I remind members of the Covid-related measures that are in place and that face coverings should be worn when moving around the chamber and across the Holyrood campus. The next item of business is a debate without motion on the subject of a progressive approach to sustainable procurement and fair work practices. I invite members who wish to speak in the debate to please press the request-to-speak buttons now. I call on Richard Lochhead Minister to open the debate up to 11 minutes, please. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer, and thank you for the opportunity to Parliament to discuss the Scottish Government's fair work policy and our recent announcements, including that on mandating the real living wage in its contracts. I no doubt today we will be discussing not only Scotland's journey towards becoming a fair work nation by 2025, as pointed to by our current consultation, but also some of the issues that were to the forefront throughout Covid in terms of people's employment circumstances and experience in their workplaces, and of course also given that we are meeting against the backdrop of COP26. Some of the issues are extremely relevant to the just transition and how we make our way towards our net zero targets of 2045 in Scotland. Fair work is central to our economic strategy. As employment law is currently reserved to Westminster, the Scottish Government is, of course, unable to improve statutory rights and protections for workers directly through legislation. In the absence of those employment powers, we are doing all that we can to promote fairer working practices across the labour market. We are committed to using all the levers that are available, for example, through our public spend, as well as promotion through every relevant policy agenda to make fair work the norm and go beyond the minimum statutory employment rights and protections. We have maintained our fair work focus during the pandemic and made opposition to fire and rehire and support for flexible working criteria in fair work first, increasing security and opportunity for workers. Also, in August, we launched our living hours accreditation scheme for Scotland. It acknowledges that, in addition to payment of the real living wage, it is, of course, essential to address the number and frequency of work hours that are also critical to tackling in-work poverty. The Fair Work's conventions 2016 framework says that fair work offers all individuals an effective voice, opportunity, security, fulfilment and respect that balances the rights and responsibilities of employers and workers that can bring benefits for individuals, organisations and society. I also want to take this opportunity to record my thanks to the convention for its valuable work to advance this agenda, which is a priority for the Scottish Government and many others in this chamber. We are committed to this framework and we have always been clear that the Scottish Government will lead the way on fair work. Our 2019 fair work action plan laid strong foundations for implementing our approach, setting out the key levers that we have committed to use in order to set a clear example both as an employer and through using our substantial investment in the services provided for the people of Scotland and our support for Scotland's business community. In the face of significant uncertainty due to Brexit and Covid-19, the Scottish Government is resolute in our commitment to making fair work the norm for workers across Scotland and to achieve more inclusive and sustainable growth. We are responding to a number of issues facing employers and workers at the moment, such as the labour shortages and through the development of our work, working with business action plan, focusing on employability, skills and fair work principles to address those labour shortages. As we meet the backdrop of COP26, the key to the strategic approach that we are taking is a just transition that aims to create high-quality good in green jobs across the country as we transition to net zero. COP26 is a good opportunity to reaffirm and share our commitment to delivering a greener fair economy in Scotland, while learning from the experience and approaches taken in many other countries. As Minister for Just Transition, after I leave this debate today, I am heading to COP26 to participate in my first in-person event in relation to the just transition and have a whole full diary for the next two weeks. It is great to see the interest in the just transition and fair work from across the global community in Glasgow this week. Fair work will be central to our new 10-year national strategy for economic transformation, putting us on the path to meeting our 2030 climate targets and helping to restore the natural environment while raising workplace standards. We have to make sure that new jobs are good jobs, complying with high workplace standards and paying fair wages. That is true across the economy, but especially important in sectors vital for reaching net zero, where a lot of our public investment is going to be targeted. To give an example of how fair work can contribute to a just transition, we recently announced a £1.8 billion programme to invest in energy efficiency and renewable heat solutions for Scotland's housing stock. We will introduce fair work first criteria as a condition of public contracts relating to the spend in a way that is relevant and proportionate, but we will demonstrate how public money can ensure that green jobs are also good jobs. Continuing to drive forward action on fair work on 14 October, we were pleased to inform Parliament that, with the immediate effect at that point, the Scottish Government is mandating payment of the real living wage in our contracts. That announcement and our recently extended fair work first criteria supports our vision, shared with the fair work convention, since 2016, for Scotland to be a leading fair work nation by 2025. Stephen Kerr, I thank the minister for giving way. Does the minister welcome the rise in the national living wage announced in last week's budget and that it meets and exceeds the promise of the fair work pledge of the Scottish Government? Minister Richard Lochhead? I welcome it as a step forward, but it certainly does not go near far enough. I am sure that we will return to that later on in my speech or my closing remarks later on in this debate. I say that we are now consulting on how we do progress our vision for fair work and we want to encourage a wide response. Of course, people in Scotland have until December 23 to respond to our current consultation. The Scottish Government's commitment to fair work aligns with the right to just and favourable working conditions, including remuneration, established in the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Our commitment is demonstrated in our national performance framework and underpinned by the fair work conventions framework. It is time to mount to a determination on this agenda that the Scottish Government was the first Government in the UK to achieve living wage accreditation. Fair work is good for business, good for workers and good for our economy. In line with the fair work convention, the Fraser of Allander Institute, back in 2016 recognised that treating workers fairly will help to create more diverse and inclusive workplaces where workers have greater security of pay and contract can develop their skills and have an effective voice in the workplace. It can improve wellbeing and motivation and enable employers to recruit, grow and retain skilled people. All of that increases productivity, innovation and creates value. Through our landmark agreement with the Scottish Green Party, we also have agreed that by summer 2022 and within the limits on devolved competence, we will introduce a requirement on public sector grants, recipients to pay at least the real living wage and to provide appropriate channels for effective workers' voices such as trade union recognition. We will engage with unions, businesses and others to agree the detail of this conditionality to ensure that it is proportionate and effective in delivering real benefits that we all want to see. We are working across Government and with industry to embed fair work in construction, for instance. We are working with the sector to develop a construction accord in line with Scottish Government priorities. Due to being agreed this year, the accord will comprise a shared vision for the industry, including a strong commitment to fair work practices that will help to create more diverse and inclusive workplaces. This shared vision for the industry will include a strong commitment to fair work and support delivery of our strategy for affordable housing and other key projects. Significant work that I am sure many members are aware is also under way for fair work in the adult social care area. The fair work in the social care group has developed a set of recommendations for minimum terms and conditions, reflecting their fair work principles. They are now being taken forward as part of that work, collaborating with all the key stakeholders working together. Since 2016, we have provided funding to ensure that adult social care staff delivering direct care are paid at least the real living wage, currently £9.50 per hour, but about to go up in a couple of weeks' time, I am sure. Already this year, we have provided £64.5 million for this purpose. Last month, we committed to providing additional funding of up to £48 million to uplift the early rate for those workers to at least £10 to £2 per hour from 1 December this year. The significant funding in this year alone recognises the incredible contribution that our social care workforce provides and is a significant step forward in delivering our commitment to embed fair work in social care. Turning to announcements on mandating the real living wage in our contracts, without control over employment legislation, we continue to use public procurement to drive fair pay. Under the procurement reform Scotland Act 2014, public bodies have been required to demonstrate their living wage policy in procurement strategies and report on success since 2016. Supporting guidance and engagement have helped to ensure that more than 90 per cent of Scottish Government suppliers have committed to paying at least the real living wage in our contracts. We have established that it is now possible to require payment of the real living wage to workers and public contracts, where fair work first practices, including payment of the real living wage, are relevant and proportionate to contract delivery by UK-based workers. The Scottish Government now mandates payment of the real living wage in our contracts and encourages the rest of the public sector to follow suit. We believe that business will appreciate this clarity because it levels a playing field for those wishing to bid for public contracts, removing the risk that businesses who pay their workers' real living wage will not be undercut by those who do not. If this policy is such a success, why was it not delivered years ago when many in this chamber were begging the Government to deliver it? Our legal advice is always being updated. As a result of the agreement with the Greens, we revisited that. Of course, now we are told that we are able to do this, and that is why we are doing it. As you know, we have made significant progress in Scotland through working with the sector and encouraging that over many years. Now we are going one step further, which I am sure is supported right across the chamber. To give one example, the new civil engineering framework is being developed to include real living wage as a condition of contract. It will be available for use across the public sector and has an expected value of £600 million over four years. Meanwhile, we issued a procurement policy update clarifying that we expect public bodies to incorporate fair work first into all relevant procurement processes from financial year 2022-23. Our reporting framework will enable us to monitor implementation progress across the whole of the sector. I look forward to members' comments today in support in realising our fair work nation vision, and I remind members that we have a consultation out. It is an important opportunity for all to come forward with how we can continue the momentum to ensuring that Scotland is a fair work nation by 2025. Presiding Officer, the past 18 months have been unimaginably difficult for businesses and for workers. People have been tested to their limits. Now perhaps more than ever, we are looking at how we work and our financial security. We have some good news, and the UK economy is