Claire Baker
Scottish Labour · Scotland
“Motion, as amended, agreed to, That the Parliament condemns xenophobia, racism and hatred in society, including recent instances of intimidation, violence and disorder; further condemns the actions and language of those who seek to stoke such sentiments and division; agrees that such beliefs and actions do not reflect those of the vast ma…”
“The UK Government has updated its planning policy, and there is a clear strategic approach to where data centres are sited, which is what members are calling for in Scotland. On the question around environmental impact assessments, at the moment, it is not mandatory for local authorities to carry out such assessments.”
“The Presiding Officer: The next question is, that motion S7M-00461, in the name of Neil Gray, on the National Security (State Threats) Bill, which is United Kingdom legislation, be agreed to. Are we agreed? Members: No. The Presiding Officer: There will be a division. Please cast your votes now. The vote is closed.”
“We need to be clear that climate change is an emergency that affects communities across the world and increasingly here in Scotland. We are seeing more extreme weather events, increased flooding, risks to biodiversity, pressures on food production, and growing risks to public health and infrastructure.”
“The Scottish National Party Government will go even further, putting in place the £2 bus fare cap across the whole of Scotland by the end of this session of Parliament. Climate action is improving the quality of our lives.”
“As I have made clear, collectively across the Parliament, we have agreed that we need to make progress on the targets, which are also legally binding by an agreement made here, and the committees have an important role to play. However, ultimately, the Government has to show leadership on the issue.”
The complete record
Every one of 360 lines we hold for Claire Baker, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 8.
“The Presiding Officer: The next question is, that motion S7M-00461, in the name of Neil Gray, on the National Security (State Threats) Bill, which is United Kingdom legislation, be agreed to. Are we agreed? Members: No. The Presiding Officer: There will be a division. Please cast your votes now. The vote is closed.”
“Motion, as amended, agreed to, That the Parliament condemns xenophobia, racism and hatred in society, including recent instances of intimidation, violence and disorder; further condemns the actions and language of those who seek to stoke such sentiments and division; agrees that such beliefs and actions do not reflect those of the vast majority of people living in Scotland, who value being a welcoming nation; welcomes the valuable contribution that migrants make to Scotland's communities and economy; reaffirms the Scottish Parliament's commitment to human rights and equality for all; supports an economy that gives opportunities and helps to deliver investment through progressive taxation to sustain the public services on which everyone relies, and recognises the economic opportunity that a just transition can offer to Scotland through investment and innovation.”
“On a point of order, Presiding Officer. My apologies. I had difficulty connecting. I would have voted yes. The Presiding Officer: Thank you. Your vote is recorded. For Adam, George (Paisley) (SNP) Adam, Karen (Banffshire and Buchan Coast) (SNP) Adamson, Clare (Motherwell and Wishaw) (SNP) Anderson, Heather (Dundee City West) (SNP) Arthur, Tom (Renfrewshire West and Levern Valley) (SNP) Baker, Claire (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab) Barratt, David (Cowdenbeath) (SNP) Baxter, Andrew (Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch) (LD) Beattie, Colin (Midlothian North) (SNP) Bibby, Neil (West Scotland) (Lab) Black, Dawn (Angus North and Mearns) (SNP) Bonnar, Steven (Uddingston and Bellshill) (SNP) Bouse, Gary (Falkirk West) (SNP) Brown, Alan (Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley) (SNP) Brown, Keith (Clackmannanshire and Dunblane) (SNP) Brown, Siobhian (Ayr) (SNP) Bruce, Holly (Glasgow Southside) (Green) Burgess, Ariane (Highlands and Islands) (Green) Campbell, Kate (Edinburgh Eastern, Musselburgh and Tranent) (SNP) Campbell, Michelle (Renfrewshire North and Cardonald) (SNP) Chapman, Maggie (North East Scotland) (Green) Chou Turvey, Yi-pei (North East Scotland) (LD) Clark, Katy (West Scotland) (Lab) Cole-Hamilton, Alex (Edinburgh North Western) (LD) Constance, Angela (Almond Valley) (SNP) Day, Martyn (Falkirk East and Linlithgow) (SNP) Dijkstra-Downie, Sanne (Edinburgh