. Again, that is an agenda that many people would agree with. It is right, however, that we draw a distinction between the original early PFI arrangements from a generation ago and the subsequent arrangements between public and private sectors to bring capital investment to the table.”
“The first PFI contracts to which Mr Gibson referred—at length and rightly—were written when I was starting secondary school in St John’s high school in Dundee. They have been around for a long time, and Mr Gibson and other members are right to refer to the fact that many of them are still with us. It is essential that we learn the lessons that members are already setting out about the value in those contracts over time. It is particularly important to set out the context around historical examples and why some of those decisions were taken. However, there is no doubt that those contracts still place a heavy burden on council tax payers in parts of Scotland, even as many constituents continue to use the facilities that are in place.”
“I welcome the debate that Kenneth Gibson has brought to the chamber. He uses the time usefully, given the long view that he brings as a long-term member of this Parliament and as a result of his service in local government. After 14 years of Tory stagnation and decline, we can all agree that there is a vital need to drive growth and rebuild our public services. We have a Scottish national health service that is in perpetual crisis, crumbling schools and overcrowded prisons. Tackling those problems will require significant capital investment. This Scottish Government and the next Scottish Government will work alongside the private sector and the public sector to deliver progress. I know that Mr Gibson agrees with that analysis, and he has set some of that out in his speech.”
“To ask the Scottish Government what support it can provide to Dundee Heritage Trust to ensure the long-term future of the organisation. (S6O- 04332)”
“The existing libraries are to be replaced by—literally—three shelves of books, not just for the children of the school but for the community at large. As colleagues said at lunch time, that gives rise to a question about the concept of adequacy that sits within the legislation. Nobody thinks that what is proposed is an adequate replacement. The council is playing the game and the legislation in order to cut libraries and remove them from people. I support all the comments that members have made about the social purpose of our library system, what it can do for people and how important it is as a place of refuge, friendship, learning and advice. The libraries in my city are part of that, and we must protect them. 18:09”
“That brings me to Douglas community centre and library, in the east of the city, which is currently under threat. Proposals to close that facility have been put in front of the council in the current budget round. The local management group raised a petition, which attracted 794 signatures. This weekend, following a door-to-door campaign, the number of signatures collected passed 1,000. I congratulate all the campaigners who are fighting to protect that facility. The community libraries in question are to be replaced by a library space in a new community campus miles away from Douglas. A council officer described her experience of seeing the plans for that library space; she told me that she wept when she saw them.”
“For many people in Lochee, it served as a literal and metaphorical escape from those mills. The fact that many of Dundee’s public libraries have survived is due partly to their being protected by the listed status of their buildings. That leads to the very difficult situation in which many of the libraries that are most at threat in Dundee are in the post-war housing schemes that line the city’s periphery, because they do not have listed status. Removing the library function from the listed buildings would leave them as burdens on the council, rather than assets. Many of the communities affected have been engaged in a long-term fight to hold on to their libraries. As colleagues have pointed out, there are real equality issues, given the pattern of poverty in my home city.”
“I thank Mark Ruskell for securing the debate, and I thank the campaigners and professionals whom I had the privilege to meet this afternoon, whose passion for our public libraries across Scotland was evident. I could more than fill four minutes with my personal love of libraries, their atmosphere, the smell of them and the quiet sounds. I could list my favourite ones—the Mitchell library in Glasgow, the Shaw library at the London School of Economics and Political Science and the British Library by King’s Cross—but none of those comes close to Lochee library in Dundee, where I hold my surgeries and where my mother took my infant children for their Thursday morning reading group. The library was built among the mills where my family worked when they arrived from Ireland.”
“Michael Marra also sought clarification on what the Government’s intention is with regard to what will come after the national mission. Today, I have set out my willingness—in fact, my desire—for there to be collaboration across the chamber, as well as with local alcohol and drug partnerships and all interested parties, on what we do to build on the national mission. Paul Sweeney made the point that the work will not have been completed by the end of the national mission. He is right. We will still have work to do, and it will be in all our interests to ensure that we work together to agree on what the framework should look like and on the areas that we need to focus on to ensure that we continue the work to reduce harm and drug-related deaths.”
