Craig Hoy
Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party · Scotland
“Given the fragility of bus services across Dumfriesshire, will the minister commit the cabinet secretary, who is overseas, to a meeting with me, so that I can reinforce the case for a station at Beattock, which is now increasingly vital?”
“Jenny Gilruth: Perhaps it was a bit too much to expect some positivity about these announcements from Mr Hoy. However, I hope that he recognises that the Government has significantly adapted our position on support for businesses in relation to some of the outputs that I have set out today.”
“If kicking the can down the road was a competitive sport, this Government would win gold every single time. Many Scottish businesses now continue to face some of the highest rates liabilities in the UK, and many have seen eye-watering increases as a result of the most recent revaluation.”
“I extend to Mr Hoy the same invitation that I extended to Mr Greer. If Mr Hoy wants to come forward with some more ambitious proposals ahead of the budget, my door is open— Craig Hoy: I am seeing you tomorrow. Jenny Gilruth: We will be meeting tomorrow—I look forward to that engagement.”
“I thank the minister for her invitation for us all to work together. I will meet the Deputy First Minister next week to that end. If the new, fiscally prudent, small-state Scottish Government can commit to reducing tax and cutting the benefits bill, we will have a fruitful relationship.”
“Let us hope that that sentiment remains as we progress through the months. We need to look more broadly at where Scotland has been and where it is going. Scotland is a country that has made reducing child poverty an absolute priority—that is one of its moonshots. With our 6 per cent lower figure, we are leading the UK.”
The complete record
Every one of 926 lines we hold for Craig Hoy, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 19 of 19.
“Scottish Financial Enterprise found that 80 per cent of financial services firms believe that tax divergence in Scotland is adversely affecting recruitment and retention, which, in turn, affects their ability to operate. We need to bear in mind that financial services is one of Scotland’s key sectors, employing approximately 9 per cent of our national workforce. Coupled with Labour’s disastrous decision to hammer businesses with crippling national insurance hikes, that tax divergence has made running a business in Scotland, whether it be large or small, increasingly difficult. Is it any real surprise, therefore, that talented entrepreneurs or members of the skilled workforce, for whom we compete on a regional, country-wide and global scale, are thinking twice about moving to Scotland? Surely that must make the SNP Government uneasy.”
“It is true that more people are coming to Scotland, but not at the same levels in percentage terms. As Jackson Carlaw identified, data shows that people on the highest incomes are simply not coming in the same numbers. In many respects, those who are moving here are often retired or working part time and looking towards retirement. The Government will play down the significance of that, but if high earners choose to work elsewhere, there is the potential for a significant skills gap to emerge in key sectors in Scotland—most notably in our national health service, where we are battling for global talent that often goes to the rest of the UK before it comes here. Businesses are also struggling in the high-tax environment that the SNP has inflicted on them.”
“They will also pay significantly more in land and buildings transaction tax if they choose to buy a mid-market home when they move to Scotland. Immigration and visa policies are set by the UK—and rightly so, I believe—but that does not mean that those systems should not be responsive to the needs of the whole of the UK. That is why we have seen certain schemes emerge, such as the seasonal agricultural workers scheme that addressed specific needs here in Scotland. However, the Scottish Government must learn to understand that if Scotland is to thrive it will require talented, hard-working migrants to want to come to this country and live and work here. The grain of public policy in Scotland is presently working against that. For the record, and as I said earlier, we have record net migration into the UK.”
“Yesterday, I spoke to a representative of the hospitality industry in Scotland. For six months, she has been seeking to recruit a senior food and beverage manager for her group. The salary for that post is £100,000 per year. She said that she could not attract the right talent here in Scotland, so she extended her search overseas. She flew to London, where she met a prospective candidate— an American—at Heathrow airport. She liked what she saw and she offered him the job, but he declined and took a similarly paid job in London. Scotland simply could not compete, she said, because tax was an issue. Why is that? It is because, this year, someone earning £100,000 will pay more than £3,300 more in tax than their equivalent south of the border.”
