Jackie Dunbar
Scottish National Party · Scotland
“I do not believe for one second that Reform UK cares about people like me; it cares about division and power, and crypto donations from dodgy billionaires. Reform UK does not represent me—it disgusts me. I am under no illusion that folk are frustrated at so much of what is happening, and not happening, in the world today.”
“Some folk who have never struggled before are now struggling, and some folk who have struggled their whole lives now doubt that things will ever get better for them. They are seeing the consequences of austerity, of a lack of investment in jobs and of a lack of spending in their local communities.”
“Anyway, I appreciate that the low-emission zones policy might inconvenience Baron Offord of Garvel, depending on which of his five cars he is driving at the time, but it will add years to the life expectancies of thousands of Scots.”
“At this point, I will take an intervention from any Reform MSP who wants to tell us whether they think that their party is too racist or not racist enough. George Adam: Oh—nothing! Jackie Dunbar: Perhaps I will use some different quotes: “I told you time and time again, I’m protecting the country”. “Enough is enough. I have had enough”.”
“The same folk who were leading the fight against “benefit scroungers” a decade ago when they were in the Conservative Party are now in Reform UK saying that we should “look after our own”. Maybe I am just not seeing what Reform MSPs are believing.”
“I wonder whether the MSPs who have been joining “street patrols” or the ones calling people “strangers” might see some similarities, too. I am not expecting them to stand up and hold their hands up, but those who are capable of quiet reflection may wish to try it.”
The complete record
Every one of 437 lines we hold for Jackie Dunbar, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 5 of 9.
“I turn to Bob Doris’s amendments 235, 258 and 276, which allow further provision in connection with community engagement obligations to be made in future and will enable ministers to legislate for a central accessible portal for all land management plans. The detail of that would be set out in regulations, subject to the affirmative procedure, following appropriate consultation. I think that we would all agree that it is important for LMPs to be easily accessible and to maximise our transparency objectives, and I completely understand the intent of Edward Mountain’s amendments in relation to the matter. Unfortunately, I cannot support those amendments, because they would require the online portal to be delivered by ministers directly and maintained by the land and communities commissioner.”
“Importantly, the provision also has a number of drafting issues, because it does not specify which commissioner is to direct landowners, and the definitions of land are inconsistent with the rest of the bill, which means that they will not cover the holdings that they should. It also makes no provision for enforcement of the commissioner’s direction and, therefore, brings uncertainty and confusion into the bill. That is why I intend to undo the change through my amendment 130, and I urge members to support that. Rhoda Grant’s amendment 131 suffers from similar flaws to the amendments of hers that were agreed to at stage 2 that I have just described. I urge members to reject that amendment.”
“Another amendment from Rhoda Grant that was agreed to at stage 2 covers what is to happen if a landowner is required to produce land management plans but the land that leads to that requirement is spread over multiple holdings. It was suggested that, in that case, the commissioner should direct landowners. I think that the amendment was meant to support other amendments that did not pass at stage 2, which looked to remove requirements for the landholdings counting towards the threshold to be contiguous with one another. As the bill requires land to be contiguous to count towards the 1,000 hectare threshold, that change is not necessary.”
“Rhoda Grant: My point is one for any Government; I am not casting aspersions on the current Government. What would happen if a community on land owned by the Scottish Government feels that its rights under the legislation are not being attended to? The appeal would be to the Scottish Government to do something about that—but the Scottish Government cannot police itself. Mairi Gougeon: The member is absolutely right. I would not expect that to happen either, and that is exactly what the position of the land and communities commissioner, which is independent of the Government, is for. I would expect it to treat us in exactly the same way as it would treat other bodies and landowners who are subject to the measures that we are introducing in the bill.”
“I want to be clear that I want us to be able to set a leading example for how landowners should engage with people who live and work on their landholdings. I do not think that it would be appropriate if, when every other owner of a large landholding is required to undertake that engagement, the Scottish ministers were hiving off the duty to someone else. That would leave crofters on those estates with worse rights on engagement with the landowner than others. Additionally, it is unclear who the independent person should be, how they would be appointed and how they could fulfil the duties when they are not representing the landowner. That would be confusing and could lead to significant and unnecessary costs for the public sector, which is why I ask Rhoda Grant not to continue to press for that change.”
