Finlay Carson
Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party · Scotland
“Forestry does not operate to a political timescale but works over decades, yet as a consequence of uncertainty about funding and direction, fewer trees are being planted and there is less confidence across the sector. The decision to cut the forestry grant scheme by 40 per cent has had consequences.”
“That is not climate leadership; it is climate displacement, which involves exporting our emissions while importing food from elsewhere, often with higher carbon costs. Jim Fairlie: I am not quite sure what the member is talking about with regard to declining production in this country.”
“In responding to the climate change plan, witnesses warned that the right balance has not yet been struck between short-term emissions and long- term sustainable restoration.”
“We all recognise the reality and impacts of climate change. Emissions must fall, Scotland must improve climate resilience and we must protect our natural environment, so we support an affordable transition to net zero.”
“Our third Scottish national adaptation plan is our blueprint to build resilience to climate change in a way that is fair and equitable but which can also potentially save millions of pounds by preventing damage. Collaboration is at its heart, including collaboration with local government.”
“The problem is, we know that action needs to be taken but the Government keeps kicking the hard decisions into the long grass. There is no certainty, and there is a reducing budget. The same credibility gap that we have just heard from the minister’s response exists when it comes to technology and implementation.”
The complete record
Every one of 599 lines we hold for Finlay Carson, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 8 of 12.
“Everybody has demands, and we want to continue to improve where we can. I will bring my remarks to a conclusion. Yes, people want to see improvement—in fact, Graham Simpson at least recognised that there is growing public satisfaction, and we have one of the best performance records in comparison with the rest of the UK. However, there is more to be done. I also want to address the important point that was made about the campaign by Sight Scotland for companions for blind people. The pilot is happening just now, and that is a very important part of what we are doing to try to ensure that companions can help to support those who have needs in that area. I encourage members to publicise that pilot.”
“Richard Leonard needs to address the issues around the budget. I have had exchanges with him, and we have sat down with the RMT. There has been a 34.9 per cent increase in our rail infrastructure improvement and rolling stock projects budget this year in comparison with last year. The network budget was down, but there was an issue around the international financial reporting standards capital cover for leasing stock; that will also impact on the UK Government when it is trying to integrate track and train and bring in public ownership. It is an accounting issue; in effect, the real capital budget increased by £63.8 million— Douglas Lumsden: Will the cabinet secretary give way? Fiona Hyslop: No, I want to make progress. With regard to other areas, Kevin Stewart was right to talk about the north-east and the rail campaign there.”
“I pay tribute to Christine Grahame for her role in supporting the Borders railway, and I look forward to joining her and representatives of Scottish Borders Council tonight as we celebrate and mark 10 years since the railway’s official opening. Emma Roddick talked about the Highlands, and both she and Finlay Carson highlighted the point that, while population growth, which the Conservative amendment mentions, is an important aspect, we need to identify what can be done in other parts of Scotland. I was recently on the Alness line in the far north, looking at the maintenance improvements. That leads me on to Richard Leonard’s point— Sandesh Gulhane: Will the cabinet secretary take an intervention? Fiona Hyslop: Oh no—after his miserabilist contribution, there is no way that I am taking an intervention from Sandesh Gulhane.”
“Finlay Carson raised an important general point about decarbonised transport. In our climate change preparations, we will be setting out a number of measures in transport areas. We are already taking action in relation to heavy goods vehicle reductions and what we can do in that territory, and more will come on that issue. Members raised other issues—Douglas Lumsden and others highlighted issues with various stations. With regard to the proposals for stations at Cove and Newtonhill, I refer Douglas Lumsden to the decisions that were made by the North East of Scotland Transport Partnership. There have been discussions between my officials and the Nestrans board, but the next stage is the development of a strategic business case, and that sits with the Nestrans board. We heard similar passion in contributions from other members.”
“Finlay Carson said that it was ended prematurely, but it was not, because it was extended twice—once when the Greens were still in power and once when they left the Government. I extended the pilot because I wanted it to have more time to be successful. Anyone who remembers last summer will know that there was the minor incident of an emergency budget that occurred when the new UK Government came into power, which caused major affordability issues. The Tories have delusions about their influence, because I always said in debates that, if funds became available for my budget, I would reintroduce the removal of peak rail fares. Why? Because certainty is important. The fact that peak fares are now gone for good will help people to make the decision to switch, which is where the modal shift will come from.”
