Bob Doris
Scottish National Party · Scotland
“I acknowledge the Scottish Government’s ambitious targets to reduce child poverty and the progress that has been made. I have heard that there will be a review of those targets, so it would be helpful to know whether the cabinet secretary believes that the targets have driven delivery in tackling child poverty.”
“They have driven focus and delivery, and have been an exceptionally important part of our armoury as we move forward with tackling child poverty in Scotland. We are seeing that difference being made.”
“Many bus users cannot take a single bus service to where they wish to go. Often, bus users will be required to change buses to reach their end destination. At times, four, as opposed to two, tickets will be required, with a change in the city centre or elsewhere to make the return journey that passengers require.”
“A few stops on a First Glasgow bus will cost £2.45, and it is only a few stops; most single journeys are £3.25. I therefore strongly welcome our Scottish Government’s commitment to a £2 cap price for bus fares in Glasgow. That will make a real difference in our city, but it needs to be carefully implemented.”
“After all, public money that is pumped into bus operators must be used for the public good. Indeed, it is anticipated that, in the current financial year, the budget to be invested in bus services is £528 million—I will say that again: £528 million— and £472.8 million for concessionary travel.”
“For balance, bus passengers, including me, do not tend to highlight when our bus services run well—and they do run well at times. There are occasions when buses are on time and the service is efficient and of high quality. We want to encourage more people to use buses, not fewer.”
The complete record
Every one of 432 lines we hold for Bob Doris, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 8 of 9.
“However, one of the reasons that we need fair trade is because free trade has not worked and the west has not historically been good at ensuring that free trade is also fair. I welcome the fact that Scotland has renewed her status as a fair trade nation. However, I feel that, at present, the bar is quite low and that we all need to do more as individuals and organisations and as a country if we are to be serious about making trade around the world beneficial for all who are involved. The Deputy Presiding Officer: We come to the final speaker in the open debate. 16:19”
“Will the member give way? John Mason: Very briefly, yes. Bob Doris: Do we also need a clearer definition of “relatively pleasant”? John Mason: I could go into that in more detail, but I do not think that I quite have time. Free trade and fair trade are not the same thing. In fact, in some cases, fair trade is the opposite of free trade. Free trade says that the strong extract resources from the weak at the lowest possible price that they can get away with. Free trade says that Ukraine must surrender its mineral assets to America in order to get support to be a democracy. Free trade says that children can be sold into slavery in south Asia and elsewhere to save their families from starvation. There are, of course, good aspects to free trade, especially if the trade is between relative equals.”
“I mentioned RSLs’ and housing associations’ ability to pay, which is relevant. Cladding officials will continue to work with factors, residents, developers and housing associations. That principle could be shared across any RSL or local authority. The Presiding Officer: That concludes the ministerial statement. I will allow a moment or two for front-bench members to organise themselves before we move on to the next item of business. Fair Trade”
“I think that I heard the minister say that, from June, social landlords will be able to apply for funding for cladding remediation, which is welcome. Such issues exist in my constituency, so that opportunity will be important to my constituents. There are often disputes among developers, architects and owners, some of whom can be social landlords. Will that be a barrier to social landlords applying for remediation funding from June onwards? Paul McLennan: Mr Doris makes an important point. I am aware of the local housing association that he is referring to in that context, and we will continue to work with it on that aspect. We mentioned the open call that is being made for those who are already in place. One of the key aims is to ensure that we move forward on that.”
“That will transform the service for our island communities. However, those communities are right to be impatient. I want to mention the outstanding fact that, despite the recent increase in ferry fares, it is cheaper today, under an SNP Government, to take a ferry in Scotland—leaving Orkney and Shetland aside, of course—because of the road equivalent tariff than it was the last time that Labour was in power. That is delivering for communities, surely. The Deputy Presiding Officer: We now move to closing speeches. 15:38”
“I acknowledge that although the headline performance figures for our ferry network are excellent, problems with services can still have a disproportionate and detrimental impact on certain island communities. That is obvious, and Claire Baker and Katy Clark made that point. I also recognise and welcome the Scottish Government’s provision in 2025-26 of more than £530 million for maintaining and improving ferry services, replacing vessels, upgrading ports and harbours and investing further in low-carbon interisland ferries. The question to ask is how that investment will benefit those island communities that have been disproportionately impacted. It would be beneficial for the Scottish Government to be crystal clear about that. In the years ahead, 37 per cent of Scotland’s fleet will be made up of new vessels.”
