Jamie Greene
Scottish Liberal Democrats · Scotland
“In reality, our end-of-life choices are not always truly choices—do not resuscitate, nil by mouth, morphine, let nature take its course—but the one thing I cannot get out of my head is this: what if? What if palliative care can do nothing more for me? What if, in excruciating pain, I lose my dignity and control?”
“If we vote against the bill and it falls, I believe that I would wake up tomorrow and regret it, and I think that others in the chamber might, too. I could not look someone in their eyes in their dying days and tell them that I denied them that choice. I will sum up in the words of Diane, who wrote to us all on Saturday afternoon.”
“I think that I sit somewhere in the middle, because there is always risk when making law. Our task is to weigh up that risk and mitigate it where we can. No bill is perfect, so the question we must ask ourselves is not an abstract one. If I or someone I love want that choice at the end, will it be there?”
“I thank Lorna Slater for that speech—that was beautiful. I think that, tonight, we have heard some of the most profound and powerful speeches I have ever heard in this place, and I thank all members for that.”
“I fear a painful death more than death itself, so the dilemma that I have grappled with is simple. God forbid the day ever comes when I need that choice, but would I rather it was there or not? Members must ask themselves the same question—there or not? If I want that choice at the very end, I must offer that choice to others.”
“Can Stephen Kerr elicit which parts of the bill, as amended to date, relate to reserved matters? My understanding is that those have all been removed from the bill. If he could point to some such parts of the bill, I would be grateful. Stephen Kerr: I accept what Jamie Greene is saying. I am speaking to amendment 249.”
The complete record
Every one of 457 lines we hold for Jamie Greene, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 3 of 10.
“I am really nervous about how many well- educated, professional young Scots we will lose to the brain drain over the coming years. They are being attracted by glossy ads for the Gold Coast and Canada and by Spain’s flat-rate tax for digital nomads. Our challenge will be to encourage them to remain in Scotland, and if they are not already here, to encourage them to consider coming and making a life here. The Deputy Presiding Officer: We move to the open debate, with speeches of up to four minutes. 15:17”
“Jamie Greene: I have less than a minute; otherwise I would have done so. Of course, we need to raise earnings across the board, because raised earnings will inevitably lead to higher tax intakes. However, here is a sobering statistic: in the year 2023-24, 20 per cent of all Scottish taxpayers paid 66 per cent of all tax. In fact, the top 1 per cent of all taxpayers paid 20 per cent of all tax. That is a sobering reminder that we need to grow the number of high earners. That should not be controversial; it is a necessity. The Government will argue about our low unemployment rate, which sits at 3.8 per cent— that is great, but it ignores not just how many people are in or out of work but what their earnings are, how well off they feel and, to put it bluntly, their potential to pay tax into the Government coffers.”
“I know that the fiscal settlement is complex— probably only a handful of people truly understand how it works—but the Government too often cites the tax intake figure as gospel in order to vindicate its tax policies. Audit Scotland has also criticised the Scottish Government for its complete lack of transparency on the issue. If we ask people in the real world whether they are comfortable paying that wee bit more in tax to fund our precious NHS or to make sure that our teachers are paid well, as others have argued, some might very well say, “Yes, absolutely.” However, I am not so convinced that they would sign up to an alternative tax regime if they knew how little of it benefited the Scottish budget. Of course, we need to raise the size of the overall tax base— Ivan McKee: Will the member take an intervention?”
“To put it simply, for every £1 in extra tax that is paid by a Scottish taxpayer, only 36p will be available to the Scottish Government to spend on public services. The Auditor General has been crystal clear about that disparity. He states why that is the case. I see the minister looking at me strangely. I can hand him the Audit Scotland report, which states that fact. We know that what is generated in revenue does not all come back to the Scottish purse. The reason why it does not is that we have an underperforming tax base, sluggish wage growth and productivity in Scotland, and sluggish overall economic growth compared with other parts of the UK. That is what is creating the funding gap.”