“The Scottish Government continues with its due diligence process on the work towards Scottish Government bonds, which is in line with the approach that was outlined in the 2025-26 Scottish budget and the 2025 medium-term financial strategy. We have engaged with ASLEF, which actually underestimates the savings that can be made. However, there is a restriction on our borrowing, and bonds would count against that. As a Government, the limits on our borrowing are prohibitive, and that, too, needs to be addressed. Jamie Greene raised a number of important points. He asked why I said that it was unaffordable to extend the pilot scheme to remove peak rail fares. It is important to remember that the pilot was a pilot.”
“We are also working with our justice colleagues to look at other powers that might be available to help with prosecutions, which people are keen to see, although the cases that are reported are being prosecuted. Mark Ruskell raised a number of issues, including that of unused first-class services. Currently, they generate £8.5 million in income, so he may want to have a further discussion about what that means for earnings, but he is right on the commuter aspects. Those services have been declassified, although I doubt that many people know about that. Therefore, that might be a communication point that has to be addressed. Mark Ruskell and Richard Leonard also raised a point about bonds and, in particular, ASLEF’s proposal for green bonds.”
“Claire Baker and others, such as Katy Clark, raised women’s safety issues, which my predecessors and I have taken very seriously. The travel safe teams have been expanded. The ticket offices issue is about staff visibility. There are more staff visible on our railways now than ever before. One issue that I raised was about access and visibility from ticket offices to platforms. Only 97 per cent of those that were impacted had visibility of the platforms. However, the points that a number of members made about CCTV and so on need to be communicated a bit more. I am concerned about the British Transport Police issues, so if Claire Baker can do anything in relation to the UK Department for Transport’s cuts, that is an issue that needs to be raised.”
“The new intercity trains are being procured. On Friday, I announced that the Fife and Borders fleets will be procured, and so will the suburban fleet. To answer Sarah Boyack’s question about accessibility, the fleets will have step-free access. Sue Webber also raised concerns about boom and bust in rail investment. That is a criticism from the rail industry for the UK as a whole. In Scotland, the industry says that we have managed to have steady investment, which allows for planning, keeps project teams together and keeps supply chains intact. Claire Baker raised the Fife circle issue. We recently had an exchange, and her point about the measurement of short-forming is reasonable. I note that she welcomed the investment in electrification and the battery electric fleet for that line.”
“What my constituents and rail passengers across Scotland want is simple: a ticket to ride, not the track of their tears. 16:59 Fiona Hyslop: Today’s subject matter is of enormous importance, and the debate has provided a timely opportunity for the Parliament to mark the achievements of many people who have contributed to the rail industry in Scotland over the past 20 years. It also allows us to set out what will happen next on our railways and to set out our aims for—and express our concerns about—the UK Government’s imminent railways bill. People have shown their passion and interest in rail, and I am delighted that the Government has been able to provide the opportunity to discuss different points. I will address a number of those that were made during the debate. Sue Webber talked about the need for fleet replacement.”
“Communities are isolated, economic recovery has stalled and passengers face some of the highest fares per mile in Scotland. The Stranraer service was suspended for more than 10 months following an arson attack on Ayr station hotel. One has to ask oneself whether such a delay would be tolerated elsewhere. The south-west is not a cul-de-sac; it is a corridor of opportunity. I am calling for a feasibility study to extend freight capabilities to Cairnryan, a clear timetable to restore pre-Covid service levels and address unfair rail fares, and a renewed commitment to station improvements in Stranraer, including the creation of a new, fit-for-purpose facility that reflects the town’s ambition and serves the needs of 21st century travellers. For nine years, I have worked with stakeholders to make that vision a reality.”
