Sarah Boyack
Scottish Labour · Scotland
“It must ensure that people get support to make their homes warm and energy efficient; support on solar, heat pumps and heat networks; affordable and accessible buses that they can rely on, with links to our railways; investment in our land to restore our peatlands; and a joined-up approach to food production and biodiversity.”
“Referring to what Ariane Burgess said, I have also been campaigning on the need to urgently address our climate and nature emergencies and to create decent jobs and empower local communities at the same time. For me, being in here is about delivering change that will benefit my constituents.”
“That taught me that constructive hard work and using the powers of our Parliament could deliver real change. For me, it was about investing in our railways—Airdrie to Bathgate, Larkhall to Milngavie and Stirling to Alloa, and supporting work on the Borders railway—as well as new CalMac ferries, improving island airports and tackling potho…”
“I hope that it is okay that I borrow a minute from my colleague. In the run-up to the 2016 election, I worked on a member’s bill to introduce a transient visitor levy.”
“In the climate change plan, we also set out greater detail on our methodology in order to provide greater transparency on the key assumptions and dependencies. However, Sarah Boyack is absolutely right, and that is where constructive criticism comes in— constructive criticism that recognises all the things in the plan that we need to do.”
“We need an urgent focus on implementation. Does the cabinet secretary agree that a key message from those who gave evidence to the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee and other parliamentary committees was that it is all about delivery and that the draft plan did not go far enough?”
The complete record
Every one of 502 lines we hold for Sarah Boyack, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 7 of 11.
“It is great to hear about new film production in Scotland, but we also need to see those films in Scotland. Therefore, I want to inform the First Minister that, after support, the Filmhouse is going to open at the end of this month, but it needs a tiny amount of capital to ensure that it will be accessible and able to use all the best formats for showing films. Will the First Minister commit to considering the tiny amount of capital funding that the Filmhouse needs to get over the line and get that accessibility? The First Minister: Given that the proposition was put to me in such a constructive fashion, I will heartily agree to do that. If Sarah Boyack would like to furnish me with the detail—which I am sure that Mr Robertson will be close to—I will have a close look at it. The Filmhouse is a magnificent asset in the city of Edinburgh.”
“To ask the Scottish Government what support it is giving to local authorities to enable them to implement their local heat and energy efficiency strategies. (S6O- 04767)”
“Sarah Boyack will be aware of the investment that the Scottish Government has made, working with the UK Government, in initiatives such as the offshore skills passport and in many other wider projects that are within our responsibility—not least the wider investment in Aberdeen and the Aberdeen area through the £125 million that has been allocated for its economic development. I accept what the member says about the importance of the RGU report. We will learn from it, and we hope that the UK Government will, too.”
“It is clear that workers need the Scottish Government to invest now and deliver the transformation that is promised by its £500 million just transition fund. Given the warnings from Robert Gordon University about the need to act now, why is the minister kicking the investment that is urgently needed into the next parliamentary session? Alasdair Allan: The member rightly pointed to the RGU report, which I am sure the UK and Scottish Governments will draw many important lessons from.”
“I thank the minister for advance sight of his statement. Will he acknowledge the critical points that were made in the Just Transition Commission report about the need for significant acceleration of the development of offshore renewables in order to give confidence to those investing in supply chains and renewables manufacturing, which will create the jobs and deliver the skills that we urgently need? I am told that we need 8,000 welders, so where is the training coming from? Will the Scottish Government act to speed up the process for renewables projects and work to ensure that jobs in offshore renewables are attractive enough in quality to retain workers with oil and gas experience? The Just Transition Commission highlighted the role of trade unions in negotiating decent terms and conditions, but the minister did not mention that.”
“However, the decision that we reached was based ultimately on the work that has been done by NatureScot as reporter, its consultation with communities on the ground and its recommendations. As I have outlined in some of my responses, it is not possible for me to set out the path forward or what investment there will be, because the discussion about how we take this forward, by engaging with existing bodies in the way that NatureScot proposed, will be important to ensuring that we get it right.”