“However, we are completely missing the other elephant in the room, which we rarely debate: whether the tax differential north of the border actually generates the level of additional revenue that the public are led to believe that it does. The answer to that question is that it does not. We are not seeing a proportionate net benefit as a result of paying more tax. In this financial year, as other members have mentioned, the Scottish Government expects to generate an additional £1.7 billion in Scottish income tax due to its policy decisions. That is fine—that is its decision. However, the Scottish budget will benefit to the tune of only £616 million. Those are independently verified figures.”
“I agree with the notion that our current politics is defined by the cost of living and by people’s perception of whether their Government or Governments are on their side—or not, as the case may be. That includes the question of tax policy. This Parliament has had tax-varying powers since its inception, but only since 2017 has the Scottish Government used them, to varying degrees of success and popularity. Over the next few weeks, particularly regarding the approaching budget, the focus will centre on the conversation about tax bands and rates and on the perceived doves and hawks in relation to taxation.”
“I think that most people will look at me in the round; I am perhaps imperfect but, first and foremost, they will take a balanced view of me and of what I contribute, as well as my failings.”
“However, what we do also matters. Along with support from Mr Greene, I passed the Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill, which was not without its controversy. I know the views of many victims. Of course, victims have different views about different politicians. Many victims have views about those who did not support the bill and those who did not vote to abolish the not proven verdict, despite their commitment to that. It is what we do that matters. I accept that we will all come to this with different perspectives, as will victims, but I am confident that most people will look at my contribution, first and foremost, as a grafter— somebody who is prepared to wrestle with difficult issues and have difficult discussions.”
“This is the first day back after recess, and the Parliament is now notably distracted by two debates about the conduct of its members. The cabinet secretary knows fine well that it is what we say and the words that we use that matter, particularly to victims. In the vote of no confidence debate, we came to a very considered conclusion that the justice secretary’s position was untenable, and I am afraid to say that our position has not changed. In the light of this now three-month-long saga, and in the cold light of day, following today’s report, does the cabinet secretary honestly—and I mean honestly—still believe that she commands the full confidence of the entirety of Scotland’s justice sector, including every victim of crime in this country? Angela Constance: Mr Greene is quite correct to say that what we say matters.”
“It was announced at the end of last year that the £4.4 million islands business resilience fund has been extended to cover the communities on Mull, Islay, Coll, Colonsay and Jura. It was always our intention to extend that funding if possible, but, initially, it had to be focused on those who had experienced the most significant disruption, which is why the first tranche of funding went to the relevant islands. I am very pleased that the SNP Government has taken the issue seriously and is delivering £4.4 million of business resilience to those communities. The Presiding Officer: That concludes topical question time. Civil Legal Assistance”
“Those technical cancellations have an impact, but we should remember that that is in the context of hundreds of thousands of journeys every year. On the member’s other point, he may have missed that there is regular three-monthly reporting on vessel completions. I was previously a member of the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee, which set the timescale for when those reports would happen. They are always published quarterly, and the timing has been regular since my time on the committee, almost two and a half years ago. There is a regular drumbeat of reporting, which I think is appropriate, from those who are responsible for the delivery of those vessels. Finally—if you can bear with me, Presiding Officer—I note that the member referred to financial support, which is the responsibility of Mairi Gougeon.”
“Will the Scottish Government look to extend and expand the compensation scheme, so that all coastal and island communities can benefit from it when they are out of pocket through no fault of their own? Fiona Hyslop: There are a number of points in that question. I, too, extend my thanks to CalMac staff who, throughout the winter period, often deliver services in very difficult circumstances. Technical cancellations are a very small percentage in comparison with the numbers of cancellations as a result of weather, which are by far the most substantial. [Fiona Hyslop has corrected this contribution. See end of report.] We are talking about hundreds of thousands of vessel journeys, and the numbers that the member mentioned amount to about 4 per cent.”