“Thanks to the Borderlands inclusive growth deal and the Stranraer place plan, we are seeing real investment, including a waterfront redevelopment that is expected to attract tens of thousands of additional visitors annually. However, one thing is missing: a modern, reliable rail service to support that revival. We need a long-term strategy to improve passenger services, unlock freight potential and, in particular, shift heavy goods off the dangerous A77 and the A75. Cairnryan remains a key national asset, yet lorries have to depend on those unfit-for-purpose roads. Investment in rail freight is not just a local issue, but a strategic priority for Scotland and the UK. Despite repeated commitments, post-Covid, rail services to and from Stranraer remain poor.”
“Our current Rail 2014 consultation allows the public to have their say in the future of the railways in Scotland and I can assure passengers that we will continue to ensure the delivery of the best possible service.” Since then—surprise, surprise—services are less frequent and more focused on connections at Ayr rather than direct trains to Glasgow. More trains now terminate at Ayr, requiring passengers to change for Glasgow, and there are fewer early morning and late evening options in comparison with the situation pre-Covid. That is hardly an improvement. Stranraer is a town with a proud past and now— finally—there is momentum.”
“Expansion must not come at the expense of rural and remote communities. Scotland’s railways must serve all of Scotland, not just the central belt. I will therefore use my time to shine a spotlight on the south-west, particularly Stranraer and the strategically vital port at Cairnryan. Like the region’s road network, the railway in the area has been neglected for far too long. Back in 2012, Keith Brown, the then transport minister, and First Minister Alex Salmond set up the Stranraer task force. At the time, Keith Brown said: “I again repeat the Scottish Government’s absolute commitment to rail services in Stranraer and, indeed, to doing all that we can do to improve and develop the service.”
“However, that nostalgia does not cover the 50-year-old InterCity trains still serving in Nigeria and Scotland. He highlighted the central belt bias when it comes to new rolling stock. If he thinks that it is bad in the north-east, he should pay a visit to Stranraer, where the first train of the morning is referred to as the polar express, because of the lack of heating. I will not spend any more time summing up other members’ contributions. Apart from the cabinet secretary’s speech, without exception the calls from across the chamber were for more to be done, and quicker. My colleague Sue Webber, a long-time campaigner for Winchburgh railway station, called for new developments, saying that they should be aligned with areas of population growth. However, we must be cautious.”
“That is a welcome step, and we on the Conservative benches are pleased to see the Scottish Government respond to calls from across the chamber to scrap the two-tier system. It is a welcome U-turn on the Scottish Government’s premature decision to end the first trial. Across the chamber, we accept that the journey ahead will not be easy. Much of Scotland’s rail infrastructure dates back to the 19th century, and that presents real challenges. If we are serious about modernisation, both the Scottish and UK Governments must work together to unlock private investment and commit to long-term upgrades. We heard that Douglas Lumsden likes a bit of nostalgia. He loves nostalgia so much that he is still emotionally stuck in 1983, back when Aberdeen beat Real Madrid and perms were peak fashion.”
“Today’s debate is a timely and important opportunity to reflect on the progress—satisfactory or otherwise—that has been made across Scotland’s railways. From the contributions that have been made this afternoon, it is clear that there is cross-party consensus for a railway that delivers value for money and puts passengers first. Jamie Greene reinforced the Scottish Conservatives’ point that we need the private sector to ensure a reliable and efficient service in modern, comfortable surroundings, without its requiring passengers to take out a second mortgage for a ticket. If we can do that, we are halfway towards winning back public confidence, which is key to encouraging modal shift. Sue Webber and others spoke of the recent removal of peak rail fares.”
“My colleagues in the Scottish Conservatives will not stand by while children go without treatment, while parents choose between groceries and dentist bills and while elderly residents lose the dignity of basic health provision. This is not about dentistry on its own; it is about fairness and dignity. Until every family in Dumfries and Galloway can access NHS dental care without fear, without cost and without delay, we will keep fighting, because they deserve better. Under this failing SNP Government, we are a long, long way from having the confidence to smile again. 18:15”
“His family has been forced into private dental care, which is an impossible burden as the cost of living continues to rise. He is deeply worried about the long-term impact on his children, who need regular preventative care but are being priced out of basic health services. His story is echoed in hundreds of messages that I have received from across my constituency. Those are not isolated cases. They are the lived reality of families who feel abandoned, unheard and increasingly desperate. Scotland’s rural communities are proud and resilient, but they should not have to fight this hard just to access the care that they deserve.”