“Amendment 254 would require a landowner to set out what mitigations had been incorporated if pylons were planned for an area. Those mitigations should be made with an independent expert with knowledge of pylon construction. Amendment 255 would ensure that, if pylons were proposed, it would be set out why the line could not be undergrounded instead. If the Government is serious about transparency and giving communities a greater say when it comes to monster pylons, I am sure that it will support my amendments. Mairi Gougeon: My amendment 126 seeks to overturn an amendment from Rhoda Grant that was agreed to at stage 2 that would require the Scottish ministers to appoint an independent person to fulfil the community engagement obligations of crofting estate that is owned by the Scottish ministers.”
“I have a quick question. You have been discussing pylons. What size of pylons do you consider to be unacceptable? Some pylons are more acceptable than others. I genuinely would be interested in knowing your answer to that. The Deputy Presiding Officer: I do not have a view on pylons. Always speak through the chair, Ms Dunbar. Douglas Lumsden: I am disappointed that the Presiding Officer does not have a view on that. When we look at the applications from Scottish and Southern Electricity Networks, we see that the pylons are much greater in size—they are up to 50m tall, if I am not mistaken. They are much larger than the pylons that are in place just now, and people have concerns about that. They also have concerns about the sag height of the cables, and operating farm equipment under them is a big concern, too.”
“Will the minister say a bit more about the steps that the Scottish Government is taking to deliver improvements across waiting lists for youth mental health services? Tom Arthur: We are taking a number of actions. As I touched on in my statement, there has been significant investment in resource over the past decade. There has been a rise in CAMHS staffing in excess of 54 per cent as well as significant increases in our mental health budgets. That is reflected in the CAMHS performance statistics, with the national target being exceeded for the third consecutive quarter and the median wait for people to begin treatment after referral being five weeks.”
“To ask the Scottish Government what discussions the education secretary has had with ministerial colleagues regarding how to support people in Aberdeen to gain the skills and qualifications needed for the energy transition, to ensure that north-east Scotland has a world-leading workforce. (S6O-05052)”
“However, early diagnosis is key, with nine out of 10 people surviving if bowel cancer is found early. Men are more likely to have a positive screening result than women, yet fewer men return their stick. If I can get one message out tonight, it would be this: please do the test—if not for yourself, for your family. You do not even have to leave the comfort of your own home. As I said, if you are diagnosed early, you have a 90 per cent chance of survival: nine out of 10 folk survive. How would you feel if a family member did not do the test because they were too feart and then left it too late? Do not be that family member—go jab your jobbie and stick it in the post. 19:13”
“I say that because, according to the Public Health Scotland statistics report that was published in March this year, for the two-year period up to April 2024, more than 1.9 million folk were invited to complete a home bowel screening test. Two thirds of those folk successfully returned their kit—a 66 per cent uptake. The report notes that “Uptake was higher in females ... than males”. However, although an overall uptake of 66 per cent sounds like good news, that still leaves a third—approximately 600,000 people—who did not return their test. We, as individuals and as a Parliament, can and must do better in getting the message out about how important that wee test is. We must remember that bowel cancer is one of the most common cancers in Scotland. Scotland has the highest rate of bowel cancer diagnosis in the UK.”
“You do not have to put it in a Tiffany box, like Sharon Osbourne used to do before sending it to folk she didna like—you just stick it in the return envelope and post it back to the NHS. It is as simple as that. In his motion, Edward Mountain “congratulates the Scottish Government in taking the lead in bowel cancer screening” and recognises “that Scotland has the most sensitive level of screening in the whole of the UK”. I echo that sentiment and add my congratulations. However, as good as that news is, we as the public, and as individuals, have a part to play, as well. We need to take control of our own health— nobody else is going to do it for us.”
