Neil Bibby
Scottish Labour · Scotland
“Thanks to Scottish National Party cuts, health and social care partnerships across Scotland face a £0.5 billion gap in their budgets this year.”
“The Presiding Officer: That concludes decision time. Meeting closed at 17:20. This is a draft Official Report and is subject to correction between publication and archiving, which will take place no later than 35 working days after the date of the meeting.”
“Amendment disagreed to. The Presiding Officer: I remind members that, if the amendment in the name of Craig Hoy is agreed to, the amendment in the name of Willie Rennie will fall.”
“Published in Edinburgh by the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body, the Scottish Parliament, Edinburgh, EH99 1SP All documents are available on the Scottish Parliament website at: www.parliament.scot Information on non-endorsed print suppliers is available here: www.parliament.scot/documents For information on the Scottish Parliament con…”
“Amendment disagreed to. The Presiding Officer: The next question is, that amendment S7M-00249.5, in the name of Willie Rennie, which seeks to amend motion S7M- 00249, in the name of Jenny Gilruth, on wealth taxation for public services, be agreed to. Are we agreed? Members: No. The Presiding Officer: There will be a division.”
“Amendment disagreed to. The Presiding Officer: The final question is, that motion S7M-00249, in the name of Jenny Gilruth, on wealth taxation for public services, as amended, be agreed to. Are we agreed? Members: No. The Presiding Officer: There will be a division.”
The complete record
Every one of 333 lines we hold for Neil Bibby, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 5 of 7.
“Motion, as amended, agreed to, That the Parliament believes that public service reform must be an ongoing process in order to deliver the best use of public funding, and recognises that the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party’s arbitrary scheme would lead to a cut in available public funding for vital services like the NHS. The Presiding Officer: The next question is, that amendment S6M-17981.3, in the name of Kate Forbes, which seeks to amend motion S6M- 17981, in the name of Murdo Fraser, on recognising the economic contribution of Scotland’s defence sector, be agreed to. Are we agreed? Members: No. The Presiding Officer: There will be a division. The vote is closed.”
“On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I would have voted yes. The Presiding Officer: Thank you, Mr Bibby. We will ensure that that is recorded. For Adam, George (Paisley) (SNP) Adam, Karen (Banffshire and Buchan Coast) (SNP) Adamson, Clare (Motherwell and Wishaw) (SNP) Allan, Alasdair (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (SNP) Arthur, Tom (Renfrewshire South) (SNP) Baillie, Jackie (Dumbarton) (Lab) Baker, Claire (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab) Beattie, Colin (Midlothian North and Musselburgh) (SNP) Bibby, Neil (West Scotland) (Lab) Brown, Keith (Clackmannanshire and Dunblane) (SNP) Brown, Siobhian (Ayr) (SNP) Burgess, Ariane (Highlands and Islands) (Green) Callaghan, Stephanie (Uddingston and Bellshill) (SNP) Chapman, Maggie (North East Scotland) (Green) Coffey, Willie (Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley) (SNP) Cole-Hamilton, Alex (Edinburgh Western) (LD) 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) Duncan-Glancy, Pam (Glasgow) (Lab) 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) Greer, Ross (West Scotland) (Green) Harper, Emma (South Scotland) (SNP) Harvie, Patrick (Glasgow) (Green) Haughey, Clare (Rutherglen) (SNP) Hepburn, Jamie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (SNP) Hyslop, Fiona (Linlithgow) (SNP) Johnson, Daniel (Edinburgh Southern) (Lab) 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) [Proxy vote cast by Ross Greer] Mackay, Rona (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (SNP) Macpherson, Ben (Edinburgh Northern and Leith) (SNP) Maguire, Ruth (Cunninghame South) (SNP) [Proxy vote cast by Rona Mackay] Marra, Michael (North East Scotland) (Lab) Martin, Gillian (Aberdeenshire East) (SNP) Mason, John (Glasgow Shettleston) (Ind) Matheson, Michael (Falkirk West) (SNP) McAllan, Màiri (Clydesdale) (SNP) McArthur, Liam (Orkney Islands) (LD) McKee, Ivan (Glasgow