“I wish members a happy new year. I thank CalMac staff, who have kept islanders moving in very difficult conditions over the past few weeks. I note that the news about the MV Glen Rosa was snuck out to Parliament in what the cabinet secretary suggested was the usual way—that is, it was announced the minute we rose for recess, as has become a habit for the Scottish Government. The reality is that there have been 6,000 technical cancellations on the Gourock to Dunoon route over the past few years. They were technical, not weather related. There have been nearly 800 such cancellations on the Arran route alone. There have been 16,000 technical cancellations in three years, due to vessels being out of action.”
“East Dunbartonshire Council also receives an annual share of £30.5 million to prevent homelessness, as well as a share of £8 million for rapid rehousing. That alone ought to make a difference in East Dunbartonshire this year. Women and Children in or Survivors of Prostitution (Investment in Prevention, Housing, Safety and Recovery) 7.”
“Màiri McAllan: What I have to say to them is that every effort that I have made since becoming housing secretary has been put into ending children living in unsuitable accommodation, stopping children spending longer periods of time in temporary accommodation than they ought to, and making sure that there is a sufficiency of affordable homes in Scotland to meet the growing needs of our population. Specifically on the situation in East Dunbartonshire, I mentioned that we are investing more than £100 million in discretionary housing payments to mitigate the bedroom tax and to help to mitigate the local housing allowance freeze. That includes £901,000 for East Dunbartonshire Council to help people who are struggling with housing costs.”
“The reason why East Dunbartonshire Council is having to put people in hotels or bed and breakfasts is that it has access to only 50 council-owned temporary properties. Shelter Scotland told me that 240 households in that council area alone are at risk of immediate homelessness. I do not know how any of us can go home after Parliament today and tuck into our turkeys next week knowing that there are children in Scotland who will spend Christmas day in a B and B or a hotel room. It is not a housing emergency, minister—it is a personal tragedy. What do you have to say to them? The Deputy Presiding Officer: Always speak through the chair.”
“Given that point alone, we will vote in favour of the motion. However, irrespective of the outcome, it is important that we all continue to act and work constructively and sensibly with the minority Government in this Parliament, as it is right to do so. Lessons can and must be learned from this and from the Government’s unacceptable response to the events that have led us to today’s vote. 14:57”
“Serious violent crime and domestic violence are on the increase in far too many areas in Scotland. Victims and the accused are waiting years for their trials to come to pass. Our police force survives only on the good will of officers and, largely, overtime and, of course, our drugs death crisis continues to be our national shame. We are in such a critical period. Our justice sector needs to be led from the front and with confidence. The justice secretary in their role must command the confidence not just of the whole Parliament but of every cog in the judicial wheel. Most importantly, they must command the confidence of victims, particularly those who have suffered the most horrendous and unimaginable trauma and abuse, who now tell us directly that that confidence has been lost.”
“We do not subscribe to any great sensationalist theory of conspiracy on her part, nor do we see any opportunism in any of this whole sorry saga. Indeed, the substance of the original debate from which all of this stems merits gravitas that it has not always been afforded in this place. When ministers place on the record a view that is based on false representation, the code demands that the record be put straight, with absolute candour, and that is yet to happen. The Scottish justice system is in upheaval and crisis in equal measure. It is undergoing some of the most substantial changes in centuries, starting with the removal of the not proven verdict. Our prisons are in a state of crisis and a condition that neither rehabilitates prisoners nor keeps people safe, either inside or outside them.”
“It is three months to the day since the cabinet secretary made the erroneous assertion and the argument was presented to the Parliament—an argument against a Conservative amendment, which we supported, to establish a bespoke inquiry into group-based child exploitation in Scotland. In response to the First Minister’s comments today, I will say that I re-read the Official Report of the meeting, and there is no ambiguity about what was said or how it could be interpreted—none whatsoever. In our view, the correct and proper response to that would have been a simple statement of correction in the chamber, which could have put the matter to bed. That is why we believe that the vote today is the inevitable result of a series of events that could have been avoided, and the matter resolved. We bear the justice secretary no ill will.”
