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 8 of 19.
“I am very clear that the handling of certain matters during the financial year 2023-24—especially matters that were concealed from the board and from ministers—did not meet the standards that are expected of a publicly funded body. When they were uncovered, the board alerted ministers and Audit Scotland and took appropriate steps to address them, including through the removal of the former chief executive. The improvements that are now embedded across leadership, assurance, financial controls and governance represent a meaningful shift in capability and discipline at the yard.”
“Four new non-executive directors with strong commercial and shipbuilding expertise have been appointed, and the board will continue to review its governance arrangements over the next 12 months to ensure that they remain robust. Internal audit capability has also improved substantially. External expertise from BDO Global has enabled Ferguson Marine to address all high- risk and most medium-risk audit recommendations, with strengthened reporting to the audit and risk committee and improved corporate and project risk registers. Nevertheless, I recognise the Public Audit Committee’s concerns regarding earlier governance failings.”
“I will always apologise to our islanders, many of whom are my constituents, for the disruptions that they have faced in the ferry network as a result of delays at the yard. With our support, the board of Ferguson Marine has, over the past year, taken sustained action to recruit fresh leadership, strengthen governance standards and improve oversight. A new chief executive, Graeme Thomson, who brings extensive shipbuilding and engineering experience, was appointed in May. He is tasked with driving completion of the MV Glen Rosa and developing a long-term commercial strategy for the yard. Board governance has been strengthened, too. The Ferguson Marine board has introduced clearer segregation of duties and more structured agenda planning, and it has enhanced its programme of board and committee meetings.”
“Will the Deputy First Minister give way? Kate Forbes: I ask Craig Hoy to allow me to make a bit more progress, and then I will be more than happy to take his intervention. We want Ferguson Marine to be capable of supporting Scotland’s long-term maritime and economic interests. We also recognise the frustrations that are felt by Parliament, which the two previous speakers expressed, as well as those that are felt by island communities and, indeed, by the workforce due to the delays and cost pressures in the MV Glen Sannox and MV Glen Rosa projects. The delivery challenges and governance issues at Ferguson’s have been significant, and it is right that we address them openly.”
“To ask the Scottish Government what discussions it has had with Police Scotland regarding the illegal use of adapted e-bikes and e-scooters. (S6O-05240)”
“The Children and Young People (Scotland) Act 2014, the named persons scheme, the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (Incorporation) (Scotland) Bill, the Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill and the European Charter of Local Self-Government (Incorporation) (Scotland) Bill were challenged in the Supreme Court, and the proposed independence referendum bill was ruled outwith the devolved competence by the Supreme Court, even though the Presiding Officer deemed it possible to bring that bill before the Scottish Parliament. What we are being asked to vote for today is bad legislation. It is rushed legislation. It is legislation that could well be challenged in the courts, with all the costs and the uncertainty that that would cause. I note that the minister did not support Jeremy Balfour’s amendment 1.”
“Given some of the answers that the Government has provided, including in some of the briefings, I think that there is now a higher chance of legal challenge. Those who believe that they have been wrongly paying the tax will drag the Government to the courts, and I simply do not blame them. We have to reflect on the Government’s track record of defending its legislation in court, from Nicola Sturgeon’s proposed independence referendum bill to the bill on gender self- identification. Those examples do not inspire confidence. Let us look at the list briefly.”
“In rejecting those amendments, ministers have shown their usual contempt for openness and accountability. However, my single biggest concern is one that was eloquently put by Murdo Fraser yesterday: it is the likelihood of the bill ending up in the courts. When the Government votes to pass the bill in a few moments, ministers will not be able to say that they were not warned of the risks of a legal challenge. The Scottish National Party Government has not provided us with evidence this week that the emergency bill will work and that it cannot be challenged in the courts. Already, constituents have told me that they are in discussion with lawyers or with the Scottish Property Federation to see whether a case can be brought against the bill.”
“I think that I will take up Mr Leonard’s request to issue a press release or two off the back of this, and we will be asking tough questions that ministers clearly do not want to answer in this chamber or elsewhere. For example, despite the Government being made aware of this enormous error in June, we are led to believe by the minister that he only found out yesterday that the case was active in June. I simply cannot believe that the Government’s decision-making matrix would allow something as potentially significant as this situation to have continued for nearly six months. Today, ministers rejected a number of amendments that were designed to be helpful— they would have helped the minister out of a hole by allowing greater transparency about what went wrong.”