“I have a master’s degree in electromechanical engineering and worked here, as part of an engineering team, with people from Spain, China and France as well as Scotland, to deliver the world’s largest tidal turbine. People come to this country from all over the world to work in our exciting, growing industries. I do not recognise Mr Hoy’s comments at all. He cannot have been out in our growing and thriving industries—which are exciting places to be—or spoken to anyone who is part of the pool of global talent coming here. The Deputy Presiding Officer: Mr Hoy, I can give you time back. Craig Hoy: I welcome the coming of such talent both to the chamber and to Scotland. However, I point out that, on net migration, Scotland is lagging behind the rest of the UK. There are reasons for that, to which I will come in the course of my speech.”
“They notice that our economy lacks dynamism and that the country does not feel as though it is on the up, because one of the few things that is presently on the up here is tax. That is a bitter pill to swallow for people who already live in Scotland; it is also a difficult combination to sell to those who might choose to live and work here. The SNP’s financial recklessness and its poor management of public services, combined with the highest tax burden anywhere in the UK, make Scotland an unattractive place for global talent, which can move anywhere, and often does so rapidly. Lorna Slater: I speak as what we might call a person of global talent, who chose to move to Scotland.”
“This debate is another opportunity for the Scottish Government to concede what is now abundantly clear—that it has repeatedly failed Scottish businesses and hard-working people up and down the country, and that it has failed to make Scotland a globally recognised destination to attract inbound global talent. The SNP repeatedly spends vast amounts of money on pet projects, on pointless Government documents that nobody reads and on ferries that do not sail—certainly not with paying customers or toilets that flush. It is important for the Government to remember that that does not all happen under the radar. People notice its recklessness and financial incompetence. They notice, too, that our education system, NHS, housing, public spaces, policing and infrastructure have all got worse under the SNP Government.”
“I move, That the Parliament recognises the social, economic and cultural contribution made to Scotland by those who have chosen to live here; notes the establishment of Scotland’s Migration Service at a cost of up to £1.5 million in the draft Budget 2025-26 to help employers, investors and individuals navigate the UK immigration system; further notes that the Parliament has previously endorsed a motion calling for the development of a differentiated, more flexible migration policy tailored to meet Scotland’s specific needs, and calls on the UK Government to accept the Rural Visa Pilot proposal and to work directly and constructively with the Scottish Government to ensure that the needs of Scotland’s employers, communities and public services are fully reflected within the immigration system. 15:10”
“Through the establishment of Scotland’s migration service, this Government is supporting employers to navigate the immigration system, and we will continue to argue for changes to the immigration system to meet Scotland’s needs. The Scottish Parliament has previously supported motions that argued for an immigration system that focuses on the needs of Scotland’s economy, public services and communities. This is yet another opportunity for this Parliament to set out our priorities and our asks of the UK Government.”
“The Migration Advisory Committee reviewed our proposal for a rural visa pilot and described it as “sensible and clear in both scale and deliverability”, calling on the UK Government to “consider what action would be required to take a pilot from proposal stage to implementation.” There is no reason not to move ahead with that pilot. Migration to Scotland supports economic growth and the delivery of public services. It helps to address the serious issue of long-term demographic change and enhances and sustains our communities. All—I emphasise “all”—our future population growth is projected to come from migration, so any reduction in migration, whether from the rest of the UK or internationally, will impact on the size of our working-age population. A UK immigration system that does not meet the needs of Scotland is not fit for purpose.”
“That is the spirit in which the debate has been brought to the Parliament. There is clear evidence of the need for a tailored migration route for Scotland. The current immigration system does not meet the needs of communities across Scotland, particularly our rural communities. That is not only the Scottish Government’s assessment but that of the UK Government’s Migration Advisory Committee, which accepted that “the current migration system is not very effective in dealing with the particular problems remote communities experience.” The solution that the Migration Advisory Committee proposed, which the then Home Secretary accepted, was a pilot scheme to facilitate migration to rural areas. We have developed detailed deliverable proposals for tailored migration routes: a Scottish visa and a rural visa pilot.”