“Given that Loch Lomond and the Trossachs national park generates £540 million a year and supports more than 6,000 jobs, and that the expanded Cairngorms national park generates £419 million annually and supports 5,400 jobs, what is the Scottish Government’s plan? What specific actions will it take and what investment will it make to ensure that communities in Galloway and Ayrshire do not miss out? Mairi Gougeon: Sarah Boyack raises important points about the value of our existing national parks. When we look at the jobs that they support and consider that Loch Lomond and the Trossachs national park generates £540 million a year and how the rangers manage visitors, we see that there is no question about the value of the parks.”
“I move amendment S6M-17648.1, to insert at end: “; welcomes the £4 million in funding from Great British Energy to fund half of the Community Energy Generation Growth Fund; believes that, as well as community groups, councils and public sector organisations are well placed to host, or collaborate on, community renewables projects, community heat projects, municipal ownership and co- operative models; further believes that land reform should mean the chance for communities to be able to have priority access to land when it becomes available; notes that there are a range of different technologies that could be utilised for community-owned energy projects, including wind, solar and hydro schemes among others, in both urban and rural Scotland; acknowledges that the Scottish Government could help to grow the sector by opening up the government electricity supply contract to community generators, which are currently denied access to the market, whether directly through conditions of tender or indirectly through procurement; calls on public bodies to create space for community ownership where possible by making public land and buildings available to community energy groups, and calls on the Scottish Government to work productively with the UK Government to create further opportunities for communities to own a meaningful stake in energy infrastructure through partnering with Great British Energy.” 15:00”
“The Scottish Government has reached just over half its target for 2030, so an awful lot more will need to be done in the next four and a half years. The Scottish Labour amendment identifies the key ways in which we might make that happen.”
“I am keen that a constructive approach is taken today, because community energy is not a nice to have. As one of the representatives from Point and Sandwick made clear, the project has been transformational in their community—but it has taken years and years. I will make two final points. Why we do not use the Scottish National Investment Bank, and why we do not think about using pension investment— that is, long-term, safe investment? We need to think about new investment opportunities and make the case for using the National Wealth Fund and GB Energy. These are safe investment projects that will be successful over time. However, we need local authorities, co-operatives and communities to be empowered to make the most of them. There is way more that we need to do.”
“My next point is critical, as it is about procurement. I have spoken to people who have set up community projects that cannot get access to the Scottish Government’s electricity supply contract. We need to reform procurement, given the huge opportunity that we have. One of my former colleagues, Allan Wilson, is involved in a community project. He highlighted the difference that it would make if projects had the opportunity to access such contracts through procurement. It is a big missed opportunity if communities cannot access that £700 million contract. Why is that? If the minister were supportive of giving them that access, I would be very keen to meet her and discuss the changes that are needed, given the feedback that I have had from local communities. It is not a nice to have, but a must have. We need change. Lots more could be done.”
“Why do we not have such projects across Scotland? It does not make sense to me. It took years for the council to agree the project, but our schools and leisure centres now have solar on the roofs. That is good for the environment and it generates income for the council. Why is that approach not taken across Scotland? I think that it is because it is too complicated, so we need to support local authorities. It is not even about new buildings; we can retrofit existing buildings. I am glad that the cabinet secretary is now talking about supporting our amendment, and I want to highlight that retrofitting could be an additional factor that would help us to open up solar. There could also be solar in rural communities alongside agriculture. That could be more integrated—and, again, those projects could be community owned.”
“We are missing out there. That is why I welcome the extra money from both GB Energy and the Scottish Government. However, it is now about how we spend that money, because communities need support now, not in a couple of years—and it is not a nice to have, but critical. The other thing that needs to happen is land reform, so that communities get the chance to have priority access to the land when it becomes available and do their own projects. I know that my colleague Rhoda Grant has been working on that. Community energy is also about the range of tech that could be used. I have mentioned wind, and there are also solar and hydro schemes that could be used right across urban and rural Scotland. We should have a solar plan—we have one for wind—and we should have 2030 targets. I gave the example of the Edinburgh Community Solar Co-operative.”
