Marie McNair
Scottish National Party · Scotland
“They provide not only advice and support but a voice, ensuring that those affected are heard in this Parliament and beyond. Since my debate last year, we have, sadly, lost two central figures in the fight for truth and justice: David Colraine, a founding member of the Clydebank Asbestos Group; and former MP for Clydebank and Milngavie, To…”
“Mesothelioma is a disease that is rooted in our industrial history, but its impact is still being felt today in Clydebank, across Scotland and throughout the United Kingdom. It reminds us of the human cost of that history and of our responsibility to those who have been affected.”
“Across the United Kingdom, there are around 2,700 new cases each year, including more than 200 in Scotland. However, statistics alone cannot convey the reality of the disease. In my hometown of Clydebank, the issue is deeply personal. Clydebank has paid one of the heaviest prices anywhere in the United Kingdom for asbestos exposure.”
“I say in the strongest terms that knowingly exposing people to a deadly substance without adequate safeguards is not neglect; it is an abhorrent criminal act. The legacy of asbestos is not confined to the past. It continues to affect people across the United Kingdom today.”
“Those are not abstract figures; they represent hundreds of families in one community who have lost loved ones. Clydebank was once described as the mesothelioma capital of Europe.”
“I have campaigned hard on what I have described as the disgraceful three-year time bar, which has denied justice to some victims of asbestos-related disease.”
The complete record
Every one of 347 lines we hold for Marie McNair, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 7.
“Along with our investment in transport and childcare, it will help more parents to enter and progress through the workforce and to increase their earned incomes. That is an important part of the plan.”
“I welcome the delivery plan and the impact that these measures will have on households in my constituency. Will the cabinet secretary set out more detail of the employability support and how parents in Clydebank and Milngavie will be supported to increase their income through work, as well as through access to expanded training opportunities? Shirley-Anne Somerville: I mentioned some of those measures in the answer that I just gave to Willie Rennie, but I will point again to the £9 million going to colleges through the RISE initiative, which will support up to 2,400 parents to access skills and education, as well as the new training access fund and the flexible workforce development fund. That support will benefit people not only in the member’s constituency but across Scotland.”
“The bill seeks to put in place a legal framework that exceeds what is in place to protect people who make other end-of-life decisions. It would allow an assessing doctor to make inquiries and to seek the views of health, social care and social work professionals and those who have provided or are providing care to the person, as the health professional considers necessary. Fulton MacGregor rightly pressed for the inclusion of that provision at stage 2, and I am grateful to him for that.”
“In addition, the Scottish Government has raised deliverability and potential equalities issues that would arise from a difference in treatment on the basis of age, as well as legislative competence issues. In the light of that, although I very much accept the principle, I ask Mr Briggs not to move amendment 170. If he does, I ask Parliament not to support it. On Fulton MacGregor’s amendment 171 and consequential amendment 306, protecting vulnerable adults is of the utmost importance, so I am very sympathetic to Mr MacGregor’s aims. However, the bill already includes clear and strong safeguards to ensure voluntariness and capacity, by providing for two independent medical assessments, specific checks for coercion and referrals to a psychiatrist if there are any doubts about someone’s capacity.”
“On Miles Briggs’s amendment 169, although my bill already requires assessing doctors to inform the person that they may be referred for a social work assessment, the inclusion of such a requirement in relation to mental health services would add an additional safeguard that I believe is both sensible and welcome. On amendment 170 and the related consequential amendments 300 and 301, I recognise the important role that social work and mental health services play and the value that they can add in the various circumstances that are listed in amendment 170 and in ensuring that protections are in place for young adults. However, I am also conscious that the proposed regulating power in relation to practitioner training may raise the same concerns as other training provisions in the bill, which should be dealt with under the section 104 order.”
“I also appreciate Jackie Baillie’s flexible approach, which relies on professional judgment about the degree of involvement from psychiatry and social work professionals to support assessments. The approach is proportionate, especially given the extremely low number of people likely to be affected, and I am content to support amendment 164. 16:15 Similarly, I am inclined to support Bob Doris’s amendments 165 to 168, which would require a specialist palliative care referral to be made in instances in which a patient has not been offered or provided care, or is motivated by the prospect of uncontrolled symptoms. Those amendments would also allow a patient to decline such a referral without being denied access to assisted dying. I think that that strikes a reasonable balance.”
