David Barratt
Scottish National Party · Scotland
“I thank the cabinet secretary for her statement. I will pick up on investment in community health hubs and, specifically, the replacement of Lochgelly health centre. Can the cabinet secretary advise whether a decision will be made on the funding model—for example, the potential use of the mutual investment model—in the coming months?”
“The focus now, post the statement, is on taking forward modern facilities that support multidisciplinary working to improve access to services for local people.”
“Will the member give way? Stephen Kerr: I am happy to give way, if I have time. David Barratt: Would the member reflect on why it took the French Government to identify that the Scottish National Party was a target of threats from abroad such as hacking and attacks on our social media channels?”
“During that time, I undertook hundreds of flood risk assessments across the UK for housing and commercial developments and for energy infrastructure. Over those 15 years, I watched climate change move from something that was discussed largely as a future risk to something that is increasingly reflected in day-to-day engineering practice.”
“I refer to my entry in the register of members’ interests, which shows that I am a councillor in Fife and a principal hydrologist for Kiloh Associates.”
“Does he think that it is right that constituents in his home constituency of Galloway are subject to huge pylons and are not able to oppose the massive wind farms and solar and battery power plants that now cover our landscape when local communities should have more say?”
The complete record
Every one of 41 lines we hold for David Barratt, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account.
“The focus now, post the statement, is on taking forward modern facilities that support multidisciplinary working to improve access to services for local people. I can assure the member that I and my officials are continuing to work closely with NHS Fife and partners to progress the proposals and ensure that they reflect local need, and I will keep him up to date on the matter. The Presiding Officer: That concludes questions on NHS capital projects. Point of Order 17:10”
“I thank the cabinet secretary for her statement. I will pick up on investment in community health hubs and, specifically, the replacement of Lochgelly health centre. Can the cabinet secretary advise whether a decision will be made on the funding model—for example, the potential use of the mutual investment model—in the coming months? Angela Constance: In-depth work is continuing around the revenue-based funding model to enable the three pilot areas that I mentioned in my statement to proceed; that includes the project in Mr Barratt’s constituency. The focus is on a standardised approach so that we can make best use of public money for best effect, for Mr Barratt’s constituents and for all the people of Scotland.”
“To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on Police Scotland’s review of the deployment of forensic tagging spray, including when it expects a decision on its future operational use. (S7O-00130)”
“Our response must therefore be united, robust and unwavering. For those reasons, I support the motion. 17:43”
“Will the member give way? Stephen Kerr: I am happy to give way, if I have time. David Barratt: Would the member reflect on why it took the French Government to identify that the Scottish National Party was a target of threats from abroad such as hacking and attacks on our social media channels? Stephen Kerr: I deprecate any foreign state involvement that undermines our democratic processes, regardless of which party it affects. I think that all our parties have, to some degree or other, been subject to misinformation and downright lies. However, we should be clear that those who seek to undermine our security do not distinguish between any of us in our party colours. They do not distinguish between Scotland and the rest of the United Kingdom—they target the United Kingdom and all of us.”
“I fully accept that there is room for legitimate debate about how we respond to climate change. We should debate which technologies we invest in, how we support workers through the transition, how we protect consumers and how we ensure that policies are fair and effective. However, there is a fundamental difference between debating solutions and dismissing the evidence that makes those solutions necessary. As someone who has worked professionally in this field, I do not regard the language of climate emergency as a slogan. It reflects the reality that the risks identified by the science are becoming more serious and more urgent with every passing decade. Duncan Massey: [Made a request to intervene.]”
“Does he think that it is right that constituents in his home constituency of Galloway are subject to huge pylons and are not able to oppose the massive wind farms and solar and battery power plants that now cover our landscape when local communities should have more say? David Barratt: To an extent, I agree with something that Finlay Carson referred to earlier, which is that a just transition takes people with it. As a former convener of the planning committee in Fife, I know that there is a process for commenting and taking part in the democratic processes that go along with that planning work. We do need infrastructure—that is part of it and it is a reality of the world that we are in—but I understand the point that he is making. We have also heard Reform members call for Scotland to abandon net zero policies.”
