Keith Brown
Scottish National Party · Scotland
“On his visit to Coalsnaughton, in my constituency, the First Minister spoke to residents about the anxiety, uncertainty and disruption that are impacting families who have been evacuated following ground movement beneath their homes, yet there is still no resolution in sight.”
“Will the member take an intervention? Jenny Young: Not just now, thank you. That funding did not repair the damage done to Scotland’s colleges done by the 20 per cent cut, and a spending review promising flat cash—which, in reality, is a cut—gives Scotland’s colleges no light at the end of the tunnel.”
“Fergus Ewing argued for years that air passenger duty should be devolved so that it could be passed to this Parliament and the Scottish Government could cut it in order to encourage more people to fly here, but guess what? It has now been devolved—we now have air departure tax—but what is the Scottish Government going to do?”
“I am just trying to work out what the Conservatives’ approach is. In the previous session of Parliament, virtually every single member of a group of nearly 30 members—maybe more than that; it is now reduced—advocated more public expenditure in virtually every area of Government and yet wanted to cut Government income.”
“What we should be doing with our tax powers, instead of constantly increasing the tax burden, is making Scotland competitive and attracting more wealthy people to come here. Whether they are coming on holiday, to invest, to set up businesses or to purchase property, let us encourage them.”
“The Scottish Fiscal Commission talks about the economic growth gap that my colleague Craig Hoy referred to earlier. People talk about the private jet tax as something to celebrate. I was recently told by tourism leaders that the fastest-growing sector in Scottish tourism is what they call the high end of the tourist market.”
The complete record
Every one of 290 lines we hold for Keith Brown, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 6.
“Will the member take an intervention? Jenny Young: Not just now, thank you. That funding did not repair the damage done to Scotland’s colleges done by the 20 per cent cut, and a spending review promising flat cash—which, in reality, is a cut—gives Scotland’s colleges no light at the end of the tunnel. If the Scottish Government is serious about growing Scotland’s economy—I sincerely hope that it is—colleges must not be left to wither on the vine. 16:50”
“On his visit to Coalsnaughton, in my constituency, the First Minister spoke to residents about the anxiety, uncertainty and disruption that are impacting families who have been evacuated following ground movement beneath their homes, yet there is still no resolution in sight. Although any support that might be provided through the Bellwin scheme would be welcome, the scale, shock and duration of the incident are placing exceptional pressure on one of Scotland’s smallest local authorities. What additional resources will the Scottish Government provide to ensure that residents continue to receive essential support and that Clackmannanshire Council is not left to bear the costs of this unprecedented emergency alone?”
“That is the point that we make in our amendment and I encourage members to support it.”
“What we should be doing with our tax powers, instead of constantly increasing the tax burden, is making Scotland competitive and attracting more wealthy people to come here. Whether they are coming on holiday, to invest, to set up businesses or to purchase property, let us encourage them. The fiscal framework that determines the overall level of the Scottish budget depends on relative income tax performance between Scotland and the rest of the UK. If we have more high-net-worth individuals in Scotland paying more tax, we will generate proportionately more money to fund our public services. That is the approach that we should take, not wealth taxes that will raise very little, cost a fortune to collect and drive away the very people, businesses and capital that Scotland needs.”
“Therefore, many end up being sucked away to the golden triangle in the south of England or overseas to the west coast of the US. The reason why we do not have enough venture capital in Scotland is that we do not have enough venture capitalists in Scotland, because venture capitalists want to invest in businesses close to where they live. That is why there is a virtuous circle of venture capitalists and growing dynamic tech companies in the south-east of England and we do not have the same opportunities here. If we send out messages that we want to tax the better- off people more and more, we will drive people away, drive investment away and lose jobs in those dynamic sectors of the economy.”
“Fergus Ewing argued for years that air passenger duty should be devolved so that it could be passed to this Parliament and the Scottish Government could cut it in order to encourage more people to fly here, but guess what? It has now been devolved—we now have air departure tax—but what is the Scottish Government going to do? Will it do what that wise man Fergus Ewing said and cut the tax? No—it wants to put it up. It wants to make it more difficult for people to come here. It wants to damage Scottish tourism. If only we could get Fergus Ewing back. We know that we have a problem with the lack of venture capital in Scotland. We are very good at generating ideas. We have great spin-offs from our universities, but once they get above a certain size, they cannot get the venture capital that they need in order to grow.”