Provan) (SNP) McLennan, Paul (East Lothian) (SNP) McNair, Marie (Clydebank and Milngavie) (SNP) Minto, Jenni (Argyll and Bute) (SNP) Nicoll, Audrey (Aberdeen South and North Kincardine) (SNP) O’Kane, Paul (West Scotland) (Lab) Rennie, Willie (North East Fife) (LD) Robertson, Angus (Edinburgh Central) (SNP) Robison, Shona (Dundee City East) (SNP) Roddick, Emma (Highlands and Islands) (SNP) Rowley, Alex (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab) Ruskell, Mark (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Green) Russell, Davy (Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse) (Lab) Sarwar, Anas (Glasgow) (Lab) 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) Sweeney, Paul (Glasgow) (Lab) Swinney, John (Perthshire North) (SNP) Thomson, Michelle (Falkirk East) (SNP) Todd, Maree (Caithness, Sutherland and Ross) (SNP) Torrance, David (Kirkcaldy) (SNP) Tweed, Evelyn (Stirling) (SNP) Whitfield, Martin (South Scotland) (Lab) Whitham, Elena (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley) (SNP) Wishart, Beatrice (Shetland Islands) (LD) Yousaf, Humza (Glasgow Pollok) (SNP) Against Briggs, Miles (Lothian) (Con) Burnett, Alexander (Aberdeenshire West) (Con) Carlaw, Jackson (Eastwood) (Con) Carson, Finlay (Galloway and West Dumfries) (Con) Dowey, Sharon (South Scotland) (Con) Eagle, Tim (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Ewing, Annabelle (Cowdenbeath) (SNP) Findlay, Russell (West Scotland) (Con) Fraser, Murdo (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Gallacher, Meghan (Central Scotland) (Con) Golden, Maurice (North East Scotland) (Con) Gosal, Pam (West Scotland) (Con) Gulhane, Sandesh (Glasgow) (Con) Hamilton, Rachael (Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (Con) Hoy, Craig (South Scotland) (Con) Halcro Johnston, Jamie (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Kerr, Liam (North East Scotland) (Con) Kerr, Stephen (Central Scotland) (Con) Lumsden, Douglas (North East Scotland) (Con) McNeill, Pauline (Glasgow) (Lab) Mountain, Edward (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Mundell, Oliver (Dumfriesshire) (Con) Ross, Douglas (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Simpson, Graham (Central Scotland) (Con) Smith, Liz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Smyth, Colin (South Scotland) (Lab) Stewart, Alexander (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Webber, Sue (Lothian) (Con) Wells, Annie (Glasgow) (Con) White, Tess (North East Scotland) (Con) Whittle, Brian (South Scotland) (Con) Abstentions Regan, Ash (Edinburgh Eastern) (Alba) The Presiding Officer: The result of the division on motion S6M-17980, in the name of Craig Hoy, on demanding a better deal for taxpayers in Scotland, as amended, is: For 83, Against 31, Abstentions 1.”
“Such issues are so important that it is necessary to have more than just one meeting. Such meetings should take place regularly, and I have begun that process. The issue of transport is one of the first issues to have been raised, and I have sought to explore solutions such as the one that he outlined. I can tell him that I have already had a bilateral meeting with the transport secretary to discuss the matter. Neil Bibby is absolutely right. We want to make sure that the benefit of festivals in one part of the country can be shared throughout the rest of the country and that those festivals can be accessed by people from elsewhere. We are working in partnership with festivals across Scotland to make sure that that is the case.”
“Edinburgh’s festivals are vital to Edinburgh’s economy and Scotland’s status as a cultural hub, but venues have recently reported that the high costs of accommodation are resulting in performers restricting their time at the Edinburgh fringe. Will the cabinet secretary discuss with ministerial colleagues, such as Mr Fairlie and the Cabinet Secretary for Transport, further extending the running hours of ScotRail services to Glasgow and the west during the festivals, to ensure that more people can attend and more performers can access cheaper accommodation, and to spread the economic benefits of Edinburgh’s festivals across Scotland? Angus Robertson: Neil Bibby makes a really good point. That is why I initiated and set up the strategic partnership for Scotland’s festivals.”
