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 19 of 22.
“The motion highlights the importance of rural and island communities to the sector, so there must be better local vocational and educational opportunities to ensure that young people have the option to gain skills close to home. Future skills must be part of an industrial strategy. In devising that strategy, we need to ask ourselves what the food and drink businesses of the future will look like, and how our workers will acquire the skills that will be needed to continue to capitalise on our excellent products and to promote that excellence. Douglas Ross: Will the member give way on that point? Rhoda Grant: I have taken a number of interventions, and I am running out of time, so I must continue. Many of our primary food producers work in the islands and in rural Scotland.”
“It is little wonder, therefore, that the industry is owned largely by multinationals, because they are the only ones with pockets deep enough to enable them to deal with our governance structures. The Scottish Government needs to provide better governance and transparency to allow the industry to flourish, while protecting our environment and reputation. Our amendment highlights the Food and Drink Federation’s estimate that the sector needs nearly 35,000 new recruits by 2031 to fill its skills gap. With universities in crisis and colleges cut to the bone, it is difficult to see how we can, in any industry, provide the trained workforce that is required. The Scottish Government must ensure that our young people are equipped with the skills that the industry demands.”
“Consumers will want to know not only the provenance, but the carbon footprint, of what they are drinking. The whisky industry cannot do that in a vacuum: it works with farmers who produce the raw material, it looks to renewable energy for its heat production and it utilises what are sometimes all-too-copious amounts of water. There are real opportunities for other industries and communities to work with the whisky sector to learn and gain from its innovation and experience. Our Scottish salmon is another iconic product, and its worldwide recognition and trade benefits to Scotland should not be underestimated. That is why governance and oversight of the industry must improve. The Scottish Government has done nothing to streamline regulation of the industry: that regulation is clunky and time consuming.”
“Will the member take an intervention on that point? Rhoda Grant: I am not taking any more interventions—I am running out of time. That said, Scottish whisky already competes in a global whisky market, and we more than hold our own against whiskies from Ireland, Taiwan and Japan, to mention only a few. The Scottish Government must also publicise and promote our industry, and it needs to highlight that our whisky industry is at the forefront in trying to get to net zero. Whisky that is being distilled today will not be consumed for four years at the very earliest, and the best will age for 10, 12 or 18 years in order to receive premium prices. Those whiskies will be sold in a world that is very different from the one that we are in today.”
“The Presiding Officer: The point that you have made is now on the record, Mr Ross. The question of information that has been collated is not a point of order for me to rule on from the chair. Perhaps we can discuss that outwith the chamber. That concludes the debate on protecting single- sex spaces in the public sector. Urgent Question 17:11 University of Dundee (Reduction in Staffing)”
“On a point of order, Presiding Officer. The SNP cabinet secretary who opened today’s debate on behalf of the Government and the SNP minister who closed the debate on behalf of the Government earn a combined salary of £232,637 of taxpayers’ money. With their positions in the Government come responsibility and accountability. However, throughout today’s debate, they did not take a single intervention. By our calculations, there were 20 or more attempts to intervene on the cabinet secretary and the minister, all of which were refused. Given that we now have an electronic way to register an interest in making an intervention, if a request is made to Parliament for the accurate number of interventions that were sought from and refused by the SNP ministers in today’s debate, will that be made available?”
“To ask the Scottish Government what its position is on whether seagulls should continue to be protected in law. (S6O-04412)”
“I hope that what we get in that evidence session with the Government and the cabinet secretary is an acceptance that more needs to be done and a willingness to listen to the concerns that we have heard across the chamber tonight to ensure that we deliver more for pupils with ASN. They deserve our support and the opportunity to thrive in education, as everyone should. 17:43”
“Last May’s report from our Education, Children and Young People Committee highlighted not just some positives, but some challenges for the Government to answer. We put those points to the Danish education committee, and it went away to look at our recommendations, the Government’s response and the future work to be undertaken. It is on that point about future work that I will conclude. The cabinet secretary will be aware that the Education, Children and Young People Committee is looking to do a follow-up evidence session on our ASN report, and I think it incumbent on the Government to accept that, in our communities right across Scotland, there are still major challenges in delivering for pupils with ASN and their families and carers.”