“Through you, Deputy Presiding Officer, I take the opportunity to say to Edward Mountain, following our conversation yesterday morning, that talking about this does not make him vulnerable; it makes him brave, in my eyes. As I know, some folk are too feart to poop on a stick; they just want to bury their heads in the sand, and they would rather not know. However, he went for the test and then went viral with his diagnosis and treatment, and he should be proud of himself for that. As a woman of a certain age who gets the letters from NHS Scotland that ask people to get tested or checked for various things such as asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, smears, mammograms and bowel cancer, I can honestly say that jabbing your jobbie wi a stick is a dawdle.”
“I thank Edward Mountain for bringing the debate to the chamber. Bowel cancer is not a topic that we normally hear being freely discussed, so I thank him not only for bringing it to the chamber for debate but for being a man who is not afraid to speak about his health, and for being someone who was not afraid to speak out during his recovery and talk about his personal experience. I know that he gave folk courage and support by doing so. I also know that it is not easy to talk about things that have had a direct impact on you, especially when you are, as he is, a private person who is not in the habit of discussing publicly your private affairs.”
“That the Parliament agrees that the Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee be designated as the lead committee in consideration of the Contract (Formation and Remedies) (Scotland) Bill at stage 1. That the Parliament agrees that the Economy and Fair Work Committee be designated as the lead committee in consideration of the Digital Assets (Scotland) Bill at stage 1. The Presiding Officer: That concludes decision time. Bowel Cancer Screening”
“Motion agreed to, That the Parliament agrees that the Climate Change (Scotland) Act 2009 (Scottish Carbon Budgets) Amendment Regulations 2025 [draft] be approved. The Presiding Officer: I propose to ask a single question on four Parliamentary Bureau motions. As no member has objected, the question is, that motions S6M-19270 and S6M- 19271, on approval of SSIs, and motions S6M- 19272 and S6M-19273, on designation of lead committees, in the name of Graeme Dey, on behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau, be agreed to. Motions agreed to, That the Parliament agrees that the Social Security (Cross-border Provision, Case Transfer and Miscellaneous Amendments) (Scotland) Regulations 2025 [draft] be approved. That the Parliament agrees that the Winter Heating Assistance (Pension Age) (Scotland) Amendment Regulations 2025 [draft] be approved.”
“On a point of order, Presiding Officer. My app did not work. I would have voted yes. The Presiding Officer: We will ensure that that is recorded. For Adam, Karen (Banffshire and Buchan Coast) (SNP) Adamson, Clare (Motherwell and Wishaw) (SNP) Allan, Alasdair (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (SNP) Arthur, Tom (Renfrewshire South) (SNP) Beattie, Colin (Midlothian North and Musselburgh) (SNP) Brown, Keith (Clackmannanshire and Dunblane) (SNP) Brown, Siobhian (Ayr) (SNP) Callaghan, Stephanie (Uddingston and Bellshill) (SNP) Constance, Angela (Almond Valley) (SNP) Dey, Graeme (Angus South) (SNP) Don-Innes, Natalie (Renfrewshire North and West) (SNP) Doris, Bob (Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn) (SNP) Dornan, James (Glasgow Cathcart) (SNP) Dunbar, Jackie (Aberdeen Donside) (SNP) Fairlie, Jim (Perthshire South and Kinross-shire) (SNP) Forbes, Kate (Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch) (SNP) Gilruth, Jenny (Mid Fife and Glenrothes) (SNP) Gougeon, Mairi (Angus North and Mearns) (SNP) Gray, Neil (Airdrie and Shotts) (SNP) Harper, Emma (South Scotland) (SNP) Haughey, Clare (Rutherglen) (SNP) Hepburn, Jamie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (SNP) Hyslop, Fiona (Linlithgow) (SNP) Kidd, Bill (Glasgow Anniesland) (SNP) Lochhead, Richard (Moray) (SNP) MacGregor, Fulton (Coatbridge and Chryston) (SNP) Mackay, Rona (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (SNP) Macpherson, Ben (Edinburgh Northern and Leith) (SNP) Maguire, Ruth (Cunninghame South) (SNP) Martin, Gillian (Aberdeenshire East) (SNP) Mason, John (Glasgow Shettleston) (Ind) Matheson, Michael (Falkirk West) (SNP) McAllan, Màiri (Clydesdale) (SNP) McKee, Ivan (Glasgow Provan) (SNP) McLennan, Paul (East Lothian) (SNP) McNair, Marie (Clydebank and Milngavie) (SNP) Minto, Jenni (Argyll and Bute) (SNP) Nicoll, Audrey (Aberdeen South and North Kincardine) (SNP) Robertson, Angus (Edinburgh Central) (SNP) Robison, Shona (Dundee City East) (SNP) Somerville, Shirley-Anne (Dunfermline) (SNP) Stevenson, Collette (East Kilbride) (SNP) [Proxy vote cast by Fulton MacGregor] Stewart, Kaukab (Glasgow Kelvin) (SNP) Stewart, Kevin (Aberdeen Central) (SNP) Sturgeon, Nicola (Glasgow Southside) (SNP) Swinney, John (Perthshire North) (SNP) Todd, Maree (Caithness, Sutherland and Ross) (SNP) Torrance, David (Kirkcaldy) (SNP) Tweed, Evelyn (Stirling) (SNP) Whitham, Elena (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley) (SNP) Yousaf, Humza (Glasgow Pollok) (SNP) Against Briggs, Miles (Lothian) (Con) Burnett, Alexander (Aberdeenshire West) (Con) Carlaw, Jackson (Eastwood) (Con) Carson, Finlay (Galloway and West Dumfries) (Con) Dowey, Sharon (South Scotland) (Con) Eagle, Tim (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Findlay, Russell (West Scotland) (Con) Fraser, Murdo (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Golden, Maurice (North East Scotland) (Con) Gosal, Pam (West Scotland) (Con) Hamilton, Rachael (Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (Con) Hoy, Craig (South Scotland) (Con) Halcro Johnston, Jamie (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Kerr, Liam (North East Scotland) (Con) Kerr, Stephen (Central Scotland) (Con) Lumsden, Douglas (North East Scotland) (Con) Mountain, Edward (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Mundell, Oliver (Dumfriesshire) (Con) Ross, Douglas (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Smith, Liz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Stewart, Alexander (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Webber, Sue (Lothian) (Con) Wells, Annie (Glasgow) (Con) White, Tess (North East Scotland) (Con) Whittle, Brian (South Scotland) (Con) Abstentions Baillie, Jackie (Dumbarton) (Lab) Balfour, Jeremy (Lothian) (Ind) Bibby, Neil (West Scotland) (Lab) Boyack, Sarah (Lothian) (Lab) Burgess, Ariane (Highlands and Islands) (Green) Chapman, Maggie (North East Scotland) (Green) Choudhury, Foysol (Lothian) (Ind) Clark, Katy (West Scotland) (Lab) Duncan-Glancy, Pam (Glasgow) (Lab) Grant, Rhoda (Highlands and Islands) (Lab) Greene, Jamie (West Scotland) (LD) Greer, Ross (West Scotland) (Green) Griffin, Mark (Central Scotland) (Lab) Harvie, Patrick (Glasgow) (Green) Johnson, Daniel (Edinburgh Southern) (Lab) Leonard, Richard (Central Scotland) (Lab) Mackay, Gillian (Central Scotland) (Green) [Proxy vote cast by Ross Greer] Marra, Michael (North East Scotland) (Lab) McArthur, Liam (Orkney Islands) (LD) McNeill, Pauline (Glasgow) (Lab) Mochan, Carol (South Scotland) (Lab) O’Kane, Paul (West Scotland) (Lab) [Proxy vote cast by Michael Marra] Rennie, Willie (North East Fife) (LD) Rowley, Alex (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab) Ruskell, Mark (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Green) Russell, Davy (Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse) (Lab) Sarwar, Anas (Glasgow) (Lab) Simpson, Graham (Central Scotland) (Reform) Slater, Lorna (Lothian) (Green) Sweeney, Paul (Glasgow) (Lab) Villalba, Mercedes (North East Scotland) (Lab) Whitfield, Martin (South Scotland) (Lab) Wishart, Beatrice (Shetland Islands) (LD) The Presiding Officer: The result of the division is: For 51, Against 25, Abstentions 33.”
“They play a challenging but vital role in supporting children with significant and often multifaceted needs. I am sure that all members agree with me and deeply value that dedication.”
