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 9 of 19.
“To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to reports that its core operating costs have increased by £53 million between 2023-24 and 2024-25. (S6T-02762)”
“Ruth Maguire made some valid points, and I welcome her frankness about her journey back to work. She said that she is not convinced that a member changing party should necessarily be a trigger for recall. That might well be the case, because people have different reasons for moving from one party to another. There is rank opportunism in those who seek to save their bacon—we have had examples of that in this session of Parliament—but there are also people who, on a principled position, can no longer sit with a party. I think of Mr Ewing in that respect. Ruth Maguire: Will Craig Hoy take an intervention? Craig Hoy: I do not think that I will get the time back, will I, Presiding Officer?”
“I agree with what Patrick Harvie said with respect to Mark Griffin’s speech. It is a privilege and a responsibility to serve in the Parliament, and we should do so with the trust of the people. However, if we lose that trust, the logical opportunity for us to be removed is at election time, unless the individual has done something so egregious that they would fall under the remit of the scheme. Mr Cole-Hamilton was right in many respects. I agree with his call for the protection of vulnerable groups to be material in relation to the proposed legislation. Some of my constituents are shocked that we do not have to go through that process. That would be something for members of the next Parliament to consider, regardless of what happens with the bill.”
“Michelle Thomson made the significant point that we come here via different electoral systems and that the office arrangements for list MSPs are different from those for constituency MSPs, for example. However, I fully accept what Jackson Carlaw said in respect of the conundrums that will be created if we try to operate two parallel recall systems. I always enjoy Richard Leonard’s contributions. As I have said in the past, I do not always agree with them, but I think that putting the fundamental principle of equality at the heart of the system is correct. However, although cost should not be the principal consideration, for us to set it aside and say that it is not a material consideration would not be to serve the public purse or our constituents particularly well.”
“I hear what Patrick Harvie says about the fact that this might not be the bill that finally delivers what is needed, which is a recall mechanism that enjoys the confidence and trust of the people who send us to the Parliament. Patrick Harvie said about those who might campaign to have someone removed that he would perhaps consider political parties not being permitted to play any part in that. There might be some merit in that, but there is also the risk that proxies would be found in order to do that. It might be better if the label at the top of the leaflet illustrates who is driving the campaign, rather than political parties operating in the shadows.”
“Today’s stage 1 debate on the bill shows that there is a general consensus on the need for the Parliament to have a recall mechanism, but there is a difference of opinion about how it should operate and be constructed. As we move forward, there is a risk that two things could happen. The bill could grow arms and legs for reasons that might or might not be political, or fundamental limbs could be removed from it because it could be overreaching. The debate has been wide ranging and relatively good humoured. I commend Sue Webber for being clear and passionate about where our party stands. I repeat that, had it not been for Kevin Stewart’s amendment, we would have supported the bill at stage 1. However, if Mr Stewart’s amendment is agreed to, we will abstain on the bill and watch with interest to see what happens next.”
“I am of the view that it is not unreasonable to expect a fit and healthy MSP to come into the Parliament at least once every six months, and most people would agree with that. Throughout the bill process, I have been clear that people’s personal circumstances should be dealt with in confidence, and I am not really sure why there has been confusion on that point. The committee had concerns about how the process would work in practice. It took issue with the role that the committee is being asked to perform and the lack of detail in the bill as to how the process would work and the criteria to inform its deliberations on what is or is not a reasonable excuse. The committee was dead against imposing a physical attendance requirement on”
“That change would deal with many of the concerns that were raised in the committee’s report, and I would welcome comments from members across the Parliament on that proposal during the debate. What I am now proposing is a Scottish system that models its approach to the recall of constituency MSPs on the UK Parliament’s system and its approach to recall of regional MSPs on the Welsh Government’s system. On the provisions on disqualification for a lack of physical attendance in the Parliament, my starting point for the bill was the fact that any MSP could, in theory, not attend the Parliament, either remotely or in person, for their entire term. That is the fact of the matter, and it is the law that councillors cannot get away with that, unless they have a good reason to be absent.”
“I assumed from the committee’s evidence and from its members’ questioning that it would be against that proposal, so I wrote to the committee on the day that its report was published to advise that I am now intending, if the bill passes stage 1, to amend that process to reflect the simpler approach that is proposed in the Welsh Government’s new bill. That would remove the recall petition process for regional MSPs and replace it with a straightforward poll on whether to retain or remove a member, which would be decided by a simple majority across the region. If the member lost that vote, they would be replaced by the next person on the party list, in the usual way.”