“I look forward to the debate on the bill in just over two weeks’ time, when the entire chamber can look at its benefits for children right across Scotland. However, I should also point out that we heard compelling testimony about how such an approach has emboldened people with ASN and made them feel part of their school and the activities in which they take part. They feel included, and I think that the bill will increase that inclusion for people who have, in many cases, felt excluded from much of what is happening. I will finish by mentioning the Danish Parliament. Last week, I and Miles Briggs met members of the Danish Parliament’s education committee, which is grappling with the same issues; indeed, people are looking to Scotland to see whether learning can be taken from here.”
“I also gently say to the cabinet secretary that, when she criticises Conservative members for not supporting the budget—and therefore, I presume, not supporting that investment—I could say the exact same about SNP MPs who did not support the budget at Westminster that resulted in record funding coming to Holyrood for the Scottish Government to distribute. Indeed, I cannot remember a time in recent years when the SNP has ever supported a United Kingdom Government budget that provides the block grant for this Government to deliver many services. I also want to pick up on Liz Smith’s point about her Schools (Residential Outdoor Education) (Scotland) Bill. This Parliament has given that bill a great deal of scrutiny, and it is to Liz Smith’s credit that it has passed through the Education, Children and Young People Committee, which I convene.”
“I agree with him that that can be seen as a positive; it might well be that diagnosis has got better and that people are getting the support that they need to deal with their additional support needs. However, there is also no doubt that we are not seeing the correlation of that increased demand and increased investment. In her intervention on Alexander Stewart, the cabinet secretary talked about the additional £29 million. I am sorry, but that money is not having the impact that it needs to have, and it is not the level of funding that is required, given that so many more people have additional support needs and need that support.”
“She was dealing with challenging circumstances in looking after her children, one of whom has very complex needs, but she was determined to travel, for hours, down to Edinburgh to ensure that her voice was heard outside Parliament. I hope that we are doing Chelsea justice by representing her concerns in the chamber tonight, because she is just one of many mums, and parents and carers, who have significant concerns about the ASN provision in their area. She is concerned about what that means for her son and her family, but also for other families. As we heard from Martin Whitfield, the issue is becoming bigger because more and more people are being identified as having additional support needs.”
“I congratulate Alexander Stewart on the way that he opened the debate and on the compelling motion that he lodged to ensure that we have an opportunity to discuss an issue that regularly appears in my mailbox from constituents who are concerned about local ASN provision and the budgets allocated to it and about the future of some excellent facilities, which is sometimes in doubt. I refer, in particular, to the Ladybird Development Group nursery in Lossiemouth. A couple of years ago, outside the Parliament, Pam Duncan-Glancy organised an event for people to speak about ASN cuts across the country. It was at that event that I first met Chelsea Findlay from Lossiemouth, who is an outstanding young mum.”
“That is a huge amount of money going to Moray Council in just a few years, which shows that there can be investment from both of Scotland’s Governments. I was delighted that the Labour Government recently reannounced the towns fund. Interestingly, the towns that the Labour Government announced last week, or earlier this week, were exactly the same ones as were selected by the previous Conservative Government. I am delighted that Jenny Urquhart, who I suggested should chair the board for the Elgin town fund, will continue in that role, working with local partners in order to see local projects in Elgin make a difference. Surely no Scottish Government minister can stand up and say that that is not UK Government money coming to communities in Scotland and delivering. That is what we should be celebrating and seeking more of.”
“I disagree with a lot of what the Labour Government has done, but there is the £200 million investment in Grangemouth. Prior to that, the Conservative UK Government made significant investments in Scotland. I remember the Moray growth deal, which I was part of as one of the local representatives. When it was signed, the funding in it was the highest per head of population for a growth deal anywhere in the country. That welcome funding came from the UK Government, the Scottish Government and other bodies that are investing in the local economy. We had the levelling-up funding of £18.2 million, going from the UK Government to Moray Council for local projects and delivering in its area. Then we had the Elgin town fund. A couple of years ago, I was very proud to see the announcement of £20 million for the Elgin town fund.”
“Look at the empty SNP seats behind him: his is the governing party of Scotland and its members cannot even be bothered to turn up to the debate, because of the grievance that the minister and the Scottish Government have put in the motion. I do not know why the minister is suggesting that I am trying to grab a headline—it is already a headline that the SNP has failed to dual the A96. That has an impact on our local economy in Moray, in the Highlands and across the north-east. Ministers might not like to listen to that, but it is the reality. I also think that we have to accept that there has been good working between the previous Conservative UK Government and the SNP Government in Holyrood, and between the new Labour UK Government and the SNP Government.”