“I admit that there have been some positive steps, such as the outreach facility in Dumfries, where 12 final-year dental students provide emergency care for unregistered patients. That is welcome, but it is a sticking plaster over a gaping wound. Even then, retaining those students locally is nearly impossible due to the chronic shortage of affordable housing, which is, yet again, another SNP failure. This is a crisis of the SNP’s making. Years of underfunding, poor workforce planning and ill- conceived policies have created a perfect storm. Unless the Government changes course, the situation will only deteriorate. However, behind every statistic there is a real person. Last week, I received an email from a constituent in Stranraer.”
“I also asked how much NHS Dumfries and Galloway has saved due to reduced provision, and how those savings are being used. The answer was that payments come from a national budget, with no separate allocation for boards. Although the minister boasted of a 15 per cent increase in the budget, that means nothing to my constituents who cannot get an appointment. Dentists are walking away from NHS work because the current contract is financially unsustainable. Fees do not cover the cost of care, especially for complex treatments, and rising overheads make it impossible for practices to survive on NHS rates alone. Yes, fees were increased during the pandemic to keep practices afloat but now, the system is broken. The result is that there is virtually no NHS dental provision in the south of Scotland.”
“In 2023, she said that she was “working closely with NHS Boards on local solutions, particularly in remote and rural communities.” In 2024, Neil Gray promised that they were “developing a Rural Delivery Plan to address the challenges faced by rural Scotland.” Those are fine words, but where is the delivery? Where is the plan? It will no doubt be too little, too late. Where are the bespoke solutions for Dumfries and Galloway? On the ground, patients are being deregistered in the tens of thousands and forced to travel miles for treatment or pushed into private care that they simply cannot afford. I lodged a parliamentary question asking where the funding has gone when patients are shifted to private care. Has any of that money been reinvested in our region?”
“In 2019, Scotland had approximately 3,400 dentists providing NHS services; by 2023, that number had fallen to 3,240—a drop of 167 dentists, which is a 4.9 per cent fall over that period. Although some might argue that that fall is significant, the number of dentists, even though it is falling, is not the main issue. This has not happened overnight. I have raised concerns with successive First Ministers—Nicola Sturgeon, Humza Yousaf and their health secretaries. Despite repeated promises, the situation has only worsened under John Swinney. I respect minister Jenni Minto and I have no doubt that she wants to sort the issue.”
“I thank Alex Rowley for bringing this important debate to the chamber. NHS dentistry is a critical issue that affects thousands across Scotland—nowhere more than in my constituency of Galloway and West Dumfries. I am not surprised that Emma Harper is the only SNP back bencher who is prepared or brave enough to try to defend the Government’s position—it is done through gritted teeth, no doubt. The situation in Dumfries and Galloway is dire, and I will not apologise for repeating some of the stark figures. We are the worst affected area in Scotland, with only 63 per cent of the population registered with an NHS dentist. According to a formal response from NHS Dumfries and Galloway, 45,432 patients lost access to an NHS dentist between September 2021 and September 2024.”
“The areas of Scotland that face the fewest problems are those that have less trouble maintaining their populations and have a younger demographic. Attracting dentists to our communities is as hard as attracting people in any other profession, as there are clearly challenges in pulling newly qualified professionals away from the urban cities. Fixing the challenges of rural dentistry also means tackling the much bigger—and, to be frank, more complex—issues around the demography of regions such as Dumfries and Galloway, and our NHS can play a part in that. I will stop there. 17:49”
“The commitment to engaging in the early years to prevent issues from arising later in life, when they increase the pressures on care services, also drives the Scottish Government’s policy on funding dental treatment for all those aged under 26 in our country, which was introduced four years ago and is putting money back in the pockets of hard- pressed households during Westminster’s cost of living crisis. There is a lot more that can be done in dentistry, just as there is always much that can be done for our health and care sector. However, I know that our Scottish Government is committing to do all that it can to provide the best possible treatment for our citizens, regardless of where they live.”