“When ferries are performing reliably and to a high standard, I ask the Scottish Government how it will ensure that we encourage visitors and increase passenger demand so that more people visit our amazing islands and experience all that they have to offer. We must not allow the essential role of conducting robust scrutiny of occasions on which performance and delivery are not up to scratch on our ferry network to get in the way of growing visitor numbers when overall performance is very good. I ask the Scottish Government to say more about how it will seek to carry out that important task, which is vital to many of our island communities. However, I will not downplay the clear challenges that exist.”
“In general terms, that is a performance that we should be talking up and not seeking to undermine. The white heat of debate and the obvious politicking that goes on aside, I am sure that no member would seek to undermine our ferry services in that way. Islanders know far better than I do how important reliability is, not only to their communities but to local businesses and to the island economy, which often rely on visitors. Those visitors are absolutely vital. Katy Clark: Will Bob Doris give way? Bob Doris: I am sorry, but I am very tight for time. I suspect that the turmoil narrative, which is not accurate, is deterring many visitors, at a time when we have the summer tourist season ahead of us. Ariane Burgess also mentioned the importance of visitors to island communities.”
“I want to speak in the debate to raise a concern that I have. In doing so, I do not wish to downplay the clear and evident challenges that have beset ferry services in recent years or the impact on Ferguson Marine. The concern that I wish to air is that there has been a perception that our Scottish ferry network is in perpetual turmoil and is wholly unreliable, when that is obviously not the case. As I said, I do not intend to downplay the impact on island communities when things go wrong, and I will return to that later. However, if we look at CalMac’s actual performance for the most recent year for which figures are recorded, we see that its crews delivered a service performance of 95.8 per cent. That means that only around four in every 100 ferry services that served island communities did not run.”
“It is not the Scottish way, and I will have no part in it. 16:05”
“I want to comment on getting back into work people who are on benefits and who are not seeking work due to their disabilities or their underlying health conditions. I note that the position some time ago—I think that it was in the 1980s, under a Conservative Government—was that if someone felt able to work despite all of their challenges but then, for whatever reason, that work broke down, because, for example, they were made redundant, they lost their job or they just could not cope with their underlying health issues, they were put back on to their underlying benefit, no questions asked. The problem with the Labour UK Government is that it is not encouraging people with disabilities into work; it is forcing, compelling and sanctioning people into work. That is not the way to do it.”
“In the time that I have left, I want to say a little bit about getting people into work. I agree with others that that should be preferably full-time work and work that pays. We sometimes forget about the early groundwork that the Scottish Government did. For example, take the family nurse partnerships, whereby nurses work with young mums. They put in intensive support, which allows those mums to be economically active and contribute to society, despite their challenges. That on-going good work makes a difference. We are building on our childcare commitments in relation to breakfast clubs and after-school care. There is a call to be hugely flexible in relation to such provision, because sometimes the issue is not unemployment but underemployment, and flexibility in childcare is absolutely key.”
“Labour is discovering that being in Government is challenging, which I appreciate. It might find that it is better to cope with those challenges by having underlying principles and sticking to them when in Government. When we lose our underlying principles, we have nothing. Labour is still insisting that it will lower energy bills by £300, but since it came to power, there have been energy price rises of £149 per year in October, £21 per year in January and another £111 per year from April this year. Labour appears to be in denial. Indeed, it is still putting out leaflets that claim that it is making pensioners £400 better off by lowering energy bills. Labour is in denial; potentially, it is deliberately trying to hoodwink voters in forthcoming by-elections in Glasgow, where those leaflets still circulate today, which is shameless.”
“Where people lose their jobs, they will enter the world of social security entitlements, which they might not have had to use before. I say to people who are questioning whether we should provide all those measures that that social protection will be there for those workers if—or when—they unfortunately lose their jobs due to Labour’s jobs tax. The UK Labour Government is also dipping the pockets of 900,000 Scottish pensioners. That will not help pensioners to get their messages in or pay their fuel bills. That leaves it to the SNP to restore a universal winter fuel payment that was robbed from Scottish pensioners, which will return to Scotland next year. Everyone will get a guaranteed £100, and the amount will increase to £200 or £300, depending on income levels.”
