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 2 of 8.
“She spoke about her childhood during the war: about the fear that was constant, about hiding and about the calculations that she and her family had to make again and again simply to stay alive. Those were not abstract decisions—they were human ones, made under unimaginable pressure, where a single mistake could cost the family everything. She spoke about living in France—in occupied territory—and explained that her family was hiding from not just Nazi SS soldiers but the Vichy police—ordinary police officers, wearing uniforms, representing the institutions that people were meant to trust. She did not draw parallels to the present day, and I am not claiming to do that on her behalf, but it was a reminder to me of something deeply important—that threats do not always look like what we might expect.”
“Six million Jewish men, women and children were murdered by the Nazi regime and its collaborators, but alongside them, there were people, not necessarily Jewish but with other characteristics, who were murdered, too: Roma people, disabled people, deaf people, LGBT people, political opponents and others who were deemed unworthy of life. That was not an accident of history—it was a result of ideology, dehumanisation and systems being turned against people. I recently attended the Holocaust memorial day event in the Scottish Parliament, and I want to reflect on that experience because it has stuck with me, as these events often do. We heard directly from a Holocaust survivor.”
“I thank Kenneth Gibson for bringing the debate to the chamber, and I pay tribute to the wonderful contributions from members across the chamber, in particular the exceptionally moving contribution from Beatrice Wishart. These debates matter, because they give us the space not just to reflect on history and on the past, and to think of all those who were lost, but to consider what that history asks of us here, now, today. Marked on 27 January, Holocaust memorial day falls on the anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz—a place that has come to symbolise the sheer scale of the brutality of the Holocaust.”
“It builds confidence in a true, authentic way—not confidence that is put on in order to mask ourselves or to provide us with a way of showing up in society, but a true, authentic transformation within a person. Gaining that real confidence is revolutionary. It is an issue that is pertinent to everybody in the chamber. I once again thank Emma Roddick for bringing the issue to Parliament, and I hope that the Scottish Government looks seriously at the programme to see how we can roll it out across the rest of Scotland. 13:05”
“Adults tend to say that we are preparing young folk for the risks that they might face, but we do that and tell them how they are falling behind, instead of being positive and giving them the opportunity to shine, which is exactly what Growing2gether does. I will certainly take that back to my constituency and talk about it. I also have a little understanding of mentoring toddlers because I have had six children and know exactly what sort of patience that takes. You have to show up and be kind, and you must be consistent. That is a lot to learn at a young age, and—believe you me—toddlers will find any loophole that they can. Of course, they are also good fun. The programme is not just good for the wee ones; it is good for all who are involved.”
“Most of all, I say, “Well done,” to the young people who have stepped up and given it a go, and to the wee toddlers who have benefited and are at the heart and core of that work. The motion talks about young people who are dealing with a lot, such as poverty, mental health challenges and trauma, with everything that comes on top of that, including living with the pressures of modern times. None of us can pretend that we do not see that in our own communities. I see it in my Banffshire and Buchan Coast constituency, where we have loads of young folk who have really good hearts and are good kids but are just carrying a bit too much. They may have had a few years of being told what they are doing wrong most of the time.”
“Instead, it is about actually handing responsibility to young people, saying that we trust them and letting them be needed. That is a lot: it is massive, but it is actually genius. I say a proper, “Well done,” to everyone involved in making the programme happen, including the staff of Growing2gether and the facilitators on the ground, as well as the school and nursery staff who make space for the work and keep it going week after week, which I know is not easy when people are already juggling everything that they have to do to look after nursery-age children. I should perhaps declare an interest, because I used to chair a local playgroup, so I have a little bit of insight.”
“I congratulate Emma Roddick on bringing the debate to the chamber. I am absolutely delighted to be able to speak today because this is exactly what members’ business is for—it allows us to shine a light on work that genuinely changes lives but often does not get the attention that it deserves. When I first read the information about what Growing2gether actually does in pairing young people with toddlers in nurseries, so that those young people can become mentors, I thought that it was a simple idea, but it is really brilliant. The programme is not about giving young people the kind of help that adults sometimes talk about, when we step in to help them fix themselves by telling them what to do, what is wrong with them and why they cannot make progress.”