“If ministers are confident that they can apply the tax retrospectively and that it will be legal and not subject to challenge, they could have taken longer to frame the bill in public, get it right, consult and work on a cross-party basis to take evidence and listen to the received responses. The Government could have taken the time to ensure that no further issues could arise, such as some of the unintended consequences that we have seen since the tax was applied to empty properties. The manner in which the minister has managed it leaves a lot to be desired. We have to be concerned about the Government’s attempts to shut down scrutiny. That will not work.”
“The bill will pass, but it will not pass with our support. In all likelihood, this rushed legislation will not fundamentally fix the problem that the Government has created. The disastrous drafting blunder in the Scottish National Party’s original legislation could still leave the Scottish Government and Scottish taxpayers picking up a compensation tab of anything up to £400 million. That is a risk of losing £400 million, which is not a molehill, as Mr Mason implied in an intervention during stage 2. That loss would be a scandal, and I agree very much with the points made by Stephen Kerr in respect of that. The bill has gone through a rushed process and is trying to fix a problem that arose because ministers did not do their job properly the first time round.”
“Martin Whitfield: If a proper assurance is given, would it not be more reasonable to rely on that assurance, given that, if it appears in the bill and the bill falls in the future, as you suggest it might, there will be no assurance? Craig Hoy: I suspect that the bill will pass. We do not want it to pass, but I suspect that it will. Perhaps we will have the double guarantee of the minister’s word and the guarantee being in the bill. We will be supporting Mr Balfour this evening.”
“I offer Mr Balfour the support of the Scottish Conservatives. We also asked the minister that question yesterday. I implore Mr Balfour to press his amendment. I am not casting any aspersions on the minister, but I think that getting the provision in the bill, rather than having an assurance in the Official Report, would probably be the soundest way to guarantee that councils are not out of pocket. We do not know where the bill will end up regarding court action, and it is, as Mr Griffin said, very likely that, if there is one single case against the Scottish Government, there could be consequential action against councils. That could be very costly, and it would be good to make sure that the assurance is in the bill.”
“To ask the Scottish Government what its position is on any potential negative impacts for local communities when asylum seekers are housed in large-scale sites in Scotland. (S6O-05220)”
“This group of amendments explores the issues of transparency and accountability—two issues that I do not think the Government is taking sufficiently seriously in the way in which it is approaching this bill and in the journey that we have been on to get to this point. My Scottish Conservative colleagues and I have been clear that we are deeply concerned by the bill and the extraordinary circumstances surrounding it. If the Parliament is to pass the bill, we must ensure that such a failure can never happen again. My amendment 7 would require the Scottish ministers to notify the Parliament within 21 days of a defect being identified in legislation on non- domestic rates for unoccupied properties. As we know, officials and ministers have been aware of this error for many months, but the Parliament was not told until this week.”
“I would have thought that those assessments from credit rating agencies—those independent voices that comment on economies around the world—would be of some solace and comfort to Mr Hoy and give him something to be cheerful about. Given that we have such strong financial planning, even Mr Hoy should be satisfied with our performance.”
“Rachel Reeves yesterday made the same mistake as John Swinney, with a “Benefits Street” budget that increased tax on workers, pensioners and savers. The Scottish benefits bill is set to soar to close to £10 billion by the end of this decade. How does John Swinney intend to pay for that? The First Minister: The Scottish Government will set out its budget in January, which will, of course, following the pattern of all the budgets that we have set out, be a balanced budget. Because of all the years of balanced budgets under the Scottish National Party Government since 2007, Moody’s is able to say that Scotland benefits from “prudent financial management”, and Standard & Poor’s is able to say that Scotland benefits from “prudent financial planning”.”
“Will the minister also confirm on the record that it is the Government, and not councils, that will be on the hook for the potential cost of £400 million and all other associated costs? The £400 million in non-domestic rates has been levied on property owners without any legal basis. Although we do not want to delve too deeply into the impact of the original legislation since it was introduced because, at the behest of ministers, the debate and the process will be too short for us to do so, it is worth putting it on the record that the £400 million that has been levied illegally in rates since then has done real and lasting damage to the commercial property market in Scotland, and therefore to towns, jobs and industry.”