“Secure accommodation is a specialised form of residential care and is designed to restrict the liberty of children who represent a significant risk to themselves or others. The primary aims of secure care are to keep children safe; to provide intensive support, therapeutic care and education; to help children—importantly—to re-engage with their communities; and to ensure that any deprivation of liberty is absolutely necessary, rights respecting and time limited. Secure care providers work intensively to provide support that focuses on equal access to education, addresses health and wellbeing needs and creates a safe and nurturing environment. However, I fully recognise the extremely complex and demanding nature of the work of secure care providers and local authority teams.”
“It is vital that secure care is more than a holding centre—that it keeps communities safe and keeps young people safe from harming themselves. Children and young people need help to break the potential progression into poorer life chances in adulthood, and secure care can do that by giving them access to the same standard of education as their peers. They must also have their underlying health and wellbeing needs addressed. The system must be one where children are still treated as children, with their rights and wellbeing at the heart of all decisions. The Deputy Presiding Officer: Ask a question, please. Jackie Dunbar: How can we ensure that that happens? Natalie Don-Innes: I fully agree with the sentiments that Ms Dunbar has expressed. We know that children or young people who do not get those chances will have poorer outcomes.”
“I say to refugees, wherever you are from—be that Ukraine, Syria, Afghanistan or elsewhere—if you have fled war or persecution, we will help you to rebuild your lives in Scotland as we work to build a better Scotland for everyone living here. Let us focus on fixing the system and not blaming the folk trapped in it. Let us continue to send out a clear message that Scotland is a welcoming country. 15:39”
“This has been particularly true of local connection legislation, which was suspended with parliamentary approval in 2022, during this parliamentary session. These changes to local connection legislation are completely unrelated to the issue of refugee homelessness—the changes did not alter rules for whether people recently granted refugee status can move to Scotland from elsewhere in the UK, or between Scottish local authorities. Those leaving the asylum system are not deemed in law to have formed a local connection to any area, and thus have always been able to move to a local authority of their choosing.” I wonder whether Mr Findlay bothered to read that briefing or whether he just decided to double down anyway. I am nearly out of time, so let me finish with a clear message. Refugees are welcome in Scotland.”
“The system is broken as a consequence of trying to save a few quid on decision makers, and now we are spending fortunes on accommodating folk in hotels. I can understand why folk are angry about that, but I think that the Tory motion is particularly disgraceful, because it is trying to turn that anger against some of the most vulnerable folk in the country. The divisive language and the misinformation that we have heard are outrageous. Seeking asylum is not illegal. It is a fundamental human right that is protected by international law. On the subject of misinformation, I will read out a bit of Shelter Scotland’s briefing for last month’s debate on a Tory motion on asylum seekers: “Recent debates around the asylum system, refugee rights and homelessness have regrettably led to misinformation being widely shared.”
“I do not think that upholding international law or showing compassion is a bad thing, and I do not think that asylum seekers are the ones responsible for every problem in society today—I usually blame such things on the Tories, and I think that I am usually right to do so. Right now, the asylum system is broken—I blame the Tories for breaking that too, by the way, although I think that Labour could be doing a better job of trying to fix it. For years, there have been far too few resources available to process applications, and losing the Dublin system following Brexit made that worse—Brexit, of course, being the gift that just keeps on giving since the last time a UK Government tried to appease Nigel Farage.”
“I can understand why folk are frustrated at the moment, as we are several years into a cost of living crisis. However, there is consensus that—I have tried to word this very carefully—there are far too many asylum seekers living in hotels. That is the case, but this is where we differ. First, there is an easy way to reduce the number of asylum seekers, which is to process their applications more quickly and better. That would have the knock-on effect of allowing folk the chance to start rebuilding their lives, to get jobs and to find a community to settle in and become a part of. It also means that they are not spending months or even years in hotels. I do not blame the people who are fleeing war and persecution for claiming asylum.”