“My concern about amendments 161 and 163, in the name of Stephen Kerr, is that mandating specialist assessments in every case would remove the ability for doctors to take into account individual circumstances, including when there is no clear basis for referral. The effect of the amendments would be to add an unnecessary burden on many applicants about whom there is no doubt as to their terminal illness or their capacity. Thus, there would be no additional safeguard. International evidence does not support that approach and I do not support those amendments. On Jackie Baillie’s amendment 164, I am wholly sympathetic to the aim of ensuring that we safeguard young adults in such a situation, as well as those with diagnoses that are fluctuating in nature.”
“Liam McArthur: As Paul O’Kane and I discussed in exchanges yesterday, I admit at this stage that in the bill as introduced to the Parliament, one of the obvious omissions was that of recognising the importance of the involvement of social work and social care in the assessments that would be required of medical professionals. I have a concern that we seem to be lurching between banning things and making them mandatory, which crowds out the ability of those who have the experience, training and qualifications to exercise medical judgment. In relation to Bob Doris’s amendments 28 and 32, although the provisions in the bill were drafted with the aim of centring the professional judgment of medical practitioners, I appreciate the additional safeguard that those amendments seek to provide and I am content to support them.”
“They will know the person and have an understanding of their circumstances, enriching some assessments. I am confident that the provisions in the bill will ensure that appropriate inquiries are made with experienced professionals, while allowing for the exercise of professional judgment. Therefore, I do not support amendment 157. Paul O’Kane: Mr McArthur seems to accept the broad concept that such inquiries are an important innovation for how we understand all the circumstances that surround a person’s life and their decision. I wonder why he thinks that they should not be mandatory. If there is nothing to worry about and we agree that they are a positive thing, surely they should be done as a matter of course. If there are no concerns, that would be identified quickly and the person could move on.”
“I understand the sentiment behind the amendment, which is to ensure that the process being undertaken is independent, but, for the reasons that I have suggested, denying the independent doctor access to those notes is not necessarily in the interests of the patient. As it stands, they are safeguarded under clinical practice. Paul O’Kane’s amendment 157 would make it mandatory for doctors to make inquiries of at least one health, social care or social work professional with experience directly relevant to the person’s condition, rather than their just having to consider doing so. Section 7 as drafted already requires that, where it is considered appropriate, the assessing doctor make inquiries of health professionals who have recently provided care to the person.”
“In practice, the co-ordinating doctor may record in the patient’s notes concerns or contextual information that highlight important aspects of the person’s condition. Those notes could help the independent doctor to make a fully informed assessment. Preventing that doctor from consulting the co-ordinating doctor’s notes could mean that that crucial context is missed. Brian Whittle: Liam McArthur and I have discussed this at length. My concern is that we are asking two independent medical practitioners, who—we would assume—have a high level of expertise, to come to the same conclusion about the same set of medical conditions. I introduced the amendments because they would ensure that one practitioner could not influence the other. Liam McArthur: Brian Whittle is right to observe that we had that conversation at some length at stage 2.”
“As such, the bill already includes provision to ensure that explanation and discussion about palliative care are available, as is referral for an assessment. Doctors already keep records as a matter of practice and in accordance with requirements. However, although I am not persuaded that amendment 154 is necessary, due to the bill’s other provisions, I am content to accept it should the Parliament consider it necessary and helpful. Brian Whittle’s amendment 155 would add that the independent RMP could not have consulted with the co-ordinating RMP on the case; and would not have been provided with access to any notes prepared by the co-ordinating doctor. There is a risk that the amendment could be counterproductive.”
“As I said, it would be reasonable for clinical practice guidance to strongly recommend face-to-face consultations and to permit them virtually only where appropriate and in exceptional circumstances. On Douglas Ross’s amendment 154, I fully support terminally ill people having access to appropriate advice and support about palliative care, and I am sympathetic to the aim of the amendment. However, as drafted, section 7(1)(a)(iii) requires any doctor undertaking an assessment to discuss and explain to the person “any palliative, hospice or other care available, including symptom management and psychological support”. They must also inform the person “that they can be referred for a palliative care assessment to explore whether any additional support could be provided to them”, and must make a statement on that, as per schedule 2.”
“My default position is that I think that such consultations should be held in person, because I am just not clear how the issue that I raise can be mitigated. Liam McArthur: That is a valid concern. As I said, I would expect consultations to take place in person in the vast majority of instances. However, as Christine Grahame amplified in her intervention, there are likely to be many occasions on which such conversations take place, and there may be instances in which the medical professional feels that it is appropriate for a remote consultation to take place. Nevertheless, the possibility that there would be no face-to-face interaction with the patient seems to me to be vanishingly small. However, I think that it is more appropriate to capture that in the clinical guidance than in the bill.”