“I am absolutely certain that, if the A96 ran between Glasgow and Edinburgh, it would have been fully dualled, but, because it connects Inverness and Aberdeen, it is not. Richard Lochhead: I know that Douglas Ross likes his soapbox and likes to chase local headlines—I am very familiar with that—but does he not think that it is important for the Scottish Parliament to discuss and debate the fact that the UK economic strategy is, according to Rachel Reeves, to build up London, Cambridge and Oxford? Does he not think that, in a few years’ time, if that has happened, we will look back and think that perhaps we should have said a lot more about that and tried to stop it happening? Douglas Ross: The minister should look behind him. It is not me he should be criticising about being slightly dismissive and despondent about the debate.”
“We could have had the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills, with her team, speaking about rising levels of violence in schools, or we could have had the Cabinet Secretary for Transport speaking about a point that I put to the Minister for Employment and Investment about the A96 corridor review earlier. Until my question this afternoon, we did not know how many people had responded to that review or when the Government was going to outline its response. Richard Lochhead: Will the member give way? Douglas Ross: I will give way to the minister in a moment. As Craig Hoy said in his intervention on the Minister for Business, roads are so important to our economy. However, the A96, connecting Aberdeen with Inverness, is still not fully dualled. The promise to do that by 2030 is now an absolute fantasy.”
“Let us remember that this is Scottish Government debating time, so this is seen as an easy topic for Government ministers to trot into the chamber to speak about, rather than speaking about the more important issues that our constituents would, I think, like us to be discussing in the chamber today. It might not have been comfortable for the Scottish Government, but we could have had the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care speaking about issues to do with people in the north-east waiting in ambulances for 12 hours outside accident and emergency departments.”
“This debate has been dreadful; it has been truly awful. Perhaps it is one of the worst, but—to quote the minister—that is given that there is quite a “low bar”. Just look round the chamber: we are calling it a debate, but it is not really a debate. Members are reading their scripts and everyone else has got their heads down. They have been responding to emails and reading correspondence because there is not much enthusiasm for the motion. That is not to do with the topic’s being the economy. We could have spoken about the economy in a positive way and about how the two Governments could work together. However, we have a motion that is couched in grievance and that is inviting opposition against the UK Government rather than looking at what could be done more positively.”
“To ask the Scottish Government what discussions the economy secretary has had with ministerial colleagues regarding any economic impact of delaying the full dualling of the A96, in light of the Moray and Inverness Chambers of Commerce calling for the road to be dualled in full and raising concerns that delays to delivering this are “constraining economic growth” in the area. (S6O-04381)”
“Surely, 12 years on from the Scottish Government’s most recent review and more than four decades since the UK Parliament looked at the issue, now is the right time to consider whether the commission is still right and whether it should be set at 10 per cent. Members’ business debates are often consensual, and we have seen that today. Ministers often say in their responses that they will go away and look into the issues, but it can be weeks, months and sometimes years before action is taken. With this debate, we have a real opportunity in days—this time next week—to make some of the important changes that Murdo Fraser has suggested in his amendments. I hope that the Government will consider them positively. 13:35”
“In response to the consultation, residents groups said that the commission is not directly related to the services that are provided. An important point that came out of the consultation is that the commission provides an incentive for unscrupulous site owners to harass residents into selling their homes in order to maximise their own profits. That is why the issue needs to be looked into. The Scottish Government did a review of the wider impacts of the situation in 2013. Looking at the Scottish Parliament information centre briefing and at the situation in England, I was surprised to see that the United Kingdom Parliament has not considered a change since I was born. The last change was made in 1983, when the commission went from 15 per cent to 10 per cent.”
“I accept that everyone knows about that when they buy their property in the first place, but we must look at whether that is still a reasonable cost for people when they want to sell their home. The minister nodded when Kenny Gibson explained some of the reasons why that rate of commission remains in place. However, when the Scottish Government carried out a consultation on the topic in 2011, the response was split right down the middle: the site owners and their representatives wanted the commission to be maintained, and the home owners opposed it. We will not please both sides, but we must decide whether we want to keep supporting the site owners, who like that income, or whether we want to respond more to the concerns of the home owners.”