“Will the member take another intervention? Graham Simpson: No, I will not take any more interventions—maybe I will do so later. I am grateful to the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee members for unanimously recommending that Parliament supports the general principles of the bill. The committee report comments on all areas of the bill, but it is fair to say that it does not make clear the committee’s collective position on a number of the provisions. For example, I am not sure whether the committee is for or against my potentially confusing and expensive proposal for the recall of regional members.”
“There is of course a mechanism, which all members will be well aware of at this stage in the session, whereby any inaccuracies or otherwise can be corrected. Before we move to the next item of business, I will suspend the meeting briefly to allow those who are leaving the chamber and the public gallery to do so. 12:49 Meeting suspended. 12:51 On resuming— Tourette Syndrome”
“On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I fear that the First Minister may have misled Parliament again today, so I seek your advice on how we can invite him to correct the record. The SNP manifesto quite clearly committed to freezing income tax rates and bands, yet in the budget of 2023-24, both income tax rates and income tax bands rose above inflation. The First Minister has yet again misled not just the Parliament but the public who are watching. I seek your advice as to how we can finally get the truth from the First Minister when he appears in this Parliament. The Presiding Officer: Thank you. Mr Hoy will be aware that the content of members’ contributions is not a matter for the chair.”
“On the issue of the tax paid by people in Scotland, the Scottish Fiscal Commission’s briefing paper, which was published on Tuesday, indicated clearly that the “majority of Scottish taxpayers pay less” in taxation than they would if they lived in the rest of the United Kingdom. [Interruption.] That is what I have always said to the Parliament, and I will keep on saying it. Mr Hoy might not like that, but I am going to keep on saying the things that are the case. The Presiding Officer: Let us ensure that everyone gathered here can hear what is being said.”
“Sir Anton Muscatelli’s report is damning on the impact of Scottish National Party tax rises. Perhaps Anas Sarwar can pass that on to Rachel Reeves before she inflicts yet more damage on the Scottish economy. Will the First Minister now stop playing the daft laddie on income tax and concede two points: first, that he has broken his manifesto pledge to freeze income tax; and, secondly, that he has repeatedly misled this Parliament, as have his ministers, on how many Scots are now paying more tax than they would if they lived in England? The First Minister: We have maintained our manifesto commitments in relation to taxation.”
“I close by thanking Mr MacDonald for securing the debate and by lending my voice in support of the centre. 17:47”
“Therefore, I ask the minister to consider the requests of the industry and stakeholders, including the Scottish Beer and Pub Association, which, in its manifesto, asked the Government to adopt several recommendations, including a request for it to recognise and act on the findings of the “What does ‘Brand Scotland’ mean for the Scottish Beer and Pub sector?” report, which was published last year by the cross- party group on beer and pubs. Evidence-based interventions that are aligned with Government priorities will be a game changer and could help to save jobs in an industry that still faces headwinds. I very much welcome the work that the centre can do in ensuring that beer and pubs remain an important part of our economy and a much-loved part of Scotland’s reputation, not just here but abroad.”
“That will also assist it in playing its part in tackling the climate crisis while remaining a driver of employment and growth. Brewers and pubs are key strategic assets for the Scottish economy and society, but the sectors face mounting pressures from rising costs to increased regulation and the tax burden, which could get worse at the next budget. Therefore, we need to provide targeted support. The proposed centre would be transformational for the brewing industry, but it alone will not be enough to turn around the fortunes of the brewing and pub sectors.”
“I am hopeful that a new state-of-the-art centre for sustainable brewing and distilling will ensure a resilient and profitable future for both industries that will feed into breweries, distilleries and pubs here and elsewhere. I am afraid to say that the brewing industry faces a significant skills gap, and I am pleased that the centre, if it secures the funding, will play a vital role in training the next generation of industry professionals, who will be recognised, as Mr MacDonald said, not just here in Scotland but around the world. With the support of brewing giants such as Carlsberg and Diageo, I hope that Heriot-Watt University’s aim to raise the necessary £35 million will be successful and that the new centre will be able to tackle the fresh set of challenges that the industry faces.”
