Alison Johnstone
No Party Affiliation · Scotland
“We will use the same voting procedure as before. Members voted by secret ballot. The Presiding Officer: Voting in this round of the Presiding Officer election is closed. I invite the scrutineers to proceed to the back of the chamber for the counting of votes. Again, candidates may also observe the count.”
“I now invite any scrutineers appointed by the candidates to go to the back of the chamber to observe the counting of ballot papers. Candidates may also observe the count.”
“The first meeting of the seventh session of the Parliament is resumed. I have received four valid nominations for the position of Presiding Officer. I shall now announce the nominations and ask all candidates, as their names are announced, to make themselves known to the chamber.”
“Ballot papers should be marked with an X before being folded and then placed in one of the ballot boxes provided at the rear of the chamber. At the end of each voting period, I shall invite any scrutineers that have been nominated by each candidate to monitor the counting of votes at the back of the chamber, which is where clerks will emp…”
“Members should remain in their seats until I invite them to collect their ballot paper from clerks at the back of the chamber. Members with surnames beginning with the letters A to F should collect their ballot papers from the desk on my left at the back of the chamber—the clerks there have their hands up.”
“15:29 On resuming— The Presiding Officer: This voting period is now open, using the same voting procedure as before. Members voted by secret ballot. The Presiding Officer: Voting in the third round of the election of the Presiding Officer is closed.”
The complete record
Every one of 1,933 lines we hold for Alison Johnstone, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 31 of 39.
“Please conclude, minister. Alasdair Allan: I recognise that the term that is used in law is “third party”, but I absolutely accept the point that the member makes about treating communities with respect. I conclude by pointing out that our planning system in Scotland is plan led, with a focus on involving all interests as early and as effectively as possible. Scotland remains committed to the principles of the Aarhus convention and we are working closely with the other devolved Administrations and the UK Government to consider the Aarhus convention compliance committee recommendations and all the potential solutions that are available. The Presiding Officer: I invite Edward Mountain to wind up on behalf of the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee. Please take us to 5.30 if you can, Mr Mountain. 17:22”
“The next item of business is a statement by Kate Forbes on project willow—unlocking Grangemouth’s potential. The Deputy First Minister will take questions at the end of her statement, so there should be no interventions or interruptions. 14:55”
“The next item of business is portfolio question time. Question 1 has not been lodged. Volunteering (Wellbeing Benefits) 2.”
“I can reassure Mr Findlay that the Scottish Government has taken forward an economic agenda that has seen gross domestic product per person in Scotland grow by 10.3 per cent, compared with 6 per cent in the United Kingdom. That is the record of a Government that is investing in the economy to boost economic performance and to create jobs and wealth in this country. That is what my Government is all about, and that is what we are delivering for people in Scotland. National Health Service 2.”
“The First Minister: The budget that the Scottish Government has successfully put to Parliament, and which is now going to be implemented, involves more than £700 million of business rate reductions for companies in Scotland, and that is just one of the pro-business measures in the Scottish Government’s budget. There is also the investment that we make in the enterprise agencies and in our representation overseas, which, of course, the Conservatives are opposed to. Mr Findlay makes his call for business tax reductions, but he also made a call in the budget for income tax reductions, which would reduce public expenditure by £1 billion and would undermine the investment that we are making in the economy.”
“Russell Findlay: So, no answer to that question, then. The new Trump tariffs will put Scottish jobs at risk, they will stop businesses from growing and they will slow economic growth. John Swinney cannot stop the tariffs, but he can lower bills in Scotland. This week, Scottish families faced more tax rises because of the Scottish National Party and Labour. Our analysis shows that an average person’s bill will rise by around £1,000 because of higher income tax, national insurance, energy costs, train fares, water bills and council tax. The cost of tariffs surely makes it vital for John Swinney to look at lowering the burden on hard- working Scots and businesses—will he do so?”