“How does that connect to cost of living pressures? Let us be frank. It means that families can buy a bit more food when they go to the supermarket, despite soaring prices. It means that they have a better chance of heating their homes, despite rising energy prices under the UK Labour Government. That is the impact that our constituents want to see. However, that is where the credibility of Labour is quickly shredded. As the Scottish Government is putting money into the pockets of Scottish families, the UK Labour Government is cutting holes in those same pockets. That applies to those who will lose their jobs due to the rise in employer national insurance contributions—which is a jobs tax—and to those who will see, due to Labour action, their incomes slashed and cost of living pressures like never before.”
“When families in Scotland—many of whom are working households—claim universal credit, they really struggle. The benefit is not fit for purpose. That is why the Scottish Government has invested £470 million in the Scottish child payment this year, putting money into the pockets of families of 333,000 children and keeping 60,000 children out of poverty. Many other Scottish Government measures are often completely overlooked due to the heft and impact of their big brother, the Scottish child payment. I will mention two that make a real difference at the root of the problem: best start foods and the best start grant, which provide food and provisions at a key time in the lives of young children and families. In the round, that has prevented 100,000 children from falling into poverty. That is real action on cost of living pressures.”
“In recent years, the UK’s “cost of living crisis” has become a well-used phrase. The danger is that we use the expression as a throwaway phrase, that we normalise it and that we accept the consequences that flow from it. It is not and should not be a throwaway phrase. Our Scottish Government has no intention of normalising the UK’s cost of living crisis. We will do all that we can to improve the lived experience of many families who are impacted by the cost of living pressures. The Scottish Government is doing its bit—let me put that on the record. We spend £1.3 billion more on social security protections than we receive from the UK Government. We spend £6.9 billion in total, with £644 million for entitlements that struggling Scots can access but that are not available anywhere else in the UK.”
“In his closing speech, I ask the cabinet secretary to provide clear assurances on and timescales for when we will see action on the panel’s recommendations, because we cannot be here again in one, two or three years’ time, asking for—calling for—the same things. We need many more people’s panels, as well as other forms of deliberative democracy, to shine a light on our shortcomings, our institutions and our agencies’ failures. We need them to address the most acute issues that challenge us, but also, and more important, we need them to challenge our assumptions, our exclusions and our spoken or unspoken prejudices, because then, with people who have lived and living experience, we can create a better and more equal world that works for everyone. 16:49”
“We need justice reforms, including substantial decriminalisation, and an end to the tragic spirals of incarceration and intensified drug use in prisons, and we need education and effective data sharing that does not require already traumatised people to tell their stories over and over again. I believe that we need most of all to recognise and fulfil the human rights of all, including rights to a decent standard of living, and to freedom from the poverty and destitution that kill so many, including with the weapon of illegal drugs. The people’s panel has done phenomenal work, but perhaps not quite the work that it or we expected. It has not so much opened a window to a view that had not been seen before as it has held up a mirror to our political systems, institutions and agencies, and shown us our shortcomings.”
“The so-called war on drugs has failed, comprehensively. We need evidence-based measures, safer consumption rooms—such as the one in Glasgow—drug-checking facilities, holistic support and a well-publicised single point of access for specialised advice and support. We need universal provision and policies, not postcode lotteries that govern services, support and prescribing practices in different parts of Scotland. We need to ensure equitable pay, fair working conditions and employment support for people with lived and living experience of drug-related harms. We need adequate and long-term funding, especially for third sector organisations, which can reach so many people whose needs are unmet by statutory services.”
“In 2019, the Dundee drugs commission published its first report, “Responding to Drug Use with Kindness, Compassion and Hope”. That report focused on key areas including the need for strong leadership and accountability; cultural change that eliminates stigma; inclusion of people with lived and living experiences in decision making and service design; comprehensive holistic models of care; prevention; gender-sensitive and trauma-informed support; and measures that tackle poverty. The panel is right to be frustrated. Why has there been so little progress on the recommendations, which were developed six years ago? Many of the panel’s recommendations echo those that we have received before. We know what needs to be done: we need a public health approach to tackling drug-related deaths and drug harms.”
“When I was on the Smith commission representing the Scottish Greens, we were the only party calling for drugs policy to be devolved to the Scottish Parliament. During the past decade, the need for that devolution has grown horribly evident. In its absence, for now we must do what we can, and I thank the people’s panel again for illuminating the path ahead. During the debate, members have spoken of the report’s recommendations and their urgency in relation to particular issues and places, and of the ways in which those recommendations can and must be made a reality. It is heartening to hear the clear agreement from across the chamber that the panel’s report must be a catalyst for action, because as the panel made clear, we have been here before.”