“On 16 January, the cabinet secretary met me to discuss the status of MAT standards in Dundee, so he already knows about my concerns that service users and providers in my home city are very sceptical about the continued improvement in the self-assessment reports. What independent validation of the MAT standards assessments is in place? The experience in Dundee, where many of the recommendations of the Dundee drugs commission of 2019 remain undelivered, does not tally with the self-assessment that is in front of us today. Neil Gray: The assessments come through Public Health Scotland. I hope that that gives Michael Marra some reassurance, although I recognise the concerns that he raised with me, some of which we are following up on.”
“Ivan McKee: The cabinet secretary indicated the timing of the plan, but the member needs to recognise that the certainty that we require from the UK spending review is hugely important in giving us clarity on what funds are available to support projects that would be included in the infrastructure investment plan. Without that certainty, we are unable to take forward that plan. Income Tax 5.”
“The minister will understand the frustration from around the chamber because of the number of projects that members want, but the infrastructure investment pipeline is something of a holy grail for the Government. It is fabled and never found, and it is difficult to determine where it might be. We expected it with the budget in December 2023, but it never came. We were told that we would have to wait until after the spring budget in March 2024, but it never came. Next, the cabinet secretary for finance said that it would come with the medium- term financial strategy in May 2024, but it never came. Can we have a commitment from the finance minister that it will come before the summer recess?”
“That is SNP fiscal incompetence of the highest order, and it is little wonder that so many struggle to believe that that record investment will result in better outcomes with John Swinney at the helm. The SNP has used the budget to fix some of the most egregious mistakes of three consecutive years of emergency budgets and panic cuts— slashing the housing budget and leaving council budgets in tatters.”
“Michael Marra: No thank you, sir. To be fair, however, John Swinney had one suggestion, which was for the Chancellor of the Exchequer to raise income tax in England to match income tax rates in Scotland. Surely, the man who negotiated the fiscal framework would know that doing that would reduce the amount of money that came to Scotland. [Interruption.] Well, the First Minister might want to listen to the Fraser of Allander Institute, which said that his fatal misunderstanding of public money would cut Scotland’s budget by £636 million— The First Minister: That is an old quote. Michael Marra: It was two weeks ago. Labour increased the budget by more than £5 billion, and John Swinney seems to want to have cut it by more than £600 million.”
“Scottish Labour’s contribution to this budget is a record £5.2 billion, and that delivery for Scotland is possible only because the people of Scotland kicked out the Tories and sent Scottish Labour MPs into the heart of a UK Labour Government. It is the largest Scottish budget in the history of devolution. Let us therefore be clear. The only reason that the measures that are set out today are possible is that Labour moved decisively to end austerity, to rebuild the public finances and to invest in public services. All of that was voted against by the SNP, which has opposed every measure for raising the money that it is spending today. The SNP’s fantasy finances of demanding £70 billion in further spending but opposing every measure to pay for it would make Liz Truss blush. Craig Hoy: Will Michael Marra give way?”
“We have done that—my Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government has done that superbly well, in bringing together the Greens, the Liberal Democrats and our colleague in Alba. The invitation is there for the Labour Party to be part of that big consensus to do the right thing for Scotland—that applies to the health service as well. I am very happy to have those discussions. However, Labour has to vote for the budget to make it happen. Michael Marra: Unfortunately, there is absolutely no evidence that the First Minister can build a consensus around the need for a change of direction in this country. He has been singularly unable to answer that question.”
“The need for a change of direction was Labour’s principal ask in all our cordial and constructive discussions with the cabinet secretary and the finance minister, but there is no evidence of that change. There is not even the recognition that change is required. For example, the First Minister’s NHS speech just last week was a reannouncement of the old plans, which had not worked, and the old schemes, which had not been followed through. There were no new ideas, no new direction and no resolve to unite the Parliament and the country behind a programme of national renewal. The First Minister: I want to put Mr Marra right on the point that he has just made. As this budget demonstrates, I am very happy to lead a process of bringing together people in this Parliament to agree conclusions.”