“The work is very innovative, and both the Scottish Government and the UK Government should think about how we get projects going and then share that best practice with councils. I was at an event in Galashiels last month at which people talked about Scotland beyond net zero. I have talked about urban areas, but district heating can also be a win-win in rural areas, using electricity that is produced locally but also giving councils the opportunity to use that electricity too. Again, I refer to the example of Denmark. I also want to comment on the huge benefits for communities. I welcome the cabinet secretary’s reference to the Point and Sandwick Trust. The Scottish Trades Union Congress published stats today that show that community-owned wind farms benefit communities by a factor of 34 when compared with privately owned wind farms.”
“I will give another example. The Midlothian project at Shawfair is a joint-venture partnership between Midlothian Energy Company and Vattenfall, which will power 3,500 houses. The council is leading that. It is using the private sector to deliver, but there is accountability. However, we are not seeing such projects across the country. Local authorities need to push down the costs of those projects, share best practice and make sure that there is a joined-up approach. In the Lothians, I have mentioned the Midlothian project, which is just on the other side of the Edinburgh boundary, but a huge amount of work is being done in East Lothian, too, and work is also being done by the City of Edinburgh Council. We need a more joined-up approach.”
“That is a win-win that we are not making the most of. We have examples. Aberdeen Heat and Power was established in 2002, and I have visited it several times. Emma Harper (South Scotland) (SNP) rose— Sarah Boyack: I will take an intervention if it is very brief. Emma Harper: I will be really brief. I apologise, Presiding Officer, I pushed the wrong button. Does Sarah Boyack think that anaerobic digestion of dairy farm by-products and co- products, which generate a lot of heat, could be part of what we need to look at to support agriculture in getting to net zero? Sarah Boyack: There are all sorts of opportunities that we are not maximising. That has been part of the discussion at the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee in relation to project willow and Grangemouth. It is about more joined-up thinking in communities and nationally.”
“Let us have that conversation afterwards. Another area that I think we have not focused on enough is heat in our communities—heat for our buildings and heat networks. The capacity is there. If we have ever more renewables, we need to think in a more joined-up way. That could involve pumped hydro storage, as well as providing a source for the use of that electricity. Our amendment references the heat strategies that local authorities submitted last January. There is an opportunity for us—and there are huge opportunities for not-for-profit heat networks—to keep prices affordable for consumers. Local authority or community ownership would give us more accountability. Denmark has been following best practice for decades. Throughout that time, Denmark has not just had local authority-owned heat networks; they have also decarbonised.”
“One reason why we need to focus on why community energy has to happen relates to the discussion about having a joined-up approach. At the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee last month, we discussed constraint payments. Last year, £393 million was paid in such payments—when we had to turn wind farm turbines off—98 per cent of which was as a result of wind turbines in Scotland. We need to use that electricity now. We need to think about creating local power but we also need to think about how we use that power. For example, we could power electric vehicles, buses and trains. Maurice Golden: On increasing demand in order to reduce the amount of constraint payments, what is the member’s position on an electric arc furnace here in Scotland? Sarah Boyack: I am not going to begin to answer that question.”
“We should not underestimate the challenge for local authorities, because they have had lots of cuts to their funding and they do not have the necessary dedicated staff. We need to learn from successes in areas in Scotland where community projects have been owned by authorities, so that we can spread that approach through working with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities and individual local authorities. The geography of our local authorities in Scotland means that they all have opportunities, but there are risks that need to be assessed, investment is needed and officers need skills. We need to share more. That is why I mention working with CARES, and what more Co- operative Development Scotland could do to share best practice. There is much that needs to be done.”