“In conclusion, I hope that today’s debate has brought the issue to the forefront of folks’ minds and that it goes some way towards getting the message across. The message that I would like to get out there is this: “Don’t risk it. If you are even thinking that you would like to become pregnant soon, just don’t drink.” 18:24”
“The UK guideline for weekly alcohol consumption is 14 units for folk who are not pregnant, and a binge is defined as drinking a certain number of units on a single occasion—six units for women and eight units for men. That sounds simple, but what is a unit? Is it a drink, a glass, a bottle or a can? In fact, a binge, which is the riskiest type of drinking for the fetus, amounts to just two large glasses of wine. That is not an unusual amount for women of reproductive age to drink on a night out or during dinner at someone’s home. It must also be taken into account that alcohol measures poured at home are often two or three times larger than pub measures—that is something that folk should ponder on.”
“We also need to address the drinking culture, including drinking patterns, because this is not only about how much people drink, but about the way in which they drink. As with any alcohol- related issue, the risks to the fetus are typically influenced by three aspects of the pattern of alcohol consumption: the quantity of alcohol consumed; frequency, or how often the mother drinks; and the timing of drinking in relation to pregnancy. The most damaging pattern of drinking for the fetus is heavy episodic drinking, known in the UK as binge drinking. Folk can get a bit of a shock when they find out how small an amount of alcohol can be considered as binge drinking.”
“Sadly, as we have heard, there is no treatment or cure for FASD, and the damage to a child’s brain and body cannot be reversed. However, an early diagnosis and support can, and often does, make a difference. Once a child has been diagnosed with the condition, a team of healthcare professionals can assess their needs and offer appropriate educational and behavioural strategies. Without early diagnosis and appropriate support starting in childhood, FASD can lead to secondary disabilities, including reduced educational attainment and outcomes; mental health and addiction problems; involvement with the criminal justice system; and premature death from violence, accident or even suicide. Early identification is vital, as support can mean fewer mental health issues, better educational achievements and improved life chances.”
“Prenatal alcohol exposure is a significant public health issue for Scotland, with an estimated one in seven babies born at risk of FASD. It is also estimated that between 3 and 5 per cent of people in Scotland could be living with FASD. Fetal alcohol spectrum disorder is a term used to identify the range of physical, emotional and neurodevelopmental differences that might affect a person exposed to alcohol while still in their mother’s womb. FASD is frequently described as a neurodevelopmental condition. The term describes a collection of disorders that are a consequence of altered development of the brain and nervous system, and evidence suggests that early and accurate identification of brain differences and support needs can facilitate better outcomes for those who are affected.”
“I thank my colleague and friend Rona Mackay for again bringing this very important topic to the chamber with a debate on international FASD day and the need for awareness. International fetal alcohol spectrum disorder day falls on the ninth day of the ninth month of each year. That, I am told, is to draw attention to the importance of going alcohol free for the whole nine months of pregnancy. Folk might feel that that is an easy ask; surely it is as simple as “If you’re going to get pregnant, don’t drink.” However, that is not so. As the motion from Rona Mackay states, “46% of pregnancies in the UK are unplanned so without better awareness, people may continue their pre- conception lifestyle until they have a positive pregnancy test”. Many women are into week 4, week 5 or even later before their pregnancies are confirmed.”
“To ask the Scottish Government what assessment it has made of the potential impact on Scotland’s dentistry sector of the United Kingdom Labour Administration’s recent changes to the skilled worker visa. (S6O-05008)”
“A prime example is Techscaler’s partnership with Scottish EDGE, which runs Scotland’s leading business funding competition. Through the Techscaler-sponsored young EDGE award, Techscaler provides funding to innovative founders who are under 30, alongside access to its education and mentorship programmes. This year, 18 Techscaler members won Scottish EDGE awards. From my perspective, it is brilliant to see the ecosystem working together, and long may that continue.”
“Thanks to the work of the Scottish Government, Techscaler successfully raised more than £100 million of capital investment last year, from both public and private sources, and it is supporting businesses across medical technology, artificial intelligence and space. Can the Deputy First Minister say any more about the importance of collaboration with the private sector and of developing confidence in and attracting investment into Scotland’s early talent? Kate Forbes: Collaboration is critically important here. The success of Techscaler members in securing £195 million of investment is a powerful reflection of the confidence that investors have in Scotland, and credit goes to the exceptional founders, whose innovation is driving Scotland’s growth. However, that progress is rooted in collaboration.”