“One of those distinct needs is to get skilled workers into rural areas. What does the minister say to the fact that the £25 million key workers fund for rural areas has managed to find only 17 homes in two years? That is clearly not the kind of action that is required to ensure that we get the right skills in the right places, particularly our rural areas. Tom Arthur: Craig Hoy will recognise that a number of initiatives are being taken and that certain schemes will be demand led. However, the Government has a demonstrable commitment to address some of those challenges using the powers of devolution. I invite members to guard against any single-action bias and the presumption that one intervention is the answer. We need a multifaceted approach to ensure that all parts of Scotland are capable of attracting and sustaining populations.”
“The Presiding Officer: That concludes general questions. Before we move to First Minister’s questions, I invite members to join me in welcoming to the gallery the Hon Om Birla, Speaker of the Lok Sabha, Parliament of India. [Applause.] First Minister’s Question Time 12:00 Budget 2025-26 1.”
“I will do something rare and agree with Kevin Stewart in his condemnation of Labour’s broken-promises tax on jobs. However, as negotiations continue with the Treasury on compensation for national insurance liabilities, will the minister commit to ensuring that, whatever deal is reached with the Treasury, a full, fair and proportionate amount is passed on to Scottish local councils and that they are not short- changed by the Scottish National Party Government all over again? Ivan McKee: The member recognises that there is a gap of around £400 million. If and when we receive full payment from the UK Government, the local government allocation will form part of that and we will work with COSLA to ensure that, should the full £700 million be allocated to the Scottish Government, local authorities will receive their necessary share.”
“That is why we need common sense for a change, not another nebulous, badly designed tick-box exercise that would do little to drive the meaningful improvements that our public services in Scotland badly need, if the SNP is truly to deliver hope to the nation. The Deputy Presiding Officer: Daniel Johnson will open on behalf of Scottish Labour, with a generous five minutes. 16:05”
“Craig Hoy: For example, in relation to energy supply, I would not be against future use of coal- fired power stations from the next generation, but I would support the next generation of nuclear, because that is a clean, safe and efficient way to deliver Scotland’s power now and into the future. I extend an invitation to the cabinet secretary—if she wants to break out beyond the Holyrood bubble, she is welcome to join us in the Tweeddale Arms in Gifford, where she could have a soft drink; I might have a pint. She would hear some frank assessments of the Government’s performance, and I am sure that the cost of a pint would be far cheaper than running the whole enterprise of the national performance framework. The national outcomes are not even a blunt instrument—they appear to be the wrong instrument entirely in many respects.”
“Kate Forbes: I can suggest some good books and conversation starters that might help the member the next time he is in the pub. The national performance framework is aligned with the UN sustainable goals, which I imagine that the Conservatives are behind—Mr Hoy can confirm whether that is the case. How do the Conservatives see the process of navigating a route through choices in situations in which UN sustainable goals conflict with one another? Mr Hoy talked about GDP growth, of which I, too, am an advocate. Clearly, however, there cannot be growth at any and all expense. How does he weigh those things up in his political choices?”
“That clearly calls for reform of the national performance indicators, if they are meant to be driving improvements. As the committee suggests, a proper audit of the policy process means that the framework should have greater prominence in headline announcements, such as the programme for government. It is currently not a practical tool for decision making. If the Government really wants to hold itself to account, it should use the outcomes more effectively. The cabinet secretary might not be shocked to hear that, when I raised the national performance framework in my local pub at the weekend, not one person I asked was aware of it. I encourage her to break out beyond the Holyrood bubble. Kate Forbes: Will the member take an intervention? Craig Hoy: I will take an intervention, and then I will make an invitation to the cabinet secretary.”
“That is why we set out crystal-clear plans for cutting tax and boosting our economy. We did that because the SNP is not focused on those commonsense priorities—for the avoidance of doubt, I say that we are. The Finance and Public Administration Committee report mentions another discrepancy. It says that the Scottish Government wants to eradicate poverty, yet the national performance framework mentions only reducing it. What is the Government’s goal—reducing it or eradicating it? Either way, it is failing, because the dial is not moving. Less than half the Scottish Government’s key performance indicators are improving, and the rest are either stagnant or getting worse. Those statistics point to a Government that is neither in control nor in command.”