“It is not for me to decide whether the cabinet secretary purposefully or inadvertently misrepresented the views of a well-respected judicial figure, but the correct course of action would have been to immediately correct the record and apologise to the Parliament, to Professor Jay and to the victims, who should be at the centre of all our attention. There has been ample opportunity for that to happen in recent months. There has been ample opportunity to take ownership of the error. Instead, junior ministers have been put up to shield the cabinet secretary from the flak.”
“The Scottish Liberal Democrats take no pleasure in this debate. We came to the view that today’s vote is regrettable, and it was avoidable. When we deliberated on our response to the motion of no confidence, our discussion was tainted by a collective feeling of disappointment, not least because colleagues expressed much personal good will towards the Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Home Affairs. On a personal level, I thank Ms Constance for the constructive attitude that allowed me to successfully progress my victims proposals in a Government bill. However, in politics, people sometimes make mistakes. To err is, of course, human.”
“It is not the consumers who need to change their behaviour—I am afraid that, in this case, it is Government ministers. I will support the essence of the Conservative motion, because the EV tax is a step backwards, it is punitive and it is short-sighted. We need to dual the A9 and get on with it, and we need to unlock our regional and rural economies by building up and building better. I believe that no one and nowhere should be left behind. Both of Scotland’s Governments share responsibility for keeping our country moving. 16:23”
“I understand the Chancellor of the Exchequer’s conundrum in replacing fuel duty with some other source of income, but the proposed policy solution smells like a policy that has been drummed up in Whitehall by somebody who gets on the tube every day to work, not by somebody who has to make a 200-mile journey to the nearest maternity hospital. That is the reality of what happens when such policies are not thoroughly thought through. Do not forget that our EV industry is up against it. It is up against China and others, so why are we handing advantage to them on a plate? Here is what we could be doing. We could be building better EV infrastructure. Why not offer sensible subsidies to move from gas to electric? Why not even cap the cost of charging EVs?”
“It said: “Scotland’s motorways are the beating heart of our economy ... But motorway construction has slowed in recent years in a way that just doesn’t fit with our ambition for long-term, sustainable economic growth.” I am sorry, but I have to disagree with Mr Johnson on EV cars. We all know that they are the future—they have a lower carbon footprint, they represent a step towards net zero and they will mean cleaner air for our children and less reliance on fossil fuels. However, the new policy to tax people who have bought an EV is utterly insane. It will hit rural economies harder than those anywhere else and will surely drive down uptake, not improve it.”
“Similarly, as others have mentioned, completing the dualling of the A77 and the A75 would massively improve not just the local economy but links between Scotland and Northern Ireland. That would keep heavy trucks off single-lane roads, improve road safety and, as Finlay Carson said, reduce carbon output in that part of the world. Presiding Officer, do not get me started on the M8, where I seem to spend most of my free time these days. It is Scotland’s busiest road, with 150,000 people using it every day. It connects our largest city with our capital city. However, the road is now the contraflow capital of Scotland. Glasgow airport is left connected to Glasgow city solely by a road that resembles a car park at most times of the day. What does that result in? CBI Scotland was quite clear with us.”
“I say gently to the Government that, no matter what the logistical or financial barriers are to finishing that road, surely there is a moral imperative, if nothing else, to get it done. The road should have been dualled before now. If that can be done before 2035, that is even better. However, the problem that remains is: how many more people will die while we wait for the road to be completed? The issue is not just with the A9. Let us look at the A96. Moray Council and the local chamber of commerce recently said that major developments such as ScotWind and the Inverness and Cromarty Firth green port are being held back by a failure to complete the dualling of that road.”