“The Scottish Fiscal Commission talks about the economic growth gap that my colleague Craig Hoy referred to earlier. People talk about the private jet tax as something to celebrate. I was recently told by tourism leaders that the fastest-growing sector in Scottish tourism is what they call the high end of the tourist market. That now represents 30 per cent of total income and is expanding rapidly. That is high-net-worth individuals—wealthy people— choosing to come and visit Scotland, and what are we going to do? We are going to try to introduce a private jet tax to discourage them from coming to Scotland. That is the opposite of what we should be doing. I can remember—as will some other members here—when Fergus Ewing was the tourism minister.”
“I am just trying to work out what the Conservatives’ approach is. In the previous session of Parliament, virtually every single member of a group of nearly 30 members—maybe more than that; it is now reduced—advocated more public expenditure in virtually every area of Government and yet wanted to cut Government income. That is the economics of Liz Truss. It is also true to say that the Conservatives presided over a national debt of more than £3 trillion and the highest tax burden since the second world war. Why should we believe in the voodoo economics of the Conservatives? Murdo Fraser: What we have to do is deliver economic growth. If we can grow and expand the tax base, we do not need to increase tax rates to get the revenues that we need. That is where the Scottish Government has been failing.”
“The First Minister may be aware that, so far, 60 families in my constituency have had to be evacuated at short notice from their homes due to underground movement in the former mining community of Coalsnaughton. The distress and uncertainty that have been caused for my constituents, including their children, cannot be overestimated. Will the First Minister assure me that the national resilience framework and his Government will spare no effort in assisting my constituents? Will they ensure that the Mining Remediation Authority and the relevant insurance companies will fully and quickly discharge their responsibilities and provide serious support for my constituents as they experience the profound distress of being moved from their homes at short notice?”
“On the subject of repentance, given that Stephen Kerr’s party proposed a £1 billion cut in the Scottish budget to pay for tax cuts and that it has said today that it wants to abolish land and buildings transactions tax, how does he propose to fund the requests that his party has made? Will he repent from his party’s stupid decisions of the past? [Interruption.] Stephen Kerr: I thank Keith Brown for his helpful intervention. I do not know why members applauded what he said, because the SNP Government has committed to making a cut of more than £1 billion in the cost of the public purse. I look forward to Ivan McKee—Ivan the Terrible, as my colleague Murdo Fraser has christened him— bringing forward those proposals. At that time, perhaps Keith Brown will repent of pouring scorn on the idea that we can do more with less.”
“I, Keith James Brown, 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.”
“To ask the Scottish Government, in light of the reported decision by Forth Valley College to retain its Alloa campus for 2026-27, what engagement it will have with the college and the Scottish Funding Council to ensure the long-term future of further education provision in Clackmannanshire. (S6O-05685)”
“I remind members that I told them during stage 3 that a GP had come to see me and said that she would resign immediately if any bill was passed that took away the right to conscientious objection. The other crucial issue is coercion. Explicit coercion is a true concern, but more pressing for me is the idea of self-imposed coercion. I do not think that the second of those issues can ever be successfully dealt with, although the first one perhaps could be. In conclusion, I think that a law on assisted dying will come at some point. I just do not think that this bill is the bill that we should pass. 21:11”
“It is also true to say, as Ruth Maguire did, that the issue of domestic violence and the fact that women can be made to feel that they have no worth are extremely important in all of this. I was extremely moved by Pam Duncan- Glancy’s speech. It brought home to me, in a way that had not been done previously, the idea that a lot of disabled people probably cling to and take a huge deal of comfort from the fact that assisted dying is not currently in law. That is worth thinking about. In my view, two of those issues are crucial. One is the section 104 issue, which is about the inability of the Scottish Parliament to see through some of the bill’s most crucial provisions, or even to be absolutely assured that they will be seen through.”
“I know that there will not be many cases like that, but, like Humza Yousaf, I would say that one is too many. It is also important to say—as Michelle Thomson did, although doing so has not been prevalent— that there is pain on both sides. I acknowledge that people will still have to go through some of the terrible experiences that they have to go through currently if we do not pass the bill, but those who are urging that we pass it should also acknowledge that, if it does pass, there will be pain on the other side. Members can imagine that, if their mother, sister or somebody else they know decided to go for assisted dying for reasons other than the ones that have been proposed, because they felt that in that way they would be less of a burden, there would be pain on that side, as well. Both of those experiences are extremely valid.”