“Scottish Labour will not stand in the way of this budget, because we desperately want to see Labour’s record investment improve delivery on the front line, but we will not vote for this budget, because we very much doubt that it will. Years and years of evidence tell us that that is the case, with a complete lack of delivery. This budget, as it stands, promises more of the same, and that is nowhere near good enough for the one in six Scots who are stuck on an NHS waiting list, the patients who are waiting for days in accident and emergency and the elderly Scots who are stuck on trolleys in corridors. They are not shocked but are resigned to what is the new SNP normality.”
“In the budget, the Scottish Government set out some aims for public service reform, but those aims must be matched by genuine and tangible actions to make a difference to services on the ground. More of the same will not suffice. Along with the Auditor General, the committee will be watching carefully over the next 12 months and scrutinising the Government on the outcomes of reform programmes. I thank all members for their contributions to the debate. The Presiding Officer: That concludes the debate on the Scottish budget 2025-26. Environmental Standards Scotland (Appointment of Board Members) 17:00”
“Reports from the Auditor General for Scotland—five in the past 15 months—have demonstrated that the Scottish Government is not delivering public service reform on the scale that is required, with Government intransigence being most clearly seen in the multiple crises, which are now acknowledged by the First Minister, that are engulfing Scotland’s NHS. The committee shares the view of the Auditor General that, in order for real progress to be made, including in relation to changing models of public service delivery, the Scottish Government needs to demonstrate stronger leadership and to bring an overall vision to the public service reform programme.”
“That has been in place since 2018 and gives some security in relation to investment and commitment in IT by the Estonian Government. The committee remains unclear about what the Scottish Government’s response is to that recommendation. We also asked the Government to work with the private sector to encourage staff exchanges on a more informal basis before adopting a more structured approach to meaningful collaboration with the private sector. We have not had a response on that, either. We remain concerned about the lack of pace or drive for public sector reform from the Scottish Government.”
“I will use the last couple of minutes to talk about public sector and public service reform. The committee has a long-standing interest in that area. We undertook a stand-alone inquiry on the topic in 2023 and subsumed that scrutiny into our annual budget work. As part of our investigation, we visited Estonia to learn from its successful approach to digitalisation and e-governance. We made a series of recommendations to the Government based on that work in Estonia. I will highlight a couple of examples that require a clearer response from the Government. For example, the committee asked the Government to consider whether Scotland should create for information technology a permanent spending commitment that can endure beyond political cycles. In Estonia, 1 per cent of gross domestic product has been earmarked as a stable state fund for IT.”
“We have been told by some witnesses, including the Fraser of Allander Institute, that that lacked sufficient transparency. The Scottish Government later announced emergency in-year spending controls for 2024-25, and blamed higher pay than it had anticipated in its budget. The committee strongly urged the Scottish Government to publish its pay policy document alongside the Scottish budget whenever possible, to allow scrutiny of how pay assumptions might impact on other areas of the budget forecast. We also asked the Government to set out more realistic pay growth assumptions in the future. In our budget report, which was published yesterday, we welcome the Scottish Government’s return to publishing its public sector pay information alongside the budget.”
“The Government finally published its pay policy on 30 May 2024, which was more than six months after the original deadline and three months after the budget had been voted on by Parliament. That document included what turned out to be an assumption of public sector pay growth of 3 per cent. The cabinet secretary told the committee that a pay growth assumption of 3 per cent was factored into the Scottish budget for 2024-25 in December 2023 and was based on—I quote— “affordability”. The committee was extremely disappointed with that information. It was not shared with the Scottish Parliament or published more widely until the end of May 2024. The fact that it was the underlying assumption came out much later, and only under questioning from the committee.”
“I want to say a little more about public sector pay. According to the SFC, the total public sector pay bill in Scotland for 2023-24 was around £25 billion. That represents more than half of Government resource spending. The SFC also highlighted that the public sector in Scotland accounts for 22.5 per cent of total Scottish employment, compared with 17.6 per cent in the UK overall. That is a significant difference. It is therefore essential that there be transparency around pay assumptions and their wider impact on the Scottish budget. Despite a written agreement with the SFC, the Scottish Government failed to supply a public sector pay policy for 2023-24 and 2024-25. That left the SFC in the dark, guessing what the policy would be, with no steer from Government.”
