Karen Adam
Scottish National Party · Scotland
“That is the question that I come back to: who is this growth for? When I think about economic growth in Banffshire and Buchan Coast, I do not think first about a graph or a statistic; I think about the young folk in Buckie who wonder whether there will be a good job for them if they stay in their home town.”
“In my constituency, I see that potential everywhere. Fraserburgh harbour has a master plan that looks to future proof one of Scotland’s key fishing ports. Peterhead port, with links to fishing, energy and trade, is already a massive asset for Scotland.”
“I welcome the cabinet secretary to his new post. It is great to see him in the Parliament. When we talk about the economy, it can sometimes feel like we are talking about something that is quite abstract—something that is separate from people’s everyday lives.”
“It affects access to education, work, freight, business confidence and how quickly and cleanly produce from one of Europe’s most important fishing ports can reach the market.”
“Karen Adam: I thank the member for that intervention because it gives me the opportunity to say that I have already opened conversations and will discuss what next steps the campaign is asking for.”
“The range of amendments before us shows exactly why Scotland needs these powers to be in Scotland’s hands. While other parties pull the debate towards delay, denial, dependence or unrealistic simplicity, my constituents need a serious Scottish plan that is rooted in jobs, bills, climate responsibility and, importantly, a community benefit…”
The complete record
Every one of 357 lines we hold for Karen Adam, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 8.
“Karen Adam: I thank the member for that intervention because it gives me the opportunity to say that I have already opened conversations and will discuss what next steps the campaign is asking for. The SNP manifesto said that there would be support for the campaign, and I look forward to working cross-party to see whether we can help to get that work delivered. The north-east needs a stronger and more bespoke economic focus. We have Highlands and Islands Enterprise, South of Scotland Enterprise and Scottish Enterprise working nationally.”
“It affects access to education, work, freight, business confidence and how quickly and cleanly produce from one of Europe’s most important fishing ports can reach the market. Addressing that is what sustainable and inclusive growth should look like: not only growth that appears in national figures but growth that reaches the communities, workers and businesses that helped to create it. Liam Kerr: I find myself in very strong agreement with the member on the benefits of north-east rail and the Buchan railway line being relayed, as called for by the CNER. What would she have the Government do about that? I certainly think that the Government needs to do proper case studies and get on with relaying the line.”
“In my constituency, I see that potential everywhere. Fraserburgh harbour has a master plan that looks to future proof one of Scotland’s key fishing ports. Peterhead port, with links to fishing, energy and trade, is already a massive asset for Scotland. In Buckie, Macduff, Fraserburgh, Peterhead and right along the coastline, our harbours, ports and communities all have a part to play in Scotland’s economic future, and we must protect it. If we want that growth to be meaningful, we need to connect the dots. We cannot look at economic cases and business plans in silos, which is why, for example, the Campaign for North East Rail’s economic case really matters. Peterhead and Fraserburgh are two of Scotland’s largest towns without a rail link—that is not only a transport issue but an economic issue.”
“That is the question that I come back to: who is this growth for? When I think about economic growth in Banffshire and Buchan Coast, I do not think first about a graph or a statistic; I think about the young folk in Buckie who wonder whether there will be a good job for them if they stay in their home town. I think about the folk across the constituency who are deciding what skills they want to build at North East Scotland College, whether that takes them into fishing, engineering, offshore renewables, construction, care, education or local business and enterprise. I think about the folk who want to raise their families in the towns that they grew up in, because they can see opportunity, stability, a decent standard of living and a future for those who come after them. That is what economic growth has to mean in real life.”
“I welcome the cabinet secretary to his new post. It is great to see him in the Parliament. When we talk about the economy, it can sometimes feel like we are talking about something that is quite abstract—something that is separate from people’s everyday lives. It sounds technical and distant, full of forecasts and figures and a language that does not always mean that much to the people who live with the dire consequences of disastrous economic decisions. The word “economy” has its roots in the management of resources, and that is a useful reminder. Having an economy should never be just about producing more wealth somewhere for someone; it should be about how we use Scotland’s resources, develop our skills, support our industries and ensure that our communities benefit from it all.”
“The offshore energy sector supports 128,400 jobs in Scotland—as far as the stats show—and 90 per cent of offshore workers have transferable skills that are essential for the expansion of renewables. That is the serious path: not shutting down our industrial base, not pretending that climate change is not real and not leaving Scotland dependent on Westminster decisions, unfair taxation, UK market rules, unfair transmission charges or imported energy from other countries. Energy-rich Scotland should mean energy-secure Scots. It should mean skilled jobs, lower bills, stronger communities and a real industrial future with energy resilience. In Banffshire and Buchan Coast, we help to power this country. It is Scotland’s energy. It should be in Scotland’s hands.”