“This might be a misogynistic view, and it might be patronising, but my view is that mothers in particular feel much more keenly than the general population the need to relieve burdens on others. It is almost socially instilled and, if it is not, it comes through sheer love—a word that has not been mentioned much in the debate until this point. I was very touched by Lorna Slater’s speech. It is of course true to say that this is also possible for men, but it may be a matter of a mother, in particular, deciding, for example, that her remaining family would be better off financially if she was to decide to go for assisted dying, or that it would be easier for some of her children—in my case, sisters having to travel from Wales and England to come and see her on a regular basis— were she to choose assisted dying.”
“To those who say—rightly, I think—that this is one of the most important bills that we have ever considered, I say, how can they accept that we will not see two vital areas of legislation through to their conclusion because the decision will be taken by others? I cannot accept that. I do not trust the idea that another Parliament can be trusted, and not because of any malevolence on its part—I think that is evading responsibility. My main concern has always been in relation to the issue of coercion and especially the pressure that people will put on themselves. When I think about this, I usually have in my mind the picture of a woman—usually a mother. In the past few years, I have lost a niece, a sister, a mother and a partner in similar circumstances, all of whom were mothers.”
“The approach that I have taken to the bill has very much been to maximise, where I thought I could, the safeguards that were presented through the amendments that would apply in the event that the bill passed, but not to the extent that I thought that they would make the bill unworkable if it did pass. There are two issues for me, like for many other members. First, there is the section 104 process, which is a huge issue. No one in this Parliament will draft the section 104 order; it will be drafted by others. It is then due to go through a process in which this Parliament will have no say, and it may be rejected completely.”
“Like others have done, I will mention the point made by Liz Smith about the excellent nature of the debate that we have had. However, she mentioned something else, which has not been repeated but which I think is worth repeating. I have always thought that it is perfectly possible for this Parliament to have debates of this quality, but we just choose not to do it. The other point that Liz Smith made about the need to get past the rancour and bad humour that is too evident in the chamber too often is extremely important, and I hope that that view prevails in the next session of Parliament.”
“Amendment 46 agreed to. The Deputy Presiding Officer: I remind members that, if amendment 47 is agreed to, I cannot call amendment 225 due to pre-emption. Amendment 47 moved—[Liam McArthur]. The Deputy Presiding Officer: The question is, that amendment 47 be agreed to. Are we agreed? Members: No. The Deputy Presiding Officer: There will be a division. The vote is closed. Ariane Burgess: On a point of order, Presiding Officer, I would have voted yes. The Deputy Presiding Officer: Thank you, Ms Burgess. Your vote will be recorded.”
“For Adam, George (Paisley) (SNP) Adam, Karen (Banffshire and Buchan Coast) (SNP) Arthur, Tom (Renfrewshire South) (SNP) Beattie, Colin (Midlothian North and Musselburgh) (SNP) Boyack, Sarah (Lothian) (Lab) Briggs, Miles (Lothian) (Con) Brown, Keith (Clackmannanshire and Dunblane) (SNP) Brown, Siobhian (Ayr) (SNP) Burgess, Ariane (Highlands and Islands) (Green) Burnett, Alexander (Aberdeenshire West) (Con) Callaghan, Stephanie (Uddingston and Bellshill) (SNP) Carlaw, Jackson (Eastwood) (Con) Chapman, Maggie (North East Scotland) (Green) 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) Dornan, James (Glasgow Cathcart) (SNP) Dowey, Sharon (South Scotland) (Con) Dunbar, Jackie (Aberdeen Donside) (SNP) Fairlie, Jim (Perthshire South and Kinross-shire) (SNP) FitzPatrick, Joe (Dundee City West) (SNP) Gibson, Kenneth (Cunninghame North) (SNP) Gilruth, Jenny (Mid Fife and Glenrothes) (SNP) Golden, Maurice (North East Scotland) (Con) Gougeon, Mairi (Angus North and Mearns) (SNP) Grahame, Christine (Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale) (SNP) Gray, Neil (Airdrie and Shotts) (SNP) Greene, Jamie (West Scotland) (LD) Greer, Ross (West Scotland) (Green) Gulhane, Sandesh (Glasgow) (Con) Hamilton, Rachael (Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (Con) 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) Kerr, Liam (North East Scotland) (Con) Kidd, Bill (Glasgow Anniesland) (SNP) Lennon, Monica (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, Gillian (Central Scotland) (Green) Mackay, Rona (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (SNP) Macpherson, Ben (Edinburgh Northern and Leith) (SNP) Martin, Gillian (Aberdeenshire East) (SNP) McAllan, Màiri (Clydesdale) (SNP) McArthur, Liam (Orkney Islands) (LD) McLennan, Paul (East Lothian) (SNP) Minto, Jenni (Argyll and Bute) (SNP) Mochan, Carol (South Scotland) (Lab) Rennie, Willie (North East Fife) (LD) Robertson, Angus (Edinburgh Central) (SNP) Robison, Shona (Dundee City East) (SNP) Rowley, Alex (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab) Ruskell, Mark (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Green) Slater, Lorna (Lothian) (Green) Somerville, Shirley-Anne (Dunfermline) (SNP) 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) 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) Whittle, Brian (South Scotland) (Con) Wishart, Beatrice (Shetland Islands) (LD) Against Adamson, Clare (Motherwell and Wishaw) (SNP) Allan, Alasdair (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (SNP) Baillie, Jackie (Dumbarton) (Lab) Baker, Claire (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab) Balfour, Jeremy (Lothian) (Ind) Bibby, Neil (West Scotland) (Lab) Carson, Finlay (Galloway and West Dumfries) (Con) Choudhury, Foysol (Lothian) (Ind) Duncan-Glancy, Pam (Glasgow) (Ind) Ewing, Fergus (Inverness and Nairn) (Ind) Findlay, Russell (West Scotland) (Con) Forbes, Kate (Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch) (SNP) Fraser, Murdo (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Gallacher, Meghan (Central Scotland) (Con) Gosal, Pam (West Scotland) (Con) Grant, Rhoda (Highlands and Islands) (Lab) Griffin, Mark (Central Scotland) (Lab) Halcro Johnston, Jamie (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Hoy, Craig (South Scotland) (Con) Kerr, Stephen (Central Scotland) (Con) Leonard, Richard (Central Scotland) (Lab) Marra, Michael (North East Scotland) (Lab) Mason, John (Glasgow Shettleston) (Ind) Matheson, Michael (Falkirk West) (SNP) McCall, Roz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) McKee, Ivan (Glasgow Provan) (SNP) McMillan, Stuart (Greenock and Inverclyde) (SNP) McNair, Marie (Clydebank and Milngavie) (SNP) McNeill, Pauline (Glasgow) (Lab) Mundell, Oliver (Dumfriesshire) (Con) Nicoll, Audrey (Aberdeen South and North Kincardine) (SNP) O’Kane, Paul (West Scotland) (Lab) Regan, Ash (Edinburgh Eastern) (Ind) Roddick, Emma (Highlands and Islands) (SNP) Ross, Douglas (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Russell, Davy (Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse) (Lab) Smith, Liz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Stevenson, Collette (East Kilbride) (SNP) Webber, Sue (Lothian) (Con) Wells, Annie (Glasgow) (Con) White, Tess (North East Scotland) (Con) Yousaf, Humza (Glasgow Pollok) (SNP) Abstentions Doris, Bob (Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn) (SNP) Mountain, Edward (Highlands and Islands) (Con) The Deputy Presiding Officer: The result of the division is: For, 77, Against 42, Abstentions 2.”
“Amendment 45 agreed to. Amendment 46 moved—[Liam McArthur]. The Deputy Presiding Officer: The question is, that amendment 46 be agreed to. Are we agreed? Members: No. The Deputy Presiding Officer: There will be a division. The vote is closed. Kenneth Gibson: On a point of order, Presiding Officer, I could not connect to the voting system. I would have voted yes. The Deputy Presiding Officer: Thank you, Mr Gibson. Your vote will be recorded.”