“That evidence points to a clear direction: weather extremes are becoming more extreme. We are seeing more intense rainfall events, increasing flood risk, longer periods of drought and greater pressure on infrastructure that was never designed for the climate conditions that are now emerging. That is why I find concerning some of the language that has entered our political discourse in recent weeks and that has been repeated today. Once again, we have heard Reform members dismiss terms such as climate emergency and climate crisis as faith-based language rather than descriptions that are grounded in evidence. Finlay Carson: I welcome David Barratt to the Parliament—he is one of the three Gallovidians that are now in the Parliament.”
“During that time, I undertook hundreds of flood risk assessments across the UK for housing and commercial developments and for energy infrastructure. Over those 15 years, I watched climate change move from something that was discussed largely as a future risk to something that is increasingly reflected in day-to-day engineering practice. When I started my career, it was common for us to apply a 20 per cent uplift for climate change to our calculations, to account for increased river flow or peak rainfall intensities in order to assess future impacts of flooding. Today, depending on the catchment, that figure can be as high as 59 per cent. Those changes are happening now. Those numbers are produced not by politicians or campaign groups but by scientists, engineers and regulators who are analysing the best available evidence we have today.”
“To take an example of the topics covered by the screening, the price of energy is a major driver of inflation and the cost of living. Renewable energy is not just better for the planet; it is more economically secure. Our dependency on fossil fuels has been responsible for huge economic shocks in recent years. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine did not make wind power more expensive, and Trump’s war with Iran did not make solar more costly. Almost 90 per cent of homes in Scotland rely on fossil fuels. It seems fairly obvious that, if we are less reliant on fossil fuels, we will be less exposed to the shocks created by global events. Before entering Parliament, I spent about 15 years working as a hydrologist.”
“I refer to my entry in the register of members’ interests, which shows that I am a councillor in Fife and a principal hydrologist for Kiloh Associates. I recently attended a screening of the “People’s Emergency Briefing” from a campaign that brings together leading scientists, economists, security experts and communicators to explain the risks posed by climate change and nature loss and to encourage a more honest public conversation about the scale of the challenge before us. The campaign calls on the UK Government to stage a prime-time, multichannel televised national emergency briefing to communicate the scale and immediacy of the risks that we face. The film perfectly captures the key risks around climate change, and I would encourage all members to look up the community screenings that are happening all over Scotland.”
“Funding decisions should be linked more closely to workforce planning, regional economic needs and the skills shortages that employers have identified. We would like to see that from the Scottish Government, and I would be interested to know whether the minister agrees. 16:44”
“To answer the question that Mr Barratt put to me, I believe that institutions continuing to receive flat cash is one of the reasons why a lot of colleges and universities face funding pressures at present. If we continue in this way, services will be reduced, campuses will come under threat and opportunities for learners will be diminished. Those challenges are not, in all cases, simply the result of individual management failures; they raise questions about the long-term sustainability of Scotland’s higher and further education system. I am well pushing it, aren’t I, Deputy Presiding Officer? The Scottish Conservatives are arguing for a more integrated and economically focused approach from the Scottish Funding Council.”
“The reality of the situation is that institutions—this applies to universities other than the University of Dundee—cannot continue to spend money that they do not have. Difficult decisions are never welcome, particularly when they affect staff and students, but university leaders have a responsibility to ensure that their institutions remain financially viable. The alternative is a continued cycle of crisis management, which serves nobody. The University of Dundee is not alone in sounding the alarm. I appreciate that Forth Valley College, which operates in my region, is not a university, but it has announced that its Alloa campus could close in order to secure the future of the wider college.”
“It is not about immigration issues but about the current funding model, which does not work for universities. In relation to the proposed further job losses and the additional £20 million-worth of savings, I am interested in finding out a bit more about the correspondence between the Cabinet Secretary for Education, Culture and Gaelic, the Scottish Funding Council and the university on pausing the redundancies, because we do not seem to be moving in the direction that we would expect. I do not know whether the minister has any more information in front of him that he could provide to members today. When so many of our leading universities face a financial crisis, senior management should lead by example, as has been reiterated by other members.”
“Does Meghan Gallacher agree that, as Heather Anderson noted, the UK’s regressive immigration policies are at least partly to blame for the challenges that our university sector now faces? Driving out fee-paying international students has compounded the financial struggles of our universities. I am a proud graduate of the University of Dundee, and that is one of the messages that I have been given by staff who still work there. Are they wrong? Meghan Gallacher: That was a well-read intervention from Mr Barrett. I thank him very much for that. If I may pick up on the point— [Interruption.] Hold on. I accepted the intervention, so please let me respond. I will set out the reasons why I think that our universities and colleges are in the financial situation that they are in.”