“There are some significant issues on the horizon, but what we are talking about today could be yet another game changer in the Scottish industry. The characteristics that Bellfield shows are, I think, those that are embodied by the world- renowned international centre for brewing and distilling at Heriot-Watt University. The centre has nurtured undergraduate and graduate courses that have breathed new life into brewing and distilling, which is hugely important not just to the Scottish and UK economies but for our global reputation and trading relationships. At the last count, in the South Scotland region, which I represent, there were 16 breweries and 703 pubs, which have created 7,530 jobs and contributed £117 million in gross value added to the economy. However, these are difficult times for the industry.”
“It is therefore good, on this occasion, to be discussing what is a good-news story for the Scottish brewing industry. Only last night, the CPG on beer and pubs met for our annual quiz night. It was a lively event at the Bellfield Brewery taproom, just a stone’s throw from the Parliament. Close to 100 people—MSPs, staffers and industry figures, including brewers— gathered for some friendly competition, while those who wanted to could enjoy a pint or two of Bellfield Brewery’s delicious IPAs, hoppy ales and crisp lagers. The team at Bellfield, like many brewers in Scotland, are dedicated to brewing great-tasting beers. They are independent, passionate, committed and proud of the beers that they brew, and they are fostering entrepreneurship from the grain to the glass.”
“I acknowledge Gordon MacDonald for bringing this important debate to the chamber. I very much agree with everything that he said. The subject is very close to my heart. As many members will know, two of the things that I like most in life are beer and pubs, normally taken together. In order to have those things, we need good home-grown brewing capabilities in Scotland that are also recognised internationally. As a newly elected MSP, I was delighted to be asked to convene the cross-party group on beer and pubs in the Scottish Parliament. Since becoming convener of the group, I have worked with colleagues on the CPG to raise awareness of the importance of beer and pubs to brand Scotland and to highlight some of the opportunities and threats that the industry faces.”
“I acknowledge the Scottish Green Party’s ask for the expansion to be considered as part of the upcoming Opposition party negotiations in 2026 and 2027, but we must be mindful of what our budget is. Jamie Hepburn mentioned a potentially massive cut to Scotland’s budget later this year. On the topic of public ownership of bus services, we have delivered all the powers for our local transport authorities and regional transport partnerships to take forward whatever they decide to run in their communities, and that is how we will proceed. This has been a good debate, and it has given us the opportunity to talk as a Parliament. If we can work together to ensure that we bring in the systems that will allow us to improve our public services, that will be a good thing.”
“There is an opportunity for bus companies to say, “If those people are dropping out, how do we hold on to them and keep them in the system?” Emma Roddick also talked about the great work that Highland Council is doing, and that fantastic work is to be commended. Jamie Hepburn talked about things that are happening in North Lanarkshire and said that the council is cutting services. I make the point that councillors must be cognisant of what the local community is telling them. If people are saying that walking routes are unsafe, councillors really need to listen to that. I am glad that Jamie Hepburn brought up that point. As we have heard, the under-22s free bus travel scheme is transformational for the young people of Scotland.”
“Those are all things that help to give people the ability to get a bus. However, there is more to do, and I accept that we still need to work things out. Between 2022-23 and 2023-24, there was a 13 per cent increase in the number of bus journeys that were made, which is a positive thing. The figure is not as good as it was prior to Covid, and we do not yet quite know how we will get it back up, but we will continue to work on those things. Unfortunately, I could not hear the question that Emma Roddick put to me. We are assessing what has happened since 2022. We are working out what happens once people drop out of the age group and how many of them continue to use the bus.”
“That is the point that I was trying to get across. Jim Fairlie: I take the member’s point, but it was the Tories who dismantled the bus service in the first place. Jamie Greene, on the other hand, talked about things that are going on. We are giving RTPs powers to make sure that local authorities have the ability to bring in the local services that they want. I was happy to hear that Mr Greene wants to talk about the solutions. There are challenges, and I welcome engagement with people who want to bring solutions to the table to allow us to get what the Parliament wants, which is a good-quality, reliable public service. Ariane Burgess and Mr Hoy talked about rural communities not having enough bus services. That is why we have the community bus fund, the plugged-in communities fund and demand- responsive transport.”
“Some of the negativity in the debate came from Sue Webber constantly running Scotland down. The Tories must come from a really miserable place when everything that we talk about—not just on buses, but across everything that happens in Scotland—is talked about in a negative way. That is disappointing, but I understand why they do it. As I said, a lot of work is on-going. We have held meetings with the Scottish road works commissioner to try to make sure that bus transport gets moving. Sue Webber: I am never in a position in which I totally run Scotland down. I was just making the case that there is massive inequality in bus service provision across our country. I am fortunate to live in Edinburgh, and other cities are also well provided for, but we have heard from colleagues about Dumfries and all the rural areas that have nothing.”