“Excuse me, First Minister. Mr Ross, please adhere to our standing orders. The First Minister: I find that line of questioning absolutely bizarre, because the Conservatives are the ones who demand that the Government close our international offices, which are critical to the representation of Scotland abroad and the economic success of our country. I am proud of what Scottish Development International does on our behalf, and I know that the export strategies of the Scottish Government are focused on the needs of the industry. I can assure Mr Findlay that the Scottish Government will take forward the interests of Scottish industry in all that we do. We will look at the opportunities to promote our products overseas, and we will stand shoulder to shoulder with Scottish industry as we promote our important products to overseas markets.”
“There is one question to be put as a result of today’s business. Unless any member objects, I propose to ask a single question on two Parliamentary Bureau motions. As no member objects, the question is, that motion S6M-17060, on approval of a Scottish statutory instrument, and motion S6M-17061, on designation of a lead committee, in the name of Jamie Hepburn, on behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau, be agreed to. Motions agreed to, That the Parliament agrees that the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman Act 2002 Amendment Order 2025 [draft] be approved. That the Parliament agrees that the Economy and Fair Work Committee be designated as the lead committee in consideration of the Community Wealth Building (Scotland) Bill at stage 1. The Presiding Officer: That concludes decision time. Scotland’s Islands”
“The next item of business is consideration of two Parliamentary Bureau motions. I ask Jamie Hepburn, on behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau, to move motion S6M-17060, on approval of a Scottish statutory instrument, and motion S6M- 17061, on designation of a lead committee. Motions moved, That the Parliament agrees that the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman Act 2002 Amendment Order 2025 [draft] be approved. That the Parliament agrees that the Economy and Fair Work Committee be designated as the lead committee in consideration of the Community Wealth Building (Scotland) Bill at stage 1.—[Jamie Hepburn] The Presiding Officer: The question on the motions will be put at decision time. Decision Time 18:32”
“Motion moved, That the Parliament agrees— (a) the following programme of business— Tuesday 22 April 2025 2.00 pm Time for Reflection followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions followed by Topical Questions (if selected) followed by Scottish Government Debate: The International Situation followed by Committee Announcements followed by Business Motions followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions 5.00 pm Decision Time followed by Members’ Business Wednesday 23 April 2025 2.00 pm Parliamentary Bureau Motions 2.00 pm Portfolio Questions: Constitution, External Affairs and Culture, and Parliamentary Business; Justice and Home Affairs followed by Scottish Government Debate: UK Government Welfare Reforms followed by Business Motions followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions followed by Approval of SSIs (if required) 5.00 pm Decision Time followed by Members’ Business Thursday 24 April 2025 11.40 am Parliamentary Bureau Motions 11.40 am General Questions 12.00 pm First Minister’s Questions followed by Members’ Business 2.30 pm Parliamentary Bureau Motions 2.30 pm Portfolio Questions: Education and Skills followed by Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee Debate: Inquiry into Framework Legislation and Henry VIII Powers followed by Business Motions followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions 5.00 pm Decision Time Tuesday 29 April 2025 2.00 pm Time for Reflection followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions followed by Topical Questions (if selected) followed by Scottish Government Business followed by Committee Announcements followed by Business Motions followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions 5.00 pm Decision Time followed by Members’ Business Wednesday 30 April 2025 2.00 pm Parliamentary Bureau Motions 2.00 pm Portfolio Questions: Deputy First Minister Responsibilities, Economy and Gaelic; Finance and Local Government followed by Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party Business followed by Business Motions followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions followed by Approval of SSIs (if required) 5.10 pm Decision Time followed by Members’ Business Thursday 1 May 2025 11.40 am Parliamentary Bureau Motions 11.40 am General Questions 12.00 pm First Minister’s Questions followed by Members’ Business 2.30 pm Parliamentary Bureau Motions 2.30 pm Portfolio Questions: Net Zero and Energy, and Transport followed by Scottish Government Business followed by Business Motions followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions 5.00 pm Decision Time (b) that, for the purposes of Portfolio Questions in the week beginning 21 April 2025, in rule 13.7.3, after the word “except” the words “to the extent to which the Presiding Officer considers that the questions are on the same or similar subject matter or” are inserted.—[Jamie Hepburn] The Presiding Officer: I call Miles Briggs to speak to and move amendment S6M-17059.1.”