“For Adam, George (Paisley) (SNP) Adam, Karen (Banffshire and Buchan Coast) (SNP) Arthur, Tom (Renfrewshire South) (SNP) Beattie, Colin (Midlothian North and Musselburgh) (SNP) Boyack, Sarah (Lothian) (Lab) Briggs, Miles (Lothian) (Con) Brown, Keith (Clackmannanshire and Dunblane) (SNP) Brown, Siobhian (Ayr) (SNP) Burgess, Ariane (Highlands and Islands) (Green) Burnett, Alexander (Aberdeenshire West) (Con) Callaghan, Stephanie (Uddingston and Bellshill) (SNP) Carlaw, Jackson (Eastwood) (Con) Chapman, Maggie (North East Scotland) (Green) 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) Dornan, James (Glasgow Cathcart) (SNP) Dowey, Sharon (South Scotland) (Con) Dunbar, Jackie (Aberdeen Donside) (SNP) Fairlie, Jim (Perthshire South and Kinross-shire) (SNP) FitzPatrick, Joe (Dundee City West) (SNP) Gibson, Kenneth (Cunninghame North) (SNP) Gilruth, Jenny (Mid Fife and Glenrothes) (SNP) Golden, Maurice (North East Scotland) (Con) Gougeon, Mairi (Angus North and Mearns) (SNP) Grahame, Christine (Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale) (SNP) Gray, Neil (Airdrie and Shotts) (SNP) Greene, Jamie (West Scotland) (LD) Greer, Ross (West Scotland) (Green) Gulhane, Sandesh (Glasgow) (Con) Hamilton, Rachael (Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (Con) 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) Kerr, Liam (North East Scotland) (Con) Kidd, Bill (Glasgow Anniesland) (SNP) Lennon, Monica (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, Gillian (Central Scotland) (Green) Mackay, Rona (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (SNP) Macpherson, Ben (Edinburgh Northern and Leith) (SNP) Martin, Gillian (Aberdeenshire East) (SNP) McAllan, Màiri (Clydesdale) (SNP) McArthur, Liam (Orkney Islands) (LD) McLennan, Paul (East Lothian) (SNP) Minto, Jenni (Argyll and Bute) (SNP) Mochan, Carol (South Scotland) (Lab) Rennie, Willie (North East Fife) (LD) Robertson, Angus (Edinburgh Central) (SNP) Robison, Shona (Dundee City East) (SNP) Rowley, Alex (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab) Ruskell, Mark (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Green) Slater, Lorna (Lothian) (Green) Somerville, Shirley-Anne (Dunfermline) (SNP) 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) Todd, Maree (Caithness, Sutherland and Ross) (SNP) Torrance, David (Kirkcaldy) (SNP) Tweed, Evelyn (Stirling) (SNP) Whitfield, Martin (South Scotland) (Lab) Whitham, Elena (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley) (SNP) Whittle, Brian (South Scotland) (Con) Wishart, Beatrice (Shetland Islands) (LD) Against Adamson, Clare (Motherwell and Wishaw) (SNP) Allan, Alasdair (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (SNP) Baillie, Jackie (Dumbarton) (Lab) Baker, Claire (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab) Balfour, Jeremy (Lothian) (Ind) Bibby, Neil (West Scotland) (Lab) Carson, Finlay (Galloway and West Dumfries) (Con) Duncan-Glancy, Pam (Glasgow) (Ind) Ewing, Fergus (Inverness and Nairn) (Ind) Findlay, Russell (West Scotland) (Con) Forbes, Kate (Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch) (SNP) Fraser, Murdo (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Gallacher, Meghan (Central Scotland) (Con) Gosal, Pam (West Scotland) (Con) Grant, Rhoda (Highlands and Islands) (Lab) Griffin, Mark (Central Scotland) (Lab) Halcro Johnston, Jamie (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Hoy, Craig (South Scotland) (Con) Kerr, Stephen (Central Scotland) (Con) Leonard, Richard (Central Scotland) (Lab) Marra, Michael (North East Scotland) (Lab) Mason, John (Glasgow Shettleston) (Ind) Matheson, Michael (Falkirk West) (SNP) McCall, Roz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) McKee, Ivan (Glasgow Provan) (SNP) McMillan, Stuart (Greenock and Inverclyde) (SNP) McNair, Marie (Clydebank and Milngavie) (SNP) McNeill, Pauline (Glasgow) (Lab) Mundell, Oliver (Dumfriesshire) (Con) Nicoll, Audrey (Aberdeen South and North Kincardine) (SNP) O’Kane, Paul (West Scotland) (Lab) Regan, Ash (Edinburgh Eastern) (Ind) Roddick, Emma (Highlands and Islands) (SNP) Ross, Douglas (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Russell, Davy (Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse) (Lab) Smith, Liz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Stevenson, Collette (East Kilbride) (SNP) Villalba, Mercedes (North East Scotland) (Lab) Webber, Sue (Lothian) (Con) Wells, Annie (Glasgow) (Con) White, Tess (North East Scotland) (Con) Yousaf, Humza (Glasgow Pollok) (SNP) Abstentions Doris, Bob (Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn) (SNP) Mountain, Edward (Highlands and Islands) (Con) The Deputy Presiding Officer: The result of the division is: For 76, Against 42, Abstentions 2.”