“Ministers must think about that before they expand the concessionary travel programme. 17:00 Jim Fairlie: I thank all the members who contributed to the debate. It has been a good debate and the speeches have, by and large, been positive. We have talked about the importance of buses and the challenges that we are facing. I also want to point out how we are tackling some of those challenges. I will not name everybody, but various members talked about the things that need to be put in place. The bus infrastructure fund is helping to tackle the challenge of having reliable timetables. I have seen fantastic work in Glasgow with the artificial intelligence technology that is being used there. The network support grant and the plugged-in communities fund are helping rural communities to create community bus systems.”
“People in some parts of the south of Scotland, which I represent, simply want to have a bus service each day, and it would be impossible for them to live in a 15-minute neighbourhood. I also ask the minister to focus on the supported services in rural areas that are being cut because councils can no longer afford them. Those are lifeline services that are being cut. We have previously debated the issue of bank closures. Before the last bank in a town can close, there has to be an assessment of access to cash. We need something similar in relation to the bus system, because we cannot have communities in parts of Scotland that have no access to bus travel whatsoever. It is fundamentally unfair if people pay their taxes and get a bus pass but there is no bus for them to use.”
“I have spoken to bus unions that have asked whether the Government is saying that, if 13 or 14 kids are about to board a bus and one does not have a bus pass, it is prepared to single out that child, given the ramifications of the increased antisocial behaviour that that might result in. Ministers will have to think the issue through, as it might well be that slightly more draconian measures will have to be put in place to address it. In the debate, we got to the heart of some of the issues. However, my real concern, which I will close on, is the issue of rural bus services. Any expansion in concessionary travel might result in scarce resources going into central belt areas, where we now have the concept of 15-minute neighbourhoods and people want four buses an hour.”
“However, if the Greens were ever to get closer to power in Scotland, I suspect that the last few millionaires in Scotland would be on a bus over the border. [Interruption.] I welcome what the Government has announced today in respect of under-22s bus travel and antisocial behaviour. However, I put a practical point to it—[Interruption.] The Deputy Presiding Officer: Members, please do not speak from sedentary positions. Mr Hoy, please continue. Craig Hoy: Will the Government give some thought to how it would work in practice if the scheme was adapted to allow the bus pass to be removed?”
“Patrick Harvie: Will the member compare the cost of providing a policy of free bus travel with, for example, the extraordinary cost of the Government’s road building programme, which the Conservatives constantly tell us the Government is not spending enough money on and is not working on fast enough? Craig Hoy: The fact that Patrick Harvie does not realise that buses run on roads shows the depth of the failure to engage in joined-up thinking. When we look at the state of the roads in Dumfriesshire, we see a bus service and a road network that have been denuded of investment under the SNP Government. When we discuss the matter, Patrick Harvie and Ross Greer say, for example, that all of that could be funded by a wealth tax.”
“If I may put a slight dose of realism into this debate, it is that everything that we discuss here is about priorities and choices. Recently, I sat on a panel that the Royal Society of Edinburgh organised in Dumfries, at which Ross Greer spoke. I am not sure whether this is a confirmed Green policy, but he said that he hoped that the Green Party could offer free bus travel to everyone in Scotland. Although that might sound a very noble outcome, it would come at a huge cost. The point that I make to the minister as the Government considers expanding concessionary travel is that, in certain areas of Scotland— particularly in Dumfriesshire over the summer— the bus network has almost entirely collapsed.”
“The restored bus services of the future should be run by the public, for the public, and should be affordable, accessible and reliable. That is the vision of the Scottish Greens. We invite other parties in the chamber to join us and make that happen. I move, That the Parliament agrees that communities across Scotland deserve affordable, accessible and reliable bus services; further agrees that more bus services across Scotland should be run in the public interest to improve services and reduce fares for all passengers; celebrates that 250 million bus journeys have been taken by young people in Scotland since the introduction of free bus travel for under-22s, and calls on the Scottish Government to expand free bus travel to more young people. 16:12”
“It is clear that decades of deregulation have been catastrophic for bus services, so it is galling to see the Conservative amendment extolling the benefits of competition. There are different ways in which we can put the public interest at the heart of how bus services are commissioned and run in this country. I am delighted that Strathclyde Partnership for Transport is moving down the road towards franchising, and the Government should support it in every way possible to achieve that goal. However, the current franchising decision-making process still raises concerns and needs to be simplified. I want other models, too: the direct control of services by councils, the establishment of community bus companies and even national parks commissioning their own services.”