recovering more quickly than expected. Like many others, I was pleased to hear the announcement from the Chancellor that the national living wage is set to increase by 6.6 per cent in 2022. It is going to £9.50 an hour, giving millions on low incomes a pay rise of more than £1,000 a year. But difficult challenges do of course remain. As world leaders gathering Glasgow for COP26, the implications of climate change loom large for decision makers. For thousands of energy sector workers in the north-east, the region I represent, ensuring a fair and managed transition to an integrated energy sector is critical. I met with Oil and Gas UK yesterday to discuss that further. As we seek to recover from Covid-19, there is an opportunity for lawmakers and businesses to look at the existing landscape and take stock. What conditions will help us to facilitate growth, to remove barriers to employment so that everyone who wants to work can? To close the persistent gender pay gap, which widened over the past year. How can we make business practices more sustainable across the whole supply chain? How can we support local economies across Scotland as they reboot post-public health measures? The SNP Government has significant powers. It has the significant powers at its disposal to address those questions, including full powers over education skills, oversight of business support agencies, including Scottish Enterprise and the control of public spending powers through procurement. Indeed, global management consultancy McKinsey highlights that two thirds of the average company's environment, social and governance footprint, lies with suppliers. There is great potential through procurement to address environmental, social and governance issues. In the speeches that follow, my Conservative colleagues will look at the procurement system in Scotland and how it can be harnessed effectively to meet some of those challenges. They are underpinned by openness and transparency. Presiding Officer, after working at a senior level in HR for 30 years, I often talk about the importance of collaborative working to avoid silos. Consultation and engagement on questions that I have raised is key, but I fear that the voices of businesses are not being heard by the SNP-Green coalition. Take, for example, the hospitality sector. Workers in this sector tend to be younger, and it is amongst the sectors with the highest proportion of women in its workforce. IPPR Scotland suggests that it will need on-going support to rebuild following the pandemic. The Scottish hospitality group has repeatedly warned the Scottish Government about Covid-19's devastating impact on the sector. I have one minute to go, so I won't, thank you. Yet the SNP refused to give hospitality and leisure businesses a full year's worth of non-domestic rates relief to provide some financial headroom until the Scottish Conservative secured a U-turn earlier this year. Now, already in a fragile state, the hospitality sector is dealing with the fallout of the vaccine passport shambles. The Vice-Chairman of the NTIA in Scotland, whose hospitality group owns a number of venues in the north-east, said last week. It is utterly bewildering that the Scottish Government has completely ignored the warnings from sectoral experts. It has taken just one week for our concerns around market distortion, unfair competition, discrimination and the severe economic impact to be proven true. Presiding Officer, I make those points because the Scottish Government's decisions affecting the operating environment for this sector. It follows that these decisions affect hospitality workers who face losing up to £200 in wages a week because of this poorly executed scheme. The SNP claims that it doesn't have sufficient levers to promote fair work. I think that the problem is in the engine room. In the programme for government, the First Minister reiterated her party's support for a four-day working week as part of a wellbeing economy. This would be a monumental shift in working pattern that would require careful and detailed planning, a worrying prospect for many businesses already stretched thin and trying to make ends meet. When I asked the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and the Economy about the £10 million pilot, no detail was forthcoming. It was kicked into the long grass and this is the problem. The SNP seemed to be paying lip service to policy ideas without delivering on the detail. It is full of promises but no follow-through. That is not just my view. Earlier this year, Carnegie UK identified an implementation gap between the Scottish Government's rhetoric and its delivery on fair work policies. The left wing, Jimmy Reid Foundation, has similarly criticised the SNP Government of the 2016-21 for its rhetoric not being matched by its actions and highlighted the devolved powers already at its disposal in this area. As we learn to live with Covid-19 and recover from the pandemic, we have the opportunity not just to revive our economy but to reset it. We are building back fairer and greener but, during this period of change, we must be mindful as politicians to take people and businesses with us. We need to restore confidence as well as trust. Thank you. Before I call the next speaker, could I remind all members who are seeking to participate in this debate to ensure that they have pressed the request to speak buttons? I now call Paul Sweeney up to six minutes. Today's debate requires us to fundamentally consider what role the public sector should play in our economy. For me, that answer is pretty straightforward. It should be a role model for the private sector, pushing standards up and creating minimum thresholds and requirements while harnessing the huge economic power of the state to drive innovation and sustainability. We have heard the minister proclaim what an excellent job the Government is doing in the years of fair work and procurement, citing the commitments that are made in the most recent programme for government. My main query is why is it taking the Government all this time to commit to this agenda? It has taken 14 years for the Government to recognise that the measures that were just mentioned would help to improve conditions for workers in Scotland. The Government can hardly claim that it is pioneers in this area. It has been the norm across Europe for years, although sadly not in the case of the British Government under the Conservatives have just ripped £1,040 a year out of the poorest households in work through their cuts to universal credit. The Government can hardly claim that it is pioneers in Scotland, although, in the context of the UK, we are hardly going to take lectures from the Opposition. I thank the member for giving way. I take note of his comments about European countries adopting all kinds of fair work measures years ago. Does he recognise that those are independent countries that have employment powers and this Parliament does not have employment powers in the reserved UK Government? It is interesting that they are now being adopted in Government as a result of new agreements with the Green Party. I have to say that, when it happened years ago when my former colleague Neil Findlay moved amendment after amendment in this chamber over the last decade calling for the real living wage to be a minimum requirement for public sector procurement contracts and the Government voted them down every time, it turns out that the most recent agreement has simply meant that the Government hiding behind lawyers has been exposed as a sham. Of course, when we see the rhetoric around fire and rehire, when only eight of the SNP MPs at 45 in the Westminster chamber turn up in the House of Commons to vote for Barry Gardner's bill to ban fire and rehire, I think that the rhetoric rings rather hollow. There is an element of... A couple of weeks ago, I asked the transport minister to join me in condemning ScotRail locking out its own work and to suggest that I was incapable of being impartial because I was a member of a trade union. We also have cleansing workers on strike in Glasgow during COP26 over a pay dispute with COSLA, and a minority SNP administration in Glasgow tried to use Tory anti-trade union legislation to break the strike. So how can it be that this Government, who are apparently so committed to the rights of workers, frequently finding themselves involved in industrial disputes with those same workers? How can it be that a Government apparently so committed to trade union rights can contain a minister who brazenly disparages members of this Parliament in this chamber for merely being a member of a trade union? I'm happy to give way. I thank Paul Sweeney for giving way. I just wonder what his comments are in relation to the STUC's demand in the Smith commission process to devolve employment powers and why his party, amongst others, refused to allow the devolution of those powers if he is so concerned for workers' rights. I would note that the Labour Party has been in governance since 2010, but Labour Party policy has since adopted to support the devolution of employment rights as a floor to level up. That is a welcome measure. I hope that, as a Democrat, you would welcome that development in our politics rather than trying to tread over history that has since long past. I would say that, also, when we look at the context of how this Government is behaving, perhaps many left-wing voters have put their faith in the SNP to uphold their values, might be pausing for thought as the true colours of certain ministers shine through. I know that I welcome many of the measures that are already announced in the programme for government. I just don't think that they go far enough. For example, there is still no ban on zero-hours contracts as part of the public procurement process. We just need to look at the situation facing thousands of workers in the social care sector to see why. Many of them would be improved and helped by a commitment to ban zero-hours contracts, but we also need to go back to the point that I raised at the outset. What role should the public sector play in our economy? Should it actively drive up standards or passively stifle them? Of course, we are seeing this play out across the UK when the Tories are discriminating against young people and their raising of the minimum wage by excluding under-23s. I am happy to give away. I thank the member for taking the intervention. I know that he is part of a small but dwindling group of actual socialists left with the Labour Party. What I would ask is this question. There is a number within his party who supports a £15-an-hour national living wage. Is he one of those people and how would he pay for that? I welcome the gentleman's intervention at this point because I think that it is very apposite, because I will offer an answer. I hope that the Deputy Presiding Officer will be somewhat generous having taken the intervention. I shall be reasonably generous to reflect the three interventions, but beyond that I cannot call. Thank you. I will do my best to persevere then. I have been a bit effusive. Certainly, in 2019, the Fair Work Convention looked at the experience of workers in the social care sector, and I think that it is fair to say that its findings are made for grim reading. The convention described the current tender methods being used as untenable and direct response for the use of zeroes, lowers and seasonal contracts, all of which undermine job security. The question of how you would pay for an increase in pay in the social care sector is one example of how we can raise wages. The Feeley report highlighted that, for every pound spent in the social care sector, it would create a multiplier effect of £2 of GDP in the wider economy. My request to the minister is simple in that regard. When are we going to ban zero-hours contracts and pay Scotland's social care workers the £15 an hour wage that they deserve? That is where the Government is being shortsighted. Rather than looking at wages of £15 an hour as a way of reinvesting and pump-priming our economy's recovery from the biggest recession in history, they see it as expenditure that is somehow lost. Let us be clear here that those workers will not be siphoning the money off into some offshore bank account. They will be spending it in their local communities, driving economic growth and tax revenue up. I am a firm believer in the role of the circular economy and the importance of community wealth building, as we see in the economic model of North Ayrshire, where the Labour council leader Joe Cullinane is using the power of the public sector to invest in local community-owned energy generation, social housing and sustainable businesses. It is often described as being radical, but I would argue that it is not radical at all. It is entirely reasonable and it is increasingly essential if we are to improve living standards. It is undoubtedly more that the Government can do when it comes to driving this agenda, and that is why I am committed, along with my Scottish Labour colleagues, to prioritising local communities and enterprise with a local first approach. So, while there is much to welcome in the Scottish Government's public procurement plans— Mr Sweeney, I have been generous. I have given you over a minute, please bring your mic. I am at my parish, if David is right, officer. It has taken far too long to get to where we are today, still far too short where we need to be. Progress has been painfully slow and we should have been doing this long ago. We need less self-congratulatory rhetoric, more ambition, former commitments and quicker action. Thank you very much, Mr Sweeney. I now call on Willie Rennie. Up to four minutes, please, Mr Rennie. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. Yesterday, I visited the old paper mill at Garbridge, which used to be a paper mill, but has now been transformed into the Eden campus by the University of St Andrews. The campus is home to an award-winning biomass energy centre, providing heat to 43 buildings in St Andrews, as well as over 2,500 student rooms. It is also home to a new solar PV field, delivering electricity to the whole campus. Soon, it will be the home to a centre for energy storage and conversion, and, for the first of its kind in Scotland, a centre for battery development. Facilities will be there for carbon capture to convert that carbon into a range of usable and valuable fuels and products. That is all part of the university's plans to be carbon net zero by 2035. It is a great partnership between the council, the Scottish Government and the UK Government, and also as part of the Tay cities deal. Many were sceptical—very sceptical—that those plans at the campus would ever be possible, but they have been delivered and have done so at speed, which is an important first lesson when we consider procurement, grants and government support. We need people who deliver at speed because the climate emergency is an emergency. It is all well and fine to have great plans for the future, but we need to deliver and we need to deliver fast, which is why we need to look to institutions such as St Andrews that have done so and have done so incredibly well. I want to give credit to the Government for eventually listening, because, week in, week out, I and others badgered the previous First Minister and the current First Minister over issues such as Amazon. Amazon received millions of pounds of government support for very little in return. They were paying their staff very low wages and their working conditions were widely criticised, yet the Government was quite happy to give out millions of pounds of support. However, the measures that are finally being put in place now will at last give support for workers like those at Amazon. Hiding behind lawyers for years has not helped thousands and thousands of workers who were desperate for their Government to stand up for them at the time. I think that the Minister would do well to reflect on that pathetic excuse that was rolled out this afternoon. I like to be fair to Amazon, because I think that they are slowly improving pay and working conditions in its centres. It has got some way to go, but the feedback that I receive is that they have changed and they have changed for the better, but they need to go much further. Other companies should use that as a signal that they should be improving their working conditions and pay as well. It would also help if they paid a little bit more tax as well, but, nevertheless, we have to give them credit where it is due. However, the Scottish Government is squeezing out small businesses from the procurement budget. The share to SMEs has fallen to just 5 per cent and 200,000 fewer businesses are now getting a share of the Government's massive procurement budget. If we wish to improve our local economies, cut the unnecessary transport of food and goods, we must improve the access to those funds for SMEs. We have been banging on about that for years, but the Government seems to be going in the wrong direction on it. I see the training programmes, I understand the information sessions that are held for businesses, but it is not delivering the change that we need for businesses in our communities. Finally, on housing. I am staggered. I referred to the Eden campus earlier on in my contribution. We have seen a biomass plant, a district heating system that is developed within site of a new housing development in Gardbridge. What is powering the homes in that housing development gas? They are getting constructed right now. The opportunity was there for them to hook up to the district heating system. However, for whatever reason—I have my suspicions— the Government and the council are not imposing the restrictions on housing developers to make sure that they adopt the best possible practices in those homes. I think that we need to get that changed if we are going to make a difference for the climate. Given that debate is being held during COP26, I will start by raising a point regarding our net zero and climate change ambitions. The Scottish Government has published excellent guidance on many aspects of procurement that will effectively influence our future direction and enable judgment to be applied when awarding public sector contracts. Invitations to tender documents specify the criteria to be used, such as price in the award of contracts and the waiting to be given to them. I note simply that there is varying practice in the criteria when aligned to net zero ambitions. For some contracts, it is very clear that waiting is sought, but this is not consistently applied. It is my opinion that all our actions in the award of public sector contracts should contribute to reaching net zero. With that in mind, would the minister consider reviewing contract award criteria to ensure that minimum criteria are applied consistently across the board? I do not underestimate the work that is required to make public procurement fit for net zero purpose, nor to ensure fair work, but it is vital that there can be no fair work if we destroy the prospects for work. I am confident and it has been mentioned here earlier that there is wide agreement across the chamber that, as we come out of the pandemic, we will not be reverting to business as usual and we need to build a future for new circumstances. One of the key requirements will be to encourage much more innovation and entrepreneurial activity in Scotland. We need the development of new, more resilient local supply chains, all of which have implications for procurement policy and our fair work agenda. We need to ensure new entrants to the marketplace are not disadvantaged because they lack a long track record. Perhaps on this occasion, one of the few occasions that I have agreed with Willie Rennie who brought that up earlier, we need to prioritise opportunities for innovation and new thinking that help us meet our obligations to current and future generations. We need to hear new voices that are not thorough to the way things I've been. We need to ensure that fairness goes beyond traditional patterns of employment and we need to break down continuing barriers faced by women in business from part-time employment to entrepreneurs. One matter of particular concern to me is the lack of systematic impact analysis by sex from many business-related organisations. In fairness, that is applied to other characteristics to encourage diversity generally. Does the minister agree that the more evidence we have, the better the chance of subsequently developing policy that tackled barriers to participation, and would he consider looking at conditionality in procurement contract awards to increase diversity, which of course leads to greater economic contribution? To the great credit of the Scottish Government, they have been addressing for some time the need for better procurement policies and the need to develop policies regarding fair work. The recent extension from five to seven elements of fair work demonstrates the ambition to keep updating and developing the forward-looking policies. I conclude by saying that in many respects, although much progress has been made, we will never reach the end of our journey. In a world with faster and faster rates of technological, social, labour market and environmental change, we are all challenged. All of us here, to ensure that our policy frameworks remain relevant to the world that we are in by shaping our actions to fit. I now call Stephen Kerr to be followed by Paul MacLennan. Up to four minutes, please, Mr Kerr. Deputy Presiding Officer, the scale of public sector spending in Scotland's economy is something quite stupendous, and yet this Government, as my friend Tess White was at pains to point out, is reluctant to use that spend to bring about positive change. It was Edmund Burke who said, if we command our wealth, we shall be rich and free. If our wealth commands us, we are poor indeed. This Parliament must see to it that the Government uses the taxpayer's hard-earned cash to deliver value for money and sustainable benefit to Scotland. Leaving the European Union affords us an opportunity to see that more of our Government spending ends up with Scotland's small and medium-sized businesses, the backbone of our economy. In short, we must put Scotland first. Whatever excuses have been given in the past for the lack of anything approaching a level playing field for Scotland's SMEs, those excuses are no longer valid. We should use our new flexibilities to see that Scotland's SMEs are given a much fairer, more equal opportunity to win business in the public sector. It is not easy for many of Scotland's SMEs to engage with the public sector. It is complex, expensive and many SMEs simply do not get involved because they cannot afford to. That must change. If ministers listen to business, they would know about the excessive burden of red tape, they would know how difficult it is to get on to certain frameworks. It is not going to change by the Government complacently sitting back and doing nothing. You have to understand that the Scottish Government has an application to ensure that public money is spent effectively and therefore the screening processes have to be rigorous. Surely there are two sides to the equation. I am grateful that the member is delighted to hear me speaking in the chamber. I think that there is quite a bit of speaking in the chamber. I take her point, but I will come on to what she is referring to. Let me continue and let us see if we can meet somewhere in between the two points that we seem to find ourselves in. When it comes to how contracts are awarded, we need to stop thinking solely about procurement in a financial or legalistic way, but in a way that accords with our values and with supporting our businesses. I ask the minister what the Government is doing to make opportunity more equal when it comes to Scotland's SMEs. What is the Government's ambition for Scotland's SMEs? What proportion of public spending—not the number of contracts but actual money—whether Government C is spent with SMEs by the end of this Parliament? I also identify probably the single biggest drag on economic activity and economic growth in this country, and that is the late payment of invoices. It is incredible the degree to which large organisations will manage their cash flow at the expense of smaller businesses by withholding payments, and it is not clever and it is not fair. What are ministers going to do to make their tier 1 contractors pay their suppliers invoices in full and on time and within a reasonable number of days? As my friends on those benches have said and will keep saying, we need a far greater level of openness and transparency from this Government. I give you only one example of many. I have been asking questions for six months about the contractual relationship between NHS Scotland and the service now of Santa Clara, California, and I have had a succession of non-answers from ministers. It is quite incredible just how secretive this Government is. Audit Scotland has repeatedly referred to this sort of deliberate lack of transparency. It is the responsibility of this Parliament to scrutinise the executive to ask questions. Mr Kerr, it is indeed, and you are nearly 40 seconds over your time. I have been generous because you did take an intervention, but could you please bring your marks to close? It seems to many of us that the ministers do not agree. They seem to think that it is none of our business to ask questions. They might not be used to it and they might not like it, but it is our business and the questions will not go away. I now call Paul McLennan to be followed by Richard Lennon up to four minutes please, Mr McLennan. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. We all want Scotland to be the best place to live, work, invest and do business. Scotland can make strides and fair work that will underpin our economic success, as well as the wellbeing and prosperity of our people, communities and businesses that we all seek. Fair work will drive productivity and inspire innovation, all of which add value to jobs and to business and, in turn, create stronger, more sustainable and inclusive growth. It is at the heart of a wellbeing economy. Increasing the quality of jobs can improve outcomes for the people of Scotland. Fair work is also crucial to our ambition to eradicate child poverty by supporting families with children and gain more income through employment and providing flexible job opportunities that respect caring responsibilities and other commitments that workers may already have. The current pandemic has impacted significantly on the economy and highlighted inequalities. We need to embed fair work principles that will help Scotland to respond to the challenges that are caused by the current pandemic, as well as the other issues that we are facing, including ageing, climate change, which has been mentioned, and automation, the shift to home working, Brexit and changes in the patterns of global trade. We have heard that fair work is now based on seven principles. Fair work that offers effective voice, security, opportunity, fulfilment and, of course, respect. It balances the rights and responsibilities of employers and workers and generates benefits for individuals and society. I want to touch on those principles later on in my speech. The Scottish Government, of course, wants to use every opportunity possible to promote fair working and ensure that people are paid at least the living wage. As we have heard, the Scottish Government is making payment of the real living wage condition of winning Scottish Government contracts and will engage widely to encourage us. In fact, the local government committee was talking about this this morning and about local authorities and how they can access procurement. We must acknowledge the valuable work that offers others such as a fair work convention and the poverty lines that have undertaken in this area. By using procurement powers to ensure that bidders pay the real living wage, the Scottish Government is leading by example to help influence employment practices and embed fair work principles. We all have a part in playing to encourage organisations, regardless of size, sector or location, to adopt the Scottish Government's progressive fair work approach on this. Everybody should have the opportunity to act to secure and stable employment that offers a proper wage, while affording staff the flexibility to balance their life and work. The Scottish Government will incorporate the seven key principles of fair working, including effective voice. Effective voice includes trade union recognition, which is vitally important. It includes the opportunity for investment and workforce development. It includes the security payment of the real living wage and no use of unfair fire and rehire practices. It also includes action to tackle the gender pay gap and create a more diverse and inclusive workforce. In fulfilment, investment and workforce development support for family-friendly and flexible working practices. The Scottish Government, as the cabinet secretary has mentioned, will consult on its ambition to be a fair work nation by 2025. An agreed vision, an action plan and milestones for delay and wanting will be produced by early 2022. The Scottish Government is committed to several initiatives. We have heard about the Scottish business pledge, promotion of a living wage, workplace equality fund and, of course, supporting the fair work convention to name but a few. I want to conclude that the Scottish Government has also established a £10 million fund to allow companies to pilot and explore the benefits of a four-day working week. The Scottish Government will use a learning from this pilot to consider a more general shift to a four-day working week, as in when Scotland gains full control of employment rights. In conclusion, the next few years are critical in ensuring that we make the progress needed to achieve that vision and meet the changing needs of our economy and our workers. Deputy Presiding Officer, can I refer members to my register of interests? I should really begin by thanking the Scottish Government for finally coming around to the Labour movement's way of thinking that the award of £13 billion of public money every year for procuring goods and services by the Scottish Government and its agencies around a third of all devolved public expenditure will now be subject to those new fair work conditions and minimum labour standards is on the face of it welcome. It's a pity, it did not come sooner and if it is legal now, was it illegal in 2016? Because of government havering, big public contracts like the £80 million award for the construction of the V&A in Dundee went to BAM, a company up to its neck in the construction industry blacklisting scandal going back decades. I've raised in Parliament before anti-union activity on the construction site of the new Dumfries and Galloway royal infirmary by another blacklister laying old rock where £275 million of public money was invested and that on the Aberdeen western peripheral route built with £754 million of public money workers were liable for both employees and employers national insurance contributions and charged for the privilege of being paid their own wages by an umbrella company. It was a scandal of wage exploitation, cost cutting and tax dodging, all going on with public money in our name, all important cases illustrating a more general problem, a systematic failure, all under the gaze of a government that was not prepared to act and none of this is ancient history. The Dumfries and Galloway royal infirmary only became operational in December 2017, the V&A opened its doors in September 2018, the western peripheral route in Aberdeen was only open to traffic in February 2019. Over a billion pounds of public money was spent on these three contracts alone and all were in the lifetime of the last session of this Parliament. I say to the Government that we welcome their late conversion. We hope that this does herald a new era, that robust governance arrangements will now be put in place, that there will be not only contract monitoring but contract compliance with tough penalty clauses to boot and that ministers and principal accountable officers will be transparent and open to scrutiny by Parliament, its committees and the people. In the Labour Party we have a wider vision of public procurement, which is based on a community wealth building model, pioneered by Labour councils like North Asia. That means ensuring that the award of public contracts does not give rise to massive leakages of investment and profits out of local economies but rather strengthens local businesses, democratic ownership, local workers and the social fabric of local communities. It is a vision as well which demands action to take on and to take out tax avoiders from public procurement-approved lists, not least in the provision of residential care for the elderly. Finally, while I know that the Government is currently talking about ethical commissioning and ethical procurement in care when it comes to the creation of a national care service, there is a more profound argument that I would make, which is that these services should not be outsourced to the private sector and marketised at all. Any more than national health services and treatments should be outsourced and marketised. They should be run locally, in-house, democratically accountable and the staff properly valued. That really would be the dawning of a new era. That really would be progressive. That really would be sustainable. That really would be fair. Thank you very much indeed, Mr Leonard. I now call on Stephanie Callahan, who will be followed by Maggie Chapman in four minutes. While Scotland has a proud tradition of progressive procurement, the twin challenges of climate change and Covid recovery mean that Scotland once again looks to reform how we procure. The Scottish Government, recognising the pivotal moment for Scotland, must be commended for quickly resetting the procurement dial to ensure that we harness the power of procurement for these unparallel times. With an annual public procurement spend in excess of £12 billion, the scope to enhance the life of employees, marginalised and vulnerable groups, as well as protect our precious environment, is considerable. Public procurement has the ability to influence change across the business world for the betterment of people and places. Last week, I had the privilege of listening to South Lancer students and what they expect me to do to ensure that we protect our planet in their future. A number of suggestions from pupils are certainly deliverable with more progressive procurement. For example, why does so much of what is delivered into schools still come in plastic packaging? Why do school meals include so few vegetarian and vegan options? And why are single-use face coverings used in school campuses? Those are questions for all public sector procurement staff to consider now. We need to reflect, rethink and reset what we procure. Sustainable procurement also means growing our indigenous supply chains, and we need, like no other, the Scottish PPE supply base successfully expanded by the Scottish Government during the pandemic. That is not only providing Scottish jobs and security of supply, but also delivering significant environmental benefits through reduced carbon footprint. A reset of how we procure will deliver substantial environmental benefits, but a reform procurement will also support enhanced fair work practices across Scotland. I was delighted by the recent Scottish Government announcement that payment of the real living wage will be a condition to secure in future Scottish public sector contracts. Those contracts support a lot of Scottish jobs, around 110,000. That is way more people than the whole population of my Oddenstone and Bales hill constituency. Affirmative action by the Scottish Government are in payment of the real living wage across the public sector as a transformative action, and I would encourage private sector organisations to follow suit. Using procurement to drive fair work practices across the Scottish economy will reduce in-work poverty and reduce societal inequalities. Scottish Government initiatives such as fair work first and the Scottish business pledge are incrementally changing employment practices across Scotland, and such redress cannot come quickly enough with Tory Westminster policies hitting the pockets of the most-paid hardest. As well as low pay embedding fair work practices in public sector procurement, has the very real potential of increasing opportunities for family flexible working, reducing the gender pay gap, eliminating inappropriate use of zero-hour contracts and increasing worker representation in company decision making? Those life enhancing improvements to fair work practices are particularly needed in sectors such as construction and social care. For job insecurity, low pay and or gender balancing is more prevalent. Given those two sectors account for around 25 per cent of Scottish public sector spend, its clear procurement can be a real enabler for sectors crying out for positive change. For many years, the Scottish approach to procurement has been admired and replicated by other nations. In recent years, procurement has enabled Scotland to secure five times as many accredited living wage employers than the rest of the UK. I am confident that we can once again show global leadership a more progressive approach to sustainable procurement provides us with an exciting opportunity to reimagine the kind of country that we want Scotland to be, a fair work nation. Finally, I have to say that I am delighted to welcome today's NHS Lanarkshire announcement that the new University of hospital Monklands, just 14 miles from the conference, will be fully net zero for both the build and operation phases sub-achievement. Thatcherism featured many crimes, but perhaps