Northern) (LD) Doris, Bob (Glasgow Kelvin and Maryhill) (SNP) Duane, Iris (Glasgow) (Green) Dunbar, Jackie (Aberdeen Donside) (SNP) Fagan, Joe (South Scotland) (Lab) Fairlie, Jim (Perthshire South and Kinross-shire) (SNP) Gethins, Stephen (Dundee City East) (SNP) Ghani, Zen (Glasgow Cathcart and Pollok) (SNP) Gibson, Patricia (Cunninghame South) (SNP) Goodlad, Hannah Mary (Shetland Islands) (SNP) Gray, Neil (Airdrie) (SNP) Green, David (Caithness, Sutherland and Ross) (LD) Greer, Ross (West Scotland) (Green) Griffin, Mark (Central Scot and Lothians West) (Lab) Hagmann, Katie (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley) (SNP) Harley, Adam (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (LD) Harvie, Patrick (Glasgow) (Green) Haughey, Clare (Rutherglen and Cambuslang) (SNP) Hepburn, Jamie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (SNP) Johnson, Daniel (Edinburgh Southern) (Lab) Kerr, Alex (Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse) (SNP) Kerr, Calum (Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale) (SNP) Kinross-O’Neill, Kayleigh (Edinburgh and Lothians East) (Green) Kumar, Simita (Edinburgh South Western) (SNP) Leask, Kristopher (Highlands and Islands) (Green) Linden, David (Glasgow Baillieston and Shettleston) (SNP) Long, Joe (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab) MacCallum, Morven-May (Highlands and Islands) (LD) MacGregor, Fulton (Coatbridge and Chryston) (SNP) Mackay, Gillian (Central Scot and Lothians West) (Green) MacKinnon, Donald (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (Lab) Macpherson, Ben (Edinburgh North Eastern and Leith) (SNP) Manivannan, Q (Edinburgh and Lothians East) (Green) Marra, Michael (North East Scotland) (Lab) Martin, Gillian (Aberdeenshire East) (SNP) McAllan, Màiri (Clydesdale) (SNP) McArthur, Liam (Orkney Islands) (LD) McKee, Cara (West Scotland) (Green) McKee, Ivan (Glasgow Easterhouse and Springburn) (SNP) McLennan, Paul (East Lothian Coast and Lammermuirs) (SNP) McMillan, Stuart (Inverclyde) (SNP) McNair, Marie (Clydebank and Milngavie) (SNP) McNeill, Pauline (Glasgow) (Lab) Melville, Lloyd (Angus South) (SNP) Merrick, Colm (Glasgow Anniesland) (SNP) Middleton, Jack (Aberdeen Central) (SNP) Minto, Jenni (Argyll and Bute) (SNP) Mitchell, Laura (Moray) (SNP) Mochan, Carol (South Scotland) (Lab) Moodie, Laura (South Scotland) (Green) Nevens, Kate (Edinburgh and Lothians East) (Green) Oswald, Kirsten (Eastwood) (SNP) Rennie, Willie (Fife North East) (LD) Ruskell, Mark (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Green) Sangster, Katherine (Edinburgh and Lothians East) (Lab) Sarwar, Anas (Glasgow) (Lab) Slater, Lorna (Edinburgh Central) (Green) Smith, Alyn (Stirling) (SNP) Somerville, Shirley-Anne (Dunfermline) (SNP) Stafford, Pauline (Bathgate) (SNP) Stevenson, Collette (East Kilbride) (SNP) Sweeney, Paul (Glasgow) (Lab) Swinney, John (Perthshire North) (SNP) Thewliss, Alison (Glasgow Central) (SNP) Young, Jenny (Central Scot and Lothians West) (Lab) Against Ahmed, Irshad (Edinburgh and Lothians East) (Lab) Bannerman, Max (Highlands and Islands) (Reform) Bland, Amanda (Central Scot and Lothians West) (Reform) Briggs, Miles (Edinburgh and Lothians East) (Con) Burnett, Alexander (Aberdeenshire West) (Con) Carson, Finlay (Galloway and West Dumfries) (Con) Currie, Victor (Highlands and Islands) (Reform) Eagle, Tim (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Fraser, Murdo (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Gallacher, Meghan (Central Scot and Lothians West) (Con) Hamilton, Rachael (Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (Con) Hoy, Craig (Dumfriesshire) (Con) Kerr, Liam (North East Scotland) (Con) Kerr, Stephen (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Kerr, Thomas (Glasgow) (Reform) Kirkwood, David (South Scotland) (Reform) Langan, Jamie (South Scotland) (Reform) Lindsay, Amanda (Central Scot and Lothians West) (Reform) MacDougall, Julie (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Reform) Massey, Duncan (North East Scotland) (Reform) McDade, Helen (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Reform) Offord, Malcolm (West Scotland) (Reform) Ross, Angela (Edinburgh and Lothians East) (Reform) Schmulian, Kim (Glasgow) (Reform) Simpson, Graham (Central Scot and Lothians West) (Reform) Simpson, Mark (North East Scotland) (Reform) Smith, David (West Scotland) (Reform) The Presiding Officer: The result of the division on motion S7M-00446, in the name of Malcolm Offord, on Scotland needs Reform: five years to 2031, as amended, is: For 91, Against 27, Abstentions 0.”