“In addition, some ambitious agreements are being worked on with our island communities, such as the accelerator model for Shetland, Orkney and the Western Isles, which has the potential to lever in hundreds of millions of pounds of investment. Again, I am happy to keep the Parliament updated on those developments. The Presiding Officer: That concludes the ministerial statement. There will be a short pause before we move to the next item of business. Crofting and Scottish Land Court Bill: Stage 1”
“I welcome the budget, which shows that Scotland is in safe hands with this SNP Government. In comparison to previous disastrous Westminster Governments, this Government is putting the most vulnerable at the heart of its budgetary decisions. What will the budget do for rural communities and our rural economy, particularly against a backdrop in which Westminster has slighted our rural communities? Shona Robison: There will be substantial investment in our rural communities. That includes continuing the work to support our agricultural sector and also investment for peat restoration and forestry. Those are important investments, not just for local economies and jobs but for our climate ambitions.”
“To ask the First Minister what action the Scottish Government is taking to support those affected by fuel poverty, in light of the recent rise in energy prices and their potential impact on the cost of living for households in Scotland. (S6F-04571)”
“That is the direction— The Deputy Presiding Officer: You need to conclude, please. Karen Adam: Therefore, I support the desire for Parliament to recognise swimming pools for what they are—essential community infrastructure. Keeping pools open protects lives, improves health and reduces inequalities— The Deputy Presiding Officer: You do need to conclude. Karen Adam: —but we must also acknowledge that funding requires creative thinking. 17:06”
“When electricity and heating costs spike, that does not just tighten budgets—it can take a facility from a difficult situation to a completely unsustainable one almost overnight. That pressure is often felt the hardest in rural areas. We should also be honest about where the main levers on energy pricing and regulation sit, because it is not at Holyrood. When local public services are being squeezed by bills that feel completely out of proportion, the frustration is real and it should be directed at the system that sets those costs. Why, in an energy-rich Scotland, are bills so high? I am glad to see that strong practical work is under way on the condition of Scotland’s pool estate and on what a sustainable future looks like, including energy efficiency measures that reduce operational costs and emissions.”
“That history matters, because it tells us what communities valued enough to build and what families expected would be there for the next generation. The reality is that the pool has now been closed for a few years and it would require additional work to reopen. We all know that, once something shuts, it can be far harder to get it back, and that is why engagement matters. When facilities such as that one are at risk, communities need time to work with councils and partners on practical solutions. If decisions arrive abruptly, people lose not just the facility but the chance to organise, to shape alternatives and to build something sustainable while there is still momentum and good will. We also need to be straight about what is driving so many closures. Pools are energy- hungry buildings.”
“Local authorities have to make difficult decisions, but they also have choices about what they prioritise and whether they fully weigh up the long-term impact when a community facility is lost. I do not shy away from saying that all spheres of government are operating within tight fiscal constraints, but if we consider the high-level overview of budget decisions and the consequences of them, surely it is good business, too. I will ground this point in a local example—the pool at Bracoden primary school in Gamrie by Gardenstown. It is a village that sits right on the cliffs on the coastline. The pool was first built as an open-air facility in the late 1950s, and it was paid for by the local community.”
“In rural Scotland, distance does not just inconvenience people; it absolutely excludes them. That is why pools matter far beyond leisure. They are where children build confidence in the water, where older folk keep moving when other exercise options are too hard on their joints, where someone who is living with severe pain or disability can access low- impact activity that simply is not available elsewhere, and where we see the quieter mental health benefit of routine and self-care. This is also where the idea of a wellbeing economy becomes practical, not theoretical. If we are really serious about prevention, we must protect local services that reduce harm and keep people well because, if we strip them out, the costs do not disappear—they just land later in poorer health, greater inequality and higher pressure on other services.”
“I am pleased to speak in this debate because, for a coastal constituency such as mine, swimming pools are vital for safety and health. Water is part of our everyday life. It is beside our homes, and it underpins jobs in fishing, aquaculture, offshore energy and the wider supply chain. It is where families spend time together when they can. When we talk about swimming pools, I do not start from a sporting perspective; I start from the simple reality that learning to swim is a life skill. In coastal Scotland, that can be the difference between a frightening moment and a tragedy. There is a rural reality that it is easy to miss sometimes. When a pool closes, people are told, “There’s another one over there.”. However, “over there” can be completely out of reach.”