“I am keen to hear from the Minister for Public Health and Women’s Health whether mobile dental services could be pursued in Galloway as an action to assist. Across Scotland, we have seen a revolution in preventative care that is aimed at ensuring that patients do not need treatment in the first place. For the past decade and a half, the Scottish National Party Scottish Government has delivered the Childsmile programme to every child under 12, with a focus on those who are under five. Over that period, the proportion of those in primary 1 with no tooth decay has improved. Children from the most economically deprived households saw the biggest benefit, and the health inequality gap between those children and those in the wealthiest households is closing.”
“I urge any practice in rural Dumfries and Galloway, in the Borders and in parts of South Ayrshire to get in touch with the Scottish dental access initiative to see what they can do to boost and expand their services and the number of patients they serve. In the time that I have, I highlight that I believe that we can go further where needed—for example, by introducing mobile dental services to go directly to communities where dental coverage is reduced and bring care to the doorstep until a longer-term solution can be found. Deploying mobile units would allow the NHS and dental professionals to react quickly to closures or the withdrawal of services and to ensure that locals who are affected continue to receive NHS dental care.”
“Will the member give way? Emma Harper: Give me one wee second. In Moffat in my region, for example, Moffat Dental Practice took on 2,000 new patients after securing grant funding from the dental access initiative. That funding helped to provide an additional NHS dentist in the practice and supported local training efforts. Finlay Carson: Does the member agree that it is too little, too late and that the Government is not doing enough? We are still seeing dentists in Dumfries and Galloway deregistering and providing only private services. Emma Harper: As I said, there are still issues that need to be addressed, and I will come on to discuss potential solutions.”
“We need a system that works, is easy to access, proportionate and risk based, is grounded in practical understanding and, above all, is responsive to the needs of each and every community. Licences should be easy to obtain when there is clear evidence of harm. They should be difficult to lose unless misused and they should be rationally connected to a licensable purpose, not bogged down in bureaucratic overreach. This is not about demonising wildlife or gulls. It is about restoring balance; protecting people, property and public health; and ensuring that our licensing bodies are equipped and willing to act on public safety. The status quo is not working and, if we do not act now, the consequences could be far more serious than a stolen sandwich. 13:04”
“There is a pattern of poor decision making that is actively undermining land managers’ ability to protect people, livestock and biodiversity. In my constituency, councillors spend upwards of £85,000 a year on trying to manage gulls— money that could be far better spent if the licensing system worked. NatureScot insists that the lethal control method should be a last resort but, when non-lethal methods fail, as they often do, communities are left without any viable options. The result is growing frustration, rising costs and a real risk to public safety. In Dumfries, residents have even raised a petition to demand action. Businesses are being targeted and people are being harassed, yet the licensing process remains slow, opaque and overly restrictive.”
“In the south of Scotland, an estate was told that it could not control ravens near a site of special scientific interest due to potential disturbance to breeding waders. Instead, it was advised to use gas guns and bangers. That method would have caused far more disruption than a single moderated shot. The approach is not logical, and it is counterproductive. In another case, NatureScot unlawfully advised an increase in raven control under a livestock protection licence, when the actual concern was the protection of ground-nesting birds. In implementing the new grouse-shooting licensing scheme, it misinterpreted the Wildlife Management and Muirburn (Scotland) Act 2024 and unlawfully requested estate boundary licences. Later, it was forced to backtrack. That was not a one-off.”
“NatureScot’s current approach to licensing is simply not fit for purpose. I say that not just as a constituency MSP but because I echo the serious concerns that Scottish Land & Estates raised in its recent briefing. SLE members, who are among the primary applicants for a species control licence, have reported a litany of issues with NatureScot’s licensing regime, including unrealistic demands for evidence of species impact, excessive delays in processing applications, a narrow and insufficient list of species that are eligible for control, licensing officers making decisions beyond their remit and a lack of understanding of the practicalities of wildlife management. I will give one example.”
“This is no longer about just a sensational headline; it is a growing public safety risk that is spreading far beyond our coastal towns and into urban centres across Scotland. These birds are no longer confined to our beaches. They are now snatching fish and chips, hamburgers and even crisps from outside shop fronts. They have adapted to urban life and are thriving on it. As researchers such as Helen Wilson at Durham University have pointed out, this is about not necessarily rising gull numbers but shifting behaviour. Urban environments now offer more reliable food sources and fewer natural predators. With changes in fishing practices, more violent winter storms and warming seas, gulls are abandoning their traditional habitats and heading inland. Although gulls may be adapting, our system for managing them is not.”