“At that point, we could be in the third year of the three-year spending review and there would never be a process of real synchronicity in relation to how the budgets match up. We need to make sure that there is a structured response that gives the Parliament the information that it requires, and which the committee conveners are demanding. As our committee’s convener mentioned, a big part of our scrutiny this year focused on the social security and public sector pay budgets. We know that, with the increase in spending on social security, every pound that goes into that area is money that is not being spent on the core functions of the Scottish Government, whether it be our hospitals or education. As was highlighted by the Scottish Fiscal Commission, the increase in that area is a concern not just for our committee but for everyone.”
“I know that the cabinet secretary is positively effusive in her view that multiyear budgeting should be forthcoming, and the FPAC shares that view. We all hope that an end to the domestic political instability of recent years will help with that, although global economic instability is still challenging. That said, the key question is how the spending review will be treated, as a number of the conveners said. When the UK spending review is published, we will need to see a detailed approach as to how the Scottish Government is going to set that in train. Waiting until after the 2026 election to have a full response to that is, to be frank, not going to deal with the problem.”
“I am pleased to close the debate on behalf of the Finance and Public Administration Committee. I thank members for their contributions and I thank all the committees and the clerking staff for the work that they have done in the budget scrutiny process. I certainly enjoyed Mr Hoy’s speech. He compared the regular utterances of our committee to the word of God. I also concur with some of Mr Greer’s points. If we are not to continue to be the resounding gongs or clanging cymbals that are often ignored, we should perhaps find a slightly different format for imparting reports to Parliament. There was a common theme in the various conveners’ reports on their committees’ budget scrutiny. What came through most strongly was the desire for multiyear budgeting. It is not a new theme, but one that has been raised before.”
“I move amendment S6M-16237.3, to leave out from “calls” to end and insert: “understands that the additional investment in Scotland’s public services has been made possible by the UK Government’s Autumn Budget, which delivered record funding for the Scottish Government and provided an additional £5.2 billion; believes that the future of Scotland’s public services can only be guaranteed through measures to improve fiscal sustainability through public service reform and regrets the lack of progress being made by the Scottish Government in this area; recognises the role that workers in Scotland’s public sector play in delivering vital services and regrets that the workforce and public are being failed by years of Scottish National Party mismanagement, which has created major challenges across the public sector in Scotland and left one in six people in Scotland on NHS waiting lists, and calls for the Scottish Government to take meaningful action to reform public services so that they work for users and staff across Scotland.” 15:35”
“Given that it was negotiated by John Swinney, one would think that he would know that. Frankly, the proposal has no credibility whatsoever. The SNP is making it up as it goes along. This is a throwback to the First Minister’s time as finance secretary, when it was all short- term populism, slash-and-burn budgets and in- year emergency cuts when the cash ran out. Scotland needs a new direction. Unfortunately, with regard to the reform programme, the substance of the budget does not provide that new direction. Leadership has to be willing to admit when things are not working and to do the hard work of making our public services fit for the future.”
“Neil Gray: During the election campaign, we made it very clear that an incoming UK Government would face a major deficit in its books, which the Labour Party denied. We set out the approach that we have taken in Scotland, which has involved addressing income tax in a more progressive manner. That approach would not have attacked growth or jobs, so why did Labour box itself in and pursue a policy that has attacked our public services and jobs? Michael Marra: Perhaps the cabinet secretary missed the Fraser of Allander Institute’s analysis of that ludicrous wheeze just last week. According to it—not me—the First Minister’s proposal that income tax in the rest of the UK should be lifted in order to pay for services in Scotland would result in a £636 million cut to the Scottish budget. That is how the fiscal framework works.”
“The Government’s motion references the UK Government’s decision to increase employer national insurance contributions, and we have had a short exchange about that already. We all recognise the challenges that that presents for the private sector and the public sector across Scotland, but the additional money for Scotland from the UK budget is possible only because of the difficult decisions that have been taken by the UK Chancellor of the Exchequer. The SNP has opposed every revenue-raising measure that the UK Labour Government has introduced. At the same time, it has called for additional spending of a scarcely believable £70 billion. Where would that money come from? Neil Gray: Will the member give way? Michael Marra: If the cabinet secretary can answer that question this time, I will be glad to hear it.”