“My aim is to be constructive, although, if members read our amendment, they will understand that it is about our need to go much further. I will focus on that today. So much more needs to be done—and can be done—to ensure that more community-owned, co- operatively owned and municipally owned projects can be delivered. I totally agree with the point that Douglas Lumsden made about the huge amount of time that it takes for individual communities to do the work. It is not just a commitment of a year or two. Getting a project through is a commitment lasting years: the community needs to work up the financial and investment side, get the project through planning, and then run it. It is a huge commitment.”
“I welcome today’s debate because the issue of community energy is a crucial one for us to debate. As a Labour and Co-operative member, I am proud to be a member of the Edinburgh Community Solar Co-operative. I will come back to that later. The debate is not just nice to have; it is absolutely key that we maximise our fantastic land, wind and water resources to the benefit of communities. Moreover, this is about empowering our local communities, and should also be about creating local jobs and investment, and delivering community wealth building. If we get it right—if we have effective planning—we will, potentially, also tackle our nature and climate emergencies. The issue is absolutely crucial. I welcome the fact that the Scottish Government will support our Scottish Labour amendment. I constructed it as an add-on amendment.”
“I move, That the Parliament believes that Scotland must increase community-owned energy production, and supports communities being aided to achieve this; welcomes that, since its inception, the Community and Renewable Energy Scheme (CARES) has advised over 1,300 organisations and provided over £67 million in funding to support over 990 projects; notes that the new Community Energy Generation Growth Fund will provide up to £8 million to boost community energy in Scotland, and believes that the development of renewables at all scales in Scotland should benefit consumers, communities and the economy. The Deputy Presiding Officer: I advise members that we have a bit of time in hand, so those who take interventions will certainly get the time back. 14:36”
“Through community energy and shared ownership, as well as community benefits and the wider economic benefits from renewables, we are absolutely committed to maximising the benefits that communities see from renewable energy. Community energy supports our net zero ambitions, but it does more than that. It puts communities at the heart of the energy transition, empowering them to support their own priorities and reflecting each community’s long-term needs and aspirations in a way that is just and fair. Our £8 million community energy generation growth fund will mean that there will be more action in this area. I look forward to participating in the debate on such an important topic.”
“The Scottish Government is committed to exploring ways in which we can maximise the opportunities that are offered by the sustainable procurement duty. That will support the development of sustainably sourced energy in Scotland and, where possible, how we incorporate locally sourced energy into the electricity that is supplied via our national framework agreement for the supply of electricity. The current framework agreement is due to expire in March 2029, so we will ensure that the next-generation framework agreement reflects the desire of the public sector in Scotland to maximise the opportunities that are offered by power purchase agreements.”
“We are progressing work on the commitment in the onshore wind sector deal to publish a framework of practical approaches to support and encourage community shared ownership models. That will assist communities, developers and funders to engage in shared ownership opportunities. The UK Government recently published a working paper seeking views on the current voluntary approach to community shared ownership and barriers to the uptake of shared ownership. I encourage all members to look at that paper—it is a consultation of sorts—and to publicise it to their communities. We will consider the proposals in detail to ensure that they consider Scottish communities and give them the chance to benefit from investing in commercially owned renewable energy projects. I come to the Labour amendment, which we support.”
“I very much welcome the cabinet secretary’s outlining that support. Would she agree that we should also be thinking about support for local authorities, so that they can be pioneers in Scotland? We have very few local authority schemes at the moment. The Deputy Presiding Officer: I can give you the time back for some of the interventions, cabinet secretary. Gillian Martin: I am open to any suggestions that would mean having more local authority schemes. If there are any barriers in the way, I would like to investigate what they are with the particular local authorities concerned. I will come on to Ms Boyack’s Labour amendment in a minute, because I think that there are some opportunities for discussion there.”