“Am I sorry that the UK Government did not allow Scotland and the rest of the UK to rejoin the creative Europe programme? Yes, because that is a shortcoming—[Interruption.] Neil Bibby must reflect on why the Labour party in Wales is prepared to be critical of the fisheries arrangements in the deal when the Scottish Labour party, in the country that has the biggest single concentration of fishing interests— [Interruption.] The Presiding Officer: Please be quiet, Mr Bibby. Angus Robertson: —anywhere in the UK cannot bring itself to do that.”
“I hope that everybody agrees that an agriculture, food and sanitary and phytosanitary deal is a good thing. We have called for it for the longest of times, and I outlined in my statement the further areas that we welcome. Curiously, Mr Bibby has come to the chamber today but will not even echo the criticism made by his Labour colleague the First Minister of Wales. Eluned Morgan shared the same criticism as that made by the Scottish Government—as have ministers in Northern Ireland—of the way in which the UK Labour Government has dealt with the fisheries issue. Why Neil Bibby finds it so difficult to come here and acknowledge that is beyond me. Do I support a deal on SPS arrangements? Absolutely. Do I support being part of Erasmus+? Yes, I do.”
“Salmon Scotland, which represents our biggest food export product, has welcomed the deal and so, too, have the Confederation of British Industry, the Federation of Small Businesses, the Scottish Chambers of Commerce, BAE Systems, Ryanair, UK Hospitality Industries, the Food and Drink Federation and many more organisations. The new UK Labour Government is getting on with the job of rebuilding our economy. Meanwhile, the SNP is all over the place and seems to be opposing the deal, alongside Nigel Farage and Kemi Badenoch. Given the overwhelming support from Scottish industry for the deal, does the cabinet secretary not accept that opposing the deal is a major miscalculation? Angus Robertson: As with most deals, there are things that are worth welcoming.”
“I thank the cabinet secretary for advance sight of his statement. The SNP response to the UK-EU deal is miserable, opportunistic, inconsistent and out of step with the interests of the Scottish people. The cabinet secretary, who supports membership of the common fisheries policy, has displayed full outrage online when it comes to fishing, but he has also displayed that he is out of touch with the vast majority of Scottish businesses and consumers. Supermarkets have said that the deal has the potential to significantly reduce the cost of the weekly shop.”
“I move amendment S6M-17539.1, to leave out from “agrees” to end and insert: “welcomes the UK Government resetting the UK’s relationship with the EU following the chaotic and damaging approach of the previous UK Conservative administration; further welcomes the summit to be held on 19 May 2025; welcomes the commitment by the UK Government to create a strategic partnership between the UK and the EU to agree a path forward on trade, security and defence; believes that economic growth, raising living standards and defence and security must be the highest of priorities for the Scottish and UK governments; welcomes the UK Government’s specific commitment to negotiate a sanitary and phytosanitary veterinary agreement so that agricultural products, food and drink can be traded more cheaply between the EU and the UK, which could boost agri-food exports to the EU by up to 22.5%; further welcomes the commitment by the Prime Minister to improve security co- operation with the EU and to increase defence spending to 2.5% of GDP from April 2027, which will benefit jobs and industries in Scotland; welcomes the UK Government’s newly negotiated trade deals with the United States and India, noting the importance of the latter for Scotland’s whisky industry; calls on the Scottish Government to support the UK Government’s efforts to rebuild the relationship with European friends and neighbours, and further calls on the Scottish Government to set out what actions it will take to improve economic growth and living standards in Scotland, including whether its public procurement processes will emulate those in other European countries in driving place-based industrial development, using the powers that it has and the record funding settlement that it has received from the UK Government of £47.7 billion this financial year.” 15:34”
“The UK and the EU will have different priorities, as we have heard, but I welcome the UK Labour Government’s statement that it will work in the national interest as well as seek co-operation with our European friends and neighbours on key issues, in line with the manifesto on which Labour was elected. This is a serious approach from a UK Government that is serious about rebuilding our economy and our relations with the EU. As I said at the start, the SNP Government should focus on its responsibility for improving living standards and economic growth, using its powers and the record funding settlement that it has had from the UK Government. However, the SNP Government’s ultimate policy position—for as long as that lasts— will run counter to that objective.”