“John Swinney sat at the front of that—sidelining, I am afraid, the cabinet secretary—so he is obviously set to bring his anti-Midas touch to the health portfolio. Frankly, the population can only hope that the First Minister does not replicate his horrendous record in education in our crisis-hit NHS. It was John Swinney who downgraded the exam results of the poorest kids in Scotland. It was John Swinney’s incompetent flagship school reforms that crashed and burned, and what is left of them is now being undone by the current education secretary as a substitute for any real intent of her own. Is that the man who we seriously think will be able to fix Scotland’s NHS? No one is buying that. The people who created the problems will not be the ones to fix them.”
“As a result of the way in which the Liberal Democrats and the Greens approached the budget negotiations, there has been increased funding in their areas of priority, including health and social care and drug and alcohol services. What approach did Michael Marra take? What asks did he make? What precisely did he get out of the negotiations? Michael Marra: From the start, the Labour Party set out that we wanted a radical departure in relation to how public services are delivered in this country—a full programme of reform—but nothing was forthcoming. The cabinet secretary talked about the First Minister’s speech yesterday, which was a cobbled- together reannouncement of a series of policies that the SNP has completely failed to deliver.”
“The recent report from the Royal College of Nursing included harrowing testimony about patients being treated in corridors, cupboards and even car parks, and about staff caring for multiple patients in one corridor without access to essential equipment. Ninety per cent of nurses said that patient safety was being compromised. The report talked about a lack of privacy and dignity, with nurses being left to discuss miscarriages with couples in hospital corridors. Despite all that, the Government has no ambition to reform our NHS. If the cabinet secretary wants to say otherwise, I will be glad to hear from him. Neil Gray: Yesterday, we set out our plans for reforming and improving our health service, but I am interested in Labour’s approach to the budget negotiations.”
“My health board, NHS Tayside, missed seven of the nine key targets that the Auditor General outlined, including the four-hour target for waits in A and E departments, the 62-day cancer treatment target and the three-week target for drug and alcohol users—that is particularly damaging in a city such as Dundee, which is so impacted by drug and alcohol addiction. The Auditor General’s message was clear: “fundamental change in how NHS services are provided is now urgently needed.” There is nothing in the budget to bring that fundamental change to our NHS. Neil Gray: Will the member give way? Michael Marra: I will in one moment.”
“The Parliament’s Finance and Public Administration Committee has grown increasingly exasperated as the Scottish Government has remained impervious to its calls for true fundamental reform. The Government is sticking its head in the sand while the crisis in Scotland’s public services mounts. Nowhere is the need for reform clearer to see than in Scotland’s NHS, with one in six Scots on an NHS waiting list and hard-working staff pushed to breaking point. The Auditor General’s report “NHS in Scotland 2024: Finance and performance” could not be characterised as anything other than damning about the state of Scotland’s NHS under the SNP.”
“There is an additional £5.2 billion uplift for Scotland—that is the difference that a Labour Government, with Scottish Labour MPs, makes. Neil Gray: Will the member give way? Michael Marra: No, thank you. It is true that the spending choices in the budget are an improvement on those in the previous SNP budget. To be frank, the bar was extraordinarily low. The SNP is correcting some of the most egregious mistakes that it made in last year’s budget in particular. At a time of increased investment, this should have been a moment for a serious Government to seize the opportunity to reform services for the better, but the SNP has declined that opportunity yet again. In the past 15 months alone, Audit Scotland has published five different reports calling on the Scottish Government to prioritise public service reform.”
“The worst-kept secret in Scottish politics is officially out, and with the support of the Greens and the Liberal Democrats, the budget is certain to pass. This is two weeks on from Scottish Labour calling time on the increasingly hysterical talk from John Swinney about the rise of the far right, plagues of locusts and the end of civilisation. We all knew that a deal was done, and the Government has—at least in the past couple of weeks—been dragged back to the topic of collapsing public services. Scottish Labour has delivered a record increase in investment in Scotland’s public services, and that is possible only because the people of Scotland kicked out the Tories and elected Scottish Labour members of Parliament at the heart of a Labour Government.”