“The UK Government has updated its planning policy, and there is a clear strategic approach to where data centres are sited, which is what members are calling for in Scotland. On the question around environmental impact assessments, at the moment, it is not mandatory for local authorities to carry out such assessments. Will the Scottish Government consider changing that to ensure that environmental impact assessments are part of the process? Gillian Martin: Obviously, that question strays into Mr McKee’s domain. I will take some of the members’ questions on planning regulations to Mr McKee, and he will see in the Official Report what members have been asking for today. I will play my part with regard to environmental impact assessments and giving advice to the cabinet secretary with responsibility for planning.”
“We agree that meeting agricultural emissions targets cannot rely on simply reducing livestock numbers. Farmers need support to adopt new technologies and lower-carbon practices while being able to maintain a thriving food-producing sector.”
“That is why we need genuine alternatives: reliable public transport, better bus services, improved rail connectivity and safer active travel routes. The reintroduction of off- peak fares was welcome in helping to tackle the cost of rail travel, but the Government’s own analysis suggested that it did not deliver the significant modal shift that had been hoped for. Achieving that shift remains one of the biggest transport challenges that we face. Climate action must also work for rural Scotland. Our farmers and crofters already experience the impacts of climate change, including increasing uncertainty around production, and are essential partners in this transition. Although we have seen emissions from agriculture reduce over recent decades, much of that reduction has coincided with declining livestock numbers.”
“Some of the pressure comes from the costs that we have put on rural transport and on people who live in rural areas, but we recognise that rural car ownership is always more expensive. If people do not have alternatives to using their cars, we need to invest more in public transport and ensure that they have such alternatives so that we can deliver modal shifts. Although EVs are part of the solution, they have to sit alongside public transport, and too many people in Scotland do not have access to a network that meets their needs. People understand the need to reduce transport emissions, but they also know that if a bus does not turn up, if the train is still too expensive or if there is no public transport option at all, they will continue to rely on their cars.”
“Last year, the Scottish Government scrapped its own target to reduce car kilometres by 20 per cent by 2030, because it had failed to put in place the policies necessary to achieve that. Although there has been expansion and investment in electric vehicle infrastructure, it seems that we increasingly rely on the switch from petrol and diesel to EVs, instead of delivering a wider transformation of our transport system. Gillian Martin: I make this intervention in the spirit of wanting to work together. One of the issues has been the UK Government’s decision to tax EV drivers per mile. Does the member not see that as a retrograde step when we want more people to access EVs? Claire Baker: My understanding is that a consultation on that decision has just closed.”
“People want warmer homes, lower bills and cleaner energy, but too many households still face barriers when it comes to improving energy efficiency or installing low-carbon technologies. Improving energy efficiency should be one of the most effective ways to reduce emissions, tackle fuel poverty and lower household bills, yet progress on retrofitting Scotland’s housing stock remains too slow and too many households are still waiting for practical support. We also need to explore how technologies such as solar power, battery storage and heat pumps can work together to decarbonise homes while helping families to manage energy costs. Domestic transport, which remains our largest source of emissions, is a clear example of the gap between ambition and delivery.”