“The next item of business is consideration of business motion S6M-17059, in the name of Jamie Hepburn, on behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau, setting out a business programme. I invite Jamie Hepburn to move the motion.”
“Her own illness made her doubly determined to use her position to raise awareness and to advocate for others. The Parliament community is sad and subdued. We feel Christina’s loss sorely. She was a passionate debater in the chamber, but she had such great chat in the garden lobby, too. When it came to wearing it pink, no one wore it like Christina. We will miss her. 14:03”
“There has been an outpouring of respect and affection for Christina from across the chamber, across the Parliament and from far and wide in these difficult days, and I hope that you will take comfort and solace from the great number of messages that you have received. Only a few short weeks ago, Christina announced that she would not seek re-election in May next year. She wrote: “It has been the honour of my life to have had the opportunity to represent the people of Central Scotland and the communities of Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse over the past 18 years.” She wrote, too, of her pride in all that she had achieved as an MSP, as a convener and as a minister—rightly and deservedly so. Christina’s desire to make things better for people defined her approach to public service.”
“This afternoon, it is my sad duty to introduce a motion of condolence in the name of the First Minister. The flags at Holyrood fly at half mast today in honour of our dear parliamentary colleague Christina McKelvie MSP. We stand with our friend and colleague Keith Brown MSP. On behalf of all members and on behalf of all who work in the Scottish Parliament, I give my warmest welcome to Christina and Keith’s family, who join us today. Christina spoke of Lewis and Jack with such love and pride, and she adored her grandchildren. Please accept our deepest condolences and our most sincere sympathies.”
“The Presiding Officer: That concludes decision time. Learning Disability, Autism and Neurodivergence Bill”
“Motion agreed to, That the Parliament agrees that clauses 1 to 11, 13, 18 to 26, 45(3), 48 and 123 of the Data (Use and Access) Bill, introduced in the House of Lords on 23 October 2024, so far as these matters fall within the legislative competence of the Scottish Parliament or alter the executive competence of the Scottish Ministers, should be considered by the UK Parliament. The Presiding Officer: The final question is, that motion S6M-17008, in the name of Ariane Burgess, on behalf of the selection panel, on the appointment of the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman, be agreed to. Motion agreed to, That the Parliament nominates Paul McFadden to His Majesty The King for appointment as the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman under section 1 of the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman Act 2002.”
“Motion agreed to, That the Parliament, for the purposes of any Act of the Scottish Parliament resulting from the Criminal Justice Modernisation and Abusive Domestic Behaviour Reviews (Scotland) Bill, agrees to any expenditure of a kind referred to in Rule 9.12.3A of the Parliament’s Standing Orders arising in consequence of the Act. The Presiding Officer: The next question is, that motion S6M-17009, in the name of Richard Lochhead, on the Data (Use and Access) Bill, which is United Kingdom legislation, be agreed to.”
“There are four questions to be put as a result of today’s business. The first question is, that motion S6M-17003, in the name of Angela Constance, on the Criminal Justice Modernisation and Abusive Domestic Behaviour Reviews (Scotland) Bill at stage 1, be agreed to. Motion agreed to, That the Parliament agrees to the general principles of the Criminal Justice Modernisation and Abusive Domestic Behaviour Reviews (Scotland) Bill. The Presiding Officer: The next question is, that motion S6M-16806, in the name of Shona Robison, on a financial resolution for the Criminal Justice Modernisation and Abusive Domestic Behaviour Reviews (Scotland) Bill, be agreed to.”