one of the greatest was to hand over the budget of public bodies for predation by private profiteers. Compulsory competitive tendering was a fantastic way to transfer wealth from communities to the balance sheets of corporations, very often reducing the quality of services and leaving them more complex and therefore more expensive services for local authorities and other public services to deal with, making the public sector look less efficient. As the fair work convention found, leading to downward pressures on public services budgets, we need a root and branch approach to eliminate this attitude in our public services. Our public spending should support the aims of our public bodies, not of people interested only in plunder and profit. I am delighted to see the rise of community wealth building approaches that use public spending to create better communities, more employment and that do not undermine the shared aims of fairness, equality and social justice. Procurement has been my guilty pleasure across my public service. One of the first things I did when elected as a councillor many moons ago was to identify ways in which local authorities could use their spending to better effect. I was the first Scottish politician to join calls for a living wage in 2008, and I am pleased that we have won that argument, even if, at the time, some of my colleagues thought that it was not worth a hassle or could not see the difference between it and a minimum wage. I am proud of the commitments that we secured in the co-operation deal with the Scottish Government on the living wage and that we have already seen action on that. Requiring all government procurement contracts to pay the living wage will make a big impact on driving up pay and improving people's lives, embedding the fair work agenda into Scotland's economy more than ever before. Not naming any names, but some of those same colleagues 15 years ago also thought that we were doing such a good job on three-year funding, they refused calls for five-year funding for the voluntary sector. Instead, they regressed to single-year funding, a disaster for the third sector and something that must end. We must renew our relationship with the voluntary sector with sustainable funding relationships. We need to update the Scottish Compact that, some 20 years ago, gave hope to so many. What I was doing then has now been wrapped up into community wealth building, an approach that can transform our public services and deliver for our communities. Sustainable procurement is key to this. Procurement means public kitchens, including school canteens, source food provided by local businesses and organic producers. Procurement that bases decisions about public sector, capital and revenue funding on targeted social, economic and environmental outcomes. However, the debate is not just about procurement. It is about treating workers with dignity and respect and compensating them accordingly. Fair work principles must be the norm, payment of a real living wage, no precarious contracts, decent conditions, democratic engagement, including trade union recognition and transparent support of management. All procured services should be centred on ethical commissioning and fair work, which will be quality and individual outcome-focused, collaborative, person-centred and human rights-based. We must also acknowledge the global impact of our commissioning and procurement activities. Our supply chains too often include child labour, slavery and actions that drive climate breakdown. In the worst cases, they support human rights abuses, such as in the illegal occupation of the West Bank. Purchasing goods and services made in the illegal settlements in Palestine supports the illegal occupation and no Scottish public body should be acting in support of that occupation. I would welcome a statement from the Scottish ministers on what actions are being taken to ensure that this ends. You must conclude now, Ms Chapman. In conclusion, by pursuing community benefit, human rights and community wealth building, we can transform our communities. I sincerely hope that, in this term of Parliament, we can abandon the legacy and mindset of thaturism in public services and embrace community wealth building, because that way lies social and economic justice. John Mason, to be followed by Liz Smith. Four minutes, please, Mr Mason. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer, and thank you for the opportunity to speak in today's debate. It is certainly my desire that we see Scotland's economy growing, so there are more resources to share around, more tax can be paid and then we can have more and better public services. However, economic growth comes in different forms, and if all of the benefits go to a very few people, then that is not acceptable and it is not good for the country. So, along with growth in GDP and other similar measures, we need to see increasing fairness and sustainability, which is why it is important that we are having this debate today. Now, it is true that we have seen progress in some areas in recent years, and at least women are now paid the same as men for the same job. However, it is only relatively recently that there was a breakthrough in Glasgow for men and women doing work of equal value after years of labour in action and collusion. We still see sectors such as the police and solicitors where more women are entering the profession but are not always getting promoted into senior positions in the numbers that I, for one, consider they should be. We need to use whatever powers we have in an imaginative way, and certainly that includes what conditions are attached to procurement exercises and grants made. I think that other countries have tried different approaches, for example France, breaking large contracts down into smaller chunks in order to support smaller local businesses, so that the EU did not really hold us back. Obviously, part of this debate is where employment law should lie, and I would certainly prefer that to be in Scotland, whether under devolution or independence. However, I think that we have to accept that, even with independence, we would face constraints as we compete internationally, and any movement to fairer work practices needs to have an international element to it as well. Just as we need COP26 and international agreement on climate change, so we need international agreement on fair work practices. On Brexit, I remain incredibly disappointed that we left the EU. We got some very good work practices from there, including a limit on the maximum working hours per week, apart from MSPs, of course. However, we were quite restricted in the conditions that we could impose when procuring goods and services. However, we are still going to be limited by the internal market act and possibly by trade agreements that the UK enters into. However, I hope that we will push the boundaries on that as far as we can. Whether it be by using public procurement or making grants, we will ensure that decent pay and fair work practices are required as much as they possibly can be. I just mentioned McVitties and the closure of the towcross plant in my constituency, which now seems almost inevitable. I think that that brings the question of ownership into the debate. We have got used to the idea of big multinational corporations as being almost the sole and best model for enterprise, but it seems to me that we need to focus more on other models, including co-operatives and employ ownership. In those models, there will be more commitment to the local area, more links to the local community and, in my opinion, more fair work practices. I believe that we need to do more to fend off the takeover of growing Scottish companies by big multinationals wherever they are based. I do not think that I have time. We are very tight for time. We have to be accommodated, I am afraid. Another angle on all this is fair trade internationally. I absolutely want to see fair working practices, flexible working and a proper living wage and reduced gender pay gap for workers in Scotland, but I do not just want to see it for workers in Scotland. I also want to see workers in Malawi and Rwanda getting a living wage there, too, and I want to see women in Zambia and Pakistan being paid the same as men in those countries. Fair trade has made great inroads on those issues, but we need to go further so that, when we buy clothes from Bangladesh or coffee from Ghana, we pay a high enough price so that the workers in those countries also get a decent standard of living. Sustainable procurement and fair work practices can mean many things, but we need to keep our focus on them in the coming years and not just on GDP and other figures that are easy to measure. Thank you very much, Mr Mason, and I call on Liz Smith, who will be followed by Katie Clark in Ms Smith's four minutes, please. Thank you, and may I concentrate my remarks on the public procurement angle, because I think if we have the right public procurement then we go a long way to ensuring that we get fair work practices. I hope that there is actually one thing that can unite this Parliament in these difficult times, and that is the drive to ensure that we get better value for public money and that we do so in as open and as transparent a manner as possible. In my opinion, I think that the public deserves no less. They surely have a right to know exactly where their money is going and why elected members of this place make certain choices, particularly when it comes to jobs and fair work. We need to be held fully accountable for every decision that we make, especially when it comes to the public finances. The finance committee, and there are several members in the chamber this afternoon who sit on that committee, certainly sees that scrutiny role as absolutely paramount in all its activities, and, of course, so too, audits Scotland. We know that, in 2018, the then Auditor General, Caroline Gardner, criticised the Scottish Government very strongly for the limited information that was made public available when it came to scrutinising the extent of the financial support that is given to several private companies. Obviously, we have had the Ferguson, Bifab, Pryswick airport situations where, quite clearly, the transparency has not been as good as it should be. It is very important that, when we recognise the request for openness and transparency, there has to be a proper structure around Scottish Government consolidated accounts, because that was one of the clear problems when it came to Ferguson Marine. Although the Government-owned company with Scottish ministers is the only shareholder, it did not fall into the Scottish Government consolidated accounts, and that is a serious problem. I think that Caroline Gardner is absolutely correct when she says that—and she said it persistently in her time in office and her successor is doing exactly the same—to deliver best value, we need to have good governance structures and effective management. After all, those are the structures that are required of local authorities, so it should be absolutely the same case for the Scottish Government. The minister mentioned in his remarks about the Procurement Reform Act of 2014, and that demanded that public bodies consider not only the economic outcomes of procurement, but also those that would enhance the social and environmental wellbeing. Several members referred to that this afternoon. Clearly, it is a very good week to be talking about those additional concerns when it comes to our social and environmental wellbeing. However, I think that there is a growing demand to help local economies. My colleague Stephen Kerr mentioned that. Willie Rennie mentioned that. There is a lot more that we can be doing to help our local economies. The FSB has made two very strong points on that front. Firstly, it would be very good to see a much higher percentage of procurement funding going to smaller firms to help local jobs and local investment. Let's bear in mind that many of the smaller firms have been very much the bedrock of our communities during Covid. Of course, it is very true to say that Covid has not made things easy in terms of tracking the money, but neither should it be used as an excuse. May I finish on what I think is a very important point? Both openness and transparency are not only good practice to measure the best value for taxpayers' money, but also because openness and transparency is essential if there is to be renewed trust between Government and the public. There is much in the media just now about how politics, maybe even politicians too, have lost their integrity when it comes to transparency and