“It is important to put that on the record, but, sadly, a significant number are not acting in the best interests of the owners in their parks. Murdo Fraser was right to say—Douglas Lumsden pointed this out, too—that the parks are extremely welcoming. Many people come to Moray and the Highlands because they like the location, but the sites also look extremely appealing from the outside, so we can understand why many people want to retire and move there. The issue that I want to focus on, which was briefly mentioned by Kenny Gibson, is the rate of commission on the sales of properties. I wrote to the minister earlier this month, and I got a very prompt response from him. Owners have to provide 10 per cent commission to the site owners when they sell their property.”
“Oliver Mundell was right to say that, although there is great interest in the issue in many of our constituencies and regions—I have dealt with the matter in this chamber and in the United Kingdom Parliament—some people are concerned about their names being mentioned in these debates, or even in correspondence to the minister, because of their fear that they will face repercussions from site owners. I am not often the one who inserts balance into debates, but some site owners are very good. Sadly, they are sometimes in the minority, but I will give the example of a site owner who went to great lengths for elderly and disabled residents during the recent cold snap in Moray. The owner and his staff went out to clear the pavements and the ramps into residents’ homes.”
“I, too, congratulate Murdo Fraser on securing today’s debate and, as Willie Rennie said, on opening the debate with great authority and great knowledge of the subject while also proposing solutions. Often, Government ministers accuse Opposition members of complaining about issues but not coming up with potential solutions. We will discuss that later, following the minister’s response, and, I hope, next week in relation to the Housing (Scotland) Bill. I will focus on one point in my speech, but I want to acknowledge what others have said.”
“I close by thanking Ashleigh Dunn, who served as a member of the commission from 2017 to 2025. I wish her the very best for the future. I move, That the Parliament agrees, under section 8 of the Ethical Standards in Public Life etc. (Scotland) Act 2000, that Malcolm Bell be appointed as a member of the Standards Commission for Scotland. The Presiding Officer: The question on the motion will be put at decision time. Business Motion 17:12”
“Will Claire Baker give way? Claire Baker: I will if there is time, and if it is appropriate to do so. Douglas Ross: I just want to add my praise for Malcolm Bell, although I hope that that does not detract from members’ support for his nomination later today. I first met him when he was chief inspector and area commander up in Shetland. He did great work as Shetland Islands Council convener and has, since his move to the mainland, continued to put great emphasis on public service. I can think of no better person to take on the role, and I commend his nomination to Parliament, as Claire Baker is doing. Claire Baker: I thank Douglas Ross for that contribution. The panel was unanimous in its decision, and I recognise that Mr Bell will bring a wealth of experience to the commission.”
“I remind members that my wife is a police sergeant in Moray. The cabinet secretary and the minister will surely be aware that a freedom of information request by The Northern Scot has shown that, between 2019 and 2024, antisocial behaviour at Elgin bus station has increased by 900 per cent. Of course, Elgin bus station was the location of the killing of bus driver Keith Rollinson a year ago. Does the minister agree that the multi-agency work in Elgin must be on-going in order to get that number back down again? Does she accept that, if we had more officers available on the beat in Moray, they would act as a deterrent for antisocial behaviour at the bus station? Siobhian Brown: Yes, and I absolutely agree that multi-agency work will be needed in Elgin. Cashback for Communities 7.”
“Shirley-Anne Somerville: Again, for the avoidance of any doubt, the answers are similar because they are based on the law of the land and the Equality Act 2010, which is exactly what the Government will continue to refer back to. Douglas Ross raises points about the letter. It is a reasonably short letter, but it contains important challenges and questions for the Government, and it is important that we take time to reflect on it. If we did not, I think that members would criticise us for that. We will, of course, move forward with meeting the commission, which we look forward to working with. There are important roles for the Government and for the commission in this. I am sure that members will have ample opportunity to continue to question the Government on the issue over the weeks and months ahead. Skye House (Care of Children)”
“I have to say to the cabinet secretary that all we are getting is the same answer every time, which is not good enough. I know that it is uncomfortable for the Government, but it must respond to members’ questions. The cabinet secretary said in her statement that she and the Government are considering the letter from the EHRC. It was sent last week, is one page long and contains only six paragraphs. How much longer will the Government need to consider the letter? Will it publish its response to the EHRC? When it has responded, will the cabinet secretary give a statement in the chamber to finally answer questions about the issue?”