“The next item of business is consideration of motion S6M-17008, in the name of Ariane Burgess, on behalf of the selection panel, on appointment of the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman. I call Ariane Burgess to speak to and move the motion. 16:55”
“The next item of business is consideration of legislative consent motion S6M-17009, in the name of Richard Lochhead, on the Data (Use and Access) Bill, which is United Kingdom legislation. I call Richard Lochhead to move the motion. Motion moved, That the Parliament agrees that clauses 1 to 11, 13, 18 to 26, 45(3), 48 and 123 of the Data (Use and Access) Bill, introduced in the House of Lords on 23 October 2024, so far as these matters fall within the legislative competence of the Scottish Parliament or alter the executive competence of the Scottish Ministers, should be considered by the UK Parliament.—[Richard Lochhead] The Presiding Officer: The question on the motion will be put at decision time. Scottish Public Services Ombudsman”
“The next item of business is consideration of motion S6M-16806, in the name of Shona Robison, on a financial resolution for the Criminal Justice Modernisation and Abusive Domestic Behaviour Reviews (Scotland) Bill. I call Angela Constance to move the motion. Motion moved, That the Parliament, for the purposes of any Act of the Scottish Parliament resulting from the Criminal Justice Modernisation and Abusive Domestic Behaviour Reviews (Scotland) Bill, agrees to any expenditure of a kind referred to in Rule 9.12.3A of the Parliament’s Standing Orders arising in consequence of the Act.—[Angela Constance] The Presiding Officer: The question on the motion will be put at decision time. Data (Use and Access) Bill 16:55”
“I look forward to collaborating with all parts of the justice system and all stakeholders to ensure that the bill delivers significant reform to public services. Criminal Justice Modernisation and Abusive Domestic Behaviour Reviews (Scotland) Bill: Financial Resolution 16:54”
“In part, that is due to Claire Baker’s representations to me some time ago, but it is also due to my horror that published research by an organisation called We Can’t Consent To This, which we consulted, highlights that 38 per cent of women under the age of 40 across the UK have experienced unwanted slapping, spitting, choking, strangulation or gagging during otherwise consensual sexual activity. Michelle Thomson is absolutely right that we need to do more to understand what is certainly a new and emerging threat to women. I will write to Rhoda Grant on the issues that she raised about the dignity and treatment of women and children in relation to forensic services. I reiterate my commitment to working constructively across the chamber to identify any improvements that can be made to the bill.”
“I assure her and other members that I remain open minded about what our next steps should be in relation to non-fatal strangulation, because I fully recognise the seriousness of the issue. I am actively pursuing work to progress the Government’s consideration of next steps, but I appreciate that some members might wish to use the bill as an opportunity to propose their own solutions. I advise members that new questions on the topic of non-fatal strangulation during consensual sexual activity have been included in the 2025-26 Scottish crime and justice survey questionnaire, which will go into the field this month.”
“On Mr Kerr’s point, I cannot see a reason why a joint review could not be undertaken, but I am conscious that every case is different and that there therefore might be a situation in which a joint review could not take place. However, I very much hope that joint reviews, when they are required, will be the norm, and I will endeavour to ensure that that is the case. We should not make individuals and families repeat their trauma and go through the same processes time and again. On Ms Dowey’s point, it is my expectation that part 2 of the bill could be implemented six to nine months after royal assent. I have very much appreciated the engagement that I have had with Ms Thomson.”
“Those issues will be developed further in the guidance, but the core of the matter is the need to provide transparency, notwithstanding the issues relating to anonymity and dealing with confidential information. We need to lift the lid on some of the horrors that exist in our society, and it is by staring them straight in the face that we will learn the lessons and put in place the right mechanisms to prevent such tragedies in the future. I recognise that the review landscape is complex, but I reiterate my point that the development of domestic homicide and suicide reviews will result in not duplication but the filling of a gap. Work is being progressed with all partners to develop and refine the process for joint reviews, which will prevent duplication.”
“I also want to aim high and set a standard of review that is no less than what those who have died and their bereaved families deserve. That is something— Jamie Greene: Will the cabinet secretary take an intervention? Angela Constance: Yes, of course. Jamie Greene: When reading the stage 1 report and listening to today’s debate, I have not been clear about how that correlation will work in practice. How will the reviews result in meaningful changes and lessons being learned to reduce the number of terrible incidents happening in the future? I am yet to see what the strategy in that regard might be. Angela Constance: That is a fair point.”