“Paul Sweeney is the final speaker in the open debate. 17:27”
“Shelagh Swanson, the artist, was commissioned to work with the relatives of donors as well as with young folk across north-east secondary schools to create glass pebbles, which have been placed on the walls of the foyer of the ARI’s emergency department, all the way up towards the Sandpiper sanctuary. The installation commemorates the ripples of organ donation, and it is hoped that it will act as a conversation starter. If people see the ripples of organ donation as they are walking in the ARI, I ask them to remember to have that discussion with their loved ones and to tell them of their wishes. [Interruption.] The Deputy Presiding Officer: Thank you, Ms Dunbar. I give a gentle reminder to those in the public gallery that there should be no participation. Tempting though it is, that also includes applause.”
“The circumstances of death that present the opportunity for donation and transplant are incredibly specific, and they mean that our health professionals need to make the best possible use of every chance that they get to help another, because those chances are few and far between. If we can increase the number of chances that our national health service professionals have, we can increase the chances for many more people across our country to lead healthy lives. I say to those watching at home that they should ensure that their families and their next of kin know their wishes. I have been made aware of an art installation in recognition of organ donors that was unveiled very recently at Aberdeen royal infirmary.”
“Indeed, these are difficult and sensitive discussions for anyone. For some folk, it feels a bit gruesome to talk to their next of kin, who often do not want to listen, about what will happen to their kidneys or liver after they have passed. However, it is because death is fundamental to the donor process that we need to have those chats now, before it is too late, and to ensure that our wishes are known. As Christine Grahame has said, only 1 per cent of donor organs are fit for transplant. In 99 per cent of cases, despite the good will and good wishes of those on the register, that generosity cannot, for a variety of reasons, be taken up.”
“The debate takes place in the middle of organ donation week, which is designed to raise awareness of organ donation and the incredible role that it can play in changing folks’ lives forever. It is bittersweet when someone receives a transplant from an organ donor, as everyone is very aware of the tragic death that has led to the much-needed donation. The raw numbers have always been small in comparison to our population—a few hundred transplants a year—but the figures highlighted in Christine Grahame’s motion are deeply concerning. The numbers on the register have continued to grow over time, but there is an issue with those who make a positive decision to be on the register communicating their wishes to their loved ones. That is another difficult, but important, discussion.”
“I congratulate my colleague Christine Grahame on securing this debate on organ donation week. I thank her not only for lodging the motion, but for her lack of fear in broaching subjects that need to be heard but which are difficult to discuss. Most of us are aware of the advances that have been made in medical science and technology and the literally life-saving impact that they have had on folk who would otherwise not survive. If my understanding is correct—I will probably get told if it is not—the first transplant took place in the year that I was born: 1967. The technological leaps forward in the decades since have been astounding. However, such advances will count for very little if our medical professionals cannot find donors in the first instance.”
“This is not the finished article but, as I said, the principles are sound and today’s debate is about agreeing to the general principles of the bill. Further detail can be given and scrutiny can, and will, happen if the bill progresses. However, that can happen, and the benefits of the bill can be realised, only if the bill passes stage 1 today. Let us make that happen. Let us move forward with a simpler funding system and make it easier for colleges, universities and training providers to focus on what they do best, which is delivering the high quality of education and training that gives the Scottish workforce such a strong reputation. Let us get the bill to its next stage. 15:48”
“It says: “The Bill enables an increase in the range, quality and quantity of apprenticeships and work-based learning in Scotland”, and there are commitments to working with and ensuring the involvement of employers. There are also commitments to continuity beyond 2027 in many areas in which that was asked for, which will allow employers to make decisions about apprenticeships now, as—I hope—the bill progresses. I am happy to see a recognition of the demand to expand graduate apprenticeships. I am keen to see where that goes and what doors it opens up, not only for young Scots but for all Scots. Therefore, I have been convinced. I recognise that there are issues that still need to be addressed and question marks over exactly how some things will work.”