“Sarah Boyack: I am therefore conscious of the importance of the status of committee convener. Given that the last report on committee effectiveness was in 2017, now is the time for change. Let us learn the lessons and get on with the job. Let us strengthen our Parliament’s accountability and make it work better and deliver for people. That is why it was set up in the first place. 16:43”
“It is not only committee members who will deliver that; important work is done by groups such as the women’s budget group. We need a balanced Parliament in terms of both representation of women and supporting other forms of diversity. Richard Leonard commented on diversity in committee membership, and others spoke about both urban and rural sectors being represented. Our approach should extend to having members from different professional backgrounds as well. We should draw on all members’ experience. A lot of good comments were made about the need for committee conveners to be elected. I think that the time has come for that. I have been a member of committees that were critical of the Government; I have also been a Government minister who received massive criticism from a committee. The Presiding Officer: You must conclude, Ms Boyack.”
“We have lots of challenges ahead of us as we move into year 5 of this parliamentary session. I turn to members’ views on committee size. There were good comments in favour of there being a role for smaller committees. One point that occurred to me is that we need not have that as a requirement for all committees. We have a lot more Government ministers than we have ever had, but some members of the Parliament are not on committees at all and others are substitutes rather than full-time members. That raises questions about capacity, which we should consider. I strongly support the points that have been made about ensuring that there is a good gender balance on committees. I say that as a former planner. We need to have women involved in every policy area of life.”
“Overall, a huge amount has changed, and we need to reflect on how our committees could do better. Therefore, the timing of this piece of work by the SPPA Committee is really important. For me, many of the issues come down to capacity and leadership and how we can learn lessons on those aspects. Things have changed a lot over the past 25 years, so such lessons are there to be learned. Other key aspects that members mentioned included committee structure, having elected conveners, committee size and committee responsibilities. We must ask whether we should have short-term committees or ones that are set up to deal with a particular piece of legislation. That could happen if, for example, a committee that should be dealing with a bill was simply too busy.”
“On committees doing cross-cutting or parallel work, a good current example is the work on Grangemouth and project willow, on which both the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee and the Economy and Fair Work Committee are taking evidence. There are various topics that cross over committees’ basic subject areas. We could do more post-legislative scrutiny, and do it better. We could also do more joined-up, cross-government or cross-policy thinking. However, that is often difficult for committees, because they are so busy. There is a huge amount of work to do across the Parliament. As a couple of members said, the nature of our job has changed, with regard to not only our digital capacity but that of our constituents. The ways in which we can communicate with people have greatly increased.”
“In this parliamentary term alone, some pieces of legislation that are before us still need a huge amount of work. Some members’ bills, such as my own, have not yet gone to committees. An awful lot of work will be needed on those. We need to reflect on our approach to post-legislative scrutiny, too. Members have made really useful comments about the importance of committees carrying out inquiries. Again, that is a really important part of their work. It should be about not just shadowing what ministers do but deciding, over the next few years, which important issues need to be discussed and which recommendations need to be made.”
“I might go slightly further than that one minute and 41 seconds. This has been a really important debate, because it has been quite a cross-party and cross- experienced debate. There have been jokes about how long people have been here. I have experienced the different dynamics of being a Cabinet member and a committee convener. We should be thinking about the role of committee conveners, because they are critical to the effectiveness of this Parliament. People have talked about the nature of what our committees do, which is central to how this Parliament was designed. Given the number of bills that we consider, it is increasingly important that we engage with stakeholders, hold ministers to account and carry out post-legislative scrutiny.”
“I accept that there is more to do, but improvements are being made that will make an immediate difference, for example, around the voids in the City of Edinburgh Council’s own stock.”
“Shirley-Anne Somerville: I am sure that Sarah Boyack would recognise that the £4 million is additional funding that has come in to ready local authorities and other partners in public services for the new responsibilities that will befall them if the housing bill goes through the Parliament. It is on top of the funding that is already provided to local authorities, registered social landlords and others to enable them to assist in preventing and tackling homelessness. With Ben Macpherson and others, I have been through the work that we are undertaking to ensure that money is being spent, particularly in Glasgow, Edinburgh and other areas where there are extreme pressures on temporary accommodation. That targeted funding is now paying dividends.”