“To protect Scotland’s interests, we want to ensure that we have a veterinary and sanitary and phytosanitary agreement that will boost support for agricultural products and allow food and drink to be traded more cheaply between the UK and the EU. Removing those barriers would also improve exports. A study by Aston University estimates that an agreement could increase agri-food exports from the UK to the EU by at least 22.5 per cent. Other issues will be discussed, including youth mobility, energy co-operation, defence and security and, in particular, our support for Ukraine.”
“Neil Bibby: I am sorry, but I have already taken three. Oh—okay, if the member is very brief. Clare Adamson: I listened to what Mr Bibby said about the UK Government having Scotland’s best interests at heart. When we have a falling population and we are constantly crying out for people to come and work in our care sector and other sectors, how on earth does the rhetoric coming from the UK Government and Keir Starmer act in any way in Scotland’s best interests? Neil Bibby: If we want more people to work in the care sector, we need to start paying care workers more money. The trade unions in the care sector have been demanding £15 an hour from the SNP Government, and the Government has come nowhere near meeting that demand. If we are serious about investing in and retaining staff in the care sector, we need to pay our workers more.”
“We are also seeking co- operation with the EU where we can and where that is appropriate, in line with our manifesto. That is the position that we have set out. I welcome the fact that the new UK Labour Government is seeking to enter a strategic partnership between the UK and the EU on trade, security and defence. The situation with the EU requires work, and we are focused on that. Next week, the UK Government and the EU will hold a summit that is part of a wider plan to reset relations. The EU provides a fantastic opportunity to support and strengthen Scottish businesses and industries, and the UK Government is hoping to agree a veterinary and sanitary and phytosanitary agreement, as we put forward in our manifesto last year. That would allow agricultural products— Clare Adamson: Will the member take an intervention?”
“That is only going to damage economic growth and living standards. Sixty-one per cent of Scotland’s exports—around £50 billion of goods— go to the rest of the UK. Independence would make Brexit look like a cakewalk. Stephen Kerr: I respect Neil Bibby, but I am interested to know whether he thinks that it is right that the EU would make security conditional on access to our fishing rights. According to the front page of the Financial Times and internal EU documents, the UK Government has already offered extensive long-term access to UK fishing waters to the EU. Does Mr Bibby know whether that is true? Neil Bibby: I am afraid that I do not know, Mr Kerr. What I do know, though, is that the UK Labour Government will be working to progress our national interests.”
“Neil Bibby: I want to make some progress. The UK Labour Government is also growing the economy, with figures announced today showing that, for the first three months of this year, the UK had the fastest-growing economy in the G7. Meanwhile, what have the SNP Government and the cabinet secretary done to deal with the mess that we have been left in? I would say that they have done nothing but complain from the sidelines. The SNP has done one thing, at least, in rebuilding relations with our EU neighbours, but, yes, it has overlooked Scottish jobs and Scottish industry by sending ferry contracts to Poland, which is hardly the action of a nationalist Government. What is the SNP’s solution? We have heard it already. It is full fiscal autonomy and independence, which would cost Scotland £12.8 billion.”
“Neil Bibby: What is acceptable is that the UK Labour Government is getting on with the job of fixing the mess that the Tories left in relation to Brexit. I have said to Mr Robertson—I will say it for a second time—that his policy is not for fishing to be devolved. He wants to rejoin the European Union and the common fisheries policy. I think that the context of his comments about the Lisbon treaty, when he called it “unacceptable” and “a travesty”, was in relation to fisheries. The UK Labour Government is getting on with the job of resetting our relationship with the European Union. To support Scottish businesses and jobs, it is negotiating trade deals with the United States and India. To protect our citizens, the UK Labour Government is increasing defence spending. Stephen Kerr: Will the member give way?”
