Douglas Ross
Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party · Scotland
“To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to comments by the Scottish Information Commissioner who stated, in relation to the Government’s handling of information concerning the Salmond files, “I can no longer trust the government to handle this information unsupervised and will explore more intrusive options to ensure complianc…”
“I literally follow sport from the sidelines in my role as a match official but, more than that, as a parent of two boys in Moray, I give credit to the sporting organisations in Moray and across the Highlands that provide so many opportunities for young people—boys and girls— throughout the country.”
“When we are thinking about the bill, which will undoubtedly pass at stage 3 today, I am sure unanimously, we might consider what she said in her email: “Calum can’t advocate for himself due to his complex disability, but he can express this truth: the children aren’t naughty, they are scared.” Children should not be scared in Scotland, an…”
“I rise to make my final speech in the chamber. I chose to speak in this debate, on this subject, for a number of reasons. First, the member in charge proved to be a very conscientious and determined member in getting the bill through.”
“The work that I have done as an individual member, as a party spokesperson, as a party leader and as a convener has been assisted by their tremendous efforts.”
“I am frustrated that we have politicians who cannot speak for four minutes without having the lectern up and reading from a script, daring not to deviate by taking an intervention.”
The complete record
Every one of 1,089 lines we hold for Douglas Ross, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 18 of 22.
“On a point of order, Presiding Officer. Will you accept a motion without notice, under rule 8.14.3 of standing orders, to extend the debate to allow those of us, including me, who requested to ask a question of the cabinet secretary to put our questions to her on this monumental statement? It is only right that the Parliament is able to hear all voices on the issue and, I hope, to get answers from the Scottish Government. The Presiding Officer: Thank you, Mr Ross. The Parliamentary Bureau discussed the allocation of time for the statement this afternoon. That time was extended, and I have now extended the extension. It is important that we protect time for other issues. There will be further opportunities this week to put questions to the Government on the matter. That concludes the ministerial statement. International Situation”
“I am sorry, but I do not think that the cabinet secretary should be offering to write to members. She has come to the chamber today to respond to a lodged question that she knows is about 506 sex offenders changing their names. If she can confidently stand up and say that that number does not reflect 506 individuals but is the number of changes that have been made, can she tell us how many sex offenders have changed their names? That is a simple question that she must be able to answer, given what she has previously said. Angela Constance: It is of deep regret to me that members seem incapable of listening. I repeat once again that, on the information that is at my disposal from Police Scotland, there are not 506 individuals— Douglas Ross: So how many are there? Angela Constance: Presiding Officer, I am not putting up with this.”
“However, Scotland is about not only what happens here in the capital or in our major cities; Scotland is the sum of all its parts, and our islands play a crucial part in what we are famous for, what we are regarded for and what we benefit from in relation to how we can draw people in from across the world. Our islands punch well above their weight. We should celebrate them, as we are doing in the chamber now and as we will do at tonight’s reception in the Parliament, but we should not do so only on occasions like this. We should celebrate them all year round and give them our support to ensure that they can continue to thrive well into the future. 18:51”
“To anyone else, it would be almost incredible to suggest that a spaceport is being built in the most northerly part of the most northerly isles in Scotland, but that area has really taken on board the benefits of the spaceport. It could be leading not only for Scotland and the rest of the UK but for that type of satellite across Europe and around the world. There is so much that we could say about our island communities and what they offer to Scotland. This debate is a great opportunity and, along with the round-table meetings that Jamie Halcro Johnston and other MSPs have been hosting, it should feed into what the Government will, I hope, continue to do to promote island communities.”
“We are not getting enough younger people to come to the islands, but they are vital to ensuring that we can keep those places vibrant and, in turn, encourage more young people and families to come to them. My family is a big fan of the television programme “This Farming Life”. We are watching the current series, which features a family from up in Papa Westray, who have their own challenges. The mother had to leave the island, with her family, to give birth to her fourth child. That programme is helpful in that it shows the amazing benefits of living in our more remote and rural island communities. We should be very proud of them, and we should promote them more. Jamie Halcro Johnston mentioned the spaceport.”
“Kenny Gibson was right to mention the problems with ferry services in his constituency, which are often raised with those of us who represent the Highlands and Islands. Jamie Halcro Johnston touched on depopulation, which I am sure the minister will mention, too. I was looking at National Records for Scotland data that shows that more than one in 10 residents of the Orkney islands of North Ronaldsay, Sanday and Stronsay, which together make up one data zone, left there between 2010 and 2015. Meanwhile, the proportion of residents in the islands who were aged 65 or older grew at twice the rate of those aged 16 and under. Not only are people leaving the islands; those who remain tend to be older.”
“Up in Lerwick, in Shetland, I met skippers from our pelagic fleet and heard about the challenges that they face, but also about their opportunities. I have seen the amazing, world-leading marine energy technologies that are being developed in Orkney. Although a taxi driver in the Western Isles abused me about a decision that I had given in an old firm match, I was pleased that my notoriety as a referee had reached the islands from the pitches in Glasgow. Everywhere you go in the Highlands and Islands, even when you are being criticised for something, you will always get a friendly and welcome reception. However, it is important that we consider the challenges that islands face.”