“I draw members’ attention to my entry in the register of members’ interests. Will the cabinet secretary accept that the £4 million homelessness prevention fund that she announced will not even cover the work that is needed in Edinburgh, never mind across the country? The Everyone Home statement was clear: “Not enough has been done. The measures taken have been insufficient, the ambition too modest and the urgency lacking.” In our capital city, people have to wait years to access affordable social housing. Does the cabinet secretary think that that is acceptable? We are talking about tackling homelessness and enabling people to access affordable social housing. Will the cabinet secretary acknowledge that the sector is massively underfunded?”
“We are committed to delivering on consents within 12 months. Transport Infrastructure in Highlands and Islands (Ferries) 7.”
“I welcome the cabinet secretary’s reference to the importance of renewables manufacturing at the port of Leith, and the need to have a joined-up approach to delivery and to invest in skills and training. However, will she acknowledge the need to tackle the significant problem of planning delays, which the renewables sector regularly raises with us? Projects can be in planning for more than two years. That affects not just low-carbon projects; it affects all the supply chains and jobs that come with them. Gillian Martin: I point to the energy consents unit in the Scottish Government. We have been tasked by the industry to vastly reduce the amount of time that is associated with consents. We have invested in doubling the capacity of personnel in the unit, which has been met with a great deal of praise from the sector.”
“At the start of this parliamentary session, in the 2020 programme for government, we committed an additional £150 million so that those actions could take place over the session. It is not for Scottish ministers to consider the particular objections in this case—indeed, we have decided that it is important to hand back consideration to the council. However, I will discuss with Councillor Meiklejohn tomorrow some of the issues around funding and the further assistance that we might be able to give the council, depending on the decisions that it makes. The task force is absolutely critical in that work. It has not dissolved in any way—it will take forward a lot of the discussions around the complexities and the nature of some of the objections, and it will have to consider how it might be able to resolve them.”
“Will the cabinet secretary clarify why the council will have to justify flood management measures, when we know that rising sea levels and extreme weather events will increase the need for effective flood management, and that five flood warnings have already been issued in recent years in the area? Can she put on the record how many homes and businesses would be put at risk if costs and delays continue to spiral out of control? Gillian Martin: As Ms Boyack knows, a flood resilience strategy was published in December with a lot of detail on those matters, including, in particular, the risk to Scottish communities if we do nothing. The Scottish Government has made funding available over many years—indeed, decades—for flood risk management actions.”
“I thank the cabinet secretary for advance notice of her statement. Given the concerns about the need to address the climate and nature crisis, will she commit to discussing with Falkirk Council solutions to deliver effective environmental mitigation and compensatory measures to address the potential impact of the current design, which objectors have raised concerns about? Will the cabinet secretary clarify whether the objections that Forth Ports submitted have now been addressed, given the importance to Scotland’s economy of access issues and the development of Grangemouth? What additional communications will take place to address residents’ concerns?”
“We are making big improvements in those areas to give people who are making decisions about what car to drive the choice and ability to do that without undue expense.”
“With that in mind—Ms Hyslop is with me just now—the delivery of EV charging points in Scotland has exceeded the number that we promised. We need to concentrate on improving public transport in our urban environments, because people should not really need a car in places such as central Edinburgh. In particular, we are not going as fast as we could with the indicators on the transition to electric vehicles, and we must recognise the barriers that are in place for people when it comes to purchasing EVs. We have massively improved the charging infrastructure, and Scotland is the only country in the UK that still has grants and loans for buying not just EVs, but the associated home charging infrastructure.”