“To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on what the next steps are towards delivering a direct ferry service between Rosyth and mainland Europe. (S7O-00092)”
“I will talk about some of the contributions that, frankly—although, as I said, not surprisingly—I was disappointed in. Murdo Fraser banged the same old drum and asked how we are going to fill the black hole; yet, every time that I answered that question, he did not listen and went back to the same point again. Likewise, Meghan Gallacher symptomises the descent into irrelevance of the Tory benches, whose members are simply going round in circles on these old canards without any innovation in their approach to how we tackle this very significant issue.”
“Does the cabinet secretary agree that that is not the kind of reform that we need? Ivan McKee: Yes. David Barratt also draws out the important point that the inconsistency in the Reform position is quite apparent. Reform members say in their amendment that we should not be talking about this stuff, and then they go on to talk about it from very different and contradictory positions. I draw Malcolm Offord’s attention to the fact that the biggest part of the net zero spend is financial support for bus fares and train subsidies—the removal of peak fares and so on. I do not know whether it is Reform policy to get rid of that support. Certainly, I expect Malcolm Offord, like me, to benefit from a bus pass. I would hate to lose that, frequent user of bus services that I am.”
“Will the cabinet secretary take an intervention? Ivan McKee: I will take David Barratt’s intervention, and then I will go on to talk about those other contributions. David Barratt: In moving the Reform amendment, Malcolm Offord stated that the Scottish Government should have no remit on net zero and energy, and he suggested cutting public bodies that are responsible for related areas. In contrast, Max Bannerman noted the value of community wind power in his region. Reform’s plan would see bodies such as Local Energy Scotland scrapped, along with the community and renewable energy scheme, cutting support for often small— The Presiding Officer: Hello. It is not a speech within a speech. It is an intervention. David Barratt: —renewable energy schemes and for community-owned wind.”
“I refer members to my entry in the register of members’ interests, which shows that I am a councillor in Fife. To ask the Scottish Government what work is being done to ensure that regulatory and consenting frameworks support the deployment of low-carbon heat recovery technologies from rivers, estuaries and coastal waters. (S7O-00039)”
“To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to bring forward the delivery of a new Lochgelly health centre before 2031. (S7O-00011)”
“Through community-based delivery and partnership with a third sector organisation, delivery will help to create spaces where children can take part, feel included and build relationships. For example, work in Glasgow will include an alternative engagement programme, class to clubs, which is designed as a targeted intervention for identified pupils who are currently disengaged and will use a progressive engagement model that begins with small-group support. The programme will focus on those who are least likely to participate in physical activity, helping to build confidence and create pathways for pupils into school-based and community sport.”
“That means recognising that some children need more support than others to participate. Inclusion is not simply an add-on in this programme—it is central to it. Although local authorities and national partners still have a few weeks to finalise plans, what we have seen so far has been extremely encouraging. Across local authorities, national governing bodies and partner organisations, there is a strong and consistent focus on reaching underrepresented groups, creating accessible and welcoming environments, and removing barriers, whether they are financial, physical or psychological. Many of these plans are rooted in communities, delivered in familiar, trusted community spaces and supported by trained and inclusive workforces. That is particularly important for children with learning disabilities and neurodivergence.”
“At a local level, we will see commitment in action, with funding distributed across all 32 local authorities, ensuring that every community in Scotland can benefit. From my perspective as minister, what matters the most is who the programme is designed for. Yes, it is universal and open to all children and young people, but it is also deliberately targeted. The summer of sport will prioritise children who too often face structural barriers to participation: children living in poverty, children with additional support needs, care-experienced young people, young carers and those in rural and isolated communities. That is absolutely the right approach. When we talk about children’s rights, we are talking not only about access in theory but about meaningful, equitable access in practice.”
“As chieftain of Inverkeithing highland games, I want to ensure that the role of highland games is not forgotten in the debate on the motion. Does the minister recognise the cultural importance of highland games to Scotland’s summer of sport? I also extend an invite to everyone across the chamber to attend Inverkeithing highland games on 8 August. Siobhian Brown: Yes, absolutely. We also need to recognise the importance of highland games; they are not to be left out. Crucially, activities within this programme will be free, targeted or low cost. That matters because, in the midst of a cost of living crisis, cost remains one of the biggest barriers to participation for too many children and young people.”