“Although there is obvious value in in-person consultations, mandating them in primary legislation reduces the flexibility that some terminally ill people may need for whatever reason. I believe that it would be more appropriate for clinical practice guidance to strongly recommend face-to-face consultations and to permit consultations to be held virtually only in exceptional circumstances and where appropriate. Ross Greer: To return to what the member said about remote consultations taking place in exceptional circumstances, the concern is that the practitioner cannot see who is out of view of the camera, and that is where concerns about coercion come in. Can Mr McArthur detail how that can be mitigated? I am torn on the issue.”
“Amendments 34A and 78A are consequential to Bob Doris’s amendment 23, which requires a doctor to be satisfied that any eligible patient has been offered or provided with palliative care. As I have said, the interaction with palliative care is extremely important, so I support amendment 23. Daniel Johnson’s amendment 153 would require the registered medical practitioner who is carrying out the assessment under section 6(2) or the independent assessment under section 6(4) to have met the person who made the declaration on more than one occasion. I would expect that to happen in the vast majority of cases, not least for the reasons that Christine Grahame mentioned in her intervention. I am concerned about removing discretion from doctors who are involved in making decisions that are appropriate to the circumstances of the individual.”
“The discussions that would need to take place with the individual who is requesting the choice of an assisted death would have to include discussions of palliative and other care options. As we see in other jurisdictions that have introduced laws of this kind, those discussions demonstrate an improved engagement with palliative care that is not there at the moment. I see no reason why that cannot be the case here. Michael Marra: Will the member give way? Liam McArthur: Not at the moment. I worked with Brian Whittle on amendments 22, 34, 34A, 78, 78A, 83 and 83A. I thank him very much for his constructive approach on those amendments and I encourage members to support them.”
“Does Mr McArthur acknowledge that, without first-rate palliative care being available, the bill does not offer terminally ill people a real choice? I know the importance of that point from my own experience. I have seen people coming into the hospice in extreme pain and distress and wishing to be put out of their misery but, within a few days, when their pain was under control and their quality of life had improved dramatically, they wished to live again. Why does the bill not take every step to ensure that people have the opportunity to have not just a discussion but a guarantee of access to such care? Liam McArthur: I think that the bill provides safeguards in that regard.”
“To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to protect women and girls from violence, in light of international women’s day last weekend. (S6O-05625)”
“Tenanted Properties (West Wemyss and Denbeath) 6.”
“I welcome the fact that the recently passed Scottish budget for 2026-27 will invest in Scotland’s housing sector. Can the cabinet secretary speak more to the Scottish Government’s plans to build our future by maximising growth and investment? Màiri McAllan: Marie McNair is absolutely right. The Government has put a great deal of emphasis on driving the delivery of more homes in the coming years and on driving simplicity, scale and speed. That will be done via the record £4.9 billion of investment that we have committed to in the coming four years, coupled with the certainty that we have offered. That is intended to deliver at least 36,000 affordable homes across Scotland and to support our all-tenure ambition by building the strength of the housing sector generally. All of that will be aided by the development of more homes Scotland.”
“To ask the Scottish Government what assessment it has made of the impact of the United Kingdom Government’s reported austerity policies on the Scottish social security budget. (S6O-05603)”
“To understand that level of terror and anguish is hard, and in remembering events like the Clydebank blitz, we must be resolute and clear about one thing: this cannot happen again. We, in Clydebank, resolutely take time to remember the blitz and those who were killed. We also remember the brave Polish sailors of the ORP Piorun, which was docked on the Clyde. They fired their anti-aircraft guns at the bombers in defence of our town, and I pay tribute to those in our town who have done so much to galvanise efforts in their memory, such as Kilbowie St Andrews church, West Dunbartonshire Council, the late Jack Tasker and so many more. Every year, we gather at the communal grave at Old Dalnottar cemetery above Clydebank, and we will always remember those we lost to such evil. The Deputy Presiding Officer: We move to the open debate. 18:47”
“Not only did the people of Clydebank suffer the bombing; they were also burdened with such a heavy charge because of the high replacement costs for capital lost in the form of houses. That was not right. I pay tribute to all those who lost their lives on the tragic nights of 13 and 14 March 1941. Eighty- five years on, their memories live on with the people of Clydebank. Clydebank has always been resilient, and no more so than in the aftermath of the blitz. I am forever grateful to the heroes who saved victims on those fateful nights and who helped with the rebuilding of our town. They will never be forgotten. It is hard for many of us now, in 2026, 85 years on, to comprehend what the Clydebank blitz must have been like.”