openness. That is not good for society. It is not good for where our public money is going, and it is certainly not good for rebuilding Scotland after Covid. Thank you very much indeed, Ms Smith. I now call on Katie Clark, who joins us remotely and should be followed by Bob Doris. Four minutes, Ms Clark. Thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer. This debate is about how public money is spent, but it is also about the kind of world that we want to live in. The fair work first guidelines describe themselves as a flagship policy to drive high quality and fair work across the labour market. In the guidelines, the Scottish Government asks employers to adopt fair working practices. One of the issues in the debate is to what extent those guidelines are mandatory, to what extent they are voluntary and to what extent there are criteria that have to be taken into account when decisions are made. For example, one of the principles that is laid out is to have appropriate channels for effective voice such as trade union recognition. However, trade union recognition is not a requirement in the tendering process. For example, the Scottish Government in the recent past has awarded Amazon a £4.7 million contract for web services. That was last year. The year before, Amazon was awarded £45,272 in a contract, and in 2018-2019, £2.5 million was awarded in a contract. It was also awarded £15 million in a tender for web services. Despite the fact that not a single Amazon warehouse in the whole of the UK is unionised, even Amnesty International commented on how Amazon has repeatedly issued legal notices to trade union organisers who even attempt to talk to Amazon workers outside Amazon facilities in the UK. I know that, as a constituency member of Parliament in the past, I was repeatedly approached by workers who lived in Ayrshire and who travelled to the Amazon warehouse in Inverclyde. We are told when they got there, even though they had a contract, that there was no work or limited hours. Amazon does not operate zero-hours contracts, but the reality of how the contracts work, according to Amazon workers—indeed, there was an ITV documentary about that fairly recently—is that, in reality, the way that contracts operate, there are zero-hours contracts. Another provision in the guidelines is that there should be no inappropriate use of zero-hours contracts. I would like to ask the Scottish Government in relation to the fair work guidelines and in relation to the business pledge, which the Scottish Government asks contractors to commit to, to incorporate the principles. I would like to ask the Scottish Minister to clarify how many successful contractors have signed the business pledge in the past. The minister indicated that companies would be mandated to pay the living wage. I would like to ask, to what extent does the Government accept that it is really only when you mandate a company to adhere to certain principles that they are actually effective? At the moment, we have companies such as Circo, who end up running Asylum Accommodation and Pricewater Coopers, who recently were awarded the £100,000 contract to design the new national care service. I would ask the Scottish Government to outline how they believe that that is consistent with the principles that are being set before Parliament today. Tax taxpayers have the right to expect that the public purse is used to support green jobs that are well paid. I welcome the debate today. I welcome what the Scottish Government has said and indeed the contributions from across the chamber from the different political parties. Our role in this Parliament is to ensure that those warm words become a reality, and I hope that the Parliament will commit itself to doing that over the coming weeks. Thank you, Ms Clark. I will now call the final speaker in the open debate, Bob Doris, four minutes, please, Mr Doris. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. I want to begin during the short debate in discussing ageism during this debate on sustainable procurement and fair work. Much has been made of the UK Government's announcement that the minimum wage is increasing to £9.50 from April next year, and I am sure that the real living wage will constantly increase further in the next few weeks. However, the rate for 21-22-year-olds will be £9.18, not £9.50. For 18-20-year-olds, it will be £6.83, and for 16-17-year-olds, it will be £4.81. I know only too well the use and abuse of those national minimum wages in the hospitality sector, some particularly bad practitioners in particular, and I hope that we can join across this chamber in saying that that is simply wrong. It might be permissible, but it is wrong. I am sure that the chamber will want to come together to oppose such an unfair, divisive and discriminatory approach to the UK minimum wage. Can I ask the Scottish Government what representations it has or will make to the UK Government to make the case to end such ageism and employment? I also welcome that the real living wage will now be a prerequisite to securing any Scottish Government contracts. That is, of course, just one element of a wider fair work first programme, which makes adoption of fair work practices as part of the career of securing public contracts and grants. I very much enjoyed Katie Clark's challenges to Government, and I would not say too much more about fair work first in relation to that, but she made some very pertinent points and I think that she put some of that on the record. Not only does the Scottish Government have to ensure that no ageism exists within fair work first, but we also have to make sure that companies are compliant much more consistently across a range of contracts and grants that they may secure from the Scottish Government. I am convener of the Scottish Parliament's cross-party group in palliative care. Our members have a great interest in development of a national social care system and of improving the pay and support of the social care workforce. That workforce must be at the centre of any fair work agenda. I welcome that last month we saw the Scottish Government introduced a £300 million package of measures to help health and social care staff. That included ensuring all adult social care staff who are currently paid the real living wage, a pay rise of over 5 per cent. That is a welcome start, but it is just a start. I am mind of the words in independent review of adult social care, where it spoke about having to carry out job evaluations, ensure equitable assessments of terms and conditions of skills, of qualifications, of responsibilities and the contributions that are made by social care staff, of national minimum terms and conditions, of raising up standards, of not lowering them within commissioning, whatever that may look like. At the heart of it, a national forum comprised of workforce representatives, employers and integration joint boards in the Scottish Government, in other words, a national sector-level collective bargaining structure, must be at the heart of any reform to adult social care. We should not pretend that national collective bargaining will immediately transform social care, or it will be easy. It will not, but it is a key component of fair work. Of course, the funding must follow the support of any national care service also, not just because it is the right thing to do, but because of the equality agenda, because of the gender aspects and the BME aspect with women and black minority ethnic workers, much more heavily represented in that sector. I will finish off by noting that the Scottish Government and COSLA are discussing a fiscal framework for local government, depending on the outcome of the consultation for a national care service and depending on who picks up the tab for the aspiration that we want to see with the fair work agenda in the national care service. We will have to make sure that we fully fund the sector as we progress forward at the heart of the fair work agenda. I begin by declaring an interest as a member of the GMB union and Unite the union, as well as being a member of the cross-party group on the RMP. Just in case any SNP member repeats the comments of the transport minister who suggested being a union member, it was a problem for an MSP, and I am proud to declare those interests. It really is the very definition of irony that the Scottish Government brought forward this debate today on fair work. At a time, our refuge collectors, our cleaners, thousands of council workers are taken to the streets not to collect their bins, but to strike for fair pay. When we have just had what was Britain's longest industrial dispute on our railways, both disputes that the Government showed little interest in resolving until ministers realised that their cop selfies might end up being photo bombed by striking rail and council workers. Nurses, however, are still balloting on industrial action because of the inaction of the health secretary since the payoff were rejected, and last week the Government snubbed retail workers by rejecting the call by usda for large shops to close on new years day. We are witnessing, disappointingly, a level of anti-trade union rhetoric from some Scottish ministers. It means industrial relations between the Scottish Government and our key workers has plummeted to an all-time low. As Paul Sweeney said in his opening comments for Labour, how can it be that this Government, who are apparently so committed to the rights of workers, frequently finds themselves involved in industrial disputes with those same workers? The reality is that the SNP's record on fair work is not as much progressive, but sadly it is all too often reluctant, and it has been for years. Positive steps are welcome, but it takes too long, and more often than not, they do not go far enough. As Richard Leonard highlighted, we welcome the fact that the SNP has come round to the Labour movement's way of thinking when it comes to the payment of their living wage, including when it comes to the award of the over £13 billion of public money every year for procuring goods and services, but it is a pity that it did not come sooner. I recall as a councillor in Dumfries and Galloway being, before I was elected to this parliament, worried even then that we would face a recruitment crisis in social care because of cuts to council budgets, and that was driving an agenda of outsourcing of care for no other reason than it was cheaper to commission private and third sector care firms than it was to use council staff. I propose that the council should seek a commitment from firms to pay the living wage as part of any council care commissions, and we work in partnership with firms to pay a fair price for fair pay. My proposal was booted out by the then Tory SNP coalition, which ran the council for most of the decade. I was a councillor with SNP councillors waving letters from SNP ministers, telling them that they could not support fair pay because it was illegal. It took the SNP nearly a decade to U-turn on a mechanism for paying the living wage to adult care workers, updating their legal advice as the minister described it. We know that the whole system of commission and co-production, the race to the bottom that is competitive tendering, is still a broken model. Two years ago, the Fair Work Convention report on social work said that the procurement model was not delivering fair work. In fact, it was a barrier to it, responsible for zero hours, low hours and seasonal contracts undermining job security. It was being used to manage the savage cuts and posting councils by green and SNP budgets, leading in part to the social care recruitment crisis that we are still facing, with staff being lost to sectors that offer better terms and conditions. Last year's budget, the SNP made no provision for an increase to social care pay. We need wholesale reform of social care, replacing competitive tendering with genuine collaboration, but that reform needs to start with a commitment to tackling poverty pay. Adopting the GMB union's call for a minimum £15 an hour in social care. Jamie Halcro Johnston asked, can we afford to do this? The reality is, we cannot afford not to. We currently spend hundreds of millions of pounds on delayed discharge, keeping people in hospital, because poor wages mean that we cannot afford the social care staff to deliver the care packages that would enable those people to leave hospital. We need to stop believing that poor wages are good for the economy and that low pay is something that does not come with costs yet. Jamie Halcro Johnston I thank the member for taking an intervention. Just to clarify, I was asking whether your colleagues supported