“We welcome the generally positive tenor of the Scottish Government’s response and hope that it will be accompanied by action, so that any future committee will not express similar concerns to ours at the end of the next parliamentary session. I look forward to the remainder of this important debate. I move, That the Parliament notes the findings and recommendations in the Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee’s 3rd Report, 2025 (Session 6), Report on the Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee inquiry into Civil Legal Assistance in Scotland (SP Paper 858). 14:37”
“In the longer term, the committee welcomed “the emphasis being placed on mixed models of delivery and user voice by the Scottish Government.” However, we believe that judicare, whereby solicitors themselves decide whether to offer legal aid and are paid on a case-by-case basis, must remain a key feature of any future system. The committee also asked that “the Scottish Government consider preventative approaches and public legal education as part of its discussion on longer-term reforms.” Again, we would welcome some further reflections on that point from the minister in the course of the debate. There are serious concerns about the operation of civil legal assistance in Scotland.”
“We also urged the Scottish Government to “investigate options for ensuring legal aid is available without means-testing to a wider selection of domestic abuse cases.” The committee did not find that the flexibilities that exist in the current system are sufficient to meet the challenges that people currently face in relation to eligibility. In its response to the report, the Scottish Government noted its commitment “to ensuring that civil legal aid is accessible to all who need it, particularly survivors of domestic and gender-based violence as highlighted in the Committee report.” We would welcome more clarity in the Minister for Victims and Community Safety’s response on how that commitment will be met.”
“For example, we noted that it is not tenable that someone with £1,718 in their bank account “should not be able to access Advice and Assistance”, and we called for inflationary increases and increases to advice and assistance financial eligibility “to match civil legal assistance thresholds as proposed by the Scottish Association of Law Centres.” We recommended “that the Scottish Government pursue reforms with a view to removing financial eligibility tests” for legally aided legal advice on civil protection orders and homelessness due to a breach of statutory duty cases.”
“We note the secondary legislation that supports those policy objectives, but it is disappointing that no changes will be made to address the pressing concerns around access to civil legal assistance, and we consider that a range of suggestions from our report could have been taken forward at this juncture. However, we welcome the on-going planning for primary legislation in the next parliamentary session to respond to those challenges. Eligibility for civil legal assistance was another key concern for the committee that emerged from the inquiry.”
“SLAB administration requirements were seen as burdensome and disproportionate resulting in a strained relationship between legal aid lawyers and SLAB.” We also heard that the administrative processes undermined legal practitioners’ capacity to undertake trauma-informed approaches, so it is pleasing to see the Scottish Government’s recognition of that concern, including its recognition of the importance of a trauma-informed approach. In the coming weeks, the committee looks forward to scrutinising secondary legislation, which the Government tells us will: provide quicker access to legally aided services for people who are eligible; reduce administration for solicitors and SLAB; reduce the number of multiple legal aid applications that are required for payment; and provide greater certainty of payment.”
“When we reported, we welcomed the Minister for Victims and Community Safety’s commitment to reinitiate fee review planning and collaborate with stakeholders on the reform of legal fees in 2025. The committee also welcomes the subsequent commitment to establishing a fee review mechanism group. It is pleasing to see that the group has now been established and has met, and we hope that it can make good and swift progress. The report says: “Bureaucratic processes were identified as another major barrier to offering and accessing civil legal assistance.”
“Those are all welcome measures that we hope can contribute to an improved supply of civil legal assistance. However, there must be tangible results from the exercise, and we will strongly emphasise to our successor committee that it must hold the Scottish Government to account for progress in those areas. Although we welcome the measures, we note that they do not respond to the primary driver of shortages that we heard about. We were told that shortages of legal aid practitioners were primarily attributable to the low rates of fees for solicitors for legal aid work, and that increasing those rates would have a significant impact on the availability of legal aid practitioners. There appeared to the committee to be a clear link between low fee rates and the lack of lawyers who are willing to undertake legal aid work.”
“We noted that that was unacceptable and, in our report, we urged the Scottish Government and the Scottish Legal Aid Board to work together to understand the extent of unmet need for civil legal assistance in Scotland. Therefore, we welcome the Scottish Government’s recognition—in its response to the report—of the need to undertake such an exercise, and we also welcome the efforts that are being made by SLAB and the Law Society of Scotland to do it. It is also pleasing to note the commitment of funding for initiatives such as the legal aid traineeship fund to attract new entrants to the legal profession. Measures to increase the capacity and capability of the supply base are noted, as well as the potential impact of the Regulation of Legal Services (Scotland) Act 2025.”