“In any energy planning, we must offer reassurance that we are cognisant of that. For more than 50 years, Scotland’s energy wealth has flowed to the UK Treasury, with hundreds of billions of pounds taken from oil and gas production, yet too many of our communities are still waiting to see the long-term investment that should have followed that. This debate is not about choosing one energy source over another. In Scotland, we have it all. We need to balance a full energy mix to strategically lead us through to what comes next— and we need to have the power to do it our way. Our offshore workers are not yesterday’s story; they are the people who built the skills base that the future depends on.”
“We have seen before what happens when industrial communities are told that the market will sort it out—Thatcher did that to the coalfields. I cannot support the premise that we can simply walk away from domestic oil and gas before the infrastructure, jobs and alternatives are fully in place. We must work at pace. My constituents are fearful. They consistently raise with me the fact that oil and gas demand has not disappeared. They ask me about whether that energy, which we still use, should be produced domestically by our own skilled workforce, under our standards, while we build the transition properly, or whether we should make ourselves more dependent on imports, global shocks and political decisions made far away from Scotland by people who do not care about our communities.”
“The range of amendments before us shows exactly why Scotland needs these powers to be in Scotland’s hands. While other parties pull the debate towards delay, denial, dependence or unrealistic simplicity, my constituents need a serious Scottish plan that is rooted in jobs, bills, climate responsibility and, importantly, a community benefit. At one end, there are those who speak as though net zero is the problem and as though Scotland should turn away from the renewables, hydrogen, carbon capture, grid upgrades, apprenticeships and offshore wind developments that young people in my constituency and across the north-east are already preparing for. I cannot accept that. That would not protect Banffshire and Buchan Coast. It would strand us. It would leave communities with nothing to transition into.”
“The question that I bring to the chamber is simple: how can communities that help to power the country still have households that cannot afford to heat their homes? That is not just unfair; it is a failure of how energy is governed. Citizens Advice Scotland’s latest energy briefing lays bare the human cost of that failure. The average energy debt is more than £2,800, which rises to £3,200 in rural areas. That is not just a statistic on a page; it is someone sitting in a cold house, trying to stretch their shopping, worrying about fuelling the car and being able to afford to fill up the heating oil, provide for their bairns and pay all the extra costs that come when someone lives further away from the centre of power. That is why the debate matters.”
“The Acorn project at St Fergus shows how carbon capture, utilisation and storage, alongside hydrogen, could help to make the north-east central to the next chapter of Scotland’s energy future. Liam Kerr: The Acorn carbon capture project was promised £80 million by the Scottish Government in January 2022. To date, not a single penny has been paid out. Will Karen Adam tell us when it will be? Karen Adam: I remind Liam Kerr that I am not a member of the Government, so I do not have the facts to hand. Investment was pledged to the Acorn project to match and support what the UK Government had put into it. However, the UK Government snubbed the Acorn project and left it on the back burner. That was pure politics, because it does not want Scotland having anything.”
“It is not a place where the people need energy explained to them from any distance; it is a place that has helped to power this country for decades. During my campaign, I was asked to speak up for constituents and not to shy away from the difficult questions. At almost every single door that I knocked, people raised the issue of energy. St Fergus regularly supplies around a third of the UK’s natural gas. Peterhead power station provides essential flexibility to the grid. Moray East wind farm, which is operated and maintained from Fraserburgh, and Moray West wind farm, with its operations and maintenance base at Buckie, sit off our coast, generating power on a scale that most countries would envy.”
“Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I welcome you to your role. It is an absolute honour to stand here again as the MSP for Banffshire and Buchan Coast. I want to be clear from the very start that, in my constituency, energy is not a theoretical debate. We see it, we work in it and we live beside it, yet still too many people pay through the nose for it. From Buckie to Banff, along the coast of Fraserburgh, St Fergus, Peterhead and Boddam, Banffshire and Buchan Coast is rural, coastal and, in some parts, industrial. It is very skilled and, importantly, it is energy rich. In my constituency, we have families who have built their lives around oil and gas, and our young people are already training for the renewable and low-carbon industries of tomorrow.”