“We accept that Brexit has been costly and damaging, and we know—because Kemi Badenoch has told us—that the Conservatives left the European Union without a plan for growth. That and the Liz Truss budget have significantly damaged our relationship with the European Union, economic growth and living standards. People now expect us to fix that mess, and that is exactly what they gave the new United Kingdom Labour Government a mandate to do. Angus Robertson: Does Mr Bibby agree that fishing is devolved? If he does, can he explain why the United Kingdom Government has had no detailed discussions with devolved Administrations about potentially making a deal around fishing as soon as next week? Does he find that acceptable?”
“Patrick Harvie: I may be mistaken, but I do not recall Mr Bibby voting against the business motion when Parliament agreed that we should have this debate. If Mr Bibby wants to use the debate to criticise others for inconsistency with a position from decades ago, can he explain why Labour’s position now is inconsistent with the position that it was arguing less than one decade ago, which was that Brexit would be a catastrophic decision for the United Kingdom to make? Neil Bibby: My point is that we should be focusing on the issues that matter to the people of Scotland and for which we are responsible. Our position is in line with the mandate that we received at the general election, and we will be progressing that in the months and years ahead.”
“However, those issues are being sidelined in favour of SNP grandstanding on Europe. The SNP opposed European Union membership in 1973—a fact that seemed to be missing from the cabinet secretary’s history lesson earlier. It spent more on the 2019 Scottish Parliament by- election than it spent on the 2016 referendum campaign. It failed to vote in the House of Commons for membership of the customs union in the 2019 indicative votes. Further, when the SNP cabinet secretary who opened today’s debate was in the House of Commons, he described the Lisbon treaty—one of the foundational documents of the European Union—as “unacceptable” and “a travesty”. The SNP can try to claim consistent support for European Union membership today, but the record suggests otherwise. This debate is not just opportunistic, it is performative.”
“I am content to debate important international issues from time to time, as we did relatively recently, and it is, of course, right that the Constitution, Europe, External Affairs and Culture Committee considers in detail issues relating to the trade and co- operation agreement with the European Union. However, today’s debate is about deflection and grandstanding ahead of the important UK-EU summit on Monday. There is a growing disconnect between the Scottish people and Scottish politics. That is because this Government and this place are not doing their job. We could be debating the First Minister’s inadequate plans for new general practitioner appointments; the challenges that our education sector faces, although that would rely on the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills turning up; or a plan to solve our housing emergency.”
“Last week, when Anas Sarwar responded to the SNP’s latest programme for government, he asked, “Is that it?” It was an important question, because, after nearly two decades of SNP rule in Scotland, the legislative programme was a weak and meagre one. It was symbolic of the SNP’s term in office: all spin and no substance. It was a failure to meet the needs of the people of Scotland and to concentrate on what the Scottish Government is responsible for. Here we are, just a week later, with a Scottish Government debate on Scotland’s place in today’s Europe when we should instead be debating what is happening in today’s Scotland.”
“I call Stephen Kerr to speak to and move amendment S6M-17539.4. You have a generous eight minutes, Mr Kerr. 15:14”
“I move, That the Parliament agrees that the best relationship that Scotland and the UK can have with the EU is to be a member of the EU; calls on the UK Government to drop its red lines on the single market, customs union and freedom of movement; further calls on the UK Government, at its forthcoming summit with the EU, as a first step, to negotiate an ambitious veterinary, food and drink agreement, closer energy and climate co-operation, greater freedom of movement, including opportunities for young people, and further measures to lessen the ongoing economic, social and cultural damage of Brexit, and believes that it is unacceptable that the UK Government has not shared any draft summit texts with the Scottish or other devolved governments. The Deputy Presiding Officer: Thank you, cabinet secretary.”
“Let me finish by reiterating a core point: the best relationship that Scotland and the UK can have with the EU will always be as full member states of the European Union. That is what we hope that Scotland can look forward to in the future.”