“Scrutiny is not an obstacle to climate action; it is essential to it. We recognise that responsibility for taking action on climate change is shared across individuals, communities, private companies, the public sector and others, as well as the Government. However, as I said earlier, the Government holds the levers of power. For local authorities, households and communities to help drive the transition, they need proper support to do so. For many families, climate policy is not about having an abstract discussion about emissions; it concerns whether they can afford to heat their homes, whether their home is energy efficient and whether they can reduce their energy bills.”
“The cabinet secretary has described the plan as a road map, but a road map must show not only the destination but how we intend to get there. Scotland needs a clearer pathway towards meeting its carbon budgets, and the Parliament needs better tools to monitor progress along the way. We have seen positive changes, including having greater scrutiny and a greater focus on carbon budgets, but there remain significant gaps in how progress will be measured and monitored. I am keen to hear more from the cabinet secretary about the priority actions that have been taken forward, how progress will be reported to the Parliament and how the cross-Government group referenced in the emissions statement will help to deliver change. She referred to some of that in her opening remarks, but I look forward to hearing more detail.”
“Emissions reductions have slowed, our carbon footprint is moving in the wrong direction and, unless we increase the pace of change, we will struggle to meet future targets. The figures matter because, every year that progress slows, the scale of the challenge becomes even greater. Delaying action today simply means steeper and more difficult changes tomorrow. The publication of the draft climate action plan at the end of last year was a missed opportunity for the Scottish Government, as it failed to provide the necessary focus on delivery. Stakeholders were looking for confidence that Scotland has a credible pathway to meeting its carbon budgets. The concern was not about ambition; it was about whether the measures that were identified were sufficient, detailed enough and, above all, capable of being implemented.”
“As I have made clear, collectively across the Parliament, we have agreed that we need to make progress on the targets, which are also legally binding by an agreement made here, and the committees have an important role to play. However, ultimately, the Government has to show leadership on the issue. Scotland does not have a shortage of climate targets; we have a shortage of evidence that we are moving quickly enough to meet them. There remains a persistent gap between the commitments that have been made and the progress that has been delivered. Devolved policy areas are where many of the emissions reductions that we need must come from, whether they be in transport, low-carbon heat in our homes, or nature restoration. Those are all areas in which we need faster progress. The recent emissions statement demonstrated the reality.”
“That should concern us all. The challenge cannot be whether we agree on the destination; it must be whether we are making enough progress to get there. If Governments repeatedly set ambitious targets but fail to demonstrate progress, people inevitably begin to question whether change is really happening. We cannot allow frustration with delivery to become an argument against action. Gillian Martin: Does the member agree, however, that the issue is not just for Government, and that there has to be a determination, in a coalition of the willing in Parliament and in wider society, to reach the targets? Claire Baker: I agree with that to an extent, but Government has the levers and is there to provide leadership and the drive to make things happen.”
“We need to be clear that climate change is an emergency that affects communities across the world and increasingly here in Scotland. We are seeing more extreme weather events, increased flooding, risks to biodiversity, pressures on food production, and growing risks to public health and infrastructure. Climate change does not stop just because some people do not believe in it. The scientific evidence is clear, the need for action is urgent and the responsibility of Government to deliver is undeniable. Members in successive sessions of the Scottish Parliament have recognised that reality and, although delivery has sometimes fallen short, the need to act has largely been accepted. In returning to the environment brief after around 10 years, I am struck by the extent to which the political consensus on climate action appears to be weakening.”
“I will not be the only MSP who, in the event of a flood, has had to visit people in households who did not have insurance at all and are devastated. The Climate Change Committee is clear that the effects of climate change are costing Scotland billions of pounds a year. That is only likely to increase if we do not take the necessary action to reduce our emissions and adapt to the impacts that are already with us.”
“The bedrock of this trend is our small and medium- sized enterprises, which make up about 90 per cent of the companies in the green sector. Let us now look at the impacts of climate change in Scotland as we are feeling them. From wildfires to flooding to coastal erosion, we know that climate change is causing more serious and more unpredictable impacts across the whole of Scotland. These trends are getting worse and they threaten our livelihoods and the safety of our communities. They risk damage to our homes, our landscapes, our businesses and our infrastructure. Insurance becomes more difficult to obtain and afford for families and businesses. Once an event has happened, the premiums go up—if people ever had insurance in the first place.”