“I, Karen Adam, do solemnly, sincerely and truly declare and affirm, that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to His Majesty King Charles, his heirs and successors, according to law. The member repeated the solemn affirmation in British”
“Màiri McAllan: I share Karen Adam’s view on the importance of specialist housing. To be clear, I expect local authorities to ensure that the housing needs of their older population are met through the provision of high-quality and well-maintained homes. In that regard, I am pleased to advise that, just this morning, I published revised local housing strategy guidance to support local authorities in that work. The guidance makes absolutely clear our expectations in relation to older people’s housing, which includes the sheltered provision that Karen Adam has shone a light on today.”
“We also continue to offer flexible grants through the affordable housing supply programme for the delivery of specialist housing where that is required. Karen Adam: Over the past five years, in representing Banffshire and Buchan Coast, I have met many older constituents who are deeply worried about the future of such complexes. Those cases have touched my heart, and they are urgent. Those people want to stay independent and they want homes that are secure, modern and properly maintained. With demand set only to grow, does the cabinet secretary agree that sheltered housing must be treated as a priority? How will the Scottish Government ensure that local authorities such as Conservative-led Aberdeenshire Council, which is closing sheltered housing, plan for more of it, not less?”
“To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to ensure that older people’s housing, including sheltered housing, is prioritised in local housing planning and delivery. (S6O- 05711) The Cabinet Secretary for Housing (Màiri McAllan): Local authorities, as statutory housing authorities, are required to assess housing requirements locally and to set out how those will be met in their local housing strategies and development plans. That includes requirements for accessible, adaptable and wheelchair housing and housing that meets the needs of older people, including sheltered housing. The Scottish Government works closely with our partners in local authorities to support the development of those strategies and to ensure that identified priorities are reflected in the strategic housing investment plans.”
“The Scottish Government is doing all that it can with the levers that are available to us to support Scotland’s skilled oil and gas workers to ensure that they can carry their expertise and experience into different roles as the energy sector evolves. I am pleased to report that more than 400 oil and gas workers have been approved for funding, supported by careers advice, to access training that is related to roles in the sustainable energy sector through the oil and gas transition training fund pilot. Earlier this week, the Deputy First Minister announced new funding to support 350 workers at ExxonMobil’s Mossmorran ethylene plant to receive training and employment support at Fife College. That builds on the reskilling and job support that we have provided at”
“It is Labour’s reckless decision to continue the energy profits levy, but it was started by the Tories, and it is causing hundreds of job losses. Experts are warning that it is going to cost thousands more. It is going to undermine energy security and the just transition that we rely on, and it will prevent billions in potential investments. Does the cabinet secretary agree that Westminster is sabotaging the chances of a fair transition? Can the cabinet secretary expand on what the Scottish Government is doing to support Scotland’s energy workers? Gillian Martin: It is not just me who agrees with Karen Adam; Offshore Energies UK and Scottish Renewables also agree that the energy profits levy is putting a just energy transition at risk.”
“Presiding Officer, “Labour are doing to Aberdeen what Margaret Thatcher did to Middlesbrough, and it’s utterly shameful.” Those are the words and assessment of GMB general secretary Gary Smith on the impact of the Labour United Kingdom Government’s policies on the north-east and areas such as my Banffshire and Buchan Coast constituency. Does the First Minister share his concern, and does the First Minister agree that we do not address the cost of living crisis by making more people redundant?”
“To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to improve the reliability and accountability of bus services in rural and coastal constituencies. (S6O-05631)”
“Let us listen to the concerns and be honest about what still needs to improve. However, simply painting Scottish education as a story of failure completely misses the mark. We need a whole- community approach involving families, local services and the third sector. No school should be left carrying the pressures alone. If we are serious about improving outcomes, let us acknowledge the good, be honest about what needs to change and, importantly, be constructive. Let us also stop the silo working, because a lot of this rests not only in the education portfolio. As I have said, it is about a whole-society approach. Let us involve our young people in these discussions, because not including that lived experience risks missing the point. 15:19”
“Leadership and culture matter, and there needs to be a shift in understanding in many ways. As Dr Jason Lang put it so well, if a supermarket shelf is too high for half of your customers, you do not build a whole individualised support system around the bad design—you lower the shelf. That is a key point, and I agree that we need to reassess systems. Issues are arising now, and this is a new and growing challenge. Post-Covid, education is in a very different setting, and we are just beginning to understand that impact. I know that the cabinet secretary has been listening and acting on that point, and it is important to have those constructive conversations. Schools need support, but we also cannot keep expecting schools and teaching staff alone to carry the pressures. We need to change wider systems.”
