Alex Cole-Hamilton
Scottish Liberal Democrats · Scotland
“I am sure that all members will join me in expressing solidarity with Scotland’s Muslim community after the brutal and unprovoked attacks on the streets of Edinburgh last weekend. That community’s response to those attacks has not been one of violence or revenge; it has been to make a plea for tolerance and understanding.”
“All told, more than 1,400 inmates have been let out of prison since the early release scheme began, and that is because our prisons are bursting at the seams. However, that is not a strategy and it will not protect the public.”
“Let that sink in, because the language of displacement and othering is the antithesis of the cohesion that Lord Offord speaks about so regularly. Liberals believe in reform—of course we do. The Whig Government in 1832— Amanda Bland: Will the member take an intervention? Alex Cole-Hamilton: I will give way to Amanda Bland.”
“This was an opportunity for Reform to prove everybody wrong and to pepper the chamber this afternoon with speeches that were measured in tone and full of bright ideas to fix the things that are wrong in Scotland. We have heard none of that today.”
“I welcome the minister’s remarks about the Edinburgh attacks. Does he recognise, as do members on these benches, that as well as expressing solidarity with the Muslim community of Scotland, we owe them a debt of gratitude that there was no call for activism and action on the streets of Scotland by the Muslim community?”
“That is why the Government is prioritising an economy with a strength that is felt by people, businesses and communities across Scotland. Scotland is a great place and, collectively, we are making it even greater.”
The complete record
Every one of 814 lines we hold for Alex Cole-Hamilton, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 17.
“All told, more than 1,400 inmates have been let out of prison since the early release scheme began, and that is because our prisons are bursting at the seams. However, that is not a strategy and it will not protect the public. How many of the inmates who were released early went on to reoffend, and how many of them are already back behind bars?”
“I am sure that all members will join me in expressing solidarity with Scotland’s Muslim community after the brutal and unprovoked attacks on the streets of Edinburgh last weekend. That community’s response to those attacks has not been one of violence or revenge; it has been to make a plea for tolerance and understanding. In a society in which tolerance and understanding feel increasingly rare, we would all do well to listen to them. [Applause.] New figures show that, last year, the number of violent crimes was up by 4,000 incidents and the number of crimes of dishonesty was up by 7,000 incidents—of course, one of those crimes has dominated the front pages this week. Even though, in recent days, everyone has been focused on Scotland’s prison population growing by one inmate, I want to ask about those who are leaving our jails.”
“Liberals believe fundamentally in reform and in challenging the old order of things. We stand by that—cleaning up our politics, accountability and making Governments accountable to their people. Our approach to reform is about lifting people up. Duncan Massey: On a point of order, Presiding Officer. Surely that language was unacceptable.”
“Let that sink in, because the language of displacement and othering is the antithesis of the cohesion that Lord Offord speaks about so regularly. Liberals believe in reform—of course we do. The Whig Government in 1832— Amanda Bland: Will the member take an intervention? Alex Cole-Hamilton: I will give way to Amanda Bland. Amanda Bland: It is interesting to hear the reference to language. I agree that we must be really careful with the language that we use. In this Parliament, members have said of other parties that “they disgust me” and have referred to an individual as a “jack-in-the-box”. Does the member agree that such language is inappropriate? Alex Cole-Hamilton: I fail to see a moral equivalence between the references that we have just heard and what is, in effect, the language of the Third Reich in some cases.”
“This was an opportunity for Reform to prove everybody wrong and to pepper the chamber this afternoon with speeches that were measured in tone and full of bright ideas to fix the things that are wrong in Scotland. We have heard none of that today. As Maya Angelou reminds us, “When someone shows you who they are, believe them the first time.” Language matters. I was struck by something that Jackie Dunbar said when she referenced the language that we have heard from Reform. Lord Offord often talks, in the same breath, about the idea of cohesion and of “strangers”, of “fighting- age men” and of “our people”. I reflect—I make no causal link between these things—that, in the attacks in Edinburgh at the weekend, we heard a half‑naked man who was wielding an axe shouting about protecting our country.”
“That is why the Government is prioritising an economy with a strength that is felt by people, businesses and communities across Scotland. Scotland is a great place and, collectively, we are making it even greater. Delivering more jobs and higher wages and a progressive taxation system that funds high- quality public services will improve the lives of our people and support our businesses.”