“At least, perhaps there is consensus—I am not entirely sure what the position of the Scottish Conservative Party is on measures that would boost our economy, support our care sector and national health service, give young people the opportunity to live and work throughout Europe, and, indeed, support continental European young people coming to this country. There is a shared agenda, and I think that there is a majority in the Parliament for it. I hope that the UK Government is listening, and I hope, with some days to go, that it chooses to conduct its business with the devolved Administrations in the UK with the same dignity and respect that the European Union does with its member states.”
“That is in stark contrast to the way the EU treats its member states. Alex Cole-Hamilton: The cabinet secretary kindly invited me to intervene at this stage in his remarks, and I am gratified to hear that a number of the clauses that were in the Liberal Democrat amendment—which was not selected for debate— on a youth mobility scheme, a comprehensive defence pact and the removal of red lines that prevent us from getting back into the customs union are all part of his Government’s priorities. Angus Robertson: Indeed, they are, and there is largely consensus on that.”
“There are a few days for that to be changed. Perhaps Mr Bibby will pick up the phone to speak to his colleagues in London and ask why it has not done that. In advance of the leaders’ summit, which will take place in London on Monday, we have outlined our position in recent publications on a youth mobility agreement, Erasmus+, creative Europe, closer energy and climate co-operation, and core needs for a veterinary, food and drink agreement with the EU. We also strongly support closer working with EU partners on defence and security. At all times during the build-up to the summit, we have offered to be constructive partners with the UK Government, and although a number of meetings have taken place, it is unacceptable that today—only a few days from the summit—no draft text has been shared with us or other devolved Governments.”
“Will the member take an intervention? Angus Robertson: I will give way to Mr Bibby. He might be able to explain that. Neil Bibby: Well, I will explain to the cabinet secretary that if we rejoined the EU—as is his position—we would be rejoining the common fisheries policy. On economic growth, does the cabinet secretary acknowledge that, during the first three months of this year, the UK was the fastest-growing economy in the G7? Angus Robertson: I always welcome economic growth, but I will not welcome holding discussions on behalf of the Parliament, the Scottish Government and the country but not involving its institutions. The European Union is sharing the text of the potential outcomes of next week’s discussions with its member states. The UK Government is not doing so with devolved Administrations.”
“A number of actions have been agreed this morning with shop stewards to amplify their voice, because they are often on the ground, identifying issues that might have a knock-on impact on build. At the moment, there is union representation at the board meetings, where the representatives get an opportunity to pose questions. I want to see a feedback loop, as it were, of issues being escalated immediately so that they can then be resolved. As I said— The Presiding Officer: Briefly, please, Deputy First Minister. Kate Forbes: As I said to the Conservative MSP, if there are further steps that we, as the shareholder, can take to ensure that there is maximum scrutiny and review of the plan at board level, I am very happy to listen to members.”
“Kate Forbes: On that final point, the member will know that that money has been allocated in the budget this year—it is to go towards the improvements that the board has identified. We are committed to distributing that funding as soon as possible. That has to be done in collaboration with the board, which will determine the improvements that are required. With regard to the other steps that we have taken, I outlined some of them to Sue Webber, but I will go through them again. We have taken immediate steps to establish a weekly review group with CMAL and Scottish Government officials to scrutinise the delivery plan. I have asked for additional steps, including for the new chief executive, who has only been in post since 1 May, to consider the plan.”
“I feel that I have gone back in time to three years ago, when the cabinet secretary said the exact same thing about unacceptable delays. The whole ferries fiasco has been the result of a lack of leadership and inconsistent management from owners, agencies and Government ministers. Not one of those supposed leaders has taken responsibility; meanwhile, islanders and workers have been subjected to buck passing and a merry-go-round of ministers and turnaround directors. What leadership is the Scottish Government finally going to show to get the ferries finished and secure a future for the yard? On that point, when will the investment to improve efficiencies at the yard that was promised by the Scottish Government be delivered?”
“I undertake that I will get my colleague Jenny Gilruth to write to Neil Bibby, letting him know what the Scottish Government is doing in that case. However, in the generality, training and skills are absolutely key to the growth of the screen sector in Scotland, and we fully support that. Constitutional Strategy (Fiscal Autonomy) 7.”