“The Housing (Scotland) Bill, which is going through the Scottish Parliament, contains ask and act provisions. If we think that someone is at risk of becoming homeless, we should act to prevent that. Perhaps we can do something in the live legislation that is going through the Parliament to meet some of the aspirations of the people’s panel, which in my final few seconds I commend. The Deputy Presiding Officer: We move to closing speeches. I note that Alex Cole-Hamilton, who participated in the debate, is not here. I will expect an explanation as well as an apology. 16:45 Maggie Chapman: I thank all those who have participated in the debate. It is clear that there is consensus across the chamber that we need to act. That consensus is welcome.”
“I say to the cabinet secretary that it would be good to see that working on a cross-sector basis in order to make sure that more organisations in the field get longer-term funding. I was hoping to squeeze in a comment on recommendation 17, which identifies the need to support people in relation to key aspects of their lives, such as “release from prison, completion of rehab, hospital discharge” and “isolation in supported temporary accommodation.” However, as I have only 30 seconds left, I will talk only about temporary accommodation. We have to ask how we can prevent people who are living with addiction from being in temporary accommodation in the first place, given that 19 per cent of the 435,000 people who were assessed as being homeless in the 15 years up to 2016 showed evidence of substance abuse.”
“I also want to make sure that increasing the number of statutory staff with lived and living experience would not undermine such provision in the third sector. Recommendation 10 states that “There needs to be a guaranteed and protected five year minimum period of funding for community and third sector services ... so that organisations can better plan provisions”, retain staff and reduce uncertainty in provision. I absolutely agree. I note that there has been some progress in relation to that, and I give Shirley-Anne Somerville a special mention for the work that she has done in partnership with the Social Justice and Social Security Committee. There are now 45 organisations in a pilot scheme in relation to getting longer-term funding.”
“I also welcome the Scottish Government’s response to that recommendation, which notes that “the Drugs Deaths Taskforce Action 129” spoke about “pathways for people with lived and living experience to enter the workforce.” It also mentions the imminent publication of “a ‘Guiding Principles’ document for employers” on employment support, as well as a toolkit and a £480,000 fund. Although the response is welcome, I am not left with total clarity on how it will all be taken forward, and I also wonder how it will be monitored. I want an assurance that a pathway into the statutory workforce would not stagnate but would be a real progression pathway. I note that recommendation 4 mentions that, as well. I am keen to understand what cultural benefits could arise from refreshing the statutory workforce in that way.”
“It was also a representative panel, and not just demographically or in terms of income groups and so on. Significantly, the recruitment process aimed to ensure that the views of the people who made up the panel had a similar distribution to broader public opinion. Quite frankly, if they could get together outside the Parliament and get a consensus, we can get a consensus in here without the party politicking. I will now discuss some of the recommendations. Recommendation 2 states: “More people with lived experience should provide ongoing support and aftercare in the statutory workforce.” I absolutely agree. The panel said that that would reduce stigma and offer role models in statutory services. We all know from our work in our constituencies the credibility that lived and living experience can bring.”
“I am pleased to be the final speaker in the open debate on the people’s panel report on reducing drug harm and deaths in Scotland. The panel was commissioned by the Criminal Justice Committee, the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee, and the Social Justice and Social Security Committee, on which I sit. The panel has done us a clear public service by considering and reporting on the question, “What does Scotland need to do differently to reduce drug- related harms?” By and large, it looked for consensus and it set a very high bar for accepting recommendations. At least 87 per cent of the panel had to agree to a recommendation, which meant that 20 of the 23 members had to be in agreement. If only we had that level of consensus in the Parliament.”
“This week, the United Nations Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights called on the United Kingdom Labour Government to immediately repeal its two- child cap, as it violates children’s rights and exacerbates poverty and social inequality. In that context, will the First Minister give an update on the work of our Scottish National Party Government to end the two-child cap in Scotland? Will he join my calls—yet again—for Westminster to scrap at source Labour’s cruel two-child cap, which, let us not forget, is deliberately designed to deny 1.6 million children in low-income families enough money simply to live on?”
“I acknowledge the updated guidance. Where is the voice of young people in the debate and how should schools, local authorities and Governments listen to young people, who are most impacted by the misuse of mobile phones in schools? Jenny Gilruth: It is hugely important that we listen to the views of young people in relation to this issue. The school at which we launched the updated guidance in August had taken a dynamic approach to involving the children—and their classroom teachers—in mining their own mobile phone use to analyse the amount of time that they all spent online. As a result of that process, the school got buy-in from the pupils, the parents and carers, and the teaching staff. Consulting children on changing policies that will ultimately impact them is hugely important.”