“The Scottish Government’s 2015 infrastructure investment plan has been laid bare not just in the debate but numerous times in the chamber. The investment plan promised, among other things, two new major ferries, which would be operational by 2017 at a price of £90 million for both. It promised to invest in our harbours, yet Ardrossan harbour is still in limbo, and all the businesses around it are still waiting for compensation for the endless disruption. There is also the famous promise—the Conservatives are right to bring it to the fore today—that was a “commitment to ... dual the A9 between Perth and Inverness by 2025”. What has happened since 2015? The sad reality is that 48 people have died on that single road alone. The worst year on record was 2022, when 13 people lost their lives.”
“We were unanimous in our conclusions and recommendations and, equally, we were unanimous in our criticisms of all parties. If the yard fails and if it closes its doors for ever, that will not be an embarrassment for the Government; it will be a national shame. We cannot let that happen. The Deputy Presiding Officer: That concludes the debate on the Public Audit Committee’s report, “The 2023/24 audit of Ferguson Marine (Port Glasgow) Holdings Limited”. Veterans and Armed Forces Community”
“It is an injustice to the talented workforce at the yard that there is no medium or long-term forecast or future for the yard that listens to the workers themselves. The Ferguson Marine shipyard has a future. Its failure is not inevitable, but neither is its success. Although the Public Audit Committee was critical about the yard’s current position, we were also clear in our recommendations about what needs to change for it to succeed. A bright future is possible: a yard that bustles with a long line of orders, makes money and pays for itself, invests back into its workforce, creates good local jobs, invests in the Inverclyde economy and gives a big boost to the Scottish national economy. It can be a yard that puts us back on the world map as a proud shipbuilding nation.”
“No one now truly believes that the Government will ever say no to further asks for money to finish the job of building the Glen Rosa, because the whole project is simply too far down the line to stop bankrolling it at this late stage. The reality is that the yard’s reputation can be rebuilt only through the demonstrable and successful delivery of future projects—projects that are built on time and on budget. However, that means being awarded or, indeed, winning contracts in the first place. If the Government is as confident in the yard’s abilities as many of us are, it must prove it. The committee had no view on the issue of direct award—others do—but it begs the question: what is the point of having a publicly funded state- owned asset such as a shipbuilding yard and then consistently overlooking it when issuing contracts?”
“Therefore, the yard must spend what is available to it to upgrade the business. We must also see an upgraded and revised business plan, but one that, this time, is realistic and accounts for the loss of the contract that was not awarded to it—a contract on which the previous business plan was heavily predicated. Money is not all that the yard needs. Of course, it needs new orders, but the restoration of the yard’s reputation is paramount as well. The past few years have been painful for the yard—I think that we all accept that. The cost overruns and delays to the Glen Sannox and the Glen Rosa are significant, and they come at a huge price not just to the public purse but to the islands that those vessels are meant to serve.”
“The committee called for the yard to get sufficient investment to be upgraded, which it must do to stand any realistic chance of securing new work. We went as far as to say that we have “significant concerns about the ongoing uncertainty” regarding the yard’s long-term financial sustainability once the Glen Rosa has set sail. That point is where I will address the Labour amendment. It raises a fair point. Of course, of the £14 million that was promised by the Government, less than around £500,000 has actually been delivered to the yard. However, it is clear from the correspondence that I received from the yard that that is because it failed to request the true value that is available to it. That leaves a worrying end result: we could be in a use-it-or-lose-it scenario because that money cannot be rolled over to the next financial year.”
“Stuart McMillan: What Jamie Greene has just said is very different from the fact that Cammell Laird won the order from Western Ferries, which Ferguson, as we know, was bidding for but did not get, because Cammell Laird was far more competitive. Jamie Greene: I will come on to how the yard can be competitive, because the committee looked at that. There are opportunities now with MV Lord of the Isles and the second stage of the small vessel replacement project, as well as many other contracts, which will undoubtedly go abroad if the yard is not fit for purpose. The Deputy First Minister seems to agree that the yard needs new work, but she failed to acknowledge in her comments that the primary source of such new work is the front benches on which she currently sits.”