“Angus Robertson: Neil Bibby is absolutely right—the role of skills and training is vital as we see the screen sector approach the £1 billion mark in terms of gross value added to our economy, which we hope it will pass by 2030. The Scottish Government is directly responsible for a number of initiatives in the area. At present, we are trying to introduce screen studies into Scottish primary and secondary schools. That will be a tremendous achievement, as other countries do not do that. Neil Bibby raises a very specific and concerning case involving a private training centre. I am aware of the case that he raises, and I know that ministers are seized of the matter. Our priority must be to support the students who studied there and who wish to conclude their studies.”
“Although the new US Administration appears to have rolled back slightly on its threat of film industry tariffs, the situation shows the importance of supporting a home-grown film and television sector and young creative talent. The cabinet secretary will be aware that, last week, the Scottish Institute of Theatre, Dance, Film and TV collapsed into administration. In the light of that situation and the impact of any US tariffs, will the cabinet secretary set out how the Scottish Government can help to ensure that young Scots have opportunities and a pathway into working in the arts, whether that is in Scotland, the US or other global markets?”
“Exclusion exists as a consequence and we need staff to feel empowered, as and when appropriate, to understand that it exists as an option for them to use.”
“When does the cabinet secretary expect the prevalence of violence in our schools to be reduced? Why has the number of exclusions fallen on this Government’s watch while levels of violence have increased? Jenny Gilruth: On the point that Neil Bibby raises about exclusions, we know that there is some reticence from the profession in relation to reporting. I addressed that point in the chamber in November 2023, when I responded to the behaviour in Scottish schools research. At that time, I was very clear in calling on the profession for clearer reporting, but, to that end, we need to give the profession confidence that it will have support. Updated guidance in relation to reporting will be published before the end of term as part of the updated work on consequences in order to help to give that support to the profession.”
“To ask the Scottish Government when it last met Caledonian Maritime Assets Ltd and what issues were discussed. (S6O-04605)”
“Our standing orders advise that “oral questions may be answered by any member of the Scottish Government or a junior ... Minister.” It is a matter for the Scottish Government to decide who to put forward for a particular session. In the first instance, the ministerial code is a matter for the”
“The Nolan principles of public life are clear. They underpin our standing orders and the ministerial code, which states, at subparagraph 1.4(d), under the “Accountability” principle: “Holders of public office are accountable for their decisions and actions and must submit themselves to whatever scrutiny necessary to ensure this.” Presiding Officer, can you confirm that, under rules 13.1 and 13.2 of our standing orders, the cabinet secretary can be afforded an opportunity to make a statement in order to issue a clarification—alongside the publication of her diary—or make an apology to you and the Parliament, because the Parliament cannot and should not simply accept the situation of ministers putting party interests before those of the country? The Presiding Officer: Thank you, Mr Bibby.”
“Not only does it set a bad example to Scotland’s schoolchildren for the cabinet secretary to skip education questions, which were presumably in the ministerial diary for weeks if not months but, worse than that, it appears that Jenny Gilruth may have prioritised party interests over her responsibilities to Parliament and, by extension, the country. I make this point of order because it is important that the cabinet secretary is afforded an opportunity to clarify her reasons for not attending her portfolio question time, alongside making available her diary and any changes to it, so that we can ascertain when Government and party business took place and where. Failure to do that can only create the impression that the cabinet secretary has been discourteous and disrespectful to this Parliament.”
“For context, Presiding Officer, I note that that question time took place hours after a serious incident at an Aberdeen school and in the week before pupils start their Scottish Qualifications Authority exams. A spokesperson for the cabinet secretary told the press that she “had a mix of government and party meetings and events in the course of the day”. A source later confirmed that the non-attendance here was “not due to government business”. No extenuating circumstances, justifiable reasons or apologies have been given for the no-show.”
“On a point of order, Presiding Officer. As you will be aware, on Thursday 24 April, I and other members of this Parliament were in attendance for portfolio questions on education. Members were there to ask questions on school violence, vaping in schools, parents being unable to access childcare, job losses at universities, teacher recruitment and care-experienced children. Those are all important and serious matters for our children and young people, parents and those who work in our schools, colleges and universities. While I and many other members were in attendance, the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills was unfortunately not here to address those important questions.”