“I hope to hear tonight from the Minister for Victims and Community Safety positive comments about things that we can do to tackle the issue, one of which would be to support Rachael Hamilton’s proposals for a bill. 17:33”
“One such campaign, which will shortly be promoted at the royal northern spring show, is the “Police Stop Me” campaign. It will involve vehicles having a sign saying “Police Stop Me”, which encourages police to stop them at certain hours of the day when one would not naturally expect them to be doing farming activities. It might be that those vehicles are, at that time, being driven by someone who has stolen them. Such campaigns are very useful and important. Chief Inspector McKenzie offered me the opportunity to meet our rural crime reduction team in Moray to hear further about its plans. After tonight’s debate, and given the work that Rachael Hamilton has done, I will certainly be taking up that offer.”
“The partnership is chaired by Police Scotland—it just so happens that Chief Inspector Mike McKenzie is the current chair—but it brings in a lot of other bodies, such as the NFUS, Scottish Water, Scottish Land & Estates and local authorities, to name just a few, and they are working together to support rural communities through prevention and education. It is important that they educate people on what resources they have available to support farmers and protect them from theft, and that they encourage farmers to take up those resources. Mike McKenzie spoke about the partnership’s work in Banff, where it spoke to an NFUS group about economic crime and fraud against farmers, so farmers are getting more information from it. He also told me about the campaigns that are being promoted.”
“It is sad, but it is a reality, that some thefts—a minority of them—are perpetrated by fellow farmers. We have to accept that, but we will, I hope, see such thefts minimised and, ultimately, eradicated. I spoke with my local chief inspector, Mike McKenzie—who is the local area commander for Moray, based in Elgin—about rural crime in our area of my Highlands and Islands region. He gave me a good overview of what is currently happening, and he spoke about the north-east partnership against rural crime.”
“Those dogs are highly trained and a lot has been invested in them, and they are being stolen in addition to machinery. Christine Grahame: My intervention is a comment on the theft of sheep, which has happened in a farm in my constituency. It was obviously a shepherd who had stolen the sheep and taken them down the old drovers’ road. It was in the middle of nowhere, and the farmer did not find out until months later, at a specific time of year, that he had lost so many sheep. Douglas Ross: It is very difficult. As members who watch—as I do—“This Farming Life” and such like will know, sheep are often in thousands of acres of hill. It can be the case that it is only at one point in the year that a farmer recognises that there has been theft, and by then it is too late to get evidence to prosecute someone.”
“That is up in the Highlands, but the nearest available unit was up in Wick, so it would be well over an hour before it got to the situation. That is a problem, and criminals are taking advantage of the fact that they know that the response from the police will very often be quite slow—if they come at all—because police resources are very stretched. It is right to mention, as Tim Eagle highlighted, the cost of machinery, which farmers know very well. However, Christine Grahame was right to speak about the cost of livestock, too. Some of the livestock on our crofts and farms across Scotland have an extremely high value. For example, there are the tups that we see being sold at the sales, and there are cattle and even sheepdogs. There have been sheepdog thefts across Scotland.”
“I, too, congratulate Rachael Hamilton on bringing the debate to the chamber and on the excellent work that she has done, locally and nationally, on the potential bill that we could—I hope—pass in the Parliament. I refer members to my declaration of interests, as my wife is a police sergeant with Police Scotland. I say that because I will mention policing, as Tim Eagle did. One of the issues in more remote and rural areas is the availability of police resources. Christine Grahame was right to outline what people should do when they see a crime—phone either 101 or 999—but it reminded me of something that I was told just a couple of weeks ago. I was at a family funeral up in Ardgay when I heard that someone had witnessed a theft out in a forest, in a very remote area. The theft had been on-going when they saw it, so they phoned the police.”
“I move, That the Parliament notes the publication of the UK Government’s consultation and review of the United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020, which sets out that it will “not consider whether to repeal the UK Internal Market Act or any part of it”; recalls that both the Scottish Parliament and Welsh Senedd refused to give the Act legislative consent; notes the position of the Welsh Government, which opposes the Act, believing it to be “an unwarranted attack on devolution”; reaffirms its decision regarding the Act on 3 October 2023, and calls for it to be repealed. 15:38”
“It can show that it is committed to the democratic principles that underpin the Scottish Parliament—the principles that Neil Bibby lauded in his comments in October 2023—or it can demonstrate that it is happy to squander that inheritance and endorse the disastrous legacy of the previous Conservative Government. I hope that this Parliament will send a strong, unified message in the name of Scottish democracy.”