“If there were any concerns in that respect, those would best be picked up in the development of the way in which we gather the data that all of us appreciate needs to be gathered in order to maintain robust and resilient gathering on different conditions and capture the fact that substances will be used for a process that will, by that stage, be legal. I press amendment 45. The Deputy Presiding Officer: The question is, that amendment 45 be agreed to. Are we agreed? Members: No. The Deputy Presiding Officer: There will be a division. The vote is closed. Alasdair Allan: On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I could not connect. I would have voted no. The Deputy Presiding Officer: Thank you, Dr Allan. Your vote will be recorded.”
“I am quite attracted to the Government’s explanation that amendments 45 to 47 would provide a less prescriptive and more flexible opportunity for data to be collected. Does that flexibility extend to being able not to mention that a death has been a result of assisted dying? It might be unfair to ask Liam McArthur this, but in what circumstances would a medical practitioner want to exclude that reason from the data? Can he help? Liam McArthur: I am not sure that I can. I understand the rationale for trying to explore a variety of scenarios, but it is difficult to envisage a situation in which what Mr Brown suggests would be the case, given the protections that are already in the bill and the continued data gathering that would be required. Some of that has been enhanced by amendments that we have agreed to over the past couple of days.”
“The First Minister will be aware of a memo that was leaked this week, which revealed the Prime Minister’s true attitude towards devolution. Is the First Minister as disappointed as I am that the Labour Party in Scotland has chosen to side with the Prime Minister and not with the principles of devolution? Unlike their colleagues in the Welsh Senedd, who called out Starmer’s actions as a constitutional outrage and a betrayal of devolution, Scottish Labour members made no such outcry. What assessment has the First Minister made of the leaked memo? Does he agree that it is only with a fresh start through independence that the integrity and future of Scotland’s Parliament can be protected and enhanced?”
“If it must be on Friday, I will certainly be here, although it may be easier for me to get to the Parliament than it will be for others. 21:41”
“I appreciate that it puts difficulties on diaries when people need to travel and have meetings, but if somebody has caring responsibilities or needs a carer who cannot be there, the Parliament will not be inclusive and we will be excluding people from employment. We must draw a distinction between members who need to travel and attend meetings and those who cannot get to the Parliament because they cannot physically get dressed to do so. Keith Brown: I have already conceded the point that I recognise the difficulties that Jeremy Balfour and other members have pointed out, and it is unfortunate that meetings will fall unevenly on different members of the Parliament. However, the situation that we are in requires us to finish this bill and the legislative programme.”
“Rather than what is happening tonight, we should make sure that, if we do meet on Friday, we conduct ourselves in a way that is cognisant of the background of that day 30 years ago. To make a shameless plug, I also have a member’s motion on Dunblane’s 30th anniversary. If members want to show respect for the people of Dunblane, they could perhaps sign that motion. I will give way to Jeremy Balfour. Jeremy Balfour: Again, I do not want to labour this point—well, I am labouring it—but can Keith Brown not see that it is different when someone wants to do their job but is excluded from doing so?”
“Rather than talk about the Parliamentary Bureau and the Government, every single one of us needs to look at ourselves with regard to what we might have done to cause this situation in the first place. Meeting on Friday, for the reasons that Jeremy Balfour and others have said, would be difficult, but a defining aspect of the job that we were elected to do is to legislate. If that is the day that it must be, then it must be that day. Jeremy Balfour: Will the member take an intervention? Keith Brown: I will just finish the point that I want to make. Friday is the 30th anniversary of the Dunblane tragedy, which is in my constituency. It is odd, of course, that we would be having a debate on assisted dying at that time.”
“I do not think that it is good enough that we are being asked to approve legislation on the basis of a hope that everything will simply fall into place. That is not the best way to make law, is it? It is not good enough, and I personally think that it is wholly unacceptable. As I said at stage 1—I make no apology for repeating this point—one mistake in legislation is one mistake too many.”
“Yet, next Tuesday, MSPs will be asked to approve— Neil Gray: Will Sue Webber give way? Sue Webber: Yes, I will. Neil Gray: I will make the same point to Sue Webber as I made to Mr Balfour: the amendments in my name that we are debating could be lodged only at stage 3 because the agreement that was required with the UK Government was concluded only recently. Indeed, the Privy Council process concluded only yesterday. Sue Webber: The deadline to lodge amendments was quite some time before that agreement. However, I am simply outlining the complexity of the legislation and its ramifications. I am not doubting what the cabinet secretary has been doing or what other members have said. I am here to sum up—I am trying my best to summarise what the debate has been about in the past two or three hours on this group alone.”