“However, Tom McKendrick is correct to say: “Clydebank people were no stranger to hardship”, as those who know the town’s history will know, “the psychological effect was the exact opposite of what was intended. Rather than divide the community and throw it into frenzied panic, it strengthened and immeasurably hardened peoples’ resolve to survive and resist.” The sense of community and of a shared longing, as I mentioned earlier, has never left our town and I hope that it never will. Clydebank paid a heavy price on those nights, but the burden of rebuilding the town fell on the council and the citizens of Clydebank. The replacement of houses resulted in the Burgh of Clydebank being left with an annual deficit of £61,000 for the next 60 years—£61,000 in 1941 would be equivalent to around £3 million now.”
“This was something you couldn’t believe, the screams were terrible, people had lost arms and legs, people were doing what they could to help but it was just too much for them”. “These people were your neighbours, people you had known all your life”. “The dead were laid out in rows in the school … it’s a sight etched in my mind for ever. All those bodies lined up in neat rows, after all that noise it was the silence that got to you”. Among this fear, though, was bravery and solidarity. We will never forget the many brave souls who saved others and who often sacrificed themselves. They are our heroes, who will never be forgotten. The blitz caused irreparable damage and hardship to Clydebank. Many close-knit communities were severed, with many relocated.”
“Fifteen of the Rocks family were killed on the first night at 78 Jellicoe Street in Dalmuir, alongside so many others. Ann Holmes, the daughter of Annie Rocks and Walter Greig, records a heartbreaking account of the impact on her family in the book, “Untold Stories: Remembering Clydebank in War Time”, and I commend it to Parliament. Ann promised her mother that she would honour the memorial to the event every year, and the Rocks family attend the service at the communal grave every year in big numbers. The blitz caused incomprehensible hardship, anger and sadness. For the people of Clydebank, those nights were terrifying, as is made clear in these quotations from Tom McKendrick’s book: “What I’ll never forget as long as I live was the noise and the screams and cries when I was taken to the First-Aid post.”
“People could see Clydebank burning from all over Glasgow—I know from speaking to people that that is one of their memories. It would simply not be possible, in this short speech, to fully depict the devastation and tragedy that occurred. As Tom McKendrick so perfectly put it: “The Clydebank Blitz could not be least described in a single story. It is thousands of tragic experiences bonded together by a single catastrophic event and like all things which entail human activity it is complex.” The blitz had a huge impact on my home town of Clydebank. It was the only town in Britain that was rendered uninhabitable as a result of bombing, and the biggest loss to a single family in the blitzing of Britain was that experienced by the Rocks family in Clydebank.”
“The notion that we are all Jock Thompson’s bairns was felt across the town. That is not to say that it was a perfectly equal society—we know that it was not—but, across the board, the Clydebank sense of community was strong and the people were never complacent, with strikes for better pay and working conditions being part of many people’s lives. Oil was a high-priority target during the war, and Clydebank lay beside what has been described as a category A target, which contained potentially 178 million gallons of fuel oil. At 11:30 pm on 13 March, two and a half hours into the raid, a 250kg mine bomb landed at the junction of Kilbowie Road and Second Avenue in Clydebank, obliterating the town’s water mains, with supplies to firefighting services being instantly cut. Clydebank burned.”
“Clydebank experienced a massive loss of housing, with 12,000 houses damaged and 4,300 destroyed, leaving only seven houses in the area untouched. It resulted in 35,000 people being made homeless. The main targets were the armaments factory at the Singer sewing machine factory works, the John Brown & Company shipyards and the William Beardmore and Company engine works. While most of those in the constituency will now be too young to remember the blitz, the stories and the feeling of sheer horror have been passed down through generations . It is not something that the town will ever forget—nor should it—and it has been, and always will be, part of the primary school curriculum. Clydebank has always been a tight-knit town. Prior to war, it had a dynamic community that truly considered itself to be socialist.”
“I am honoured to have secured this debate to commemorate the 85th anniversary of the Clydebank blitz, and I thank members for supporting my motion. I take the opportunity to thank Clydebank artist and historian Tom McKendrick and many of my constituents for sharing their knowledge of the blitz and shaping the contribution that I will make today. I dedicate this speech to the memory of all those who lost their lives in the Clydebank blitz. On 13 and 14 March 1941, Clydebank was changed forever. During those two terrifying nights, Clydebank was pounded by the Luftwaffe, which dropped more than 1,000 bombs in its raid over the town, killing 528 people and seriously injuring 617. Those are the official figures, but many more died later as a result of their injuries.”