“It was only through the intervention of the then Scottish Government energy minister, Fergus Ewing—that is another Ewing reference—that the project was ultimately completed. The Scottish Government moved heaven and earth to salvage what it could, with one hand tied behind its back. Very little hydropower has been developed in the more than a decade since then. That is not because the resource is not there in vast and untapped quantities; it is because the resource is predominantly in Scotland. When decisions are made elsewhere, Scotland’s priorities will never come first. For too long, decisions about Scotland’s resources have been made elsewhere, and our communities have paid the price. Scotland’s energy should be in Scotland’s hands, and, in Scotland’s hands, it could power our future.”
“I use the term “support mechanisms” rather than “subsidy”, because the term “subsidy” is never used when people talk about nuclear power, is it? The strike price for energy from Hinkley, after inflation, is more than double that of most offshore wind, and that is leaving aside the cost of nuclear waste. With greater powers, we could invest some of that difference in smarter grids, insulation, efficiency, and greater heat and energy storage. I mentioned what the UK Government did in 2015 to undermine our renewables industry. At that time, I was helping to take a small-scale hydro scheme through the consenting process. Construction very nearly did not go ahead, because the funding structures were ripped away with virtually no notice.”
“I do not object to the principle of energy infrastructure. I spent the best part of 15 years working in renewables and energy as a hydrologist and an environmental consultant. What I object to is communities not feeling the benefit of that infrastructure and Scotland not having powers over its own energy. Scotland stands on the cusp of another renewable energy boom, but that was true a decade ago, so why are we still paying some of the highest energy bills in the world when we produce so much energy? The answer is simple. We do not have powers over our own energy. In 2015, the UK Government, under David Cameron, systematically dismantled support mechanisms for renewables, which devastated the then growing small-scale wind, hydro and solar sectors.”
“They are my first priority, and I will not let them down. Today, the constituency faces a new wave of energy development: vast solar farms, towering wind turbines and massive grid infrastructure in the form of eastern green link 4, which is a high- voltage cable linking Ballingry to Norfolk. That cable, which will be more than 600km long, will be capable of transmitting 2GW of clean, green Scottish energy to homes in England. Ballingry is a proud community with deep roots in its mining heritage, but it is also a community surrounded by energy wealth, the benefit of which it too often sees little of. The EGL4 cable will transmit electricity to an area in England that has lower standing charges than apply in Scotland. Energy that is sent from Ballingry will cost less in King’s Lynn than it does for those who live in Ballingry.”
“The tradition of a first speech is that I should try to shoehorn in references to my constituency. It is not difficult to do that in a debate on the subject of energy, as Cowdenbeath is a constituency that has been forged by energy boom and energy decline. Our mining heritage shaped our communities and powered our economy and our nation. The decline of mining was rapid and devastating, and it left families and communities broken. It was the very antithesis of a just transition. That legacy lives on today. It lives on in deprivation, in communities that are vulnerable to rising energy costs and in places that too often feel left behind, but it also lives on in the character of our communities. I am profoundly honoured to represent those proud, resilient and deeply tight- knit communities.”
“The project was intended to symbolise the generations that the Parliament was built to serve. I remember spending what felt like hours hunting for that drawing. I would love to say that that visit inspired me to seek election one day, as I hope that visits here inspired many young people now. Truthfully, I suspect that I was more excited by whatever came after—I cannot remember whether it was Edinburgh Zoo or Dynamic Earth. Reflecting on that visit, it struck me how strange this parliamentary session must feel to those who have been here ever since then, and for this to be the first session without a Ewing among us. I promise to do my bit to inject a little Ewing spirit into defending the people I represent. I can already feel the whips getting nervous, so I should move on.”
“I want to begin by paying tribute to my predecessor, Annabelle Ewing. Annabelle spent decades in the service of Scotland and was a formidable voice for the Cowdenbeath constituency. She was vocal on issues such as improving the rail services on the Fife circle and defending our hard-working and essential fire crews, and she fought for investment in the replacement Lochgelly health centre— something that I will, constructively, continue to press for. As I walked into this building for the first time, earlier this month, I found myself recalling a visit many years ago, when I was still in primary school and the Parliament was still under construction. Alongside thousands of schoolchildren from across Scotland, I had drawn a picture of myself, to be displayed on the construction hoarding around the site.”