“Sue Webber: Group 8 has brought into sharp focus some of the serious competence issues that remain in the bill. I will not dwell on that for too long, as Ross Greer gave a succinct outline of what could be done to resolve that a moment ago. Quite frankly, it has been unsatisfactory for the Parliament to find itself at stage 3 still debating and removing provisions that should have been properly addressed and scrutinised much earlier in the process. Using stage 3 to strip out elements of the bill that should have been addressed earlier is not how careful legislation should be made, particularly on a matter as grave and consequential as this. I can think of no issue that Parliament has debated in this session that carries greater moral weight or demands greater certainty than this.”
“For example, I do not have religious or moral objections to the bill, but I want to know whether members have objections to it on those grounds—I want to understand the motivations behind members’ objections. Similarly, if I see unjustified attacks on the Government or on the Parliament, that can only undermine the view that I form on judgment and motivation when considering the views of those who have lodged amendments. The Government has acted with integrity at all stages, and it should not be attacked for doing so. It is very unfortunate that that has happened, because it leaves people such as me, in the position that I am in, trying to find our way through the amendments with less to rely on as we consider them. The Deputy Presiding Officer: I call Sue Webber to wind up and to press or withdraw amendment 90.”
“It was not my intention to speak at this point, and I have not spoken yet in proceedings, which, after 15 hours, is a bit of a record for me, I would say. However, I want to say a couple of words before we decide on the amendments. I have genuine concerns about the bill, and I voted against it at stage 1. I recognise that it is a very complex bill—perhaps with the most complex set of votes that we have had in my 19 years in this place. For my part, I was keen to listen to others with perhaps more expertise and with different points of view from my own. In doing so, I also try to take account of what I believe to be the motivation and judgment of those who are proposing amendments.”
“Net zero will be achieved only with the support of the people of Scotland. Their support cannot be commanded; it must be earned. Right now, the SNP is failing on all counts. 15:43”
“I respectfully ask for your ruling on some of the language that Mr Lumsden has used which, personally, I find offensive. It is not becoming of a member of the chamber. The Deputy Presiding Officer: I accept your point of order. I remind members of the requirement for courtesy and respect. I suggest that the temperature of the debate has gone up a few notches in the past 10 to 15 minutes. I invite Mr Lumsden to bring his remarks to a close and to moderate his language. Douglas Lumsden: I am not sure what language some people took offence at. Those communities will not be silenced, because they are doing something that the SNP is failing to do, which is to stand up for rural Scotland. Only the Scottish Conservatives are working with communities, listening to them and providing them with a commonsense plan to tackle climate change.”
“How can she claim to represent her constituency when she shows such disregard for its residents? She should be ashamed. Presiding Officer, I am sorry if my language is less than parliamentary, but you will understand my disgust at the phrase that was used by the cabinet secretary in describing my neighbours and friends as far right. A just transition requires partnership with communities, not rhetoric that is directed at them. For the cabinet secretary to direct that language at those communities just shows what a disgusting organisation the SNP is. It is trying to discredit communities that dare to speak up and then brand them as far right in the hope of shutting them up. Those communities will not be silenced— The Deputy Presiding Officer: Mr Lumsden, please resume your seat. Clare Haughey: On a point of order, Presiding Officer.”
“They are made up of local residents, community councils and volunteers who are trying to engage in good faith with the planning process and the energy transition. It was deeply concerning that the cabinet secretary dismissed concerns that were raised about energy infrastructure as narratives that were linked to the far right. That kind of language is not only wrong; it is damaging and it undermines trust. It polarises the debate and risks shutting down legitimate participation in the planning process. I invite the cabinet secretary to take the opportunity to apologise to those individuals and groups that she has labelled as far right. Those groups and communities care about where they live. She refuses to meet them and she denigrates them in the press and badmouths them to the public.”
“You now have the opportunity, on behalf of Stephen Kerr, who is supporting you in this, to answer the question that I asked last night. Will you support the removal of the energy profits levy, which your party introduced and which is now supported by the Labour Party? It is quite an important issue. All the industry leaders say that that is what is losing the most jobs in the energy sector. The Deputy Presiding Officer: Members should always speak through the chair. Douglas Lumsden: I agree 100 per cent. We have been calling for the energy profits levy to be scrapped for a long time, because there is no windfall. At least we know where the SNP stands on oil and gas. The Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee heard directly from community groups across Scotland.”