“This cannot become a debate in which we pull everything down and ignore people who are quietly getting on with it and getting it right every single day. I remember being in a high-level meeting, when I was a local councillor. I will not risk identifying anyone, but I heard someone say that autism is caused by too much screen time. That told me a lot about why there were so many barriers for my family and for other families around that area. I have also sat in a meeting with one of my own children and heard the words, “You cannot blame your ADHD for that. That was just you.” If anyone wants to say that attitude is not a part of the issue, I tell them plainly, from lived experience, that it is. No cabinet secretary can control every individual’s attitude in school, and ministers cannot legislate away that type of ignorance.”
“It is not always about money or process. I will focus my comments on additional support needs. Sometimes it can be about attitudes, sometimes it can be about barriers, and sometimes it can be about gatekeeping and misunderstanding getting in the way of a child getting the support that they need. If we are serious about improving ASN delivery, we need to be honest about that and not shy away from it. I have also seen the flip side, in a personal capacity, with my children and grandchildren, and professionally, with my young constituents. I have seen them thrive when they have an attentive, understanding teacher with them, and I have seen the difference that good practice makes. There are fantastic examples of that across Scotland.”
“As the cabinet secretary said, there is always room for improvement. However, that does not mean that it is a story of blanket failure. I look at this through my own lens. I have children who have been through the school system, as I am sure that many of us have. Willie Rennie: If Karen Adam does not think that it is blanket failure, will she identify some failure in what has happened in the past 10 years? The Deputy Presiding Officer : I can give you the time back. Karen Adam: I identified in my opening remarks that we are not saying that the situation is perfect. There are areas that need improvement. The cabinet secretary said that herself. However, it is not blanket failure—absolutely not. I have lived experience of things that have not gone well, and it is important that we talk about those things.”
“This debate cannot be reduced to the idea that Scottish education is simply failing, because that is just not true. Yes, there are pressures; yes, there are areas where improvement is needed; and yes, Opposition parties are right to raise those concerns. However, they should always be honest enough to recognise the good that is being done, too. If everything is framed through a negative lens, all that it does is risk demoralising teachers, support staff, pupils and families who are living the daily reality of school life. The truth is that the picture is more mixed than that. There is record funding going into education, continued investment to tackle the poverty-related attainment gap, support for additional support needs, and progress in outcomes, too. That does not mean that the job is done; clearly, it is not.”
“I have made representations to make it clear that applying a Barnett-based population settlement is inappropriate for land and sea-based support and that it fails to recognise the potential of Scotland’s land and seas to contribute significantly to the UK’s climate and restoration targets.”
“The support that we deliver through the FFIS is in addition to the most generous package of support on these islands, including more than £100 million in voluntary coupled support for livestock producers. In contrast to the UK Government, we have committed to supporting active farming and food production through direct payments, to provide the certainty that the industry asked for, and we have brought forward payment dates to ensure that farmers and crofters are paid at the earliest possible opportunity, to assist with cash flow. Funding for Scottish agriculture is no longer separately identified in the UK Government’s settlement.”
“Does the minister agree that the £21.4 million investment, which will be augmented by at least a further £14.25 million this financial year, in addition to the most generous direct support package in the UK, highlights that positive action is being taken to invest in our rural businesses, which is in stark contrast to a UK Labour Government that is turning its back on our food and our farming? Jim Fairlie: Karen Adam is absolutely correct. Despite an extremely challenging budget situation, the Scottish Government will invest more than £660 million in support for our farmers and crofters under the Scottish Government’s budget for 2026- 27, which is similar to the amount that was allocated for 2025-26.”
“We were promised the broad shoulders of the UK, but people in my communities do not feel at all upheld by UK broad shoulders. Instead, they feel weighed down by decisions that have been made elsewhere. Scotland can do better than this. With full powers in our hands—the hands of an independent Scotland—we can keep more resources here and invest in our public services in a way that people deserve. The motion for debate is spin, dressed up as concern. My constituents deserve honesty and real solutions, and that is what I am offering today. 13:01”
“People deserve to know that, because it means that some of what we are seeing was a choice and was not fate. I will make a constructive call: when Aberdeenshire councillors set their budget later this month, I ask members on the Conservative benches to speak to their colleagues, asking them to work with the SNP council group and across parties to protect the most vulnerable. They must stop the blame game and do the hard work that it takes to get consensus for the benefit of the community. When cuts hit disability day services, that is not an abstract saving line, because families are left carrying the weight on their own. If we truly care about the ageing population, we cannot ignore the people who need support now or the carers who are already at breaking point. If Conservative members genuinely want a way forward, there it is.”