“We are happy to have people who change their mind on independence. I just wish that the Tories would do the same. Craig Hoy: I recall Thomas Kerr when he was supporting Penny Mordaunt and Jeremy Hunt, before he reinvented himself as the Reform Genghis Khan that he is now. Fundamentally, it is a sorry state of affairs that this is the first substantive debate that we are having in the new parliamentary session. If anyone beyond this Parliament is watching the debate, they will inevitably come to the same conclusion that I reached during the previous parliamentary session. This debate is a waste of space and a blatant waste of valuable parliamentary time.”
“In fact, after Lord Offord’s performance, the hens are probably having a party. Reform cannot be trusted on the future of the union. As exhibit A, we can take the self-styled “Sir” David Kirkwood MSP, who is sitting over my shoulder to the left. He remains committed to breaking up Britain. If Mr Offord looks to the Reform benches, he will see a clutch of cranks and constitutional chameleons who are weak on Scotland’s place in our United Kingdom. Thomas Kerr (Glasgow) (Reform) rose— Craig Hoy: Presiding Officer, talking about cranks, I will take an intervention. Thomas Kerr: Considering that his party stood a pro-independence candidate in Shettleston and accepted Lisa Cameron on to the Conservative benches, would Mr Hoy accept that it is a tad hypocritical to attack other people?”
“People brought up the state of the roads and the state of the health service, the parlous state of the SNP and corruption in the SNP, but never once did they bring up independence. I therefore make this appeal to John Swinney today: why does he not ditch his constitutional obsession and fix the mess that the SNP has created and ignored over 19 wasted years? In this chamber, we are the only authentic voice making that call, because Labour’s Sir Keir Starmer is now so weak and beleaguered that he is incapable of standing up to the SNP. Although Reform claims to be a unionist party, we know that it is weak on the future of the union. Reform promised to be the fox in the hen house, but after today’s contribution from Malcolm Offord, it is clear that the hens have nothing to fear.”
“Emma Roddick: I am grateful to the member for giving way; I have heard a few members on his side of the chamber today call for us to live in the present and not the past, so I am curious as to why he is referring to arguments lost in 2014, rather than who won the election this month. Does he recognise that that referendum was 12 years ago, and that that is as many MSPs as his party currently has? Is he really in a position, therefore, to claim that we cannot go back and ask people for their opinion again? Craig Hoy: Such is the member’s complacency that she does not realise that her party lost 400,000 votes over the past five years. I knocked on 10,000 doors and not one person brought up independence.”
“Had Reform handed the SNP my seat, could members imagine pro-UK voters living in Gretna looking their children and grandchildren in the eye and telling them that we put at risk their right to go forth into the world and to profess themselves proud to be Scottish and proud to be British, with all the doors that that opens and all the benefits that it brings? If it was not for the Scottish Conservatives preventing the SNP from taking those blue-wall seats and denying the First Minister the majority that he craved, we could be in that very dangerous place today. David Barratt: Will the member take an intervention? Craig Hoy: I will take Emma Roddick’s intervention.”
“So, as I seek to increase my majority, I invite Mr Swinney to attend my constituency as often as possible over the next five years, because, each and every time that he raises the spectre of independence, my constituents are reminded of the reckless disregard that he has for their futures: the risk to their jobs, pensions and public services, their national security and their national identity. Emma Roddick: Will the member give way? Craig Hoy: I will, in a moment. Those risks remain very real for those who live along the border.”
“Will the member accept an intervention? Craig Hoy: In the recent election, in the south of Scotland, it was the Scottish Conservatives alone who stood up to the SNP and for Scotland’s place in our United Kingdom. Despite the First Minister’s best efforts, and those of his unwitting allies in Reform, the vitally important blue wall remained resolutely in place. So convinced was John Swinney that he could break it that he visited Dumfriesshire during a dash along the border, just days before the election.”
“My loyalty is to the people of the Cowdenbeath constituency. I take the following affirmation as required by law. I, David John Barratt, do solemnly, sincerely and truly declare and affirm, that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to His Majesty King Charles, his heirs and successors, according to law.”