“I heard what the Deputy Presiding Officer said to Mr Fraser about the legal competence of the bill, but, as the formal response from the Presiding Officer to Mr Fraser makes clear, whether a provision of a bill is within the Parliament’s legislative competence can only definitively be determined by a court. Will the minister produce the legal advice— whether now or during the debate? I know that the Government would not routinely do that, but will the minister do so in order to confirm beyond reasonable doubt that these are exceptional circumstances? If he cannot do so, he should be very worried, because property developers are already in discussion with lawyers and are murmuring the words “unjustified enrichment”.”
“The Scottish Conservatives have very real concerns about the emergency bill—concerns about how we got here, the legality of the measures and that, today, two days into our knowing about the situation, the Scottish Government’s story is already changing. Will the Government be sure- footed in the answers that it gives moving forward? We do not have confidence that it has been on top of the issue to date. Ministers are saying today that they have confidence that the tax can be levied retrospectively. However, thanks to Mr Fraser, we all know that the law states quite clearly that retrospective taxes can apply only in exceptional circumstances.”
“Initial concerns were notified to ministers on 21 August, and that concern, following further investigation and legal advice, was confirmed to ministers on 19”
“Although section 19(2) of the 2020 act repealed section 24 of the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1966, which stated that no rates were payable for unoccupied non- domestic property, the effect of section 16(1) of the Valuation and Rating (Scotland) Act 1956, which sets out that rates shall by payable by occupiers only, was regrettably not taken into account. In the interest of transparency, I can inform members that a routine inquiry about the basis for rates to be charged to the owner of unoccupied properties was received from a council by Scottish Government officials on 23 June. There was no indication at that time of the implications of the query and it was treated as routine. In investigating the issue, it became apparent to Scottish Government officials that there might have been an error in the 2020 legislation.”
“Empty property relief was devolved on 1 April 2023 and local authorities were given £105 million of additional revenue funding each year, equal to the forecast cost of that relief before it was devolved. Councils, which are accountable to their local electorate, have full flexibility over how they deploy those extra resources locally. However, a technical error in the Non-Domestic Rates (Scotland) Act 2020 was recently identified that means that the amendments did not have the intended legal effect.”
“Will the minister give way? Ivan McKee: I will make a wee bit more progress, before perhaps giving way to the member later. As members know, the Scottish Parliament voted in 2020 to devolve empty property relief to local authorities in order to provide greater local fiscal empowerment for councils by letting them, rather than Scottish Government, decide whether to offer any rates discounts to the owners of unoccupied properties. To do that, a Government amendment at stage 2 of the Non-Domestic Rates (Scotland) Bill in 2019, approved on a cross-party basis at committee, repealed legislation from 1966 that provided that no rates were payable on unoccupied properties, and also repealed a power that allowed ministers to prescribe by regulation classes of unoccupied property for which such rates were payable.”
“Today, the chickens came home to roost for the Chancellor of the Exchequer. In what has been described as “shambolic” and “a fiscal fandango”, Rachel Reeves has systematically and recklessly talked down the economy. She has flown kites and then shot them down. She has repeatedly leaked tax and spending proposals. She has performed U- turn after U-turn and then sought to blame others for the breaches that have sown much doubt and distrust. It has been a bizarre strategy: a nihilistic form of expectation mismanagement, which has taken a wrecking ball to the United Kingdom economy.”
“It is easy to forget that it is only a few years since the Scottish Parliament had complete consensus in recognising the reality of the climate emergency. The public still want climate action, and growing Green parties in all the nations of the UK will continue to call out those who back the multinationals. We will stand up to the fossil fuel profiteers, and we will show that a fairer, greener and more equal society is the only viable path ahead of us. 15:15”
“That is why the Scottish Government thinks that it is fine to scrap road traffic reduction targets, scrap any halfway-serious action on clean heating, reject the UK Climate Change Committee’s advice on agriculture, and demand a massive tax break for the fossil fuel giants that have brought the world to a state of climate emergency. Clearly, it is also why the UK Government thinks that it is fine to betray the trust of those who thought that the Labour manifesto commitment on oil and gas meant something. I was always sceptical, but I know that there were those who thought that “no new licences” was a pledge worth having. Now it is clear that the UK Government will always put the interests of the fossil fuel giants first, and it does not care much for the last shreds of climate credibility that it once had.”