“The purpose of Scotland’s domestic homicide and suicide reviews, as set out in part 2, is to learn lessons following deaths in which abusive domestic behaviour is known or suspected, which is very much on the prevention terrain. Rona Mackay said that the measure was long overdue, which I agree with, and Pam Gosal quoted Fiona Drouet, who said that “these reviews have the power to change”, which I also agree with. I look forward to engaging with Ms Gosal further when she publishes the detail of her bill. Ultimately, I want the domestic homicide and suicide review model that we develop in Scotland to be robust, fit for purpose, future proofed and supportive of the effective change that must be delivered in order to prevent deaths that result from abusive domestic behaviour.”
“The one exception to that is in proceedings in which the only party is a public official—a police officer or prosecutor seeking warrants or court orders—which has been one of the beneficial gains of the emergency measures that came in as a result of the pandemic. Audrey Nicoll raised the issue of digital productions. I appreciate that the committee is supportive of the provision but is looking for safeguards to be strengthened. We will explore that, but it is important to emphasise that the court currently has the power to say that an image cannot be used instead of the physical evidence. Objections around the use of digital images can become a preliminary issue in solemn cases. We are now also seeing the benefits of the digital evidence-sharing capability, which is supporting further improvements in our justice system.”
“At stage 1, the committee was very supportive of the bill’s broad principles around virtual attendance, but it sought the inclusion of further details in the bill—we heard more about that, in particular, from Ben Macpherson. As always, I will work with colleagues in good faith. At this stage, my only plea is that we ensure that, in seeking clarity, we do not cause more confusion, which would not be in the interests of anyone who seeks to use our justice system. Regarding the bill as it stands, it is important to reiterate that the default position is still that people should attend court in person.”
“No doubt, when it comes to stage 2, we will all rightly be in the weeds of the detail, but my one appeal to Liam Kerr is that he makes sure that his colleague Jamie Greene does not lodge 50 amendments five minutes before a deadline. Mr Greene likes to keep us all on our toes, as is his democratic right. In response to Mr Kerr’s direct question on the time limits, I can confirm that the Scottish statutory instrument on savings provisions was laid in the Parliament today. I perhaps should have said in my opening speech that, yesterday, I signed the provisions. The instrument will come to the Criminal Justice Committee’s attention so that it can do due diligence. I note that Pauline McNeill, Liam McArthur, Ben Macpherson and others spoke in detail about virtual attendance.”
“I call the cabinet secretary to wind up the debate. You have a very generous eight minutes, cabinet secretary. 16:44 Angela Constance: I thank members for their contributions and for their constructive engagement on the bill. I also pay tribute to our very hard-pressed Criminal Justice Committee. I do not have a solution for the members of that committee, but they, of course, have my sympathy. I think that we are all agreed that the provisions in part 1 of the bill will deliver a great deal of benefit to all justice system users, including victims, witnesses and the accused, and—not to forget them—professional witnesses, such as the police, and the Crown, the defence and the courts. It is welcome that we are all largely on the same terrain, and I appreciate people’s support.”
“The next item of business is a statement by Alasdair Allan on “Tackling Fuel Poverty in Scotland: Periodic Report 2021-2024”. The minister will take questions at the end of his statement, so there should be no interventions or interruptions. 14:24”
“Motion moved, That the Parliament agrees to the following revisions to the programme of business for— (a) Wednesday 2 April 2025— delete 2.00 pm Portfolio Questions: Rural Affairs, Land Reform and Islands; Health and Social Care followed by Ministerial Statement: Heat in Buildings Bill and insert 2.00 pm Motion of Condolence 3.00 pm Portfolio Questions: Rural Affairs, Land Reform and Islands; Health and Social Care delete 5.30 pm Decision Time and insert 6.00 pm Decision Time (b) Thursday 3 April 2025— after followed by Ministerial Statement: Project Willow - Unlocking Grangemouth’s Potential insert followed by Ministerial Statement: Heat in Buildings Bill delete 5.00 pm Decision Time and insert 5.30 pm Decision Time.—[Jamie Hepburn] Motion agreed to. Topical Question Time 14:04 Female Teachers (Physical Abuse and Violence) 1.”