“It is a pleasure to speak in the debate. I congratulate Jamie Halcro Johnston on securing it and the way in which he has opened it, the work that he has done in the lead-up to today and the round-table meetings that were held this afternoon. I expect that the reception that the Parliament will host later this evening will be very successful. I welcome to the gallery members of the public who have come from Scotland’s various islands to hear their Parliament discuss issues that are important to them. It is my privilege, as a member for the Highlands and Islands, to represent so many island communities. Ahead of the debate, I was reflecting on some of the highlights that I have experienced as I have gone around the islands that I represent.”
“The Presiding Officer: The question is, that amendment S6M-17059.1, in the name of Miles Briggs, which seeks to amend motion S6M-17059, in the name of Jamie Hepburn, on behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau, setting out a business programme, 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. 18:25 Meeting suspended. 18:28 On resuming— The Presiding Officer: We come to the vote on amendment S6M-17059.1, in the name of Miles Briggs, which seeks to amend motion S6M-17059, in the name of Jamie Hepburn, on behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau, setting out a business programme. Members should cast their votes now. The vote is closed.”
“The business motion before us also indicates that, on 30 April, the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party will have the chance to bring forward a subject for debate. It can bring forward—[Interruption.] It can bring forward the issue for debate then, but I tell members— [Interruption.] The Presiding Officer: Members! Jamie Hepburn: I have accepted a request for, and I am committed to bringing forward, a debate in Government time. I will take the request to the bureau. We can agree it then, we will schedule it then and we will bring it back to the chamber and agree it at that point. However, lodging an amendment at this stage is, frankly, no more than performative nonsense.”
“[Made a request to intervene.] Jamie Hepburn: We have a process for scheduling business—we go through the bureau to schedule business, and then we agree it. I will give way to Mr Ross. Douglas Ross: Does the minister accept that there should be a principle in the Parliament that issues to be debated that are on devolved issues should take precedence over issues on reserved matters? Jamie Hepburn: International matters will inevitably have an impact on devolved matters. The impact on energy prices will have an impact on devolved services in Mr Ross’s area. Maybe he does not care about that—I care about it and I think that we should be debating it. Let me make another point: we all have the opportunity to bring forward subjects for debate.”
“Last August, Brazil gave Scotch whisky GI status. That took 10 years to negotiate. Does the cabinet secretary agree that it is deeply troubling for the United Kingdom to potentially have more than one definition of single malt, and that it would be damaging to the industry’s negotiations to secure GI status of that iconic Scottish product in other countries around the world? Mairi Gougeon: I agree with the member on that. I will continue to do all that I can in my role in liaising with UK Government ministers to ensure that any definition of single malt is not watered down. Fortunately, the process is still on-going; DEFRA’s consultation is open until 20 May, and we will certainly be making representations to the UK Government. Land Reform (Engagement with Highlands and Islands Communities) 2.”
“The NASUWT has said that “a greater focus on exploring correlation between behaviour issues and poverty is required.” Last month, the general secretary of the Educational Institute of Scotland said: “since the onset of austerity, we have seen rising incidents of violent, aggressive, dysregulated, distressed behaviour in classrooms and growing incidents of additional support needs.” I take my responsibilities on that extremely seriously, but I hope that Mr Ross can reflect on some of the policy decisions that his party took when in government that might also contribute to the challenges in our classrooms.”
“When we talk about some of the causation factors, we need to look at the impact of the pandemic. That has been recognised by the United Nations and by a number of education secretaries from across the United Kingdom. However, the point that Mr Ross does not alight on is the impact of poverty in our classrooms.”
“At last week’s Conveners Group meeting, the First Minister admitted to me that he has sleepless nights because of the rising level of violence in Scotland’s schools. Does the cabinet secretary share those concerns? Eighteen years after the Scottish National Party came to power, with education fully devolved in Scotland, does she also accept that SNP education ministers past and present must accept responsibility for the rising level of violence in our schools? Jenny Gilruth: Mr Ross asks whether I share those concerns. Of course I share them. He knows, too, that I am a former teacher, so I recognise some of the challenge. He understands the national action plan that the Government has set out. A broader update on that was published last Friday and provided to Parliament.”
“The Education, Children and Young People Committee supports the general principles of the bill. There are issues that need to be addressed in relation to costs and staffing, as I have set out, but the further parliamentary stages that will be afforded to Liz Smith, the Scottish Government and the Parliament as a whole provide us with an opportunity to resolve those. 15:42”
“Not only the education committee but the Finance and Public Administration Committee said that there was merit in exploring such alternative funding models, and we recommended that the Scottish Government liaise with Liz Smith to explore the options in a meaningful way. The committee heard of concerns regarding capital funding for outdoor education centres. We were told that, rightly, current market prices for school residentials do not include capital costs for the centres, to keep the costs of residential trips affordable. We also heard that some centres were built in the 1930s and were designed to be used for perhaps up to 25 years but are still in use now, with refurbishments done on a piecemeal basis when funding allows. All those issues were rightly highlighted and brought to the fore during one of our evidence sessions.”