“Will Mr Harvie take an intervention? Patrick Harvie: No. I do not have time. My real worry at the moment is that the Tory and Labour position—the new antagonism to any kind of credible climate policy—not only is bad in its own right and harmful in indulging the interests of the fossil fuel industry and rebooting climate denial, but is worse because of the effect that it is having on both the Labour and SNP Governments. They are clearly reaching the conclusion that they can persuade people to compare them to those who are looking to rip up climate legislation instead of being judged against what the science demands. In reaching that conclusion, they have clearly decided that they can get away with doing the absolute minimum on climate policy or even going into reverse.”
“Motion agreed to, That the Parliament agrees to the following revisions to the programme of business for— (a) Wednesday 26 November 2025— after followed by Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party Debate: Growing Scotland’s Economy insert followed by Stage 1 Debate: Non-Domestic Rates (Liability for Unoccupied Properties) (Scotland) Bill followed by Financial Resolution: Non-Domestic Rates (Liability for Unoccupied Properties) (Scotland) Bill delete 5.10 pm Decision Time and insert 6.10 pm Decision Time (b) Thursday 27 November 2025— delete 2.15 pm Parliamentary Bureau Motions 2.15 pm Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body Questions followed by Portfolio Questions: Social Justice and Housing followed by Scottish Government Business and insert 2.00 pm Parliamentary Bureau Motions 2.00 pm Committee of the Whole Parliament: Stage 2 Proceedings: Non-Domestic Rates (Liability for Unoccupied Properties) (Scotland) Bill followed by Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body Questions followed by Portfolio Questions: Social Justice and Housing followed by Stage 3 Proceedings: Non-Domestic Rates (Liability for Unoccupied Properties) (Scotland) Bill delete 5.00 pm Decision Time and insert 7.00 pm Decision Time Decision Time 17:22”
“On a point of order, Presiding Officer. My app would not connect. I would have voted no. The Presiding Officer: Thank you, Mr Hoy. We will ensure that that is recorded. For Adam, George (Paisley) (SNP) Adam, Karen (Banffshire and Buchan Coast) (SNP) Adamson, Clare (Motherwell and Wishaw) (SNP) Allan, Alasdair (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (SNP) Arthur, Tom (Renfrewshire South) (SNP) Baillie, Jackie (Dumbarton) (Lab) Baker, Claire (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab) Beattie, Colin (Midlothian North and Musselburgh) (SNP) Bibby, Neil (West Scotland) (Lab) Boyack, Sarah (Lothian) (Lab) Brown, Keith (Clackmannanshire and Dunblane) (SNP) Brown, Siobhian (Ayr) (SNP) Burgess, Ariane (Highlands and Islands) (Green) Callaghan, Stephanie (Uddingston and Bellshill) (SNP) Chapman, Maggie (North East Scotland) (Green) Choudhury, Foysol (Lothian) (Ind) Clark, Katy (West Scotland) (Lab) Coffey, Willie (Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley) (SNP) Cole-Hamilton, Alex (Edinburgh Western) (LD) Constance, Angela (Almond Valley) (SNP) Dey, Graeme (Angus South) (SNP) Don-Innes, Natalie (Renfrewshire North and West) (SNP) Doris, Bob (Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn) (SNP) Dornan, James (Glasgow Cathcart) (SNP) Dunbar, Jackie (Aberdeen Donside) (SNP) Duncan-Glancy, Pam (Glasgow) (Lab) Ewing, Annabelle (Cowdenbeath) (SNP) Fairlie, Jim (Perthshire South and Kinross-shire) (SNP) FitzPatrick, Joe (Dundee City West) (SNP) Gibson, Kenneth (Cunninghame North) (SNP) Gilruth, Jenny (Mid Fife and Glenrothes) (SNP) Gougeon, Mairi (Angus North and Mearns) (SNP) Grahame, Christine (Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale) (SNP) Grant, Rhoda (Highlands and Islands) (Lab) Gray, Neil (Airdrie and Shotts) (SNP) Greer, Ross (West Scotland) (Green) Griffin, Mark (Central Scotland) (Lab) Harper, Emma (South Scotland) (SNP) Harvie, Patrick (Glasgow) (Green) Haughey, Clare (Rutherglen) (SNP) Hepburn, Jamie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (SNP) Hyslop, Fiona (Linlithgow) (SNP) Johnson, Daniel (Edinburgh Southern) (Lab) Kidd, Bill (Glasgow Anniesland) (SNP) Lennon, Monica (Central Scotland) (Lab) Leonard, Richard (Central Scotland) (Lab) Lochhead, Richard (Moray) (SNP) MacDonald, Gordon (Edinburgh Pentlands) (SNP) MacGregor, Fulton (Coatbridge and Chryston) (SNP) Mackay, Gillian (Central