“The next item of business is consideration of motion S6M-17058, in the name of Jamie Hepburn, on behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau, on changes to the business programme. I call Jamie Hepburn to move the motion.”
“We can start by being compassionate and reaching out to incomers, just like me, which encompasses immigrants and people who are seeking asylum. We can include people who seem different, just as I was. After all, embedded in humanist values—in those that we all share and live by—are being fair and respectful, and recognising the dignity and potential in all people. Finally, and just to let you know, I have been accepted in the Highlands. I feel valued in a great small community, where I do belong. Business Motion 14:04”
“As the philosopher Patricia Churchland rightly said: “We long to belong, and belonging and caring anchors our sense of place in the universe.” Before those life events of mine, I had not really thought about what belonging meant, but I was always aware of where I felt comfortable and valued. Sometimes belonging starts with being able to value ourselves, as that can help us to engage most confidently with our families, in our workplaces and in our social and community lives. However, not everyone believes that they can ever be valued and accepted. It is true that our sense of belonging is influenced by how we feel, think and behave, but it is also influenced by wider societal forces. If belonging is both felt and ascribed, how can we influence both?”
“Even at seven, I knew that a by-product of that experience would be that I was viewed as different. I spoke with a different accent, and I was not like everyone else. That troubled me. Meanwhile, my younger brothers decided to adopt the Yorkshire dialect, just to fit in. Then, 28 years later, I moved to the Highlands, and to the shores of Loch Ness. I remember being told, partly in jest, that I would never be a local. That stuck with me, because it reminded me of those old, uncomfortable feelings about identity and difference. I wanted to belong. I also wanted all incomers to be welcomed and seen as having something to contribute.”
“Good afternoon. The first item of business is time for reflection. Our time for reflection leader today is Laura Gillespie of the Humanist Society Scotland. Laura Gillespie (Humanist Society Scotland): Presiding Officer and members, I am a Highland- based celebrant with the Humanist Society Scotland. Those words, which describe my location and my identity, make me think of the importance of belonging in a place and in a group. Belonging is what gives us a feeling of security and support; it is about feeling accepted and included. I spent part of my childhood in Yorkshire, where a seven-year-old little Scottish me was paraded around the classrooms to recite Scottish poetry— not Burns, but “The Sair Finger” and that classic about Kirkcaldy “The Boy in the Train”.”
“There is one question to be put as a result of today’s business. The question is, that motion S6M-16789, in the name of Liz Smith, on the Schools (Residential Outdoor Education) (Scotland) Bill at stage 1, be agreed to. Are we agreed? Members: No. The Presiding Officer: There will be a division. There will be a short suspension to allow members to access the digital voting system. 17:30 Meeting suspended. 17:33 On resuming— The Presiding Officer: We move to the vote on motion S6M-16789, in the name of Liz Smith, on the Schools (Residential Outdoor Education) (Scotland) Bill at stage 1. Members should cast their votes now. The vote is closed.”
“On that basis, the Greens will vote for the bill at stage 1. 17:01”
“My reading of the response is that it implies—it does not say this outright—that the Government disagrees with the view that every pupil should have an opportunity to take part in residential outdoor education. The Government agrees on the value of outdoor education, but it does not directly address the residential aspect, which is key here. If, as a Parliament, we believe that every young person in Scotland should have the opportunity to take part in residential outdoor education, the bill provides an opportunity to make that possible. If the Government also believes that but does not believe that the bill is the right vehicle, it still has a narrow window of time in which it could bring forward an alternative proposal. It has had the opportunity to do that, but it has not done so.”
“That is particularly the case in relation to young people from more rural communities, who have much readier access to outdoor education as things stand. The point was made that they might benefit more from spending a couple of days in a city centre accessing museums, galleries and so on, which they would not otherwise be able to do in their day-to-day lives. That is worth considering. The minister was right to say that, in general, the quality of outdoor education has probably improved since 2010, but that does not address the issue of inconsistency, on which I will close my remarks. The committee’s first recommendation in its stage 1 report is that we think that all young people in Scotland should have access to residential outdoor education. The Scottish Government’s response does not address that directly.”