“Climate action is now at the heart of Scotland’s economy, our public health and our wider society. Let us drill down into particular areas of Scotland. The CBI report demonstrates that climate action is driving the economy of Aberdeen—my home city and Europe’s energy capital—as well as that of Perth and Kinross, where the sector supports 12 per cent of gross value added. In fact, 19 of Scotland’s 32 local authority areas have more than three times more net zero businesses than the UK average, compared with the overall number of businesses in their area. That includes North Lanarkshire, where there are 8.8 times more than the UK average. Net zero activity in Glasgow and Edinburgh together support £3.8 billion in GVA, when the wider supply chain and spillover effects are included. The net zero economy is the economy.”
“The Scottish National Party Government will go even further, putting in place the £2 bus fare cap across the whole of Scotland by the end of this session of Parliament. Climate action is improving the quality of our lives. Active travel not only reduces emissions but increases physical activity and the health benefits that come from that. The switch to EVs means clearer air, which reduces our risk of respiratory and cardiovascular diseases, meaning long-term and significant health budget savings. The Edinburgh Climate Change Institute estimates that those co-benefits are worth £1,450 per person over the 15-year period of the new climate change plan, not least by reducing pressure on our national health service. That figure does not even include the £42 billion of financial benefits that are directly attributable to the plan up to 2040.”
“For every £1 of direct economic value that is generated in the sector, a further £1.75 is supported across the wider Scottish economy. Households and businesses will also see direct financial benefits from the switch to, for example, electric vehicles, including the electrification of heavy goods vehicles. That will mean lower operating and maintenance costs across the economy, as well as reduced vulnerability to fluctuations in fossil fuel prices—shocks can be caused by geopolitical events, as we have seen particularly this year. This Government’s significant investments in concessionary public transport are also making it easier and more affordable to switch. In addition, our £2 bus fare cap is now active across the Highlands and Islands, supporting rural connectivity and tourism.”
“Delivering climate action means investing in our economic future and improving the lives of our citizens. Scotland is blessed with vast natural resources, creative communities and businesses and exceptional people. That gives us a huge competitive advantage to seize the opportunities of the industries of the future. The transition that is already under way is not only our path to decarbonisation; it is central to our industrial resilience and our long-term competitiveness as a country. However, we will succeed in achieving that only if we deliver a fair and just transition. A recent Confederation of British Industry report shows the lead that Scotland has over the rest of the United Kingdom, with net zero-related activity contributing a total of £10.2 billion to Scotland’s economy and supporting more than 105,000 jobs.”
“Yes, they expect disagreement and debate, but, above all, they expect and want collaboration, action and progress. I am prepared to deliver that with willing colleagues, and we are making progress. For example, this year, we have significantly exceeded our programme for government target on peatland restoration, with 15,448 hectares having been restored. We have also committed £110 million to peatland restoration over the next four years, which will give the sector certainty and realise the potential of jobs growth. Alongside the necessary accelerated action, we will also continue to set out more detail on delivery planning. I intend to convene a cross-Government delivery group on climate action to support that and strengthen delivery monitoring across the whole of Government.”
“Will the cabinet secretary take an intervention? Gillian Martin: Yes. Claire Baker: I am happy to confirm that the amendment refers to carbon budgeting and the changes that we have made to the five-year targets. Gillian Martin: I thank Claire Baker for that confirmation—it is very helpful, because I wanted to support the content of the amendment, but there was just an issue with wording. I am pleased to be able to confirm that we will vote for the Labour amendment. The pace of change will not be easy, and it will be achievable only if those of us who believe in climate change work together instead of offering opposition for opposition’s sake, which has regrettably been all too common in previous parliamentary sessions. The people we represent expect better.”
“To be honest, the issue that she raises is a planning matter that is devolved to Fife Council, so I would put to her that it must be Fife Council that considers it.”