Scotland) (Green) [Proxy vote cast by Ross Greer] Mackay, Rona (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (SNP) Macpherson, Ben (Edinburgh Northern and Leith) (SNP) Maguire, Ruth (Cunninghame South) (SNP) Marra, Michael (North East Scotland) (Lab) Martin, Gillian (Aberdeenshire East) (SNP) Mason, John (Glasgow Shettleston) (Ind) Matheson, Michael (Falkirk West) (SNP) McAllan, Màiri (Clydesdale) (SNP) McArthur, Liam (Orkney Islands) (LD) McKee, Ivan (Glasgow Provan) (SNP) McLennan, Paul (East Lothian) (SNP) McMillan, Stuart (Greenock and Inverclyde) (SNP) McNair, Marie (Clydebank and Milngavie) (SNP) McNeill, Pauline (Glasgow) (Lab) Minto, Jenni (Argyll and Bute) (SNP) Mochan, Carol (South Scotland) (Lab) Nicoll, Audrey (Aberdeen South and North Kincardine) (SNP) O’Kane, Paul (West Scotland) (Lab) [Proxy vote cast by Michael Marra] Robertson, Angus (Edinburgh Central) (SNP) Robison, Shona (Dundee City East) (SNP) Russell, Davy (Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse) (Lab) Simpson, Graham (Central Scotland) (Reform) Slater, Lorna (Lothian) (Green) Somerville, Shirley-Anne (Dunfermline) (SNP) Stevenson, Collette (East Kilbride) (SNP) [Proxy vote cast by Fulton MacGregor] Stewart, Kaukab (Glasgow Kelvin) (SNP) Stewart, Kevin (Aberdeen Central) (SNP) Sturgeon, Nicola (Glasgow Southside) (SNP) Sweeney, Paul (Glasgow) (Lab) Swinney, John (Perthshire North) (SNP) Thomson, Michelle (Falkirk East) (SNP) Todd, Maree (Caithness, Sutherland and Ross) (SNP) Torrance, David (Kirkcaldy) (SNP) Tweed, Evelyn (Stirling) (SNP) Villalba, Mercedes (North East Scotland) (Lab) Whitfield, Martin (South Scotland) (Lab) Whitham, Elena (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley) (SNP) Wishart, Beatrice (Shetland Islands) (LD) Yousaf, Humza (Glasgow Pollok) (SNP) Against Briggs, Miles (Lothian) (Con) Burnett, Alexander (Aberdeenshire West) (Con) Carlaw, Jackson (Eastwood) (Con) Carson, Finlay (Galloway and West Dumfries) (Con) Dowey, Sharon (South Scotland) (Con) Eagle, Tim (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Ewing, Fergus (Inverness and Nairn) (Ind) Findlay, Russell (West Scotland) (Con) Fraser, Murdo (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Gallacher, Meghan (Central Scotland) (Con) Golden, Maurice (North East Scotland) (Con) Gosal, Pam (West Scotland) (Con) Gulhane, Sandesh (Glasgow) (Con) Hamilton, Rachael (Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (Con) Hoy, Craig (South Scotland) (Con) Halcro Johnston, Jamie (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Kerr, Liam (North East Scotland) (Con) Kerr, Stephen (Central Scotland) (Con) McCall, Roz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Mountain, Edward (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Ross, Douglas (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Smith, Liz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Stewart, Alexander (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Webber, Sue (Lothian) (Con) Wells, Annie (Glasgow) (Con) Whittle, Brian (South Scotland) (Con) Abstentions Balfour, Jeremy (Lothian) (Ind) The Presiding Officer: The result of the division is: For 89, Against 26, Abstentions 1.”
“On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I would have voted no; I thought that my app had frozen but it is now reflecting my intention to vote no. The Presiding Officer: I can confirm that your vote has been recorded,”
“What ministers did not realise at the time—despite the ever-increasing numbers of civil servants and the army of bureaucrats that support them—was that the legislation was incompetently drafted. It was deficient, like much of what this Government does.”
“However, it turns out that the legislation was even more shoddy than the SNP minister who introduced the bill at the time. That minister was the disgraced Derek Mackay, the same minister who botched the award of the contract for the two ferries. The bill then fell to Kate Forbes, who completed it in its final stages after Mr Mackay left the Government. The bill was meant to allow SNP ministers to levy business rates on companies that owned unoccupied properties, even if there was a legitimate reason for the property lying empty, such as the building not being fit for purpose or, as is increasingly the case in areas such as Aberdeen, because the loss of jobs in sectors such as oil and gas means that nobody is left to fill the offices and the firms are falling into administration.”