“To ask the Scottish Government what proportion of three- year-old children receive free early learning and childcare in the week after their third birthday. (S6O-04571)”
“Often, we do not fully appreciate what we have lost until it is gone, but we have not lost “River City” and Dumbarton studios just yet. I hope that we will see a twist in the plot that means that both survive into the future. [Applause.] The Deputy Presiding Officer: I say to our visitors in the gallery that you are all very welcome to observe our proceedings. However, as you are observers and not participants, I ask you to refrain from clapping and from any other form of involvement. Thank you very much in advance for your co-operation. 12:55”
“Equity has also described the move as “a blow to working class performers”. It is important to acknowledge that “River City” has tangible social value. There has been significant discussion, here and elsewhere, about the recent Netflix documentary show “Adolescence”. Television is a unique forum to explore sensitive subject matters. Throughout its run, “River City” has confronted difficult topics, including mental health, domestic violence and self-harm. The social value in exploring those topics cannot be overstated. The writers, producers, crew and cast of “River City”—many of whom are in the gallery—have done a phenomenal job in doing that, and we should thank them for it. It is difficult to imagine another show filling the void that “River City” will leave. The BBC should think again.”
“Even when “River City” is not shooting, students from the Royal Conservatoire of Scotland come into the studio and get the chance to film. That gives them invaluable experience to allow them to develop in the industry. That clearly shows that it is not just an entertainment show but a pathway and platform for young Scottish talent, with talent such as Sam Heughan going on to star in “Outlander”. The actor Stuart Martin, who has appeared in the show, made a powerful statement. He said: “Losing River City is devastating to an industry that is increasingly brutal to those trying to break into it. In an industry that is increasingly favouring those who can afford to do it and closing its doors to those who don’t have the means. It is a necessity that the River City’s of this industry remain”.”
“It was wrongly suggested that the owner of the site did not wish to renew the lease, but, as was revealed by Jackie Baillie, that was not the case, and the owner is still keen for the studios to remain. I was impressed by the set and, given that it provides good value for money and that it would be hard and expensive to replicate, it makes little sense to close the studios. It has multi-uses, too, having been the site for other productions, including “Vigil”, “Shetland” and “Two Doors Down”. We also heard at first hand the importance of the training opportunities that it provides. In all, 72 trainees have come through the production in the past two and a half years alone, with the vast majority of writers and directors being women.”
“There are concerns about ensuring that the budget is fully spent in Scotland, and there are proposals to award replacement drama programmes to London-based production companies. It is, of course, not the place of politicians to make editorial decisions on what is or is not aired on public service broadcast television, but we should highlight the serious concerns on behalf of viewers and of those working in the industry when necessary. As I mentioned, this is about more than the loss of a soap opera. The decision to close BBC Dumbarton studios is also deeply regrettable. I visited the studios recently, and it is clear that they are a valuable asset.”
“If it gave the show the consistent slot and the right marketing that it deserves—for example, by updating the out-of-date information on its website—the viewing figures would be even higher. However, the current figures still represent a sizeable proportion of the Scottish public and the importance of linear television. For context, on the weekend of 12 and 13 April, attendance at all Scottish professional football league fixtures was just under 140,000. BBC Scotland has stated its intent to protect and increase the budget for drama, and we all want to see that happen. However, concerns have been raised that the planned replacement will result in 13 fewer hours of production than currently takes place. That has implications for writers, cast and crew.”
“I look forward to hearing from the cabinet secretary on what steps the Scottish Government can take to support its calls and challenge the BBC. The entertainment provided and the awards won by the show have been achieved on a budget of only £9 million, which, in the grand scheme of things, represents significant value for money. Previously, around 500,000 people regularly watched the show. Even considering the declining trend for long-running UK television productions, recent figures show that “River City” still attracts about 200,000 to 285,000 viewers. That is in the context of greater competition from streaming platforms and the show being moved around its BBC One slot more than any other production. The BBC has a great product and it should be proud of it.”