“I am slightly unsure about the notification that we received last night from the Scottish Government, in its response to the committee, that it “will not stand in the way of the Bill but will not be lodging” the financial resolution that is needed unless some progress is made. I ask that, when the minister speaks, she outlines the process that we must go through as a committee and as a Parliament to determine whether the Scottish Government will eventually lodge a financial resolution, which is clearly crucial. We heard interesting evidence from the member in charge on other funding options that could supplement the central Government funding that will be required to implement the bill. That included a public trust model.”
“That said, parental contributions and fundraising are key sources of income for many schools that currently provide residential outdoor education. We have, therefore, asked the Scottish Government and the member in charge of the bill to consider whether the aim of universal provision of residential outdoor education can retain a place for parental contributions and local fundraising. The costs that are associated with the bill mean that it cannot proceed to stage 2 unless a financial resolution is lodged. That cannot be done by the member in charge; it can be done only by the minister and the Scottish Government.”
“Currently, teachers facilitate residential outdoor education visits on a voluntary basis. Many of the teachers whom we spoke to spoke highly of the value of that experience to pupils and to them personally. However, representatives of education trade unions cautioned that placing such trips on a statutory footing, as proposed in the bill, would change the nature of the arrangements. We heard that that could potentially require teachers to renegotiate their terms and conditions via the tripartite Scottish Negotiating Committee for Teachers, and we recommended that the Scottish Government provide its view on whether that would be required and an estimate of any resulting costs. On funding, we all agreed that the national funding of residential outdoor education is a good example of preventative spend—its benefits are well documented.”
“However, we recognised the challenges in relation to the universality of the opportunity to experience residential outdoor education, including how it should be funded, the impact on teachers and the existing capacity of residential outdoor centres to accommodate pupils. We all acknowledged that more work needs to be done in assessing capacity across Scotland and the ability for existing outdoor centres to provide residential opportunities for all pupils—including, as Liz Smith said, to accommodate pupils with complex additional support needs. We all agreed that the additional costs of providing residential outdoor education for pupils with ASN should not fall disproportionately on those pupils’ families. I will move on to teachers and the concerns that we heard during our evidence sessions and our informal session with teachers.”
“Given those life-changing benefits, we said that all pupils should have the opportunity to experience residential outdoor education, which should be linked to the existing curriculum at some point in their school career. We welcome the inclusive approach that has been taken in the bill. Martin Whitfield: As an add-on to my earlier intervention, was the committee satisfied that outdoor education fulfils many of the requirements of the curriculum for excellence, both in its original form and with the additional vision that was added in 2010? Douglas Ross: We absolutely were. That came across in the evidence sessions that we held and in the information that we gathered during those sessions. I hope that our report reflects that.”
“That is one memory that I have from my visit to a residential outdoor centre. The interest and passion that Liz Smith has shown were replicated by all members of the committee, who have had their own experiences of attending outdoor centres and know of constituents’ experiences of that. That has brought a lot to the debate. We saw that in our committee sessions and in the visits that the committee made as part of our scrutiny. The stage 1 report makes it clear that the benefits for pupils and staff are considerable. They include building pupils’ confidence and developing the teacher-pupil relationship—that happens while they are attending an outdoor residential centre, but continues back in the classroom, sometimes for the entirety of a pupil’s time at school. We have also noted the improvements in attainment.”
“I should point out that the bill does not make it compulsory for pupils to attend residential outdoor education, but there must be an opportunity to do so. During the committee sessions, many of us spoke about our experiences of going to residential outdoor centres as young people. I kept my story for today’s debate, because I did not want to introduce it at committee stage. I went to Abernethy. I attended a small primary school in Moray called Alves primary school, which was so small that we had to join up with Dallas primary school to have enough pupils to go. Unfortunately, my twin sister, who was in the same class as me, fell and broke her collarbone. I used most of my time on that trip trying to get some sympathy, saying that I had referred pain because my twin was in hospital being treated for her broken collarbone.”
“Lastly, the committee is grateful to the Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee and the Finance and Public Administration Committee for their work in scrutinising the bill and sharing their conclusions in a timeous manner so that we could reflect them when we were considering our report. I say at the outset that the whole committee recognised the value of offering children and young people residential outdoor education. However, there was some divergence in views on how that should be funded. Turning to the bill, as Liz Smith spoke passionately about, its main aim is to ensure that all pupils in state and grant-aided schools have the chance to experience at least four nights and five days of residential outdoor education during their school career.”