“Daniel Johnson: Will the member take an intervention? Craig Hoy: I am sorry; I do not have time. Daniel Johnson: It might help. Craig Hoy: I will take a helpful intervention. The Deputy Presiding Officer: I say to members that there is quite a bit of time in hand. Daniel Johnson: Does Craig Hoy agree that, although it might not be possible to compete with London, it is possible to compete with Manchester, whose growth in terms of GDP per head is around twice that of Scotland? Craig Hoy: I thank Daniel Johnson for being helpful—it is good to see that he is helpful to the Conservatives as well as the SNP these days. Daniel Johnson: I am even-handed. Craig Hoy: I accept that the UK economy has been too sluggish in recent years, but the Scottish Conservatives are now the only party in the chamber that is committed to economic growth.”
“If the Scottish economy had grown at the same rate as that of the rest of the United Kingdom, it would be £10.7 billion larger, and the Scottish Government would have had £600 million extra in revenues to spend on services or to support business to drive growth. The UK economy has been too sluggish in recent years, but to underperform a sluggish economy is surely worse still. John Mason: We have been over this point previously, but does the member accept that it is hard for Scotland to compete with London and the south-east, whereas we can compete with other parts of England? Craig Hoy: I concede that it is presently hard to do so, but we could start to compete if we made ourselves competitive. That is why the Scottish Conservatives argued to lower tax in Scotland, so that we would have a competitive advantage over south-east England.”
“An economy without growth may be many things, but it cannot be a well economy, let alone a wellbeing one. That is the greatest and most damaging shortcoming among the Government’s many shortcomings, which are obviously included in the framework. It talks of growth, yet does little, if anything, to deliver it. How can growth be deemed a priority for our nation if it is absent from the nation’s framework? That point is noted in the report, which states that the public responses were critical of the Government’s “omission of explicit references to economic growth.” This Government, in recent years aided and abetted by its colleagues in the Greens, pays only lip service to growth. The First Minister today appeared on radio repeating the mantra but offering little in the way of an economically credible or recognisable strategy to achieve it.”
“There are too many strategies, too many working groups, too many action groups, too many steering groups, too many frameworks and simply not enough delivery. The Finance and Public Administration Committee’s report exposes a disconnect between the Scottish Government’s rhetoric and the reality on the ground across the public sector in Scotland. It refers to a lack of coherence between the national performance framework’s outcomes and the Scottish Government’s stated outcomes, including those of the First Minister. The First Minister said this week that his focus was on economic growth, which is a prerequisite to delivering on his long-overdue priority of eradicating child poverty. Why, then, do the performance indicators measure only the wellbeing economy—whatever that is—and not real-terms growth in Scotland’s gross domestic product?”
“Three out of eight critical indicators—in fair work, business and health—are worsening. None of the indicators in poverty, culture or health show any improvement at all, while four out of nine indicators in education, which was Nicola Sturgeon’s overriding mission, have no data available whatsoever. Rightly, the committee report describes that as unacceptable. How on earth can progress be measured if there is no data against which to measure it? This week, the First Minister said that he hoped to give hope to the nation, and I hope that he can finally do so, because, at present, far too many Scots are despairing of the Scottish National Party’s record in office. It is a record of broken promises, profligate spending and a lack of focus on actual and material outcomes. Targets have been set; targets have been missed.”
“I thank the convener of the Finance and Public Administration Committee for securing the motion for considered debate in the chamber, and I thank committee conveners for their contributions so far. I say for clarity that, although I was involved in reviewing the final report, I was not a member of the Finance and Public Administration Committee during the evidence-gathering process or the drafting of the report. However, I fully support the report’s sentiments and conclusions, because it sheds yet more light on the performance and operation of the Scottish Government. The Government has been in office for 18 years. The national performance framework is meant to tell us “what good looks like”, yet only 61 of the 81 indicators are measurable, and 11 of those show that there has been a deterioration in performance.”
“To ask the Scottish Government whether it has been made aware of the identity of the police officers investigating operation branchform, and, if so, when. (S6O-04162)”