“There are two issues that we need to bear in mind: first, how the pot is shared out through COSLA’s distribution process; and, secondly, what happens after that. Councils choose priorities locally, and that local accountability matters. Councillors are democratically elected to make those decisions. What the motion tries to glide past is the fact that Aberdeenshire’s budget choices are made by the Tory council administration—it is those councillors who decide what is protected and what is cut. However, time and again, we see the same trick: local cuts are made, and then the Conservatives point to Holyrood and say, “It’s not our fault.” There were alternatives. In Aberdeenshire, for example, the SNP council group put forward a different budget proposal and priorities to reduce the damage, but those options were rejected.”
“Let us say the quiet part out loud: public services did not get stretched by accident. They have been systematically squeezed for years by UK austerity. People at home do not need MSPs to explain what pressure looks like. They feel it in their everyday lives, and I see it reflected in my casework. I agree that rurality, distance, harsh weather and an ageing population mean that it costs more to deliver services in Aberdeenshire, and Brexit has caused a serious labour shortage. That is why the Scottish Government has ensured that local government funding in Scotland is at record levels. Councils will receive almost £15.7 billion in the upcoming budget, and that matters. I am not saying that that will solve everything, but it cuts clean through the idea that the Scottish Government is simply not putting money into local services.”
“I am grateful to have the opportunity to debate the motion, and I thank Alexander Burnett for bringing it to the chamber. However, there is something quite ironic about the subject of the debate, and I will not shy away from calling that out. We cannot let the Conservatives off the hook for their record or for what is happening locally. Over the past decade and a half, they had ample opportunity to do something about the situation, and they chose not to. In fact, they chose to do the opposite. Conservative politicians have a track record of voting for public spending cuts. That is on the public record. That is the ideology of Conservatism. The Conservatives cannot spend years squeezing the state and demanding tax cuts for millionaires and then call for a bigger share of a pot that, through their design, is smaller.”
“To ask the Scottish Government how the additional £10 million of funding for community justice services announced in its draft budget 2026-27 will be allocated. (S6O-05528)”
“It is about being honest that children have rights, too, and that schools should be a place where learning builds understanding, not barriers. The bill strengthens children’s rights, protects RME as education and gives schools a clearer footing. I will be pleased to vote for it. 19:34”
“Part 2 of the bill, which is technical but important, amends the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (Incorporation) (Scotland) Act 2024 to place a duty on public authorities not to act incompatibly with UNCRC requirements when carrying out functions under acts of the Scottish Parliament. The bill limits that amendment so that, where a public authority is compelled to act in such a way by another act, it is not forced into an impossible choice that risks the continuity of an essential public service. There are also safeguards should such a question of exemption arise in legal proceedings, including notification to the Lord Advocate, the Children and Young People’s Commissioner Scotland and the Scottish Human Rights Commission. The bill is not about taking away faith from anyone, and it is not about dismissing parents.”
“I welcome the stage 3 changes that have been agreed today that strengthen how that will work in practice, including provisions on guidance for schools, annual reporting on withdrawals from religious observance and a review after three years. That matters, because we should come back to the legislation with evidence and not just assumptions. If the Parliament has agreed a consultative route to consider an independent right for a child or young person to request withdrawal from religious observance in future, I welcome that approach, because it allows proper consultation and scrutiny before any further change is made.”
“It helps pupils to learn about and from different religions and belief groups, and it helps them to explore ethical questions and values, which I think we can all agree is needed in our education systems now more than ever. For the avoidance of doubt, nothing in the bill stops religious observance—it simply makes the decision making around it fairer. In the world that our young people are growing up in, with division being fed online every day and misinformation travelling faster than facts, it is more important than ever that we have the broad grounding provided by RME—not so that all young people think the same, but so that they can understand difference without fear and can disagree without dehumanising.”
“We also heard genuine concerns about family conflict and the position that teachers can possibly be put in. For me, the answer is not to pretend that those concerns do not exist, and it is not to push the child to the side, either. The answer is to provide a clear process that puts the child’s views into the decision and then backs schools with guidance and consistency, so that nobody is left guessing. I am genuinely pleased that, with the bill, we will have a clear separation between religious observance and religious and moral education, and that we will have removed the right to withdraw from RME, which is a measure that I advocated for. RME is education. It is one of the eight core curriculum areas, and it is delivered in an objective, critical and pluralistic manner.”