“The Scottish Government’s AI strategy has a clear aim of promoting Scotland as a centre for green data centres, but it is less clear on what the terms mean in practice. It says that “guidance on what factors are prevalent in a ‘green’ data centre” is expected to be published in 2027. Would that include the necessity to have an environmental impact assessment? At the moment, my understanding is that there would be no such necessity. Does the minister think that the timescale that we are working towards is still appropriate, given the number of projects that are already seeking planning permission in principle? Hannah Mary Goodlad: Claire Baker will appreciate that there are local planning decisions that I cannot comment on from a Government perspective.”
“I want to talk to my counterparts across the chamber to work out how we can do that, because it is not just the Government’s challenge but Parliament’s challenge. It is society’s challenge, but it is also Parliament’s challenge. Particularly when we have individuals in the Parliament who do not believe in climate action—we have already heard them in the past three weeks—it is ever more important that those who understand the science and realise the imperative around climate action stick together and get action done.”
“We have made progress in the 10 years that I have been in the Parliament. We are more than halfway to net zero. I do not agree with the position that those things would have happened anyway. A tremendous amount of work has been done on peatland restoration, which is sequestering carbon and stopping leakage into the atmosphere. A great deal of work has also been done on Government support for electric vehicle chargers and heat pumps and for various other measures to help businesses to reduce their carbon footprint. I want to work with every individual shadow of mine on our shared goals and ideas, because I do not believe that anyone has a monopoly on good ideas. The climate change plan was set out in March. However, are there areas in which we can do more?”
“I very much take to heart what she has said about the will to make progress on the matter. The answer to her substantive question about how we are going to do that has been laid out in the climate change plan. The climate change plan is, in effect, the road map for all the policies that we will take forward. I am convening early meetings with my Cabinet colleagues, because the areas that are associated with action to deliver on transport, energy, housing and social policy lie with other cabinet secretaries. We will form a cross-Government group to make sure that we hit the ground running. I will convene a meeting with the relevant cabinet secretaries and their officials in the next couple of days. I have also reached out to every one of my shadow cabinet secretaries, because I think that Claire Baker’s fundamental point is correct.”
“Stop Climate Chaos said today that the figures are a “stark confirmation” that action to tackle climate change has been “nowhere near strong enough or fast enough”, and the Climate Change Committee called for immediate accelerated implementation. There is political will in the Parliament to make that happen, but the action so far—the 2,500 heat pumps that were funded last year and the provision of 12,700 electric car chargers—will not deliver the change that we need. At the start of this session of Parliament, with the 2030 targets now in our sight, how will the Scottish Government and the cabinet secretary accelerate that action and make sure that we meet our 2045 targets? Gillian Martin: I welcome Claire Baker to her role, and I look forward to working with her.”
“I last led on the environment and rural affairs for Scottish Labour in 2014, and I am afraid that, returning to the annual statement on meeting our 2045 targets today, the analysis and the questions for the Government largely remain the same. The Parliament agreed the 2045 targets not because of ideology but because of science. There is clear evidence that, for the future of our country and others around the world, we must address the impact of climate change and reduce our carbon footprint. However, our progress so far has not been the result of intentional policy—it has too often been a consequence of what is happening anyway. At a time when progress should be faster, it is stalling, and the carbon footprint figure that was published today has actually increased. Friends of the Earth says that it is a “meagre” reduction.”
“At this stage, it is crucial that we unlock these much-needed projects. The infrastructure investment plan is key to that. Such developments are crucial to expanding primary and community care, in order to shift the balance of care from hospitals into the community so that it is nearer to people and can meet their needs. Disinformation and Conspiracy Theories 3.”
“Mr Barratt raised the issue of the coupling of Lochgelly health centre with Cowdenbeath and the concern that that will delay the Lochgelly centre. The Lochgelly centre is a shovel-ready project, and people have waited a long time for it to be delivered. The existing centre no longer meets the needs of local people and the Government has known that for a while—it has been more than a decade since it was identified that they need a new centre. When will that be delivered? The cabinet secretary has talked about perhaps starting to build in 2031, but people have been waiting more than a decade. Angela Constance: If the member is not already aware, it is important that I inform her that, in 2022, an outline business case was submitted for the replacement of Lochgelly health centre, and detailed feedback was provided.”