“On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I would have voted yes. The Deputy Presiding Officer: Thank you, Ms McNair. I will ensure that that is recorded.”
“They are tired of false promises, tired of U-turns, tired of being ignored, tired of being treated with contempt and tired of being told that they are wrong—but they are not wrong. They deserve fair and fast compensation now. That is a fact. No more delays. No more lies. I stand here today with my SNP colleagues to urge the Labour UK Government to rethink this awful decision. Labour must reverse this shameful decision now. It is time for the WASPI women to be treated with the respect that they deserve. That is a moral duty. 17:21”
“Alongside my SNP colleagues, I have stood beside these women for years, and I was pleased to see them— including one of my constituents—in the Parliament the other week to reiterate my support. The women were promised, in good faith, that a Labour UK Government would right that wrong, but we have instead seen U-turn after U-turn from the Labour Government. Make no mistake—the Labour Party, the Tories and Reform are no friends of the WASPI women. Only the SNP has been consistent in its support for the WASPI women, and I will continue to speak up about the issue. For years, these women have remained resolute in their beliefs and have never given up, and I know that they will not give up now. However, time is, unfortunately, not on their side. They are understandably tired.”
“It is beyond doubt that the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsmen was clear that these women should be compensated, but the Labour Government has ignored that decision. It is a historic injustice. The DWP’s own research showed that it failed to get the message across and chose to do absolutely nothing about it. The Labour Government has said that compensation would not be a fair use of money, but the WASPI women said it best, stating recently: “If your MP said, ‘paying compensation wouldn’t be fair or proportionate’, neither was it fair not to give adequate warning to the women affected.” In the name of equality, the process has once again left women facing inequality.”
“Behind those figures are real women with deep and complex lives—women who have worked tirelessly, who, during their working life, were paid less than men, did not have maternity rights and might have had smaller private pensions, and who often took on most of the caring responsibilities for the family. Due to Government failings, those women find themselves facing financial uncertainty at a time when they should be able to enjoy the next stage of their life. Since 2015, 405,770 WASPI women have died. That figure should haunt those on the Labour and Tory benches—nearly half a million women have died without even getting the rightful compensation that they deserved. That is truly shameful and a real injustice.”
“I am grateful to my colleague Bill Kidd for bringing this important debate to the chamber. The Labour UK Government’s decision not to compensate the WASPI women is as appalling as it is hypocritical. Prior to being in government, Labour politicians stood beside those women for every photo op and called for compensation, only to desert them once in power. With an election on the horizon, some are arguing that they are still on the side of WASPI women, but the WASPI women are not daft and will not be fooled this time. They know that warm words will not pay the bills. The decision denies as many as 3.6 million women the rightful compensation that they deserve. In my constituency, 4,700 women in East Dunbartonshire and more than 6,000 in West Dunbartonshire have been affected by changes to the state pension age.”
“Màiri McAllan: I am aware of the concerns that have been expressed by businesses about the effect of the UK Government’s delay in publishing its warm homes plan and the uncertainty that exists about future policy and support for heat and energy efficiency measures. I understand MPC Energy’s concerns in that regard. By contrast, this week, we marked a milestone of 50,000 households that have been supported to live in warmer, better homes through our warmer homes Scotland scheme. My officials and I will provide Ms McNair with the best information on how she and her constituents should approach the UK Government in respect of the continuity of support.”
“Energy bills remain around £190 higher than they were at the general election, when the now Labour UK Government pledged to reduce them by £300. I will continue discussions with the UK Government, urging it to use its reserved powers to go further, including through the adoption of a social tariff. Marie McNair: I recently met MPC Energy, a business in Clydebank, to discuss the impact of Labour’s short-sighted plans on its business. MPC has more than 10 years’ experience and has helped hundreds of people on low incomes make their homes energy efficient, but, as a result of Labour’s plans, it now faces uncertainty. Is the cabinet secretary willing to hear more about its work and consider what more can be done to ensure that my constituents and others across Scotland can continue to have access to warm and energy-efficient homes?”