“The Government is asking us to set aside concerns about transparency, legitimacy and competence, and we should not be prepared to do so when such a significant sum of public money is in play. I have been an MSP for just over four years, but I have been a political journalist since 1996. I have seen my fair share of Scottish National Party incompetence, but this latest fiasco possibly tops it all. Let us explain to the paying public exactly what nationalist ministers are asking us to rush through today under this emergency procedure. In 2020, the SNP Government, backed by the Labour Party, passed legislation to reform business rates. At the time, we said that it would lead to an increased tax burden for businesses, and we were right.”
“I move, That the Parliament agrees that the Non-Domestic Rates (Liability for Unoccupied Properties) (Scotland) Bill be treated as an Emergency Bill. 16:36”
“The sums at stake would fall to the Scottish Government and would be estimated at more than £100 million a year if local authorities decided that they had to repay the rates collected on those properties and cease future collection. There will be no change to rates bills as a result of this legislation, and if the bill passes, it will not introduce any additional new costs to businesses or individuals compared with the Scottish Parliament’s original intended policy. I therefore seek the chamber’s support today for the bill to be taken as an emergency piece of primary legislation that is subject to that support. Stage 1 would take place tomorrow afternoon, and stages 2 and 3 would take place on Thursday afternoon.”
“Without this bill, local authorities might decide that the rates that have been paid by owners of unoccupied properties since 1 April 2023 need to be refunded and that rates can no longer be collected on unoccupied properties in future. The bill seeks to protect revenue that is already collected in line with the Scottish Parliament vote and in subsequent budget bills. If the bill is not passed, those who paid rates on unoccupied properties will likely receive an unexpected and unjustified refund of rates paid since 1 April 2023. That could require cuts to public spending and a significant future rates increase to make up for that loss.”
“Will the minister give way? Graeme Dey: I will give way one final time, to Mr Simpson—my apologies, Mr Hoy. Graham Simpson: Can the minister say who raised the query with the Scottish Government? Graeme Dey: I am not in possession of the exact detail. What I can say is that a local authority raised the query with the Scottish Government. That is the detail that I can offer the member at the moment. I hope that that is of some help to him. The process that we are following will ensure that there is a clear and certain legal basis for local authorities to collect non-domestic rates from the owners of unoccupied properties. It will bring the statute book into line with the position as understood by local authorities and ratepayers, as applied by local authorities and as voted on by the Parliament in 2019.”
“The Deputy Presiding Officer: I see that Ms Grahame is still not ready, so I call Rhoda Grant. 18:00”
“Rural health services and rural councils must be properly funded—with a fair funding formula, not the pork-barrel politics of John Swinney’s SNP. Roads such as the A75 and the A76 need urgent action. The state of disrepair on rural roads has reached crisis levels on the SNP’s watch. My constituents—often elderly ones—are sick and tired of the SNP Government ignoring rural parts of the south of Scotland. They are sick and tired of seeing their services suffer while the SNP pump primes the areas of Scotland where it is buying votes to deliver on its only priority. That kind of SNP pork-barrel politics has to end because, under John Swinney, it is independence at the expense of all else, particularly the rural residents and communities that I represent.”
“Music tuition is at risk in Dumfriesshire schools, which means that only the privileged few whose parents can afford to pay a private tutor will be able to learn a musical instrument. There have been proposed closures of leisure centres, including Hillview leisure centre in Kelloholm, which will strike another blow to rural residents. It will mean the loss of a space where people can play sports, go to the gym and have community and social gatherings. That is a clear loss to a rural community, and it has been brought about by SNP neglect. Today, I say to the SNP that enough is enough—it must call a halt to the chronic underfunding of rural public services, and it must stop diverting money elsewhere. The political motivation at the heart of Scotland’s resource allocation has to be brought to an end.”
“Rural primary schools have been systematically underfunded, with the closure of some village schools, the loss of headteachers, who have been replaced by pool teachers, and the removal of additional support needs provision entirely from rural schools, which has forced children into larger town-based settings. That includes children in a village who have had to move schools less than three years after their own school was closed. There is systematic defunding of core services. This year, Dumfries and Galloway’s SNP council is being forced, by the SNP Government, to consider removing funding entirely from the citizens advice bureaux network. That £1 million saving could result in the loss of £15 million in social and economic benefits that are delivered by the services that the citizens advice bureaux provide. The cuts do not end there.”