“That would amount to a change in teachers’ terms and conditions, so it was entirely legitimate for their union representatives to raise that concern That said, I should put on record the level of enthusiasm that was displayed by the individual teachers to whom the committee spoke and from whom it took evidence on the proposals. Teachers have seen the transformational impact that involvement in residential outdoor education has had not only on their pupils but on their professional development, and we should not lose sight of that. On the wider concerns about teacher workload, I say to the Government that there are many other ways in which we could reduce that workload—in particular, tackling bureaucracy in the classroom would go a long way. The issue of flexibility was raised and is well worth considering.”
“I would be a bit cautious if we were to displace the commercial activity that currently provides a valuable income stream. The solution to that is to increase capacity across the residential outdoor education estate, in which case we would not have any risk of displacement. However, that is an issue to be grappled with as we move forward. As other members have also mentioned, throughout stage 1, I was particularly concerned about the impact not only on teachers but on school support staff, who are often expected to accompany children on such trips. Compelling teachers and other school staff is not the intention but, if we are compelling local authorities to provide such opportunities, there is the risk that they will compel teachers to do so.”
“This goes back to Arran outdoor education centre, which Jamie Greene mentioned, and Blairvadach, which is operated by Glasgow City Council but is in my and Jamie Greene’s region, in Argyll and Bute. I emphasise that, year after year, those council-run centres are slated for closure and, year after year, a few more of them close. We need to come to some kind of resolution to, at the very least, preserve the current estate. Blairvadach is an interesting example that needs to be grappled with in relation to finances. My understanding of that centre is that Glasgow City Council maximises commercial bookings to cross-subsidise its traditional local authority class trips. The aim of the bill is to increase the number of children accessing residential outdoor education through schools.”
“Christine Grahame: I fully accept the position about local authorities, but capital funding will be needed by some of the existing providers, such as Broomlee, which is a charity, and I am not sure where that will come from. I wish that it could be done, but I want to see that nailed down. Ross Greer: The fact that we require not just the on-going cost of provision but the capital funding is an essential point. There are relevant models. Jamie Greene listed a number of them, repeating Liz Smith’s earlier points about trust models, philanthropy and so on. As a socialist, I believe that the state should be able to provide much of the funding that is required for that.”
“It is quite right that they have been scrutinised by both the Education, Children and Young People Committee and the Finance and Public Administration Committee. Although there is a substantial and credible proposal, Liz Smith will appreciate that, if more money is required, I am never short of an additional tax proposal. I am more than happy to share mine if she wishes to take on one or two of them. I take this opportunity, as I do with many other subjects, to say that much of the difficulty here relates to how we fund our local authorities. They are the ones who deliver education, and they will be primarily responsible for the delivery of this responsibility if we pass the bill into law. At the moment, the primary method of tax that our local authorities have is based on a valuation from before I was even born.”
“From the outset, my most significant concern about that, as of today, is about what appears to be an element of brinkmanship from the Scottish Government on the financial resolution on the bill. It is not only in the seven weeks since publication of the committee report that the Government has had time to grapple with the issue and engage with the member in charge; Liz Smith stated her intention to introduce the bill at the start of this parliamentary session. Years have passed during which those issues could have been worked through. I am concerned that setting the six-month timescale for the financial resolution involves an element of brinkmanship, given that, without it, the bill will fall. That is unwelcome in a process in which we are trying to achieve unanimity. Liz Smith has already laid out options for the costs.”
“We move to winding-up speeches. 16:55 Ross Greer: The debate has been an excellent example of effective parliamentary scrutiny of a bill, as has the whole stage 1 process. Excepting the point that John Mason just made about the general principles in relation to cost, in so far as those principles relate to policy outcome, there is complete unanimity across the Parliament. It is a question of implementation and what exactly we are trying to achieve. I have said already that the Scottish Greens will support the bill at stage 1, but I want to address some of our concerns that I did not get to in my opening speech. The first is about the cost, which is a significant concern.”