the national living wage across the board and how that was going to be paid for. I have highlighted the fact that Labour very much supports that £15 for social care workers. It is a way to tackle the challenges that we face, particularly in social work. I hope that Jamie Halcro Johnston will back our campaign on that as well, and more importantly, that of the trade unions. As Paul Swinney said in response to what Mr Halcro Johnston said, the failure report was very clear. For every £1 spent on social care, £2 is generated for the wider economy, so fair pay not only delivers for the workforce crucially the majority of whom are women, it also delivers a stronger economy. It is vital that a stronger economy is more inclusive. Willie Rennie was correct when he highlighted the fact that at present a procurement process squeeze out small businesses. He rightly highlighted that only 5 per cent of the Scottish public sector's almost £14 billion procurement budget is spent with firms with fewer than 10 employees, despite those firms accounting for 94 per cent of businesses in Scotland. The value of procurement contracts won by smaller firms has been in decline in Scotland since 2006, and that is why Labour has consistently called for a local first approach to all procurement. That is why we want to see the commitment that we have secured in the legislation that is established in the south of Scotland enterprise agency that embeds fair work in all grants to businesses strengthened and extended to Highlands and Islands and Scottish enterprises. It is also why, as Katie Clark highlighted, we want conditionality and grants to businesses to go beyond just their living wage and vague commitments to fair work, but better mandate companies in areas such as collective bargain. That is why Labour will always call for not just a stronger economy but one that is more eco, more inclusive and fairer for all. Thank you very much, Mr Smith, and I call on Jamie Halcro Johnston to close for the Conservatives. Seven minutes please. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. Scotland's workforce has faced unprecedented challenges over the last 18 months. For many, the nature of work has changed, or more accurately, the change that was already taking place has been accelerated. The effects have fallen on employer and employee alike. While businesses were shuttered, employment also seemed more precarious, businesses stopped trading, while others limped on as their customer base collapsed under the weight of the public health emergency. Many enterprises survived, some regrettably were lost. Key workers across sectors were faced with adapting and managing risk, ensuring that vital services could continue. The pressures placed on them have been immense, and in too many cases are still on-going. It is a welcome step that we are discussing fair work particularly, but we have also heard sustainability in procurement. Hopefully, we can each recognise the need to drive forward positive change and to continue even to redouble our efforts despite the impact of recent times. We must also recognise that the nature of work is evolving before our eyes and must evolve if we are to meet the challenges of tomorrow. There remains an important role for this Parliament and the Scottish Government to be responsive to those changes, to adapt to lead by example and to ensure that the values of fairness are promoted. In many ways, the worst outcomes from the pandemic have been averted. It was thanks to the furlough scheme and other support mechanisms that our economy carried on, and that so many jobs and livelihoods were protected. We have seen UK growth projections look increasingly solid and the threat of huge rises in unemployment averted. That is a legacy that we should all welcome. Moves have gone further. Despite challenges, the UK Government last year surpassed the SNP's ambition of an £8.70 per hour minimum wage by 2020. This spring, as announced by the Chancellor in last week's budget, the national living wage will rise to meet the living wage foundation's £9.50 an hour. Good fair work involves fair pay, but it goes beyond that, too. In relation to procurement, there is an opportunity to expand the promotion of skills in retraining, and aspiration that the Scottish Government has stated is a priority. Part of that, as colleagues have observed, is about including support for apprenticeships, but it should also recognise the parallel need for reskilling and upskilling, building bases of expertise or providing support for transition. The 2014 Procurement Reform Act also recognised the merits of sustainability. On this week, in particular, environmental sustainability should be at the forefront of our minds. In pursuing those aspirations, we should also recognise the need for an approach that is inclusive. It would be very easy to use procurement to drive forward those ambitions, but in a way that was exclusionary, that created a narrow door that only a few could enter. Avoiding that outcome was another of the principles of the 2014 act, and one that we should take seriously in turning principle into action. It is not such a great stretch to see how such an outcome, on that limits potential sources of procurement, limits the utility of the measures that we are discussing today. It would also, just as importantly, strike at the very fundamentals of government procurement, finding value for money that the public has entrusted us to spend. Scotland has an incredible diversity of innovative and creative SMEs, SMEs that are trailblazers in new areas and drive competition in others. That is particularly true in regions such as mine, the Highlands and Islands, where smaller enterprises are the lifeblood of our economy, and where government procurement can make so much of a difference. We know that there are barriers of access for smaller businesses already, as other members have pointed out, but we must be in business of lowering rather than raising those walls. There have been a range of useful contributions from around the chamber. My colleague Tess White spoke of that as a time to take stock, and to ask ourselves the sometimes difficult questions about what we, both as state and society, can do and improve. Sustainability is an often used term, but one that encompasses a great deal, and it depends both on clarity of purpose and on an understanding of the effects of our interventions. Tess White also highlighted the importance of supply us to an organisation's overall social and environmental footprint, as well as emphasising the importance of education and innovation. She also spoke about the importance of engagement. We know all too well the consequences of that in this Government's anti-business approach and the problems it has created. Attempts at making positive change must be on the basis of working with employers and other organisations, not against them. Liz Smith spoke about the issues raised by committees of this Parliament, as well as the Auditor General of Scotland in relation to the transparency of procurement. She mentioned among others the current issues faced at Ferguson Marine on the Clyde, an issue that was brought up in detail in my member's debate on ferries just last week. While we recognise the issues around commercial sensitivity, it is clear that there remains a lack of openness on important and high-value procurement and support to businesses from the Scottish Government. That was, as Liz Smith pointed out, a vital part of good governance and effective management. She also touched on the issue of support for small businesses, a point raised by Willie Rennie and my colleague Stephen Kerr, who highlighted some of the challenges faced by small businesses and operations in accessing public procurement. The continued issue of late payments, which should be simple to correct in today's work, remains just one, but it is something that we can see a difference between businesses succeeding and failing. Yes, I will. Jim Fairlie. You are talking about small businesses and the need to support them. Does the member share my position that the increase from 5 per cent to 7.5 per cent for the hospitality sector on 1 October, imposed by the UK Government, is anything but business-friendly? In a hospitality sector, first to shut down, last to open, being brutalised by a lack of staff because of the lack of free movement of people. How do you stand by the 7.5 per cent rise in that? I'm sorry if my letting the member intervene surprised him. He did try to intervene on me, so I'm slightly surprised by that. The UK Government has supported business, and if you go out into the communities, businesses will say how important that UK Government support has been. I tell you what they will also tell the member how difficult it has been to access some of the Scottish Government's support, how there has been a lack of clarity, how there have been delays of getting that support through, how there have been far too many different pots that have made it even harder. I'm sure that that is a message that the member himself will have been getting as well. There is an important role for this Parliament in promoting sustainability and positive employment practices in a changing world, but it must be an approach that is collaborative and responsive to change. Without those key requirements, the influence of this Parliament and the Scottish Government will be greatly diminished. In furthering the principles of sustainable recruitment, we should look to the future, to the coming needs of our wider society, and consider whether, in the round, public authorities in Scotland are making a positive contribution. Thank you very much indeed, Mr Halber. I call on the minister to wind up the debate for around nine minutes, Mr Lockhead. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. Thank you to all members for the contribution to this debate. It's a very important debate. It's a debate that affects every working Scot and every Scottish employer. It takes place against the backdrop of us all witnessing the impact of Covid, which has exposed and highlighted many of the unacceptable features of our economy and some people's working lives. And, of course, it's against the backdrop of the impact of Brexit. And, as we look ahead, with COP26 taking place, as to the economic transformation, our country will have to go through in the coming decades to meet our 2045 net zero targets, which, again, will have an impact on every working Scot and every business in this country. It's also a debate, as Katie Clark said, about the kind of country that we want to build. I want to refer to some of the powerful contributions that are made by many members and answer some of their questions, if I can, and also comment on some of the other comments. I have to start with Jamie Halcro Johnston saying in response to Jim Fairlie's excellent intervention that the Conservative Party are pro-business, because, if I recall, it was the Conservative PM Boris Johnson who was not very complimentary about business, and he said the word business, which has preceded by a four-letter expletive, which I won't say in Parliament because I like to adhere to the standards of this place. But it wasn't him and else. It was the Conservative Prime Minister who said that. Jamie Halcro Johnston? I'm just wondering if the member, because obviously he's slightly trying to deflect that. Can I ask him how many businesses in his Murray constituent have commented, have come forward to him about the difficulties they've had in accessing Scottish Government support, the confusion, the lack of clarity, the problems they face? How many have come to him? Minister. Ironically, I was about to refer to some businesses in my own constituency as well as the rest of Scotland, because I was also intrigued by Tessie White's comments where she had the audacity to say that this Government, the SNP Government, is not listening to the hospitality sector in Scotland, because I do speak to the hospitality sector. I speak to him in my constituency in Murray and other organisations through my ministerial role as well. What their number one concern is the impact of Brexit on Scotland's hospitality sector, and I put it to Tess White. I put it to Tess White. It is not SNP or Green Ministers who are not listening to the hospitality sector. It is our colleagues in the Conservative UK Government in London. I was also intrigued that Tess White was saying in one hand that the Scottish Government has to be very careful with the impact of our fair work criteria on business and our measures on business, and then immediately afterwards, in the same breath, she said that we should listen to the