“Their relentless and noisy squawking and aggressive behaviour have made them a nuisance across Scotland. No, I am not referring to the nationalists—on this final sitting day before summer recess, I hope that, for once, we can part on the best of terms; I am talking about the growing scourge of gulls, particularly in my constituency of Galloway and West Dumfries, where those wild flappers seem to rule the roost and, frankly, appear to revel in the misery that they cause in communities such as Kirkcudbright, Stranraer and Dumfries. I thank my Conservative colleague Douglas Ross for securing the debate. The issue is long overdue serious attention. We have heard the stories of elderly residents being attacked outside their homes and children being left bloodied by swooping gulls.”
“Yes, Scottish legislation takes up parliamentary time, but that is the price of proper scrutiny, that is the price of protecting devolution and that is the price of ensuring that this Parliament—not Westminster—decides how devolved powers are exercised. For those reasons, I cannot support the motion to suspend standing orders, and I urge colleagues to do the same. 14:05”
“We have been told that any UK statutory instruments will be notified to us, but that is a political commitment, and we know that we do not always have time to consider UK SIs following notification. We have also asked for a breakdown of whether powers in this policy area have been delegated to UK ministers or to Scottish ministers, under their competence. The questions that we have asked are not unreasonable; they are the basic requirements of democratic oversight. I am speaking not to oppose the policy aims of the bill or the legislative consent memorandum but to defend this Parliament’s role. I do not want us to set a precedent whereby important decisions are rushed through without due process. I want to ensure that the Scottish Parliament retains its rightful role in scrutinising legislation that affects the people of Scotland.”
“In his latest letter, which we received this morning, the minister told us that there would be no set criteria and that decisions would be made on individual sets of circumstances, and he spelled out the guiding factors that would influence those decisions. The minister has said that there may be circumstances where ministers will wish to give consent to UK instruments when policy objectives are aligned, but that is not a sufficient explanation. We need to know what those circumstances are. We need to know what specific criteria will be used to decide when it is appropriate for UK ministers to act in devolved areas, and we need to ensure that the Scottish Parliament is notified and given sufficient time to consider those decisions when they are made. The committee has asked for that information.”
“Although we appreciate the minister’s response, it does not address the core issue of the limitation on the Parliament’s ability to scrutinise the matter properly. The bill proposes to give regulation-making powers not only to Scottish ministers but to UK ministers in areas of devolved competence, which raises serious constitutional concerns. Questions on the matter have not been answered. Why is it necessary for UK ministers to have such powers at all? The bill will give the Scottish ministers powers, so it is not clear why UK ministers would need those powers, too. What criteria should the Scottish Government use to determine whether regulations are to be laid by the Scottish ministers, who are scrutinised here, or by UK ministers, who are scrutinised at Westminster?”
“In its letter to the minister, the Rural Affairs and Islands Committee made it clear that it has not had the time or capacity to consider the legislative consent memorandum before the motion is due to be debated this afternoon. That is not a procedural inconvenience; it is a fundamental failure of parliamentary scrutiny. The Scottish Parliament is being asked to delegate powers in devolved areas to United Kingdom ministers without sufficient time to consider the implications. The minister agrees that “there has not been sufficient time and information for the Committee to review this.” However, I question his view that “the Scottish Government have brought this to the attention of the Parliament at the earliest opportunity”, given that the Senedd in Wales was given twice as long to consider the same bill.”
“I oppose the motion to suspend standing orders in relation to the legislative consent memorandum on the Animal Welfare (Import of Dogs, Cats and Ferrets) Bill. I begin by clearly stating that I support the principle of improving animal welfare, and I note that, on the surface, the proposals in the bill appear to support that aim. In a letter that was received only a few hours ago, the Minister for Agriculture and Connectivity, Jim Fairlie, states: “The proposals included in this Bill are strongly welcomed by animal welfare organisations ... as well as being supported by all political parties”, and I agree with him. However, right now, we are not here to vote on principles, and I want to raise objections in relation to the opportunity of this place to scrutinise legislation.”