“I welcome the minister’s remarks about the Edinburgh attacks. Does he recognise, as do members on these benches, that as well as expressing solidarity with the Muslim community of Scotland, we owe them a debt of gratitude that there was no call for activism and action on the streets of Scotland by the Muslim community? There were no mass protests, violence, or police officer assaults, which shows a tremendous amount of restraint from a faith that is absolutely rooted in peace, tolerance and openness. Tom Arthur: I welcome Mr Cole-Hamilton’s remarks and associate myself with them entirely. We want Scotland to be more than just a welcoming country. We want it to be a place that people actively want to live or locate in.”
“This week marks the ninth anniversary of the Grenfell fire. Our thoughts are of those who lost their lives in that tragedy and with those who survived it. The Humanity for Grenfell group is still campaigning for people who live in cladded flats, and it is right to do so. Nearly a decade on from Grenfell, too many people are lying awake at night, wondering whether their home might be at risk. Across Scotland, almost 1,000 buildings are suspected of having dangerous cladding, yet new figures that came out this week revealed that the First Minister’s Government has got round to investigating only 149 of them. Why is that the case, and why is cladding removal under way in— staggeringly—only three buildings in this country?”
“I thank everyone for taking part in the debate and I ask the Minister for Mental Wellbeing, Public Health, Sport, Alcohol and Drugs to seriously consider what kind of research should be undertaken on this subject. 18:08”
“An increasing number of professionals, as well as families, are clamouring for an investigation into possible contributing factors. Risks that might be considered include genetic traits, which are then affected by environmental, pollution, iatrogenic and nutritional factors and factors in pregnancy and in the first years of life. It is not possible to have an epidemic of a genetic condition. That is simply the case—we cannot have an epidemic of something that is purely genetic, and we have an epidemic, whatever its causes, so research should be an absolute priority. We have a crisis in care, but we must say what we are going to do to look at this. We need to dam the flow and not just stick our finger in the dyke.”
“Putting to one side those who are less affected by autism and those with ADHD, the evidence in our communities and the burden of care that we see might suggest that something is very different from the child population of 50 years ago. Some of us might say, “Well, I spoke to teachers and asked what happened in the past.” I come from a town up north—Thurso—which is 100 miles from the nearest big place that those children might have been taken, for instance. I think that those of us who have been around for long enough can say that there is something different going on here. It is therefore essential that, as well as looking at the crisis here and now in social care, as the Royal College of Psychiatrists has usefully suggested, we take a more strategic view.”
“However, I would ask people to consider that, if something is happening that is causing a massive increase— not a pretend thing or something that has not been diagnosed before—that means that there is a tragedy happening, and we have a duty to look at that. Others, like the psychiatrists, can give an alternative view. They might suggest that autism has always been here and that the increase is down to better diagnosis and relabelling. They might say that such children were in special schools or that their father is an engineer. However, if there is the slightest chance that that is not what is happening, we have a duty to look at it.”
“I have been told by my family that, as a vet with experience in the environment, I sometimes go off on the wrong analogy. This time, I will try an environmental one. There is a concept in ecology called the shifting baseline syndrome. It is a gradual generational amnesia whereby each new generation sees a progressively degraded environment, which they accept as normal. I suggest that it could be applied medically in this context. Is there really not a change, and a drastic increase, in the numbers of children who are affected in this way? Here, I differentiate myself from the psychiatrists, who have said that the unprecedented rise is due to increased public awareness, unmet historical need, population growth, evolving diagnostic criteria and the impact of Covid-19. I am sure that those things all have a part to play.”
“The RCP recommends a layered approach with a pyramid of care whereby the least affected would perhaps be able to self-diagnose and then be pointed to resources and ways to self- manage. There are a lot of issues to be discussed around that, but we need to do something. Is the RCP report the equivalent, perhaps, of sticking a finger in a hole in the dam? It is necessary crisis management, but the report itself recognises that it is a way of trying to ensure that the psychiatrists who are dealing with the most severe cases do not have a long list of others to see. However, where are those others? They still need help. This epidemic, which causes untold misery, needs to be not only acknowledged but investigated. I will take a slight diversion here.”
“I have spoken to an adult I am close to, who recently had a private diagnosis of attention deficit disorder, which she has found very helpful in understanding various difficulties that she has experienced and in enabling her to be directed to ways of managing situations. I am sure that there are others who are taking that route if it is possible and where they can afford it. The diagnosis has made a significant difference to her life, and we need to look at that aspect. Yesterday, I spoke to the Royal College of Psychiatrists in Scotland, which has published a report entitled “Multi-system solutions for meeting the needs of autistic people and people with ADHD in Scotland”.”