“Given that the Government has dumped its car reduction target, what is it doing to ensure that people have access to the buses that they urgently need across our urban and rural communities? Gillian Martin: I do not have time to go through every one of the 17 indicators, but I will point to a couple of them. Landfill waste is one of the indicators on which we are slightly off track. We want to be in a situation in which waste from municipal local authorities does not go to landfill, so we have given 95 per cent of the £70 million recycling improvement fund to local authorities. The extended producer responsibility for packaging will also make a big difference to local authorities. On the point about cars, it is important to recognise the diverse nature of Scotland. In some areas, a car will always be necessary.”
“I thank the cabinet secretary for providing advance notice of her statement. I agree that the climate emergency is now having a negative impact on communities, so when are we going to see action across Scotland to reduce our damaging climate emissions? None of this is new, and the Scottish Government has been rolling back on commitments and continually missing targets. How, therefore, can our constituents have any confidence that the progress that they need will be delivered? Will the cabinet secretary acknowledge that the climate change plan needs to focus on using the Parliament’s powers to the max, and publish a working draft now? Can she tell us what the Government is doing to get the 17 indicators that are off track back on track and to make people’s existing homes warmer and energy efficient?”
“On a point of order, Presiding Officer. Although I welcome the opportunity to hear from the Acting Cabinet Secretary for Net Zero and Energy on the Scottish Government’s plans to update its climate change plan, should we not have had the opportunity to hear from the Scottish Government after it had properly considered the United Kingdom Climate Change Committee’s Scotland carbon budget advice report, which I understand is due to be released tomorrow? Why did the Scottish Government not change the timing of the statement, not least because this has happened before? The Presiding Officer: Thank you Ms Boyack. That is not a point of order. The cabinet secretary will take questions at the end of her statement, so there should be no interventions or interruptions. 14:51”
“Michael Marra’s point about having clarity on the additional funding that has been mentioned is absolutely critical. I want to know what that means for the councils in my region, because the holidays are weeks away and parents and their children need support now. We need increased investment, training and support for our carers, recognising and amplifying the vital role that they play in safeguarding Scotland’s public health, keeping our economy going and, crucially, giving our young people the support that they need now so that they can achieve their potential. Everybody should be signed up to that, and the Government needs to give that support now. 13:25”
“A 2020 report by Shared Care Scotland, “‘Holidays or Isolation?’ Research into holiday activity provision for disabled children and young people in Scotland”, noted that “96% of respondents said that the summer holidays were when they needed most support.” As Jeremy Balfour said, we need action, not warm words. The adult carer support plan was introduced under the Carers (Scotland) Act 2016, which states that local authorities “must provide support to” unpaid carers. However, the “State of Caring in Scotland 2024” research “found that just 20% of unpaid carers said they had received an ACSP in the last 12 months.” We need action now, and the lack of funding is a key reason why parents and their children are not getting the support that they need.”
“Last year, only 260 of the 460 applicants were able to get places, and they received at most 16 days, from 9 to 3, of holiday hub care. That means that parents are struggling to balance childcare responsibilities with work obligations. There are massive pressures in that regard, and—as Michael Marra commented—the need for more information and support is key. Studies have shown that children with ASN mostly just want to feel included, but the summer holidays bring isolation, boredom and social exclusion. The lack of support means that those young people and their working parents are going to struggle to get the opportunities that they need, and working parents are struggling to work around their jobs to care for their kids. Carers of children with ASN often experience burnout and isolation as a result of those increased pressures.”
“The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child says that children with ASN, as well as their carers, have the right to special care and support during the child’s growth and development. As Michael Marra highlighted, the need for support does not stop once the school year is finished—if anything, children with ASN and their families or carers require more, not less, support outside term times. However, they suffer from a significant lack of consistent, accessible and affordable summer activities for children with ASN. I thank the Edinburgh REPAIR—robust engagement with parents for ASN and inclusion reform—network for its excellent briefing. The City of Edinburgh Council organises the holiday hubs scheme, which is fantastic, but we do not have that support at the scale at which it is needed.”