“As has been made clear, NHS Dumfries and Galloway is currently trying to find £58 million in savings, otherwise it will be cutting front-line services. I say to the minister that there is no clearer case of the SNP’s neglect of rural areas than the challenges that Dumfries and Galloway Council currently faces. However, the chickens have come home to roost, for the council is now run by a minority SNP administration, which is having to clear up the mess that was created by SNP central Government. That is the reality on the ground. Rural bus funding has been systematically cut, and the SNP council leader is now begging ministers for additional cash as lifeline supported services face the axe.”
“I thank Finlay Carson for bringing this important debate to the chamber. Today, we are talking about one overarching issue: the SNP’s neglect of rural Scotland. It is a neglect that is based not on geography, history or economics but on one thing only: constitutional politics. For years, the SNP has systematically and cynically neglected the rural parts of Scotland that do not support independence. Areas such as Dumfries and Galloway, the Scottish Borders and Aberdeenshire have been forgotten about by a Government that values independence-supporting central belt areas and communities more than it values the communities that I represent. The numbers speak for themselves. In March, Dumfries and Galloway councillors were forced to find £30 million in savings over three years, blaming what they described as an “unprecedented funding gap”.”
“I think that it would make a real difference if the minister could take forward that solution. The Deputy Presiding Officer: I am not getting an indication from Ms Grahame that she is ready just yet, so I will call Craig Hoy and possibly come back to Christine Grahame after that. 17:56”
“He was told that he needed an angiogram, but the Scottish Government has told NHS Grampian that it will not pay for angiograms to be performed at the weekend. I want to know why, in one of the biggest health boards in Scotland, we are not performing that important procedure at the weekend. He had to wait until the following Monday—he got his angiogram and was released on Tuesday 11 November, well over a week later. Why was that treatment and vital test delayed, and why was he then forced to find his own way home from Aberdeen to Moray? The family has put forward a very sensible solution: that we have a shuttle bus between the ARI and Dr Gray’s, or back to Moray, so that people can use that type of facility to get to and from those two medical centres, rather than having to rely on the good will of friends and family.”
“I am grateful that Finlay Carson was able to get support in order to have this important topic debated in the chamber, but I think that, when people look around and see the vast number of empty seats in the middle and on the other side of the chamber, they will wonder why those MSPs are not here to raise constituency concerns about healthcare issues. In my final minute, I will relay the details of a case that I have already articulated to the cabinet secretary—I have provided him with further information. The case highlights what we are facing in Moray. A father and husband had a heart attack on Saturday 1 November. He stayed in the accident and emergency department at Dr Gray’s hospital, where he was based for four days, in completely inappropriate conditions. He was transferred to Aberdeen Royal infirmary on Thursday 6 November.”
“As ever, Mr Ross is speaking up for his rural constituents. What do you think that viewers of the debate tonight should read into the fact that not one single SNP member supported the motion that brought the debate to the chamber and the fact that the debate is very sparsely attended by SNP and Labour members? The Deputy Presiding Officer: Always speak through the chair, Mr Hoy. Douglas Ross: I think that it is very disappointing. I will listen closely to the speeches from SNP members when we hear them. However, I note that we have members’ business debates to try to get cross-party support. We do not always agree with every word in a motion, but I have supported SNP motions in order to allow a subject to be debated.”
“Of course, under the Tories’ plans, £1 billion would come out of public services because of tax cuts that cannot be afforded. We have set out our intentions for taxation in our tax strategy. The tax policy for 2026-27 will be announced in the budget on 13 January. Local Authority Funding 4.”
“Last year, Labour broke its promise to workers that it would not increase tax by introducing a jobs tax, which has undermined jobs and investment and impacted growth. The Scottish National Party, across two of its budgets, has also broken its manifesto pledge, which has resulted in what the Auditor General for Scotland has pointed to as a £1 billion shortfall in the tax take and undermined growth in the process. Is it not the case that both Labour and the SNP have broken their pledges to the Scottish people on tax? Is it not time that both Governments focused on doing the right thing by Scotland, which is to focus on the tax take and not simply increase tax at every opportunity? Shona Robison: First, revenues that are raised from tax are essential for public services.”