“Helen McDade: I thank Alex Cole-Hamilton for that intervention, and I absolutely recognise that that story is, unfortunately, common everywhere. We probably all have similar stories of meeting people in that age bracket who are going to transition to adult services without ever getting a diagnosis, having been told years ago that they would get one. I will come back in a minute to discuss what might help with that, but the situation absolutely cannot go on like that. The CAMHS situation demonstrates that we are in crisis. The low percentage of affected adults who have a diagnosis is worrying; some of those adults will have been the young people who have waited for a diagnosis and then transitioned—that might not be the right word; rather, they disappeared and then came back for help as adults.”
“I am grateful to Helen McDade for taking my intervention—I offer my apologies for having to leave early, but I am very grateful that she has brought the debate to the chamber. Does she recognise that, in particular health board areas such as NHS Lothian, young people are being asked to wait for as long as eight years for a diagnosis? I have a constituent called Abigail who is 16 years old; she has been told to wait eight years for diagnosis, by which time she will have left child and adolescent mental health services and transited into adult services. She worries—quite rightly—that she may be at the back of the queue for an adult services diagnosis. Does the member recognise that that is a particular problem in Scotland right now?”
“The Parliament should go into this with its eyes wide open and be aware that, if we do not agree to the motion, the Parliament will not have the opportunity to determine whether to grant or withhold consent. With the best will in the world, we all have to recognise, based on experience, that, if we do not take that opportunity, the UK Government will not halt its processes and will not withdraw its bill—it will go ahead whether or not we have had the chance to determine that. That is not in the spirit of the devolution settlement, so I ask Parliament to back the motion. The Presiding Officer: The question on the motion will be put at decision time. Decision Time 17:49”
“The minister will forgive me, because Liberal Democrats are not represented on the Economy, Tourism and Energy Committee, so we are unclear as to the process that has been followed on this occasion. Is he clear that, when he asked the convener of the committee, the convener had sought representations from each member and each party represented on that committee? Jamie Hepburn: Again, I say with respect that it is not the Government’s place to handhold a committee and talk through the entire process of how it might want to consider such matters. There is a limit to how far I can undertake that exercise. The point is that the Government has engaged with the committee, we have had the feedback from the convener, and I have now lodged the motion to vary standing orders.”
“The Presiding Officer: There will be a division. There will be a short suspension to allow members to access the digital voting system. 17:34 Meeting suspended. 17:38 On resuming— The Presiding Officer: We come to the vote on motion S7M-00380, in the name of John Swinney, on the appointment of law officers. Members should cast their votes now. The vote is closed.”
“I am grateful to the Parliament for its consideration of the nominations for appointment today and for the recognition that, in Ruth Charteris and BJ Gill, I have brought forward for nomination as Lord Advocate and Solicitor General two outstanding representatives of our legal profession, who I know will continue to build on the formidable records that they have amassed in protecting the public interest of Scotland. They will do so in new and significant roles as the Lord Advocate and the Solicitor General. I look forward to receiving parliamentary support for their appointments. The Presiding Officer: Thank you. That concludes the debate on the appointment of law officers. The question is, that motion S7M-00380, in the name of John Swinney, on the appointment of law officers, be agreed to. Are we agreed? Members: No.”
“I appreciate Maggie Chapman’s comments. She talked about the importance of the law officers being at the heart of ensuring that our justice system is accountable and accessible. That is the approach that drives the law officers who are being nominated. Obviously, the law officers operate within a legal system in which the independence of the judiciary is sacrosanct, and the roles of Parliament and the Government are clear in those relationships. Fundamentally, ensuring that there is open access to the justice system and that the justice system meets the needs of the public is central to the role that will be taken forward by the law officers.”
“The Government has started work on the issue and, shortly before the election, we published the report that was prepared by the former Scottish Law Commission chief executive, Malcolm McMillan, on the role of the Lord Advocate, which was designed to inform and structure debate on these questions. I am happy to confirm to the Parliament that the Government is willing to engage with parties across the chamber in considering the case for reform, and to ensure that we do that in an open and considered fashion, to ensure that all the relevant issues—there are significant issues involved—are properly aired before the Parliament considers any further change. I should point out, of course, that in order to take forward any reform, we would require Westminster legislation, but that is for some time down the road.”