“I thank Liz Smith, as the member in charge, for introducing the bill, which has given the committee the opportunity to discuss the important issue of how to ensure equal access to residential outdoor education for pupils. I also thank my fellow committee colleagues for their diligent work on the bill and all the individuals and organisations who provided evidence, either in person or by responding to our calls for views, especially the numerous pupils who wrote in to share with the committee their positive experiences of outdoor education. The committee would also like to thank Scottish Outdoor Education Centres and its team, who all generously gave their time and shared their insights when the committee visited Broomlee outdoor education centre.”
“I am speaking on behalf of the Education, Children and Young People Committee. I begin by speaking about one of our members, Keith Brown, who recently joined the committee. On behalf of the committee, I offer our support and sympathies to him following the terrible news that we heard this morning about Christina McKelvie, as well as to Christina’s sons, Jack and Lewis, and her two grandchildren, Maeve and Leo. Keith has been rightly missing from committee meetings in the past couple of weeks as he spent precious time with Christina. We wish him all the very best to get through these challenging times, and I hope that we will welcome him back in the near future.”
“That the Parliament agrees that the Budget (Scotland) Act 2024 Amendment Regulations 2025 [draft] be approved. That the Parliament agrees that the Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee be designated as the lead committee in consideration of the legislative consent memorandum relating to the Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill (UK Legislation). That the Parliament agrees that the Education, Children and Young People Committee be designated as the lead committee in consideration of the Restraint and Seclusion in Schools (Scotland) Bill at stage 1.—[Jamie Hepburn]. The Presiding Officer: The question on the motions will be put at decision time. Decision Time 17:39”
“It is surely in the interests of Scotland’s pupils and teachers that members of the Parliament work together to ensure that the new body is operational and in place to oversee the 2026 examination diet. I ask Parliament to support the order. The Presiding Officer: The question on the motion will be put at decision time. The next item of business is consideration of four Parliamentary Bureau motions. I ask Jamie Hepburn, on behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau, to move motions S6M-16943 and S6M-16944, on approval of SSIs, and motions S6M-16945 and S6M-16946, on designation of lead committees. Motions moved, That the Parliament agrees that the Public Services Reform (Scotland) Act 2010 (Part 2 Further Extension) Order 2025 [draft] be approved.”
“Graeme Dey: I acknowledge the potential for significant amendment, but nevertheless committee members supported the bill’s principles. To answer the specific point about the order of the process, any amendments that are agreed to in regard to qualifications Scotland’s governance arrangements can and will be fully incorporated into the process. Furthermore, the person specification and subsequent advertisements will not be finalised until after the bill has completed stage 2, which will allow any changes to be made. There is no counting of chickens here. I emphasise that, if the order is not approved, it will not be possible to start making regulated appointments to qualifications Scotland’s board in time for its establishment in autumn 2025, which will have consequences.”
“The session that the Education, Children and Young People Committee had was useful. The minister knows that committees are entitled to up to 90 minutes to discuss such things—we did not use even half of our time, so perhaps I will consider extending the debates when we have the cabinet secretary in front of us in the future. Does the minister accept that, given that hundreds of stage 2 amendments to the bill have already been lodged, it is possible that the board that, just now, he is seeking to be able to appoint might be appointed to an organisation that does not exist at stage 3? Is that a possibility? Graeme Dey: It is an interesting argument, given that I think that Mr Ross and the rest of the committee voted for the bill’s principles. Douglas Ross: If significant amendments were made.”
“To ask the Scottish Government, in light of the potential impact on victims of crime in Scotland, what discussions it has had with the United Kingdom Government regarding the time taken to determine applications made to the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority. (S6O- 04453)”
“Motion agreed to, That the Parliament recognises the value and importance of Scotland’s food and drink sector in terms of economic benefits, its particular importance to Scotland’s rural and island communities and, importantly, its role in enhancing Scotland’s reputation on a global scale; further recognises the risks of the proposal for an English whisky geographical indication that could undermine Scotch whisky and single malt, which is central to the economy; acknowledges the challenges and opportunities faced by the sector in an ever-changing world; calls for cross-party support to ensure that the sector continues to receive backing and support in order to grow sustainably and contribute to a prosperous and thriving economy; notes the new risk from tariffs, and calls on the UK Government to do all that it can to protect Scotland’s businesses and consumers from their impact.”
“Amendment disagreed to. The Presiding Officer: The final question is, that motion S6M-16839, in the name of Mairi Gougeon, on protecting and growing Scotland’s iconic food and drink sector, be agreed to.”