“At the same time, I recognise the need for local authorities to be properly funded to provide their nursery provision, because they provide the bedrock system for many families. We need to see progress towards an agreement— Meghan Gallacher: Will the member take an intervention? Claire Baker: If there is time.”
“We need childcare that is built around the realities of family life, which means: greater flexibility; recognising the needs of shift workers, single parents and families of children with additional support needs; ensuring that funding genuinely follows the child, so that parents have a meaningful choice over providers; and supporting childminders and private providers, which are essential to making flexible childcare possible in many communities. There is a lack of clarity about how the current 1,140-hour system works, with the Scottish Government giving money directly to local authorities that then decide what to keep for their own provision and what to pass to partner providers. Some partners say that they do not get enough funding to meet their costs and that they are not advertised equally by local authorities.”
“Childcare costs are among the biggest outgoings for working families. Research from Pregnant Then Screwed found that around two thirds of mothers surveyed in Scotland said that childcare costs are the same as, or more than, their income. Around half said that it does not make financial sense for them to work, and more than a quarter said that they relied on debt or savings to pay for their childcare. That should concern every member of this Parliament, because childcare should remove barriers to employment, not create them. At the moment, many parents, particularly women, are reducing their hours, turning down promotions or leaving work altogether because childcare costs and inflexible provision make participation in the workplace impossible, which is damaging for family finances, economic growth and equality.”
“We need to think about whether the nursery offer prepares children for school and whether any issues arise from having families drop off young children but not taking the opportunity to build relationships between parents and their children. That is why, in our recent manifesto, we argued for wider family support through measures such as family network hubs, which are based on sure start principles, that would help families access advice on childcare, employment, housing and financial support in a more joined-up way. The benefit of the vulnerable two-year-olds policy is that we support the child, but we must ensure that parents or the family are still involved. Equally, if childcare is intended to support employment, it must function in a way that allows parents to work. Currently, too many parents say that it simply does not.”
“Will she, like me, welcome the findings in the evaluation report—I said that it was published by Diffley, but it was the Scottish Government’s report, so I will correct the record on that—which demonstrated that, after one year, those who had been eligible two-year-olds showed no developmental difference when compared with the three-year- olds who were coming into childcare on a universal offer? Claire Baker: I recognise and welcome that, and I do not denigrate the policy on two-year-olds in any way. However, last week, figures were released on violence in schools. In Fife, a 50 per cent increase in violence in schools was reported. When I recently met education authorities, they highlighted particular pinch points and said that there was a trend of increased violence among younger children when transitioning between nursery and school.”
“Willie Rennie talked about the importance of attachment in early years. I have spoken to education authorities, which have told me that they are seeing a spike in disruptive, dysregulated and even violent behaviour in some young children as they start school. We need to consider how the early years offer addresses that trend and whether it has unintended consequences that we need to be aware of. Màiri McAllan: To pick up on Claire Baker’s point about the value of provision for eligible two- year-olds, I completely agree with her about the importance of early learning at that point.”
“The reality is that the system is trying to achieve all those things, but that means recognising the practical implications of that ambition. For many families—especially those who face poverty or vulnerability—early years services provide much more than childcare. Early intervention at that stage can have a lasting impact on educational attainment, wellbeing and life chances; the services can provide speech and language support, identify developmental concerns early, offer parenting support, reduce isolation and connect families to wider services. Largely, however, we run a drop-off-and-collect system. If the purpose of provision for vulnerable two- year-olds is to tackle inequality and support vulnerable families, we need to consider whether the current model builds family resilience and capacity.”
“Any expansion of funded childcare relies heavily on an increase in the capacity of the private and voluntary sector as demand rises, and on sufficient capacity in every community. Without that, families are left frustrated, providers are stretched and inequalities deepen between areas where provision exists and areas where it does not exist. We also need to have a full discussion about the purpose of childcare and early years provision. Is childcare the primary purpose, to enable parents to work, or is it nursery education, which focuses on children’s development and early intervention? How do we ensure that the system supports vulnerable families, including eligible two-year- olds, when parents may not currently be in work?”