“Mr Sarwar made an important contribution when he indicated his confidence in the professional approach and capabilities of the two nominees who I have brought forward for appointment, and I am grateful to him for his comments. Mr Sarwar and Mr Cole-Hamilton made the point that, while supporting the nominations and recognising the calibre of the individuals whose nominations to serve in these roles I have brought forward, it is also entirely legitimate to consider the nature of the roles and whether there is the potential for reform. I accept that point, and it is important that the Parliament conducts discussions substantially on those questions, because there are big issues involved.”
“On the specific point that Amanda Bland raised about the conduct of criminal cases, I confirm on the record, as has been confirmed on many occasions in the past, that wherever there is a legal issue in connection with a politician, the law officers are not involved in the scrutiny of that case. That is done independently by representatives of the Crown and it never involves the Lord Advocate or the Solicitor General. I thank colleagues for the comments that have been made in relation to the service of Dorothy Bain as Lord Advocate. Dorothy Bain has much to be proud of in exercising the role and responsibilities of Lord Advocate, and I welcome the comments that have been made. I am also grateful for the support that has been expressed for the nominations that I bring to the Parliament.”
“Those are very different skill sets, and I think that the intervening period has only reinforced and underscored the case for reform. As we have heard, England has an Attorney General to advise the Government, but a separate Director of Public Prosecutions. Similar reform has been emulated in the Republic of Ireland and, recently, in Northern Ireland. However, I recognise that we need law officers, and we will support the appointment of the nominees before us today. There are big challenges before them both in relation to drug policy enforcement and fixing our broken fatal accident inquiry system. I congratulate them on ascending to these offices today, and we will support the motion before us. 17:30 The First Minister: I thank colleagues for their contributions to the debate.”
“These are the highest law offices in the land—it is important that we have people of calibre and respect, and both the nominees before us have those in spades. However, I say respectfully to the Government that it is perfectly acceptable to respect the legal competence and experience of the nominees before us but to recognise that the case for reform of these offices is now unanswerable. When Dorothy Bain was appointed five years ago, the SNP recognised at the time of the election just preceding that—when it had promised to consult on reform of these offices—that having a Lord Advocate acting both as chief prosecutor and as principal legal adviser to the Government, as a full and active member of the Cabinet, presented many risks.”
“Before I come to the appointments before the Parliament today, I, too, on behalf of the Scottish Liberal Democrats, pay tribute to Dorothy Bain KC—the second woman to hold the post of Lord Advocate in our country. She was very generous with her time with me, and forgiving of my lack of understanding of the law at times. She also brought forward groundbreaking guidance, in particular as regards safe consumption rooms such as the Thistle centre, which I was fortunate enough to visit at the start of this year. That facility has saved nearly 100 lives since it opened, and I think that a lot of that is thanks to her visionary application of the guidance. I welcome Ruth Charteris KC and BJ Gill KC to their appointments, and assure them of Liberal Democrats’ support this afternoon.”
“Today, the Scottish Liberal Democrats are publishing new research that shows that more than 500 teaching jobs had to be readvertised due to shortages. Posts have been left unfilled for as long as two years. In Kirkwall, the maths teacher post was readvertised 14 times. Subjects such as science, computing and technology are the industries of the future. Why on earth are they being taught by history teachers or being dropped entirely?”
“On behalf of the Scottish Liberal Democrats, I echo the remarks about the Scotland world cup side and wish Steve Clarke and his squad all the best in the Americas. On the violence that we have seen on Scottish streets in recent days, the heat and hate that are stoked by bad actors online and amplified by voices in this chamber do not reflect the welcoming and internationalist country that I recognise. If they seek to gain advantage by trying to divide the people of Scotland, they underestimate the people of Scotland, and they will fail. A leading education expert warned this week of a persistent and worsening shortage of specialist teachers in Scottish schools. This is not just an education crisis; it is an economic one.”
“Jamie Hepburn: Can I check, Presiding Officer: if I give way, will I get the time back?”
“Will he give way? Jamie Hepburn: Not at the moment. I believe that the Parliament has a proud and good record of constructive committee work. It is not always easy or straightforward. It is well known that I was back on the back benches for a short while during the previous session, and I was on a parliamentary committee. I found it rewarding, collaborative and collegiate work. Parliament is capable of doing that. The question is whether, on this particular subject, it would be perceived to be possible, and I do not think that a perception of an impartial process could be achieved. I do not think that any of us would wish the record of the Parliament to be tarnished by inviting members to blur the lines when they have a stake in the verdict. Michael Marra: Will the minister give way?”