“To ask the Scottish Government what assessment it has made of any impact on Scotland of the United Kingdom Government’s warm homes plan. (S6O-05535) The Cabinet Secretary for Housing (Màiri McAllan): [Inaudible.] The Presiding Officer: Excuse me, cabinet secretary. Can you check that your card is inserted? Màiri McAllan: Apologies for the delay, Presiding Officer. The UK’s warm homes plan acknowledges the importance of improving energy efficiency and supporting households, but it falls short on the meaningful action that is needed to accelerate clean heat and bring down energy bills. Despite promises, the UK Government failed to set out an enduring solution to reduce electricity prices, which continue to plague households in this energy-rich country.”
“The Scottish Government is determined to ensure that we never move away from our principle of working with disabled people to ensure that our policies are right for them. I am proud of what we have done in relation to social security, and I am keen to work with disabled people to see what more we can do in the future. Private Sector Tenants (Discretionary Housing Payments) 6.”
“I welcome the Scottish Government’s first annual joint meeting between the Cabinet and disabled people, which took place at the start of February. Will the cabinet secretary tell us more about the outcome of that meeting and about how disabled people’s lived experience is helping to inform the work of Social Security Scotland? Shirley-Anne Somerville: I thank the disabled people’s organisations and disabled people who came along to take part in the Cabinet takeover, which I hope will be the first of many. It was an informative discussion on a wide variety of issues. I mentioned to Brian Whittle the fear that is being created by the increasing stigmatisation of disabled people and the way that they are discussed by certain sections of our media and by certain politicians.”
“To conclude, although the committee supports the policy objective of the bill to embed sustainable development and wellbeing as primary considerations in public policy making, the majority of the committee concluded that the bill should not proceed at this time to stage 2, due to the potential for overlap, duplication and confusion. 15:02”
“Although I agree that improving public policy coherence and embedding long-term policy making across the public sector is essential, it is vital that that is done in such a way that it does not burden public bodies with overlapping duties. Indeed, it does not seem appropriate, given the Scottish Government’s on-going review of the national performance framework, which will play a significant role in strengthening accountability and embedding wellbeing and sustainable development in all that we do. It would therefore seem more sensible to focus on and complete the NPF reform process, rather than to create new legislation at this time.”
“On part 2 of the bill, regarding the future generations commissioner for Scotland, although the majority of the respondents to the committee’s call for views indicated support for the establishment of a commissioner, concerns were raised that that could result in an overlap between the duties and responsibilities of other commissioners and oversight bodies. That point was highlighted by Scottish Environment LINK, which stated that that could be a key challenge, and by the Children and Young People’s Commissioner Scotland, which did not support the establishment of a commissioner due to the risk of overlap with its office and that of the Scottish Human Rights Commission.”
“That concern was highlighted by many, including Aberdeenshire Council, which described much of what is outlined in the bill as a potential duplication of work. Historic Environment Scotland raised a similar concern about overlaps and similarities between the bill and other legislation and policy initiatives. That was pointed out by the minister, who confirmed that public bodies already have wellbeing and sustainable development reporting duties through the national performance framework and their accountable officers.”
“On the other hand, those who were not supportive indicated that those objectives could be delivered through existing policy and legislation. It is my view, and that of the majority of the committee, that the latter position is correct. Although the committee supports the policy intention of the bill, the majority concluded that it should not proceed to stage 2, for reasons that I will now set out. The central concern that was raised throughout our consideration was the potential for the bill to duplicate existing public sector duties, such as in the Community Empowerment (Scotland) Act 2015, the Climate Change (Scotland) Act 2009, the Procurement Reform (Scotland) Act 2014 and the Child Poverty (Scotland) Act 2017.”
“I speak as a member of the Social Justice and Social Security Committee. I thank the clerks for their assistance with our report and thank everyone who responded to our call for views. The bill would create a new duty requiring public bodies “to have due regard for the need to promote wellbeing and sustainable development” in the exercise of their functions. The committee received a substantial amount of evidence in response to our call for views, with those who were supportive of the bill highlighting a number of reasons for strengthening the integration of sustainable development and wellbeing into public policy. Those included the climate and biodiversity crises, rapid societal and industrial change and the increased use of artificial intelligence.”
“On a point of order, Presiding Officer. My vote would not record. I would have voted no. The Deputy Presiding Officer: Thank you, Ms McNair. I will make sure that that is recorded.”
“There was one fatality on the A9 Perth to Inverness section in the operational records that we have—although sometimes those figures can alter—but we need to be constantly vigilant. That is why I put a great deal of emphasis on road safety investment, and £12 million is being spent on delivering casualty-reduction measures and speed reductions on our trunk road network.”