“For Baillie, Jackie (Dumbarton) (Lab) Baker, Claire (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab) Bibby, Neil (West Scotland) (Lab) Boyack, Sarah (Lothian) (Lab) Choudhury, Foysol (Lothian) (Lab) Clark, Katy (West Scotland) (Lab) Duncan-Glancy, Pam (Glasgow) (Lab) Grant, Rhoda (Highlands and Islands) (Lab) Griffin, Mark (Central Scotland) (Lab) Johnson, Daniel (Edinburgh Southern) (Lab) Lennon, Monica (Central Scotland) (Lab) Leonard, Richard (Central Scotland) (Lab) Marra, Michael (North East Scotland) (Lab) McArthur, Liam (Orkney Islands) (LD) McNeill, Pauline (Glasgow) (Lab) Mochan, Carol (South Scotland) (Lab) O’Kane, Paul (West Scotland) (Lab) Rennie, Willie (North East Fife) (LD) Rowley, Alex (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab) Smyth, Colin (South Scotland) (Lab) Sweeney, Paul (Glasgow) (Lab) Villalba, Mercedes (North East Scotland) (Lab) Whitfield, Martin (South Scotland) (Lab) Wishart, Beatrice (Shetland Islands) (LD) Against Adam, Karen (Banffshire and Buchan Coast) (SNP) Allan, Alasdair (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (SNP) Arthur, Tom (Renfrewshire South) (SNP) Balfour, Jeremy (Lothian) (Con) Beattie, Colin (Midlothian North and Musselburgh) (SNP) Briggs, Miles (Lothian) (Con) Brown, Siobhian (Ayr) (SNP) Carlaw, Jackson (Eastwood) (Con) Carson, Finlay (Galloway and West Dumfries) (Con) Coffey, Willie (Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley) (SNP) Constance, Angela (Almond Valley) (SNP) Dey, Graeme (Angus South) (SNP) Don-Innes, Natalie (Renfrewshire North and West) (SNP) Doris, Bob (Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn) (SNP) Dornan, James (Glasgow Cathcart) (SNP) Dowey, Sharon (South Scotland) (Con) Dunbar, Jackie (Aberdeen Donside) (SNP) Eagle, Tim (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Ewing, Annabelle (Cowdenbeath) (SNP) Ewing, Fergus (Inverness and Nairn) (SNP) Fairlie, Jim (Perthshire South and Kinross-shire) (SNP) FitzPatrick, Joe (Dundee City West) (SNP) Forbes, Kate (Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch) (SNP) Gallacher, Meghan (Central Scotland) (Con) Gibson, Kenneth (Cunninghame North) (SNP) Gilruth, Jenny (Mid Fife and Glenrothes) (SNP) Golden, Maurice (North East Scotland) (Con) Gosal, Pam (West Scotland) (Con) Gougeon, Mairi (Angus North and Mearns) (SNP) Grahame, Christine (Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale) (SNP) Gray, Neil (Airdrie and Shotts) (SNP) Greene, Jamie (West Scotland) (Con) Gulhane, Sandesh (Glasgow) (Con) Hamilton, Rachael (Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (Con) Harper, Emma (South Scotland) (SNP) Haughey, Clare (Rutherglen) (SNP) Hepburn, Jamie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (SNP) Hoy, Craig (South Scotland) (Con) Hyslop, Fiona (Linlithgow) (SNP) Halcro Johnston, Jamie (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Kerr, Liam (North East Scotland) (Con) Kerr, Stephen (Central Scotland) (Con) Kidd, Bill (Glasgow Anniesland) (SNP) Lochhead, Richard (Moray) (SNP) Lumsden, Douglas (North East Scotland) (Con) MacDonald, Gordon (Edinburgh Pentlands) (SNP) MacGregor, Fulton (Coatbridge and Chryston) (SNP) Mackay, Rona (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (SNP) Macpherson, Ben (Edinburgh Northern and Leith) (SNP) Maguire, Ruth (Cunninghame South) (SNP) [Proxy vote cast by Rona Mackay] Martin, Gillian (Aberdeenshire East) (SNP) Mason, John (Glasgow Shettleston) (Ind) Matheson, Michael (Falkirk West) (SNP) McAllan, Màiri (Clydesdale) (SNP) [Proxy vote cast by Jamie Hepburn] McCall, Roz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) McKee, Ivan (Glasgow Provan) (SNP) McKelvie, Christina (Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse) (SNP) [Proxy vote cast by Jamie Hepburn] McLennan, Paul (East Lothian) (SNP) McMillan, Stuart (Greenock and Inverclyde) (SNP) McNair, Marie (Clydebank and Milngavie) (SNP) Minto, Jenni (Argyll and Bute) (SNP) Mountain, Edward (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Mundell, Oliver (Dumfriesshire) (Con) Nicoll, Audrey (Aberdeen South and North Kincardine) (SNP) Regan, Ash (Edinburgh Eastern) (Alba) Robertson, Angus (Edinburgh Central) (SNP) Robison, Shona (Dundee City East) (SNP) Roddick, Emma (Highlands and Islands) (SNP) Ross, Douglas (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Simpson, Graham (Central Scotland) (Con) Somerville, Shirley-Anne (Dunfermline) (SNP) Stevenson, Collette (East Kilbride) (SNP) Stewart, Kaukab (Glasgow Kelvin) (SNP) Stewart, Kevin (Aberdeen Central) (SNP) Sturgeon, Nicola (Glasgow Southside) (SNP) Swinney, John (Perthshire North) (SNP) Thomson, Michelle (Falkirk East) (SNP) Todd, Maree (Caithness, Sutherland and Ross) (SNP) Tweed, Evelyn (Stirling) (SNP) Webber, Sue (Lothian) (Con) Wells, Annie (Glasgow) (Con) White, Tess (North East Scotland) (Con) Whitham, Elena (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley) (SNP) Whittle, Brian (South Scotland) (Con) Yousaf, Humza (Glasgow Pollok) (SNP) Abstentions Burgess, Ariane (Highlands and Islands) (Green) Chapman, Maggie (North East Scotland) (Green) Harvie, Patrick (Glasgow) (Green) Mackay, Gillian (Central Scotland) (Green) Ruskell, Mark (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Green) Slater, Lorna (Lothian) (Green) The Presiding Officer: The result of the division on amendment S6M-16839.1, in the name of Rhoda Grant, is: For 24, Against 85, Abstentions 6.”