“It makes no sense to observers that CMAL, which is a state-owned public body, has set its bid-scoring criteria in such a way that it clearly excludes yards such as Ferguson Marine— a state-owned shipyard—from winning contracts. Ferguson can absolutely win on quality, but never on price. We urge the Government to revisit that weighting so that Scottish shipbuilding is on an even footing with that of the rest of the world. If the issue is not addressed, the outcome will be fatal for the yard. Stuart McMillan: Will the member take an intervention? Jamie Greene: If I can have my time back, I will happily take interventions. The Deputy Presiding Officer: There is no additional time, so it is up to the member. Jamie Greene: Okay—if it is quick.”
“However, the chair of the board of Ferguson Marine sat in the Public Audit Committee and told us: “We are not playing on an even field. No shipyard in the UK ... can hit the prices of overseas shipyards. It is impossible.”—[Official Report, Public Audit Committee, 5 February 2025; c 42.] However, the benefits of building ships in our own backyard and the immense social value that that brings have been consistently overlooked. Stuart McMillan: Will the member take an intervention? Jamie Greene: I do not have time at the moment—I will make some progress first. That surely is the very ethos of another Government bill, the Community Wealth Building (Scotland) Bill, which this Parliament has been asked to consider.”
“We saw opportunities for small vessel shipbuilding, work on offshore wind tri-floaters, steel work and defence work. We saw a yard that was clearly willing to rise—and capable of rising—to the challenge to take on new projects and grasp new opportunities, but those opportunities have continued to pass it by. The small vessel replacement programme was a contract that the committee, the yard’s board and even the Auditor General for Scotland acknowledged would be the key win to underpin the success of its business plan, but that business plan now lies defunct. It became clear to everyone concerned that Ferguson Marine could never compete against yards in Turkey or Poland—not on price, anyway, because we rightly pay our shipbuilders well in this country and we have high standards of working equality.”
“They were way above Scottish public finance manual thresholds and seemed only to serve as reward for failure culture in the yard’s management. Of course, there was that repeat offender, as Mr Leonard will know, in Public Audit Committee reports—a complete and severe lack of oversight on behalf of the Scottish Government’s sponsorship department, the Scottish Government being the sole shareholder of that business. It became clear to us that the yard’s interests have not always aligned with the interests of the protagonists involved in this lengthy saga. I will not repeat the convener’s comments, but I will pick up from where he left off and talk about the future of the yard. When the committee went to Port Glasgow, it was clear that there is bags of potential for Ferguson Marine.”
“I thank all members for their contributions today; it has been a good committee debate. As someone who was born and raised in Inverclyde, I always relish the chance to talk about Ferguson Marine. However, I do so in today’s debate without any pleasure, because I am as disappointed as I am sad to have had to co-author the report that we are debating. The report unearthed a catalogue of issues with regard to this publicly owned, apparently strategic asset that has been the source of so much attention over the past decade. Our report brought to light many issues: poor governance and leadership; the uncertainty of the future of the yard; the secondment arrangements, which inexplicably lacked any financial transparency; the lack of adequate internal audit functions in the yard; and the highly valuable exit packages that were discussed.”
“The Deputy Presiding Officer: I call Edward Mountain. You have around five minutes, Mr Mountain. 15:35”
“However, it is important to note that that is the board’s business plan, which will then be submitted to ministers. The yard is actively pursuing commercial contracts, and it has been clear about the importance that it places on securing future public sector work. As Parliament knows—this is so important—shipbuilding is a competitive global market and any public contract award must fully comply with procurement and subsidy control rules. If it does not, we will have the worst of both worlds—no work for Ferguson Marine and ships not being built. In conclusion, there is still much to do at Ferguson Marine, but strengthened leadership, firmer governance, targeted investment and clearer strategic planning provide a more stable foundation for the yard’s future. Presiding Officer, I will close there, considering the look that you are giving me.”