“To ask the Scottish Government how many new-build social and mid- market rental properties have been delivered in the Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn constituency in the last 10 years. (S6O-04368)”
“Presiding Officer, I must apologise, as I thought that my question was going to be taken this afternoon, during portfolio question time. I do not have a copy of the Business Bulletin. [Interruption.] New-build Properties (Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn) 7.”
“The Parliament very kindly allowed us to put a yellow JCB right in front of the building to demonstrate the CESAR scheme. I look forward to hearing contributions from members, in particular Rhoda Grant as a Labour member, because it is the Labour Government that is holding up the issue for Scotland. All that it needs to do—as I have asked for time and time again—is have the Minister of State for Policing, Fire and Crime Prevention, Dame Diana Johnson, publish the consultation responses and move forward with regulations as secondary legislation. We can then move forward in this Parliament to support all the aforementioned people. We in Scotland are a soft target, and I look forward to hearing contributions from other members on this issue. The Deputy Presiding Officer: We move to the open debate. 17:20”
“Farmers, rural businesses and construction businesses are the backbone of Scotland’s economy. They work hard every day to build houses, provide food, maintain our landscapes and drive economic growth. They deserve to feel safe, and they deserve the Parliament’s full support in tackling the rising threat of rural crime. I call on the Scottish National Party to take the issue very seriously, listen to those affected, engage with industry experts and take action to prevent such crime from continuing to escalate. Scotland cannot afford to fall behind on rural security. I thank representatives of the following organisations for coming to my rural round-table event: the national rural crime unit; NFU Mutual; the Association of British Insurers; ATV Services Scotland; and Durham University.”
“I was surprised to hear that there is no clear, identifiable traceability for tractors, for example. I had not realised that. Should that be implemented in the UK as a matter of course, via either the UK Government or local authorities? I would like to see similar measures applying to quad bikes, off-road vehicles and e- bikes, for example. Rachael Hamilton: Bob Doris is absolutely spot on. The Equipment Theft (Prevention) Act 2023 that was passed by the UK Parliament covered three aspects: the creation of a comprehensive database for registration of equipment; forensic marking; and the use of immobilisers. However, I would like us to go further in Scotland, because there is so much more that we can do. As I mentioned, the CESAR scheme is very effective.”
“To ask the Scottish Government what its position is on using the blood spot test given to newborn babies to screen for spinal muscular atrophy to support early diagnosis and effective treatment of babies born with the condition. (S6O-04324)”
“That is what my constituents need right now, not empty promises from the SNP or empty offices from Labour. The Presiding Officer: Before I call Ms Boyack, I remind all members that language is important and that we should strive to be courteous and respectful to one another. 17:15”
“Perhaps if the Labour Party took less money from eco zealots and started talking to oil and gas workers, Anas Sarwar and Keir Starmer would know that and would understand the truly existential issue in Aberdeen. Just as Harold Wilson closed more coal mines than any other Prime Minister, Keir Starmer will be the Prime Minister who shuts down the North Sea oil and gas industry. No one—and I mean no one—knows what GB Energy is going to do, but I can tell members what it will not do. It will not stand up for oil and gas workers, it will not support oil and gas extraction and it will not make bills cheaper. What makes bills cheaper? More domestic oil and gas production and drilling, which has the side effect of providing secure and well-paid employment for years to come.”
“Does my fellow committee member Douglas Lumsden intend to speak to the terms of the LCM at any point, rather than engaging in a party-political rant? Douglas Lumsden: Bob Doris knows only too well that the LCM is about the creation of GB Energy, which will provide absolutely nothing for my constituents. Instead of supporting an industry that brings in money, Labour has made it clear through the establishment of GB Energy that it is doubling down on an industry that we subsidise through contracts for difference and constraint payments. I have nothing against building a renewable energy source, but why on earth are we not supporting oil and gas extraction? GB Energy is a policy of national self-harm. Yet again, the nationalists and the socialists are doing what Putin and his cronies want.”