“The UK Government will find a ready partner in the Scottish Government if it is prepared to approach the issue on those terms and to ensure that the powers of this Parliament are restored in full. I acknowledge that a Labour Government legislated to establish this Parliament, following an overwhelming vote by the people in September 1997. I do not believe that all those who voted for our new national, democratic and permanent Parliament wanted it to be at the mercy of arbitrary and unaccountable decisions that are made at Westminster. The new Labour Government therefore has a decision to make.”
“If the UK Government is serious about making common frameworks the means by which we manage regulatory co-operation, it has to start by setting out how its proposals will meet the agreed principles that underpin those frameworks. More fundamentally, if it is serious about respecting the decisions of this Parliament and the Welsh Senedd, it should repeal the internal market act. It is baffling that not only has the UK Labour Government refused to repeal the act, it has ruled out even considering repeal or even repealing any part of it as part of the review process. Devising a better system requires trust, mutual respect and a willingness to listen.”
“We stand ready to work with the UK Government and other devolved Governments to deliver a better system that will remove the unnecessary, unworkable and undemocratic constraints that the act has placed on the Scottish Parliament. We believe that a better outcome is easily achieved. It is entirely possible to devise a system of regulatory co-operation that provides certainty to businesses, consumers and citizens while respecting devolution. In that respect, the IMA has demonstrably failed to deliver any of the ambitions that were set out by the UK and devolved Governments in the agreed 2017 statement of principles. In particular, it does not “respect ... devolution ... and the democratic accountability of the devolved legislatures”.”
“The consultation document recognises some of the damage that was done by the previous UK Government, and it proposes, rightly, that common frameworks—intergovernmental mechanisms for regulatory co-operation that are underpinned by agreed principles, including respect for devolution—represent the correct approach. However, the development of common frameworks has been greatly impeded by the introduction of the IMA. That further strengthens the case for its repeal. As matters stand, the act’s market access principles apply automatically in nearly every case, impeding sensible discussions on managing divergence and acting as a disincentive to seeking and agreeing proportionate, sustainable solutions.”
“The point is that members who are elected to the Parliament are accountable for the decisions that we make. That should stand without a minister from another Government unilaterally overthrowing laws that are passed by the Parliament. Douglas Ross: Will the Deputy First Minister take an intervention? Kate Forbes: I think that I have answered Douglas Ross’s point. As matters stand, we still face the prospect of laws that were passed in this Parliament— irrespective of what members across this Parliament think—being nullified at the stroke of a pen, and the prospect of those powers being diminished without the Parliament’s consent.”
“Kate Forbes is speaking about bills that were nullified by the UK Parliament. One of those was the Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill. John Swinney, who is sitting next to her in the chamber today, said that he had no regrets about supporting the bill. I know that the Deputy First Minister did not vote on it, but does she support the bill, as her First Minister does? Kate Forbes: I stand with NFU Scotland, Alcohol Focus Scotland, Scottish Environment LINK, and the Scottish Crofting Federation, which have all stated that the fundamental principle at the heart of the IMA, irrespective of what issues are at stake, is that it has undermined the powers of devolution. We are accountable to the people of Scotland. There will be disagreement from members across the chamber on the matters that are under debate.”
“This morning, the cabinet secretary said that he could not comment on the Sandie Peggie case because it is a live employment tribunal but, in the same interview, he went on to say that he has full confidence in the board of NHS Fife, which is the other party in the employment tribunal. Can Neil Gray tell us why he is backing the bureaucrats on the board and not a nurse with 30 years’ service to the NHS? Neil Gray: I am not going to provide any further comment on a live tribunal process. It is important that we support the work of NHS Fife in delivering for the citizens of Fife and improving its health and social care services.”
“Finally, several members have mentioned the coastal testimonies that we heard at the reception that was hosted by Rhoda Grant, which are in the book that has been provided to members. Rhoda Grant quoted Bailey Dacker from Kishorn, and I will finish by quoting him, too. He is a young fisherman who is passionate about his industry, and he says: “Who would I say owns the sea? All of the fishermen. I don’t feel like I have a say in the decisions made about the sea, but I’d like to. A lot of the decisions by the government aren’t taking into consideration the fishermen’s thoughts at the moment. If I were to make one request of political decision-makers, it would be to come and ask us younger fishermen.” We need to hear from the future generation of fishers, who are so important. I hope that the Government takes that on board. 18:15”