“One reason that our committee did not take a position on the bill relates to the cost benefit of what it proposes. What has changed? Graeme Dey, in what might have been one of his final acts as Minister for Higher and Further Education, responded to the committee’s report and offered a range of assurances. For those who do not fancy reading the full 53-page letter before decision time, I will draw out a couple of the highlights. The first is that “the higher cost estimate has been reduced ... by around a third”. If we are basing our decision on cost benefit, cost makes a big difference. On the benefits, I also welcome the comprehensive assurances in relation to apprenticeships. If I had time to read out that section of the response in full, I would, but I do not think that I do.”
“Before I get any more interventions from members saying that the Education, Children and Young People Committee did not take a position on the bill and that I am the deputy convener of that committee, I will cover that point now. Let me start with the first point in the conclusion of the stage 1 report, which says: “Apprenticeships offer valuable opportunities to learners and businesses across Scotland, and make a vital contribution to Scotland’s economy. It is clear from the evidence the Committee heard, that the current approach towards administering and delivering those apprenticeships needs to be improved.” That is my starting point. It is something that was said by many of the folk that the committee spoke to when they offered their support—or their caveated support—for the bill.”
“Just now, the funding to train architects and town planners comes from one organisation, the Scottish Funding Council, while the folk who turn that into reality—our bricklayers, joiners, sparkies and so on—have their apprenticeships funded by a different organisation, Skills Development Scotland. It makes sense to me that those should all be funded by the same organisation. That is what the bill seeks to do. It will ensure that Scotland’s whole education and skills system works as a single, easy-to-navigate system. That is the principle of what we want to achieve. This is stage 1, which is about agreeing to principles, and I will be supporting that principle today.”
“Does she not in fact demonstrate the problem with the bill, in that it misses that point altogether? Jackie Dunbar: The bill is about college, university and apprenticeships, and it encompasses everybody, not just young people. I was just—[Interruption.] Sorry—would you like to come back in, Mr Johnson? Daniel Johnson: At the beginning of your remarks, you were referring explicitly and exclusively to young people. The Deputy Presiding Officer: Always speak through the chair. Jackie Dunbar: I am at a bit of a loss about why that intervention was needed. I will always speak up for young folk. As I was saying, let us take the example of the building industry.”
“Some have even suggested that the bill is a little bit boring, but they are wrong. So often in the chamber, we talk about Scotland’s future and building a better country for the next generation. What we are doing today is about not just building a future for the next generation, but ensuring that they have the skills and knowledge to build their own future. Let us take the example of the building industry— Daniel Johnson: Will the member take an intervention? Jackie Dunbar: I will take an intervention from Daniel Johnson. Daniel Johnson: I am grateful to the member for giving way, but in her opening remarks, does she not demonstrate the exact problem? The skills system needs to become about more than just young people acquiring skills and entering the workforce. It needs to be about people who are already in work acquiring skills.”
“First, as is always the case, I thank the committee clerks, the witnesses and my fellow committee members for their work in scrutinising the bill to date. Secondly, I welcome Ben Macpherson to his new role as Minister for Higher and Further Education. I am looking forward to working with him to ensure that our ambition to give everyone the best start in life extends right through to college, university or an apprenticeship. I also pay tribute to Graeme Dey for his work as the former minister and thank him for all that he did while he was in post. I know that a few folk feel that the bill is just about rejigging how things work behind the scenes, as they can already see a steady stream of well-educated, well-skilled young Scots coming out of our education system.”
“I welcome the announcement of Scottish Government funding for organisations working on community cohesion because we know the importance of that work in promoting inclusion. Will the minister expand on the type of work that the funding will support in order to build integrated communities in Scotland? Kaukab Stewart: We want to support organisations that bring local communities together to tackle exclusion and division. The additional funding stream will support grass-roots organisations working across shared interest areas such as sport, health, wellbeing and cultural activities, bringing communities together to build trust and connections through meaningful dialogue and engagement. We want to support activities that unite and that deliver outcomes that can benefit everyone, regardless of their background.”
“In tandem, it is critical that we see urgent action on decoupling the cost of gas from the price for electricity that consumers pay. Both those actions will make a material difference in eradicating fuel poverty. Those critical policies are necessary to support long-term energy affordability, protect consumers from volatile global fossil fuel prices and support investment in new heat network projects.”