“Amendment disagreed to. The Presiding Officer: The next question is, that amendment S6M-16839.1, in the name of Rhoda Grant, which seeks to amend motion S6M- 16839, in the name of Mairi Gougeon, on protecting and growing Scotland’s iconic food and drink sector, be agreed to. Are we agreed? Members: No. The Presiding Officer: There will be a division.”
“On a point of order, Presiding Officer. My app would not connect. I would have voted yes. The Presiding Officer: Thank you, Mr Ross. We will ensure that that is recorded. For Baillie, Jackie (Dumbarton) (Lab) Baker, Claire (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab) Balfour, Jeremy (Lothian) (Con) Bibby, Neil (West Scotland) (Lab) Boyack, Sarah (Lothian) (Lab) Briggs, Miles (Lothian) (Con) Carson, Finlay (Galloway and West Dumfries) (Con) Choudhury, Foysol (Lothian) (Lab) Clark, Katy (West Scotland) (Lab) Dowey, Sharon (South Scotland) (Con) Duncan-Glancy, Pam (Glasgow) (Lab) Eagle, Tim (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Gallacher, Meghan (Central Scotland) (Con) Golden, Maurice (North East Scotland) (Con) Gosal, Pam (West Scotland) (Con) Grant, Rhoda (Highlands and Islands) (Lab) Greene, Jamie (West Scotland) (Con) Griffin, Mark (Central Scotland) (Lab) Gulhane, Sandesh (Glasgow) (Con) Hamilton, Rachael (Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (Con) Hoy, Craig (South Scotland) (Con) Johnson, Daniel (Edinburgh Southern) (Lab) Halcro Johnston, Jamie (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Kerr, Liam (North East Scotland) (Con) Kerr, Stephen (Central Scotland) (Con) Lennon, Monica (Central Scotland) (Lab) Leonard, Richard (Central Scotland) (Lab) Lumsden, Douglas (North East Scotland) (Con) Marra, Michael (North East Scotland) (Lab) McCall, Roz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) McNeill, Pauline (Glasgow) (Lab) Mochan, Carol (South Scotland) (Lab) Mountain, Edward (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Mundell, Oliver (Dumfriesshire) (Con) O’Kane, Paul (West Scotland) (Lab) Ross, Douglas (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Rowley, Alex (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab) Simpson, Graham (Central Scotland) (Con) Smyth, Colin (South Scotland) (Lab) Sweeney, Paul (Glasgow) (Lab) Villalba, Mercedes (North East Scotland) (Lab) Webber, Sue (Lothian) (Con) Wells, Annie (Glasgow) (Con) White, Tess (North East Scotland) (Con) Whitfield, Martin (South Scotland) (Lab) Whittle, Brian (South Scotland) (Con) Against Adam, Karen (Banffshire and Buchan Coast) (SNP) Allan, Alasdair (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (SNP) Arthur, Tom (Renfrewshire South) (SNP) Beattie, Colin (Midlothian North and Musselburgh) (SNP) Brown, Siobhian (Ayr) (SNP) Burgess, Ariane (Highlands and Islands) (Green) Chapman, Maggie (North East Scotland) (Green) Coffey, Willie (Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley) (SNP) Constance, Angela (Almond Valley) (SNP) Dey, Graeme (Angus South) (SNP) Don-Innes, Natalie (Renfrewshire North and West) (SNP) Doris, Bob (Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn) (SNP) Dornan, James (Glasgow Cathcart) (SNP) Dunbar, Jackie (Aberdeen Donside) (SNP) Ewing, Annabelle (Cowdenbeath) (SNP) Ewing, Fergus (Inverness and Nairn) (SNP) Fairlie, Jim (Perthshire South and Kinross-shire) (SNP) FitzPatrick, Joe (Dundee City West) (SNP) Forbes, Kate (Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch) (SNP) Gibson, Kenneth (Cunninghame North) (SNP) Gilruth, Jenny (Mid Fife and Glenrothes) (SNP) Gougeon, Mairi (Angus North and Mearns) (SNP) Grahame, Christine (Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale) (SNP) Gray, Neil (Airdrie and Shotts) (SNP) Harper, Emma (South Scotland) (SNP) Harvie, Patrick (Glasgow) (Green) Haughey, Clare (Rutherglen) (SNP) Hepburn, Jamie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (SNP) Hyslop, Fiona (Linlithgow) (SNP) Kidd, Bill (Glasgow Anniesland) (SNP) Lochhead, Richard (Moray) (SNP) MacDonald, Gordon (Edinburgh Pentlands) (SNP) MacGregor, Fulton (Coatbridge and Chryston) (SNP) Mackay, Gillian (Central Scotland) (Green) Mackay, Rona (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (SNP) Macpherson, Ben (Edinburgh Northern and Leith) (SNP) Maguire, Ruth (Cunninghame South) (SNP) [Proxy vote cast by Rona Mackay] Martin, Gillian (Aberdeenshire East) (SNP) Mason, John (Glasgow Shettleston) (Ind) Matheson, Michael (Falkirk West) (SNP) McAllan, Màiri (Clydesdale) (SNP) [Proxy vote cast by Jamie Hepburn] McKee, Ivan (Glasgow Provan) (SNP) McKelvie, Christina (Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse) (SNP) [Proxy vote cast by Jamie Hepburn] McLennan, Paul (East Lothian) (SNP) McMillan, Stuart (Greenock and Inverclyde) (SNP) McNair, Marie (Clydebank and Milngavie) (SNP) Minto, Jenni (Argyll and Bute) (SNP) Nicoll, Audrey (Aberdeen South and North Kincardine) (SNP) Robertson, Angus (Edinburgh Central) (SNP) Robison, Shona (Dundee City East) (SNP) Roddick, Emma (Highlands and Islands) (SNP) Ruskell, Mark (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Green) Slater, Lorna (Lothian) (Green) Somerville, Shirley-Anne (Dunfermline) (SNP) Stevenson, Collette (East Kilbride) (SNP) Stewart, Kaukab (Glasgow Kelvin) (SNP) Stewart, Kevin (Aberdeen Central) (SNP) Sturgeon, Nicola (Glasgow Southside) (SNP) Swinney, John (Perthshire North) (SNP) Thomson, Michelle (Falkirk East) (SNP) Todd, Maree (Caithness, Sutherland and Ross) (SNP) Tweed, Evelyn (Stirling) (SNP) Whitham, Elena (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley) (SNP) Yousaf, Humza (Glasgow Pollok) (SNP) Abstentions McArthur, Liam (Orkney Islands) (LD) Rennie, Willie (North East Fife) (LD) Wishart, Beatrice (Shetland Islands) (LD) The Presiding Officer: The result of the division on amendment S6M-16839.2, in the name of Tim Eagle, is: For 46, Against 64, Abstentions 3.”
“Although debates on it have not been as numerous in recent weeks and months as they were, protests continue at Westminster against the UK Labour Government and its plans for inheritance tax. It is right that we continue to raise those points in the chamber and to remind the Labour Party that what it is threatening to do to the industry in Scotland and across the country will impact our farming communities not only now but in the future. I hope that, even at this late stage, the Labour Party will reconsider and remove its plans on inheritance tax, which will have such a large impact on Scottish and UK farming. 16:21”
“The industry is clear that, if “English single malt whisky” is defined, it would be possible for it to be produced at multiple locations and in different areas. The “single malt” definition is so important to Scotch whisky that all of us in the chamber should be doing our utmost to protect it, rather than Labour MSPs coming here simply to protect their Government. In my final few seconds, I want to say that, although we are right to celebrate our produce in the chamber today, there will be no Scots produce from our farmers if there are no farms left. It is important to re-emphasise the “No Farmers, No Food” campaign. I agreed with what the cabinet secretary said about food security: I now think that food security is as important as energy security, here in Scotland and across the UK.”
“Douglas Ross: The letter makes it very clear—I will read it again—that DEFRA is “satisfied that” the application “meets the requirements of the relevant legislation.” It goes on to say that “It is important to note that the proposed single malt definition in the EWG”— that is, the English Whisky Guild— “GI application aligns with all relevant UK legislation.” I am sorry, but Scottish Labour members cannot come to the chamber today and ask to be congratulated on solving the problem when the problem still exists. It is incumbent on members of the Scottish Parliament to stand up for the Scotch whisky industry. In fact, the industry itself has come up with a pragmatic solution, which I also want to get on the record.”
“[Interruption.] However, what was said in the UK Parliament, I have to say, is true, and he has to accept it. Douglas Ross: That is quite a revelation. Rhoda Grant says that Daniel Zeichner MP, Minister of State for the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs—I am holding up the letter to show the letterhead of that UK Government department—has said something that is, apparently, not true. I am only reading out what UK Labour politicians are telling us. If that is not true, Rhoda Grant should go back to her UK Government and tell it not to write letters of clarification, because apparently they are wrong. If Rhoda Grant wants to intervene again, I will give way. Rhoda Grant: The letter talks about legal competence. What the minister said on his hind legs in the UK Parliament was that they were not going to change a definition.”