“The Presiding Officer: That was not quite on the nose for the general question, but do you want to respond, cabinet secretary? Stephen Flynn: I am happy to answer. If Mr Cole-Hamilton wishes to write to me, I will write back to him as swiftly as I possibly can. Scottish Fire and Rescue Service (Service Delivery Review) 2.”
“I hope that the cabinet secretary will agree that one of the safest ways to get students from Kirkliston in my constituency to their catchment high school in South Queensferry is via the council-funded coach service that has been operating well there for several years. A decision by the City of Edinburgh Council to remove that service for up to 200 pupils was halted today. Given that public transport timetables do not marry up with the start of the school day, that decision could have led to hundreds of extra car journeys every day. Does the cabinet secretary agree that families in Kirkliston who pay Edinburgh council taxes should enjoy the same level of council-funded transport services as those in every other community in the city?”
“The most regrettable aspect of this whole sorry saga around the Scottish National Party’s finances is the erosion of public trust and faith in politics that it creates. There are still big unanswered questions around all of this. That is why we need a parliamentary inquiry, but the Government is blocking one, just as it has blocked other measures to challenge bad behaviour. For 10 years, Westminster has given people the right to sack criminal or corrupt MPs. It removed the likes of Margaret Ferrier when she endangered lives during Covid. We could have had such legislation at Holyrood, but the SNP blocked it just three months ago. Why does John Swinney think that people should not have the right to sack their MSPs when misconduct has been proven?”
“During the Easter holidays, at least eight ferries were out of action at the same time. Every Scottish island faced disruption. Those communities are overdue serious compensation, and I hope that the First Minister will finally extend that to the coastal communities that are affected, too. Businesses there are now looking to the summer holidays and wondering what this situation will mean for them. Last week, technology of the 19th century came to the rescue of passengers of the 21st century when the Waverley paddle steamer stepped in for a stricken Caledonian MacBrayne vessel. John Swinney must have winced with embarrassment at that reality. Is Scotland’s ferry fleet ready for the summer?”
“There were rules in place and they were flouted due to criminality. That is what the police investigation has found and that is what was addressed in the courts yesterday. It is incredibly painful for my party to be experiencing all of this and the impact of it all, but we are the victims of criminality. As I have made clear to Parliament, that is the root of the issue.”
“The First Minister: I do not think that it is the place of Parliament to be carrying out investigations that the police have carried out. If I were to suggest any of that from this place, I would be breaching my commitments in the ministerial code. If that obligation and burden is on me, I do not see why it is not on Mr Cole-Hamilton and Parliament. The issues that are at the heart of this case—I made this point in my answer to Jackie Baillie— are about criminality; they are about the rules being flouted; they are about the rules being bypassed. That is what the police explanation was about yesterday—that the rules had been bypassed. To quote Assistant Chief Constable Houston, this was an “extremely complex case” where Peter Murrell went to extraordinary lengths “to try and cover his tracks”. So, the explanation is very straightforward.”
“Nicola Sturgeon stated yesterday that she knew nothing of the £125,000 camper van parked in her mother-in-law’s drive until the police informed her of it, yet an SNP source quoted in the Daily Record the week that the camper van was seized passed it off as a legitimate SNP resource for a Covid election, describing it as a “mobile campaign room”. I hope that Police Scotland has unravelled the inconsistency of those two positions. If we are to believe the narrative account of the former First Minister that this was not a criminal conspiracy, it follows that it was, in fact, a catastrophic failure of financial oversight. Therefore, I ask the First Minister, if his party leadership cannot steward the accounts of the Scottish National Party, why on earth should our constituents trust it with the finances of our nation?”
“In all truth, as a chamber, since the SNP came to power, we have never fully flexed the muscles of devolution—as one of the most empowered devolved nations in this world—to address the things that all our constituents have decidedly sent us to Parliament to discuss. I will give him credit—the First Minister touched on the cost of living emergency. This was a cost of living election, but nothing about 18 months of debate around the constitution is going to make people’s homes warmer by instructing the emergency programme of home insulation that we need. It is not going to address the crisis in our social care system, which is keeping 2,000 Scots in hospital who neither need nor want to be there but who cannot get home for want of a social care package. It is not going to lift up education, and it is not going to—”
“Because the SNP failed in that effort, the covenant that the First Minister tried to establish with the people must be set aside, because a section 30 order is not going to build a new hospital in Shetland; 18 months of campaigning around the constitution is not going to dual the lethal A9 any faster; identifying offices for embassies and high commissions overseas for a future independent Scotland is going to do nothing to reduce child poverty; and the interminable debates about what currency an independent Scotland would or would not adopt are going to do nothing to instruct an independent review that is so vitally needed for maternity services in the far north of Scotland.”