“Jenni Minto: As I have indicated, I recognise that there are issues in Dumfries and Galloway— Finlay Carson: Is it better or worse? Jenni Minto: —and we are doing what we can to improve access to dentistry across the region. General Practitioner Waiting Times (NHS Grampian) 5.”
“Can the minister state whether access to NHS dentists has been getting better or worse since the Government’s additional funding was made available? Jenni Minto: I would like to report—if I can find this in my notes—that Public Health Scotland statistics published in May show that more than 4.2 million courses of treatment were delivered to patients in the 2024-25 financial year— Finlay Carson: This is not about Dumfries and Galloway. Jenni Minto: More than 1 million patients were seen by NHS dentists in the quarter ending March 2025. As I have indicated, I recognise that we have— Finlay Carson: Is that up or down? The Deputy Presiding Officer: Members, could we let the minister respond? I think that she is getting on to Dumfries and Galloway.”
“On Finlay Carson’s last point, I am more than happy to have a meeting. I will be in touch to make those arrangements. Livestock Culling and Meat Consumption 2.”
“Will the cabinet secretary set out how she could use the marine fund Scotland 2025-26 to support the sustainable management and potential reopening of the Solway cockle fishery? Will she also set out how she expects projects to be successful and to deliver long-term value when applicants may not receive confirmation of funding until late October, yet all work must be completed and expended by the end of March? That is a window of just five months, which makes a summer survey this year without other support impossible. Will the cabinet secretary agree to meet me and stakeholders? Mairi Gougeon: I encourage anyone with an interest to apply to the fund. I know that officials will be working at pace to process the applications to ensure that there is a good chance of the money being fully utilised.”
“I recognise that a balance always needs to be struck between needing to travel and ensuring safe and timely access to services. As I said, I am from an island community, so I recognise the need to travel for services and what that means, and the burden that it can have on individuals and their families. We want to make sure that such decisions are always taken in a proportionate manner that reflects the needs of those communities. The Deputy Presiding Officer: Three more members have requested to ask a question. I will take all three, but I need one brief question from each member and a brief answer.”
“How does it reflect the fourth principle of population—planning services based on local needs—when the needs of rural families in Galloway are being entirely ignored? Is it not the case that this Government’s rhetoric on reform is completely at odds with lived experience— The Deputy Presiding Officer: Mr Carson, that is quite long—I think that the cabinet secretary has the gist of the three questions. Neil Gray: I well recognise the issues that Mr Carson raises. I engaged on them with his constituents when I was at the Dumfries and Galloway board annual review last year and when I met trade union colleagues in his area. I have also had meetings with him to discuss those matters. The thread that runs through all that he has set out is patient safety. We rely on clinicians to advise us on ensuring that services remain safe.”
“Forced to deliver a £30 million budget cut, NHS Dumfries and Galloway is seeing a systematic dismantling of local health services. Cottage hospitals are being closed, maternity services are being shut, there is no hospice provision, and care home beds are in critically short supply, yet this Government claims that it wants to deliver on five principles of reform. How does the closure of maternity services and cottage hospitals align with the second principle of people—designing care around individuals and empowering them to make their care decisions? How does it support the third principle of community—bringing services closer to home— when expectant mothers are forced to travel miles for basic care?”
“Before we move to the next item of business, there will be a short pause to allow front-bench teams to change position, should they so wish. Migration”
“The Scottish Government committed £80 million to the Acorn carbon capture project in January 2022 and said that that was contingent on UK Government funding being committed. That commitment has now been made, so when will the Scottish Government spend the £80 million? Alasdair Allan: As I indicated, we are pleased that the UK Government has made commitments in that area. As the Climate Change Committee has said, Acorn is essential to our reaching net zero. It is also essential to the economy of the north-east, Grangemouth and Scotland as a whole. We are pleased that we took the lead in that area and that the UK Government is following it, but we need a timeline from the UK Government as to when that investment will come. The Deputy Presiding Officer: That concludes the statement on greenhouse gas emissions statistics for 2023.”