“I very much associate myself with the comments and questions of Jamie Greene. I will ask the cabinet secretary a question on a related note. The Prime Minister’s decision to allow UK military bases to be used by the United States in this operation has drawn the UK into this conflict. There should be real cause for concern about the risks and dangers that are faced as a result of that decision. What communication has the Scottish Government had with the UK Government in that regard?”
“We should oppose the amendment from Murdo Fraser. The Presiding Officer: I call the minister to respond on behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau. 18:38”
“It is clear that the only reason that this issue is being raised again is desperation on the part of the Conservative Party and others to smear the Lord Advocate and to smear this institution and seek to undermine it, in the same way that Conservative members regularly shout down anyone who speaks against their interests. This is part of the tawdry tactics that we have seen for the past 10 years from the Conservative Party. Instead of engaging in debate and asking questions, every time it is about running a smear campaign, particularly by two individuals who have been contaminated by the worst aspects of the Westminster bubble, and who have brought them into this Parliament. It is time that it stopped. The sensible heads in the Tory party should have a word with the rest of them and stop this nonsense.”
“For the record, I note that we would cut tax and cut the benefits bill, and our plans are costed and deliverable, unlike many of the measures in the budget that we are debating today. Our approach would create a virtuous circle, giving people and businesses more of their own money to spend and invest as they choose. Tackling welfare will give more people the chance to work, breaking the culture of dependency that has been cynically fostered by this SNP Government. I turn to other areas of the budget. On college spending—”
“Professor David Heald, who is one of the Scottish Government’s tax advisers, has warned of “an erosion of the rest of the Scottish budget”—[Official Report, Finance and Public Administration Committee, 20 January 2026; c 54.] as a result of the mounting benefits bill, which already accounts for £1 in every £7 that is spent by the SNP Government and which will rise to £10 billion by the end of the decade. As a result of the SNP’s ballooning benefits bill, there is less in the budget for rural affairs and the enterprise agencies, and in future years there will be less for Scotland’s local authorities and health boards. Ministers must be honest that spending more on benefits means tax rises or severe cuts to core services—or, ultimately, a toxic combination of both.”
“The projections for benefits spending are eye-watering and are creating a cycle of dependency that can no longer be credibly described as an investment in Scotland’s future. Not only is it undesirable to adopt the soft-touch approach that the SNP takes to the adult disability payment and to disincentivising work through the Scottish child payment—the Scottish Government’s data reveals that one in 10 recipients have changed the way that they interact through the workforce because of it—but it is also fundamentally unsustainable, as a number of independent reports have flagged again this week.”
“The Fraser of Allander Institute’s Mairi Spowage says that the shift in the tax base amounts to “a fundamental change in our understanding of who counts as a higher rate taxpayer and what proportion of the income distribution should be paying higher rates of tax.”—[Official Report, Finance and Public Administration Committee, 20 January 2026; c 46.] During the coming year, the total additional burden of the SNP’s tax regime will be nearly £1.8 billion, but only £969 million will accrue to the Scottish budget. That is the true cost of the SNP’s on-going failure to grow the Scottish economy. Based on tax outcomes alone, we will not be voting for the budget, but there are many other reasons not to vote for it.”
“Given the issues with tax during the period that Craig Hoy is speaking about, is it a good time for him to apologise for the fact that the Conservative Government, which he supported, trebled the national debt to nearly £3 trillion and brought in the highest tax burden since the second world war? Only the actions of the Scottish Government have reduced that burden in Scotland. Craig Hoy: As the SNP’s depute leader, Mr Brown must have been so busy looking at the party’s accounts that he missed Covid and the war in Ukraine, which led to a significant increase in everybody’s energy bills. It is not only me who is pointing out the folly of the SNP Government’s budget.”
“On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I could not connect. I would have voted no. The Deputy Presiding Officer: Thank you, Mr Brown. I will make sure that that is recorded.”
“Amendment 14 disagreed to. After section 2 Amendment 15 moved—[Maggie Chapman]. The Presiding Officer: The question is, that amendment 15 be agreed to. Are we agreed? Members: No. The Presiding Officer: There will be a division. The vote is closed.”