“Parents are struggling to access places, and private and voluntary providers warn that the funding model is unsustainable. In some parts of the country, because of shortages in provision, parents cannot even secure their third choice of nursery. The briefing that we received from COSLA ahead of the debate outlined some of the pressures on current funding and the consequences of the tension between choice and quality. It also makes clear the need to ensure that the current model is suitable and sustainable in resource and workforce before any further expansion can be considered. Talk about expanding entitlement means little if, already, families cannot access the places that they are promised.”
“That means that we must have transparency from the outset—not simply headline announcements, but clear planning, clear funding models and clear accountability—so that the Parliament can properly scrutinise delivery and the people of Scotland can have confidence in it. Ahead of the election, the now Deputy First Minister promised an additional half a billion pounds in childcare funding. The Parliament deserves to know how that money will be delivered, how it will be distributed fairly across local authorities and private providers, and how the Scottish Government will ensure that the expansion does not simply place even greater pressure on a childcare sector that is already struggling with workforce shortages, closures and capacity constraints. The reality is that the current system is already under strain.”
“The SNP manifesto promised a “transformational national expansion of childcare, from 9 months to the end of primary school, 52 weeks a year, making life easier for families.” That was a commitment, not an aspiration or an ambition, but it came without a clear timetable, a workforce plan or detailed costings to make it credible. The first step must be to publish a fully costed delivery plan with a clear timetable for implementation. We are just beginning the parliamentary session, but it is one in which fiscal responsibility will be more important than ever. Difficult choices will have to be made across devolved budgets.”
“There seems to be an issue with the lectern. [Interruption.] I will switch to a different one—no, that is it. I welcome the cabinet secretary to her new post. Every child deserves the best start in life, and every parent deserves a childcare system that works for the reality of modern family life. A good childcare system should support the child’s development, help to reduce poverty and give parents the flexibility and confidence to work, train and study. Scottish Labour recognises that high-quality, flexible and affordable childcare is essential both for children’s outcomes and for Scotland’s economy. However, expansion has to be credible, sustainable and deliverable in practice. Families need a system that genuinely works for them.”
“This Saturday, Dunfermline Athletic will meet Celtic in the Scottish cup final. That is great for Fife and for the club’s supporters. What discussions has the cabinet secretary had with Glasgow City Council, Police Scotland and the clubs to ensure that we do not see a repeat of the terrible scenes that we saw last weekend? Angela Constance: Let me assure Ms Baker that I and my officials will reach out to her local team and Police Scotland in the hope that we can reassure her with regard to this weekend.”
“I, Claire Baker, 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.”
“On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I had trouble connecting. I would have voted no. The Deputy Presiding Officer : Thank you. I will ensure that that is recorded.”
“That is due to the Government delivering over a variety of projects and policies. It is important that we also take cognisance of the fact that Scottish Government policies are estimated to keep 70,000 children out of deep poverty next year. I recognise the scale of the challenge that we face and that it is the Scottish Government’s responsibility to meet those targets. I wish that we had a UK Labour Government that matched our scale of ambition; unfortunately, that is not what we saw when the UK Government’s much-delayed plan was eventually delivered. In saying that, though, we continue to commit to delivery and action, as I have set out in the plan today.”
“Shirley-Anne Somerville: I refer Claire Baker to annex 1 of the plan, which details how the two- child limit payment allocation has been invested. I mentioned some of that in my statement. There is £50 million for the whole family support package, the new £20 million whole family support for the third sector delivery fund, the flexible workforce development fund and the additional money for the child poverty fund, which will tackle additional childcare support. Annex 1 includes further detail on that. The Government recognises that any child in poverty is one child too many, which is why there is no complacency on our part. We are very clear that there has been progress. Scottish Government policies are estimated to keep 100,000 children out of relative poverty in 2026-27.”
“The First Minister told people this week to judge him in 2031 if the target is missed, but we should recognise the impact of the failure to meet the interim target, which is resulting in Herculean efforts being required over the next four years. The Poverty and Inequality Commission said that, to meet the 2030 target, we need three or four measures on the scale of the Scottish child payment. Does the cabinet secretary believe that the plan delivers that? The removal of the two-child cap by the UK Labour Government will have a positive effect. Significant funding earmarked for mitigation has also been released. What additional measures in the action plan has the money been used for? If the money had not been released, what resources were planned for the child poverty action plan?”