“That commitment has not changed, and, in that spirit, I am more than delighted to support Daniel Johnson’s amendment. To date, we have received 11 capital expenditure requests from Ferguson’s, all of which have been scrutinised rigorously and approved. That targeted investment supports essential repairs, health and safety improvements, and equipment upgrades. It is intended to assist with the delivery of the MV Glen Rosa and to build capacity for the yard to deliver future work more efficiently. Access to the remainder of the modernisation funding requires a clear, board-approved long- term strategy, which will be evidenced through the revised business plan that is currently being finalised. I cannot remember whether it was Richard Leonard or Daniel Johnson who talked about that.”
“Daniel Johnson: [Made a request to intervene.] Kate Forbes: I ask the member to let me get through my points and, if I have some time, I will bring him in. Lessons from the MV Glen Sannox are being applied to the MV Glen Rosa’s build and commissioning stages. Looking ahead, the future of Ferguson Marine must be built on strong leadership, improved productivity and a sustained pipeline of work. Incidentally, I think that most members across the chamber are agreed on that point. The Government remains firmly committed to supporting the yard to compete for and win new contracts, and to secure its long-term sustainability. As part of that commitment, up to £14.2 million has been allocated over two years to support yard modernisation, subject to due diligence and commercial tests.”
“Will the Deputy First Minister take an intervention? Daniel Johnson: Will the Deputy First Minister give way? Kate Forbes: I do not know whether Craig Hoy wants to come in at this point. Craig Hoy: The minister is painting a rosy picture of the situation now that borders on recklessness and complacency. Is it not the truth that this has been a fiasco in procurement, a fiasco in governance and a fiasco in providing a strategic direction to the yard? Why, throughout all this, has no SNP minister resigned? Kate Forbes: Craig Hoy was not listening if he thinks that I was painting a rosy picture in my comments a few minutes ago. Let me turn to the delivery of the MV Glen Rosa. A joint project group now brings together Ferguson Marine, CMAL and Government officials to monitor progress and assess risks in real time.”
“That includes the investment that we have made in general practice; the increased investment that is going through social care; and the upskilling and upstaffing of NHS 24 and the Scottish Ambulance Service, to ensure that we provide the best possible resilience to the whole system, so that the pressures that Jamie Greene is narrating and which are felt in our hospital settings are suppressed as much as possible.”
“Neil Gray: The staffing establishment and safe staffing levels are covered by legislation, and we support boards to ensure that they have the requisite staffing establishment, although I absolutely take Mr Greene’s point about the pressures on staff, particularly at this time of year. In my response to the initial question from Carol Mochan, I set out some of the areas in which we are investing in order to reduce and suppress demand, particularly in relation to accident and emergency and our acute system, which is particularly pressured at this time.”
“Three quarters of NHS staff in Ayrshire and Arran report that they are working in conditions where they are so short staffed that they believe that patient safety has been put at risk. That is a major concern, because, if staff now go off sick due to flu or other viruses, the pressure on accident and emergency, for example, will be immense. If staff do not believe that they can deliver adequate levels of care to their patients—and that was before the current flu pandemic—what will the situation look like in January and February next year? What is the Scottish Government doing to ensure that all our NHS boards are appropriately staffed during the winter season? This situation has been a long time coming.”
“However, I point out that the capital allocation from the United Kingdom Government is far from generous. Fatal Accident Inquiries (Legislation) 2.”
“Police Scotland wrote to me to confirm that, if the Scottish Government was forthcoming with financial resource, it would direct that investment into a new police station. That was in December 2023. Is it the case that the Government has provided the financial resource but it has not been delivered by Police Scotland, or has the financial resource that Police Scotland asked for—and needs—not been forthcoming? If so, why not? Angela Constance: As I outlined in my original answer, in this financial year, the Government increased the capital resource provision to the Scottish Police Authority. Where Police Scotland deploys that is entirely an operational matter. We are in the middle of planning for the Scottish budget, which will be announced at the start of the new year.”
“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 contact Public Information on: Telephone: 0131 348 5000 Textphone: 0800 092 7100 Email: sp.info@parliament.scot”