“I will engage further with Dr Mary Ross-Davie, who is leading miscarriage care in NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, to see how it is getting on with the support that I believe is needed. I have a tiny amount of time left. If I had more time, I would have said more about graded miscarriage support, links to assisted conception services and the lack of reliable information that is out there—for example, do natural killer cells cause miscarriages? Discuss, please. When you are a victim of recurrent miscarriage, you go through the internet forensically to work out why. No one knows why, and we need more research. 16:28”
“Indeed, Glasgow midwife Caroline Judge won the prestigious Mariposa award for the quality of service that she offers. However, I suspect that what often happens across Scotland—or in some parts of Scotland—is that information is made available through signposting or a soft referral process at a time when mum and dad are numb, not receptive, or unable to engage with such support. I have no idea what support me and Janet were offered; that time was a chaotic blur. That is why I have been championing Held in our Hearts’ hospital to home model, which trains people, often those with lived experience, to reach out to families in their homes, and not just at the point of crisis but later, when that chaotic blur has died down and when mums might most need that support and be most receptive to it.”
“However, the impact on those on the way to have the most devastating news passed to them—that yet again they will not see the birth of a child that they so desperately want, or that they will have to undergo a related clinical procedure—can be profoundly traumatic. The thoughts that people have at that time are not always rational, but they are very real. We have to think more not just about dedicated facilities but about the geography and co-location of those facilities. I want to talk about the emotional support that is available to mums and families. Again, I can see that there has been progress, such as that in NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, which has bereavement midwives and strong referral processes to valued partners.”
“Imagine heading to an early pregnancy clinic and expecting not to find a heartbeat, anticipating that yet another pregnancy will not progress. You are not excited. You never get excited about a pregnancy when you have faced recurrent miscarriage; you are anxious the entire time. You are using the same shared space as mums-to-be who are almost full term, or family members of new mums who are excited to see a new baby in what is one of the happiest moments of a family’s life. They should be happy and excited, and they should share that joy with anyone and in any way that they so wish.”
“Today’s debate must ask the question: have matters related to miscarriage improved since 2020? I am pleased that there has clearly been progress, but we need to take a step back and comprehend what that means in practice. For instance, a key recommendation that has been made over the years is to have dedicated facilities for women who are experiencing unexpected pregnancy complications. It is positive that that is happening increasingly in NHS boards across Scotland, with most providing early pregnancy units. However, although that is incredibly welcome, such facilities are often co-located with or in close proximity to maternity units. Although I understand the reasons for that, the emotional impact of it can be quite profound.”
“I took part in a similar debate on miscarriage in October 2020 that was led by Shona Robison. I said at the time that my wife Janet and I had had four miscarriages over the years, but that we were absolutely blessed to have our son Cameron in our lives who, at that time, was four years old. Now, we are also incredibly lucky to have a beautiful young daughter Isla, who is three. Cameron is now nine. My short contribution to the debate, for which I have drawn in part from our family experience, is tempered by the reality that, despite the heartache and trauma that we went through, two beautiful and joyous children are now our lived reality. Others go through the pain and heartache of recurrent miscarriage and may never be as fortunate as we have been.”
“The decision to proceed with the two-body approach was also based on consultation with stakeholders and the findings of the outline business case. I will make a point that goes to some of the comments that we have heard today: changing structures alone will not deliver the reform that we all know needs to happen here. This is an enabling process that will allow us to make the changes that we require to make. The Deputy Presiding Officer: The minister generously did not take up his full allocation of 10 minutes, so I can take the two colleagues who still want to ask a question.”
“As we have heard, there will be a shift from three post-school education and skills funding bodies down to two. Some might ask why the Scottish Government did not take the opportunity to reduce that to a single funding body. I would like to hear the benefits of consolidation and having those two funding bodies. Graeme Dey: The option was chosen because it simplifies the tertiary education system by providing clear and separate remits for our public bodies. It means that the SFC has responsibility for funding all teaching and learning provision, and SAAS has responsibility for all student support funding. It is less disruptive than moving to a single funding body, but it still takes us in the direction of what James Withers rightly called for.”
“To ask the Scottish Government whether it will consider reviewing the planning guidance provided to local authorities relating to issuing a call for ideas/sites when undertaking their statutory requirement to prepare a 10-year local development plan. (S6O-04292)”
“To ask the Scottish Government how schools promote an understanding of, and respect for, religious diversity. (S6O-04280)”
“That is why I will vote against Labour’s motion this evening, and why I will back this Government and this health secretary to turn our NHS and social care system into the one that we want to see for all the people of Scotland in future. 16:06”