“We should invest in expanding concessionary schemes to cover more people, so that people can continue to access vital opportunities and are not left behind because they cannot afford an extortionate bus fare. I welcome the pilot project, which was agreed as part of last year’s budget negotiations between the Greens and the Scottish National Party, to introduce a bus fare cap in a region of Scotland. However, we are just weeks away from the proposed start date and, to my knowledge— unless the minister corrects me—there has been very little progress. The Government needs to follow through on its commitments. It is critical that more bus services are run in the public interest.”
“Young people are also more likely to be in insecure employment, with zero-hours contracts, low pay and irregular shifts being the norm, and they are significantly more likely to be in private rented accommodation, the prices for which have soared over the past decade. On top of all that, young people have to attempt to stretch their budgets even further to cover their travel costs. That will only worsen and deepen young people’s experiences of poverty and the cost of living crisis. We need decisive, bold action to expand free bus travel. The schemes for under-22s, older people and disabled people should be seen as the start of the work rather than the end of it.”
“A young person who travels into Edinburgh from Dunfermline to attend college will—overnight, when they turn 22—face a £35 travel bill every week. However, the circumstances of those young people’s lives will not have changed overnight. The affordability crisis does not stop when they reach 22; it is not paused until a later date. People in their 20s are far more likely to be living, and struggling, with soaring costs of living, adults under the age of 25 are more likely to be living in poverty than older adults, and 37 per cent of 16 to 25-year-olds were in relative poverty, after housing costs were paid, last year.”
“In every way, the under-22 scheme continues to achieve what it intended. We must ensure that its success continues, which includes addressing some of the key issues that young people and their families have highlighted. Reliability, frequency and accessibility are some of the main reasons why young people, especially in rural areas, have not yet had the full benefits of the scheme. I agree with Mr Hoy that the scheme is great if you are a young person who can use it, but if no buses are near you, the timetable is not great or the buses just do not show up, it will have very little impact on your life. As soon as a young person turns 22, they hit a cliff edge and, overnight, they are suddenly forced to pay full fares. A young person who commutes into Glasgow for a new job will face a £40 travel bill every week.”
“There is success in the thousands of pounds that young people and their families have saved, which has been crucial at a time of ever-stretching household budgets. It is also shown in the way in which it has allowed young people to find new opportunities, whether those are social, at work or in education. In the one-year evaluation of the scheme, it was found that a third of young people using the concession scheme were able to access new opportunities and new activities. Ultimately, that is good for the economy. I want young people to get the best possible start in life by being able to access good careers and prosperity and to generate wealth that can then be reinvested back into the public services to pay for the services that gave them a helping hand in the first place. Let us dare to invest in that future for more young people.”
“Does the member share the concerns of my constituents in South Scotland, particularly young people, who might have a free bus pass but not a bus service to ride on? Mark Ruskell: Absolutely. The point of the debate is to look to the future and to the vision that we all want to create. The success of bus travel has not only been about the number of journeys that have been taken; it is shown in the way in which it has removed travel barriers for young people and encouraged them and their families to use buses more widely. It is clear that attitudes are changing: recent data from the Walk Wheel Cycle Trust shows that 67 per cent of young people are supportive and want to see more public transport.”
“Polling has shown that more than 90 per cent of oil and gas workers surveyed want a clear path out of high-carbon jobs and that more than 90 per cent of oil and gas workers possess skills that are transferable to the offshore renewables sector. The real pathway to supporting the workers, supply chains and communities that currently depend on the oil and gas industry is developing a credible plan for the North Sea transition and ensuring that those who are dependent on the oil and gas sector benefit from the transition. That includes establishing domestic clean energy supply chains to provide secure, long-term jobs for oil and gas workers to transition into. The Rosebank decision is about people, climate and the future of the north-east, and it is incredibly important that we balance all those aspects as we move forward. 15:31”
“With the Scottish Government’s backing, the north-east can become the net zero capital of the world. The Scottish Government is committed to capitalising on the enormous opportunities that the net zero system offers our industries, our economy and our climate. The Scottish Government is focused on reducing emissions in line with climate commitments, delivering affordable energy supplies and ensuring that a just transition for the oil and gas workforce is secured as North Sea oil resources decline. The number of jobs that are supported by the UK’s oil and gas industry has more than halved in the past decade.”