“Ross Greer: I remember that, in the last session of this Parliament, we pointed out that the pro- independence parties had won not just a majority of seats but a majority of votes, and Mr Cole- Hamilton had to come up with a whole new reason against a mandate for a referendum at that point, so why do the goalposts keep shifting? Alex Cole-Hamilton: Ross Greer is celebrated as one of the brightest members of this Parliament, yet basic arithmetic seems to be escaping him; 59 per cent of the public is bigger than 41 per cent. I think that he should consult his maths teacher.”
“I will quote from The Scotsman what John Swinney said—he could not have been clearer—on 28 April: “I’m … saying that we need to make sure we get an SNP majority to make sure we can take forward an independence referendum”. Presiding Officer, 59 per cent of the public—the voting public—disagreed with that assertion and voted for parties that did not back a second referendum. It is only because of the vagaries of our voting system and the gaming of the system by the parties of independence that we are now in this situation.”
“Members will be delighted to hear that I do not plan to take all of my time this afternoon. I intend to cede some of it to Duncan Dunlop, who will be making his first speech later. In the time that I have, I remind members that debates such as this used to be marquee occasions. There were times when the galleries would be full, the press gallery would be absolutely stuffed and we even had the cameras of the world trained on this Parliament, because the question of Scotland’s future in the union was so unpredictable. However, there is a muscle memory now—a performative element—to debates such as this, because a section 30 order will be requested this afternoon and it will be declined. Why? Because John Swinney has manifestly failed the test that he set himself just a month ago.”
“Democracy is a system that we live in every day of our lives. This debate requires some honesty. Is this a voluntary union? Was it a voluntary union only until 2014, and is it not one any more? We have to wonder why people are so angry and cynical. Is it because of the anti-democratic games that are being played? I do not expect the Labour Party, in particular, to have some kind of Damascene conversion to the cause of independence, but I would expect respect for Scottish democracy and Scottish voters. I credit Paul Sweeney for making suggestions and being open to a conversation about how we can move forward on the constitutional question. I would say that the best time to have that particular debate was a decade ago, but I welcome that there are some in the Labour Party who are open to having it now.”
“Will the member take an intervention? Ross Greer: Not quite yet. I ask those who use that particular line to reflect on the fact that 800,000 people who were old enough to vote at the election just a few weeks ago were not old enough to vote in the referendum in 2014. Is it really credible to continue with the line that it has not yet been a generation since the referendum? I absolutely respect the cause of unionism and I respect those who disagree with me and my party on independence. It is important that unionists are well represented in this Parliament. However, whether we are for or against independence, surely everyone who sits in this place should be a democrat, and democracy is not a one-off event. The public are no more bound by the vote in 2014 today than this Parliament is bound by its predecessors.”
“I humbly submit my candidacy for First Minister. The Presiding Officer: Thank you very much, Mr Cole-Hamilton. That was four minutes and 57 seconds—I am impressed with your timing. I call Russell Findlay to speak for five minutes. 14:06”
“We want to drive down the cost of living by instructing an immediate programme of emergency home insulation to make sure that the coldest homes in Scotland—the households that are most at risk of fuel poverty—are ready for the increase in the fuel price cap that we heard about today, and that those who are already at risk of fuel poverty, because they do not have a price cap to protect them from an increase in costs for heating oil, are protected with as much insulation as we can provide. We need to get Scotland moving again. The early days of the election campaign were bedevilled by a ferry crisis that brought our island and coastal communities to their knees at a time when they needed our support. Elections are about a choice. We offer a vision of hope and change with fairness at its heart.”
“We heard just this week the awful results of an Educational Institute of Scotland survey that shows that far too many of our teachers at primary and secondary level are assaulted on a daily basis in their place of work. We want to support them by taking mobile phones out of classrooms, putting in 2,000 pupil support assistants and making sure that newly qualified teachers have a stable, permanent job to go to.”
“There is the fact that we have all had constituents come to see us, sometimes in great distress, because their young person or they themselves have been unable to get access to the diagnostics that they need, particularly to diagnose things around child and adolescent mental health or neurodiversity—in parts of Edinburgh, some have been told that they will have to wait seven years for that. People come to see us because they are receiving care in crumbling hospitals that are no longer fit for purpose and are in desperate need of not just refurbishment but renewal in their entirety. We want to focus on lifting up Scottish education.”