“He says that DEFRA “is satisfied that it meets the requirements of the relevant legislation.” He goes on to say: “It is important to note that the proposed single malt definition in” the English Whisky Guild’s “GI application aligns with all relevant UK legislation.” How does that comment, in black and white from a UK Government minister representing the Labour Party, align with what the Scottish— Daniel Johnson rose— Douglas Ross: I will give way to Rhoda Grant, because she is seeking to intervene. How does that align with Scottish Labour telling us in its amendment that everything is fine and there is nothing to worry about? [Interruption.] I will give way to Rhoda Grant. Rhoda Grant: I did not ask to intervene. However, I have to say that the member may stand up in the Parliament and say things that are maybe not true.”
“I have a point for Rhoda Grant, as she gets ready to intervene. I was going to put it to her earlier, but she refused a number of times to take my intervention. On one hand, the Labour Party here in Holyrood is telling us, “Don’t worry—the situation has been resolved”, but on the other hand, I received, just last week, a letter from Daniel Zeichner, the Minister of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs in the UK Labour Government, on the application for English whisky to have GI status as single malt.”
“I will focus a lot of my remarks today on the GI status of Scotch single malt whisky and the application for an English single malt. We are being invited by the Labour Party to congratulate it and applaud the shameful UK Labour Government for something that it has not actually done. Rhoda Grant is already shaking her head. She would not give way to me, but I will give way to Rhoda Grant if she can answer this point. In her amendment, and in Daniel Johnson’s intervention on the cabinet secretary earlier, they were telling us “Relax—everything is fine”. Indeed, Daniel Johnson told us that, because a Labour minister has said something, it will be true. [Interruption.] I am not sure that I believe that, because it was Labour politicians who told us that they would not change inheritance tax for farmers. How did that go?”
“It is a pleasure to contribute to the debate. It has been interesting to hear about many of the local suppliers, from across the constituencies and regions, that members use and support. It has got me thinking that a lot of those suppliers start off very small—they build a nucleus and have to get known. Part of the process for becoming known in the local community is getting publicity, and some of that is done through our local press. The former editor of The Northern Scot, Chris Saunderson, is with us in the gallery today. It is important that we recognise that sometimes it is our local papers that promote those businesses to a wider audience, so that they can go on and grow even more. I wanted to get that on the record.”
“I remind members that there is now no time in hand. I encourage any interventions to be brief and to be made through the chair. 15:08”
“I move amendment S6M-16839.1, to insert at end: “; notes the further risk to Scotland’s food and drink industry posed by rural depopulation, caused by a lack of housing supply and weakened transport links; acknowledges that the Food and Drink Federation estimates that the sector needs nearly 35,000 new recruits by 2031 to fill skills gaps; welcomes the commitment by the UK Labour administration to not water down the legal definition of single malt whisky; believes that the Scottish Government can do more to promote the unique nature of Scotch whisky and other Scottish food and drink exports to maximise the reach of Brand Scotland; calls on the Scottish Government to work across every department to drive a coherent strategy on food and drink as part of a wider industrial strategy, and further calls for clear career pathways in these industries to address skills gaps and drive excellence in the world-famous sector.” The Deputy Presiding Officer: Thank you, Ms Grant.”
“I long for the day when the need for food banks is a thing of the past. We are rightly proud of our reputation for excellence in the food and drink industry. To sustain and grow our food and drink industry domestically as well as internationally, businesses need modern and fit-for-purpose transportation networks. They also need skilled employees in order that they can grow their operations. Those employees need homes to live in in order to nurture communities and the workers of the future. To promote our food and drink, we need to protect its reputation and excellence while ensuring that we achieve net zero. Reputations need to be actively maintained and sustained. We need to ensure that our food and drink sector has the Government backing that it needs.”
“There are jobs in fish processing; however, processors get their products from a myriad of small boats, so they would need catches to be transported to the mainland, but those boats are far too small to land in mainland ports. Therefore, if the processors move out, the boats will have nowhere to sell their catches. Our shellfish is also recognised for its excellence worldwide. To keep that reputation and gain us national and international benefit, it needs to be kept fresh. Therefore, we need to make it fairer and easier for the whole industry to work and trade. With all that said, it is sad that, in a country such as ours that is renowned for its produce, many of our citizens live in food poverty. It is simply wrong that people are forced to get their nutrition from food banks.”
“However, the Scottish Government is not building homes in rural Scotland. That means that the workforce is depleted and young people are being driven to our cities. Producers also need good reliable routes to market in order to ensure the quality and freshness of their products. That counts, whether they are transporting goods around the world or within Scotland. Our islands’ fish processors have a daily battle to try to get their produce to the mainland and beyond. A ferry cancellation because of yet another breakdown plays havoc with that need. That situation forces those industries to consider moving to the mainland, which will decimate our island economies.”