“On Rosebank, I repeat that decisions on offshore oil and gas licensing and consenting are currently reserved to the UK Government. However, the Scottish Government continues to call on the UK Government to approach its decisions on offshore oil and gas projects on an evidence-led, case-by-case basis. Patrick Harvie: Will the member give way? Paul McLennan: I am sorry, Mr Harvie—I have only four minutes. Climate compatibility and energy security should be key considerations, and climate compatibility assessments and checkpoints should inform any decision that the UK Government makes on new licences. The Scottish Government has consistently insisted on the importance of those assessments—a position that has also been adopted in legal judgments. We also have to remain committed to a fair and just transition to net zero.”
“Will the member take an intervention? Paul McLennan: I am sorry, but I have only four minutes. Scotland’s energy wealth has been squandered as a cash cow by many successive UK Governments while ordinary Scots pay some of the highest bills in Europe. Labour promised to cut energy bills by £300, but the reality is that energy bills have risen by £190 since the party came into office. The SNP is calling for an end to the energy profits levy, which is having a negative impact on investment in clean energy, oil and gas decommissioning and the shared energy supply chain—there is no doubt about that whatsoever. We all hear that from stakeholders. That is why it is vital that we continue to invest in renewable energy opportunities and maximise that investment.”
“What does the cabinet secretary think his negligence says to the communities in Dirleton and Melrose, where HES properties are still surrounded by Heras fencing? Is it not the case that if the minister spent more time on his day job and less time adding to his air miles, he might finally be able to fix those problems? Angus Robertson: I think that Mr Hoy is aware—I hope he is—that the operational management of Historic Environment Scotland is for Historic Environment Scotland. I share with him the wish that our historic sites are able to be open, and that is why the Government has provided Historic Environment Scotland with the funds. It is only a shame that Mr Hoy voted against that in the budget. The Deputy Presiding Officer: That concludes the urgent question. Motion without Notice 16:27”
“Is the First Minister aware of the swingeing budget cuts that are being proposed by SNP-run Dumfries and Galloway Council? Those include the closure of the Hillview leisure centre in Kelloholm, the removal of free music classes for children, and cuts that would result in the closure of the entire citizens advice bureaux network. Will the First Minister look the people of Dumfries and Galloway in the eye and answer the question of why those cuts are being proposed? Is it because the SNP Government in Edinburgh is not properly funding Dumfries and Galloway Council, or is it because the SNP-run administration is not properly managing its finances?”
“Amendment 298 agreed to. Amendment 299 not moved. Amendment 300 moved—[Michael Matheson]. The Deputy Presiding Officer: The question is, that amendment 300 be agreed to. Are we agreed? Members: No. The Deputy Presiding Officer: There will be a division. The vote is closed.”
“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) 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) Forbes, Kate (Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch) (SNP) Gibson, Kenneth (Cunninghame North) (SNP) Gilruth, Jenny (Mid Fife and Glenrothes) (SNP) Gougeon, Mairi (Angus North and Mearns) (SNP) Grant, Rhoda (Highlands and Islands) (Lab) Gray, Neil (Airdrie and Shotts) (SNP) Greene, Jamie (West Scotland) (LD) 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 Patrick Harvie] 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) 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] Rennie, Willie (North East Fife) (LD) Robertson, Angus (Edinburgh Central) (SNP) Robison, Shona (Dundee City East) (SNP) Roddick, Emma (Highlands and Islands) (SNP) Rowley, Alex (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab) Ruskell, Mark (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Green) Russell, Davy (Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse) (Lab) Slater, Lorna (Lothian) (Green) [Proxy vote cast by Maggie Chapman] 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) Carson, Finlay (Galloway and West Dumfries) (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) Lumsden, Douglas (North East Scotland) (Con) McCall, Roz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Mountain, Edward (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Mundell, Oliver (Dumfriesshire) (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) White, Tess (North East Scotland) (Con) Whittle, Brian (South Scotland) (Con) The Deputy Presiding Officer: The result of the division is: For 91, Against 27, Abstentions 0.”