recommendations as I quote her of the left-wing Jimmy Reid Foundation. I'm sure that the Jimmy Reid Foundation will be delighted that they have a supporter in a Conservative MP on their benches. I just want to address some of the comments that are made by some members. First, Michelle Thompson spoke about sustainable procurement, and many members spoke about procurement. Procurement, of course, is just one of the windows to the fair work agenda, but I know that many members explore some of the issues around procurement. I should say that in public procurement Scotland, we have really happened to pushing out the boundaries of what is permissible for the last two decades in this Parliament. There is now a major focus on ensuring that public procurement contributes to a green and inclusive recovery, and I want to just give Michelle Thompson that assurance. Maggie Chapman referred to the issues around procurement and government contracts in relation to the occupied territories. I should again say that the Scottish Government takes the issue of human rights very seriously and believes those we contract with should take a robust approach to preventing human rights violations in any part of their business, including their supply chain, and that is reflected in much of the procurement legislation. I am embarrassed to find myself to agree with Stephen Kerr on one particular issue, because I will come back to that later. I want to address one point that he did make, which I do not agree with him. I will come back to the issue and I do agree with him to where I do not agree with him entirely, because he did refer, as others did, to the recent rise in the national living wage. However, while he is welcome, that is not nearly as generous as it sounds as others have said. I think that it was Bob Doris who referred to that. It does not support those workers under the age of 23 who are one of the groups most affected by the recession. It does not compensate for the £20 a week cut to universal credit, and it will soon be woefully short of the new real living wage rate, which is set to increase again on 15 November at living wage week in 2021. I read in the newspapers this week that the UK chancellor, the Conservative chancellor, is the richest elected politician in the UK. I do not think that we are particularly surprised that he missed that opportunity to do more for the low-paid in this country. Where I do agree with Stephen Kerr on one issue that he raised in some other members as well is the need to do more to ensure that small to medium-sized businesses do benefit from procurement and the spending of public pounds and their local economies. There is cross-party support, and I hope that I know from many parties to support community wealth building as part of the Government's agenda and the Parliament's agenda going forward. People will be aware that there are five pillars to the community wealth building agenda, one of which is making financial power work for local places, another is fair employment in just labour markets and one is socially productive use of land and property. The minister explains how the SNP Government believes that it can manage work when it disastrously cannot manage its ferries, improve the attainment gap and it cannot manage and improve its drug deaths report. What would help us to deal with the challenges facing working people in Scotland who are having employment powers devolved to this Parliament? We have no confidence in legislating reserved matters such as setting the minimum wage, trade union laws, employment rights, protections against discrimination or enforcement action. Many members, when they were speaking, actually made the case for these powers to be devolved to this Parliament when they were calling for action to be taken, which we do not have the legislative power to take in this Parliament, so I ask you all to get behind the efforts of the Government to get employment legislation devolved to Scotland's Parliament. In closing, the Government has achieved so much over the past few years in terms of the fair work agenda and the absence of legislative powers over employment. We have, through our fair work first criteria and public sector grants and procurement, asked employers to commit to appropriate channels for effective voices for staff such as trade union recognition, investment in workforce development, nor inappropriate use of zero-hours contracts, action to tackle the gender pay gap and create a more diverse and inclusive workplace and payment of the living wage. I remind people that more people pay the living wage in Scotland than in other parts of the UK as well. As from October, two additional criteria have been added to the fair work agenda, employers are asked to offer flexible and family-friendly working practices for all workers and oppose fire and rehire practices. Over and above that, there are other issues that we have been discussing today over conditionality through public grants and procurement as well. I urge everyone to submit to the Scottish Government's consultation on creating Scotland's fair work nation by 2025, but under the SNP leadership and with the support of the Green Party, we are making fantastic progress to creating Scotland as a fair work nation. That concludes the debate on a progressive approach to sustainable procurement and fair work practices. Earlier today, I asked the cabinet secretary for justice about a Scottish prison service policy in respect of prison mail. The policy is that contaminated mail items are given to prisoners upon their release. I explained that officers were angry and worried by that. I further stated that they, quote, feel complicit in what they describe as state-sponsored drug dealing. In response to that, the cabinet secretary stated, and I also quote, I do not think that it is right to call prison officers drug dealers even to try and make a political point. Now, as a new MSP, I try to avoid making personal attacks and false comments about colleagues of all parties. I would like to ask you, Deputy Presiding Officer, with respect to standing order 7.3, relating to members' order in the chamber what options are available to you or to myself in respect of the cabinet secretary's false and deeply offensive comment? I thank the member for his point of order. As the member will be aware, the content of contributions during proceedings is the responsibility of members themselves. Excuse me, Mr Halcro Johnston, I am in the middle of responding to your colleague's point of order. As the member will be aware, the content of contributions during proceedings is the responsibility of members themselves and not a matter for the Presiding Officer. There is a place for robust debate and discussion in the chamber, but members are expected to treat each other with courtesy and respect at all times. Should I or my colleagues in the chair consider that a lack of courtesy or respect is being shown, we will intervene. It is now time to move on to the next item of business, and the next item of business is consideration of business motion 1914, in the name of George Adam on behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau, setting out changes to this week's business. I call on George Adam Minister to move the motion. Thank you, Presiding Officer, and moved. Is Mr Golden trying to price his... We've established today that it doesn't seem to work, perhaps Mr Golden could move. Apologies for that. It didn't seem to work earlier for Mr Coot. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I seek your guidance on how Parliament will allow members to scrutinise the Scottish Government and how this Government operates with the transparency expected of a Scottish Government. Members will have noted the Government's intention to provide a statement on incineration and deposit return, but not until after COP26. Given that the Government has all the evidence now, then why the delay? We can only assume it's because they are going to deliver bad news, news that could embarrass them in front of the world at COP26. Why are the two equally important environmental issues being bundled into one statement? That can only mean less scrutiny. That is to spare the blushes of the SNP Green coalition. In fact, incineration could have been dealt with two years ago. That's when Zero Waste Scotland forecasted that the SNP were headed for more than 1 million tonnes of incineration over capacity, which could see the SNP Green coalition importing waste to burn, but perhaps more importantly, consigning future Scottish Governments to do the same. The Greens already promised a ban on new incinerators in their manifesto, but now they announce a nonsensical review, meaning that more incinerators can be built, which will make Scotland the ashtray of Europe. There has been very little on the deposit return scheme promised for July 1 next year. I remind members to please listen to Mr Golden across the chamber, including on the Labour benches. Very little, despite working on it for a decade, my letter to the minister is still unanswered after a month. This is a Government hiding from parliamentary scrutiny. It's time that the SNP Greens took their responsibilities seriously and allowed the Parliament to question them on their shambolic record on tackling climate change. I call on George Adam Minister to respond on behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau. I thank Mr Golden for his questions. There is no conspiracy in the whole scenario. There is no launch shooter in the grassy knoll. It is effectively just a case of parliamentary business and getting through the parliamentary business. What I will say is that I am trying to be reasonable, as always. I am trying to be reasonable with everyone in the chamber. When requests are made by Opposition parties, I try to work with them. Incidentally, I am trying to be a better person as well. I am trying to make sure that I can see others' points of view and work with them in such a way that we can actually work for the betterment of the people of Scotland. On this issue, it is purely process. As much of what my job as Minister for Parliamentary Business is, much of it is process. The Scottish Government has accepted two statements this week, one from Labour and one from the Conservatives. The request for a statement on action for legal aid solicitors will take place tomorrow, which is what the motion proposes. A statement covering the incineration review has been scheduled for Wednesday 17 November. That is the basis of arguments that the Conservatives have made at the Parliamentary Bureau on a number of occasions. Number one, the Conservatives requested that we lessen the pressure and the intensity of parliamentary business for the duration of COP26. The Bureau accepted and agreed with that proposal. Two, the Conservatives also repeatedly requested that we maximise scrutiny of Government policy. I believe that having it in the date that we are proposing actually gives the Conservatives the opportunity to get more publicity and answer questions, because currently the whole world is quite rightly looking at Glasgow for COP26. I have listened to the Conservatives and the basis of both of their points scheduled the statement on the incineration review for the week immediately following COP26 to allow all members to participate without any conflicting commitments. This is me being reasonable. This is me trying to help colleagues to make sure the flow of parliamentary business can go as easily as possible. It is purely just for the process and not for the conspiracies that the Conservatives believe. I would like to point out that my offers in the Bureau to accommodate the special period in the history of our country when we are hosting the largest gathering of world leaders in the United Kingdom, perhaps ever, was intended to be in the spirit of working across this Parliament in order to facilitate that. I have to say at no point have any of my overtures to the minister for parliamentary business been intended to convey the idea that we were anything less than keenly interested in the scrutiny of this Scottish Government. Therefore, I hope that the minister for parliamentary business understands what he has insinuated by his remarks today and the consequences that will flow from it. That is not a point of order. I will now put the question. The question is that motion 1914 be agreed. Are we all agreed? Are we all agreed? Motion is therefore agreed. We will now move to decision time. In fact, there are no divisions as a result of today's business, so I will now move on to the next item of business after a short pause to allow people to change their seats.