“The bill is about children’s rights showing up in the real world—in the school day and in the decisions that adults make that can change how a young person experiences their education. Parents have had a long-standing right to withdraw a child from religious observance. The bill will bring children’s rights into that reality in a way that schools can operate with. When a withdrawal request is received, the pupil must be told that the request has been made. The pupil has the right to object, and the school must take account of the pupil’s views with regard to their age and maturity. I convened the lead committee that took evidence on the bill. To be clear, I am not speaking as convener today; however, I want to say that hearing the evidence made it clear how easy it is for children’s voices to be missed, although nobody intends harm.”
“Families deserve consistency, children deserve dignity, and staff deserve a system that supports them in keeping everyone safe. The Deputy Presiding Officer: George Adam is the final speaker in the open debate. 15:29”
“I also note and understand that schools are operating in really tough conditions. Distressed behaviour has increased, workloads are heavy and staff safety matters, too. That is exactly why we must get our approach right for everyone involved. I believe that we can both protect children’s rights and support staff with clear, workable expectations, training and a culture that learns rather than blames. We must refine definitions to avoid ambiguity and we must ensure that the practical operation strengthens relationships rather than weakens them. I support the motion to agree to the bill’s general principles at stage 1, with parents and carers at the very forefront of my mind and with a clear expectation that definitions can be tightened at stage 2.”
“I am glad to see that the one-year review is now under way, with a final report expected in March 2026. I do not see this as an either/or situation. The bill would put key expectations on a statutory footing. I note that the Government will support the general principles of the bill at stage 1, while being honest about the amendments that might be required. I think that that is a responsible approach, because it respects the complexity of the matter while giving us the chance to get the detail right at stage 2. What I hear from parents and carers is not a desire to punish staff; it is a desire to be treated as a partner, to be informed promptly, to have an accurate record, to know that there is clear national expectation, and to ensure that children’s rights are not optional or dependent on a postcode.”
“The petition that was lodged in the Parliament back in 2015, and another lodged with the Children and Young People’s Commissioner Scotland in 2018, highlighted inconsistent practice across local authorities and a lack of monitoring. Those are not small issues. If practice is inconsistent, rights are inconsistent. If monitoring is weak, learning and trust are weak—and trust is what families need most. I therefore welcome the Scottish Government’s guidance that was published in November 2024, which is built around relationships and rights, prevention, de-escalation and post-incident support. That guidance matters, and it was developed with the engagement of stakeholders, including parents, education staff, local government and unions, which is really important.”
“For too many families, harm has been caused not just by an incident itself but by what comes afterwards—the uncertainty, the delay in getting answers, the lack of clarity and, sometimes, the feeling that they are being kept at arm’s length from information about their own child. That is why parents and carers have pushed for consistency, transparency and change that are real, and not just well meaning. I come to this debate not just as an MSP but as a parent of children with additional support needs. I have witnessed restraint and seclusion being used on my own children in primary school. Even now, that memory causes frustration. I send my whole-hearted support to parents, children and young people affected by this issue. I share their frustration, and I understand.”
“I will start my remarks where the public conversation on the bill started, which is with the parents and the carers who have had to live through something that we should never normalise in any school setting—not for any child, and not in any part of Scotland. I pay tribute to campaigners Beth Morrison and Kate Sanger for their strength and determination, to Daniel Johnson for believing in them and in their plight, and to the Education, Children and Young People Committee for its measured and thorough report. Restraint and seclusion should only ever be used as a last resort, to prevent injury. That is the Government’s position, which I support. Use should be rooted in children’s rights, safety and basic human dignity.”
“Seeing our efforts to pass down that history being picked up and guarded is exactly what we must aim for because, without that, remembrance risks becoming something that we mark rather than something that actually changes us. It is about not just remembering the dead but protecting the living. I hope that we listen, learn and carry the lessons forward, not just in words, but in deeds and in the choices that we make to protect our human rights and values and have humanity every day. The Deputy Presiding Officer: Stephen Kerr is the final speaker in the open debate. 13:26”
“Sometimes, they look official; sometimes, they look legitimate; and, sometimes, they present as order. She went on to describe how Jewish people were stripped of their humanity, gradually, through language, labelling and being spoken about as lesser, a problem and something to be managed. As I sat listening, it was impossible not to reflect on the power of language and how easily harm can be justified once people are never seen as fully human. The theme for Holocaust memorial day this year is bridging generations, and it was great to see at that event a pupil, Finlay Cleland, from Banff academy in my constituency, reciting a poem that he had written after visiting Bosnia, where another horrific genocide was committed. It gives me hope to see young people taking note.”