“Amendment 14 agreed to. Amendment 298 moved—[Michael Matheson]. The Deputy Presiding Officer: The question is, that amendment 298 be agreed to. Are we agreed? Members: No. The Deputy Presiding Officer: There will be a division.”
“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) Briggs, Miles (Lothian) (Con) Brown, Keith (Clackmannanshire and Dunblane) (SNP) Brown, Siobhian (Ayr) (SNP) Burnett, Alexander (Aberdeenshire West) (Con) Callaghan, Stephanie (Uddingston and Bellshill) (SNP) Carson, Finlay (Galloway and West Dumfries) (Con) 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) Dowey, Sharon (South Scotland) (Con) Dunbar, Jackie (Aberdeen Donside) (SNP) Duncan-Glancy, Pam (Glasgow) (Lab) Eagle, Tim (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Ewing, Annabelle (Cowdenbeath) (SNP) Ewing, Fergus (Inverness and Nairn) (Ind) Fairlie, Jim (Perthshire South and Kinross-shire) (SNP) Findlay, Russell (West Scotland) (Con) FitzPatrick, Joe (Dundee City West) (SNP) Forbes, Kate (Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch) (SNP) Fraser, Murdo (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Gallacher, Meghan (Central Scotland) (Con) Gibson, Kenneth (Cunninghame North) (SNP) Gilruth, Jenny (Mid Fife and Glenrothes) (SNP) Golden, Maurice (North East Scotland) (Con) Gosal, Pam (West Scotland) (Con) Gougeon, Mairi (Angus North and Mearns) (SNP) Grant, Rhoda (Highlands and Islands) (Lab) Gray, Neil (Airdrie and Shotts) (SNP) Greene, Jamie (West Scotland) (LD) Griffin, Mark (Central Scotland) (Lab) Gulhane, Sandesh (Glasgow) (Con) Hamilton, Rachael (Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (Con) Harper, Emma (South Scotland) (SNP) Haughey, Clare (Rutherglen) (SNP) Hepburn, Jamie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (SNP) Hoy, Craig (South Scotland) (Con) Hyslop, Fiona (Linlithgow) (SNP) Johnson, Daniel (Edinburgh Southern) (Lab) Halcro Johnston, Jamie (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Kerr, Liam (North East Scotland) (Con) Kerr, Stephen (Central Scotland) (Con) Kidd, Bill (Glasgow Anniesland) (SNP) Lennon, Monica (Central Scotland) (Lab) Leonard, Richard (Central Scotland) (Lab) Lochhead, Richard (Moray) (SNP) Lumsden, Douglas (North East Scotland) (Con) MacDonald, Gordon (Edinburgh Pentlands) (SNP) MacGregor, Fulton (Coatbridge and Chryston) (SNP) 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) McCall, Roz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) 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) Mountain, Edward (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Mundell, Oliver (Dumfriesshire) (Con) Nicoll, Audrey (Aberdeen South and North Kincardine) (SNP) O’Kane, Paul (West Scotland) (Lab) [Proxy vote cast by Michael Marra] Rennie, Willie (North East Fife) (LD) Robertson, Angus (Edinburgh Central) (SNP) Robison, Shona (Dundee City East) (SNP) Roddick, Emma (Highlands and Islands) (SNP) Ross, Douglas (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Rowley, Alex (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab) Russell, Davy (Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse) (Lab) Somerville, Shirley-Anne (Dunfermline) (SNP) Stevenson, Collette (East Kilbride) (SNP) [Proxy vote cast by Fulton MacGregor] Stewart, Alexander (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) 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) Webber, Sue (Lothian) (Con) Wells, Annie (Glasgow) (Con) White, Tess (North East Scotland) (Con) Whitfield, Martin (South Scotland) (Lab) Whitham, Elena (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley) (SNP) Whittle, Brian (South Scotland) (Con) Wishart, Beatrice (Shetland Islands) (LD) Yousaf, Humza (Glasgow Pollok) (SNP) Against Burgess, Ariane (Highlands and Islands) (Green) Chapman, Maggie (North East Scotland) (Green) Greer, Ross (West Scotland) (Green) Harvie, Patrick (Glasgow) (Green) Mackay, Gillian (Central Scotland) (Green) [Proxy vote cast by Patrick Harvie] Ruskell, Mark (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Green) Slater, Lorna (Lothian) (Green) [Proxy vote cast by Maggie Chapman] The Deputy Presiding Officer: The result of the division is: For 112, Against 7, Abstentions 0.”