“The committee was presented with a picture of legal aid deserts that are compromising people’s ability to exercise their legal rights. These legal aid deserts relate both to geographical areas and to areas of law, including those relating to asylum seekers, immigration, welfare, housing and employment. Perhaps most strikingly, we heard about the experience of women seeking legal assistance in relation to domestic abuse cases. We were given the example of Grampian Women’s Aid, where workers are making 50 to 60 calls a day to find a legal aid solicitor. That challenge is not unique to remote and rural areas. We were also told that, in domestic abuse cases across Scotland, women are having to contact 30 to 50 solicitors before they can access advice.”
“The concerns that we heard emphasised that the need for legislative change has long been known and has not just emerged, and a desire was expressed that primary legislation should have been introduced earlier in the session. However, it is welcome that the Scottish Government has been consulting on reform, and we hope that the Government will go even further. Legislative reform of civil legal assistance must be a priority for the next Administration. During our inquiry we heard significant concerns about the operation of current systems, which emphasised the acuteness of the situation. I am grateful to all those who provided us with written and oral evidence that painted such a vivid picture of the current predicament with regard to civil legal assistance in Scotland.”
“In the context of recent increasing concern about the ever-declining number of solicitors in Scotland who are taking on legal aid work, the committee agreed to undertake an inquiry into civil legal assistance in Scotland. The committee agreed to focus on what is and what is not working in the current civil legal aid system, and on what changes could be made in the short term and the longer term to address access issues. A number of key themes emerged from our work. However, before I get into those themes, I state that the committee was disappointed that no primary legislation has been introduced in the current session of Parliament to effect an improvement in the provision of civil legal assistance.”
“I am pleased that we have the opportunity today to debate the provision of civil legal assistance in Scotland. In the course of our inquiry, the committee was presented with an alarming picture of the current availability of civil legal assistance. People’s access to justice is being compromised, and we must take the opportunity today, as a whole Parliament, to debate the “Report on the Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee inquiry into Civil Legal Assistance in Scotland”. Access to justice has been a key theme of the committee’s work during the current session of Parliament. In particular, the committee has been concerned about the provision of civil legal assistance and the increasing challenges that some people face in finding a lawyer to take on a case.”
“Scotland’s fishing and coastal communities deserve fairness in funding and practical support that keeps value and jobs where the fish is landed. I support the motion, and I urge the UK Government to do the right thing at last and support an uplift in the coastal communities growth fund. 14:31”
“They are asking for a mechanism that reflects contribution, recognises need, invests where the potential is, and underlines the wider point at the heart of the motion that decisions that are taken closest to the industry tend to fit the industry better. The Scottish Government is engaging intensively with stakeholders and using its powers to protect jobs and investment. Meanwhile, the UK Government is telling Scotland to accept a population-based share of a fund that was designed for fishing and coastal communities. If Westminster wants to prove that it respects Scotland’s fishers, it should start with the simple step of rethinking the allocation of the fund so that it reflects contribution and need. Coastal growth cannot be delivered by treating Scotland as an afterthought.”
“We also have to be honest about the limits of what Holyrood can do. Two of the biggest pressure points that processors raise with me are trade friction and immigration rules, which are not devolved. Those decisions are taken elsewhere, but the strain lands on our harbours and in our coastal communities. Yes, the debate is about fairness, but it is also about respect. If Scotland’s fishing industry is held up as a national asset when it suits, it cannot be treated as if it is a rounding error when money is allocated. Our coastal and island communities are not asking for any special treatment.”
“From 1 January 2026, the requirement will be species specific—70 per cent of mackerel landings and 70 per cent of herring landings into Scotland in 2026, up from the current combined requirement of 55 per cent—with the measures kept under review. Processors tell us plainly that reduced volume next year threatens jobs and undermines confidence to invest. If we lose onshore capacity— skills, plant, contracts—it does not spring back overnight, so when the Scottish Government uses a devolved lever to help to keep more of that reduced volume landing into Scotland, so that the cash flow stays in our coastal communities and wages are protected, I struggle to see who can argue against that principle. It is not forever and is not without review; it is a stabiliser—an emergency condition—for 2026.”
“Scotland’s contribution is not in dispute. Scottish vessels consistently land more than half of the UK’s total catch, 63 per cent of total catch value and more than 60 per cent of seafood exports. If the aim of this fund is fishing and coastal growth, those figures should be the starting point. Since the motion was lodged, the pressure on the pelagic supply chain has become even clearer. Quota reductions coming for mackerel and herring next year will bite, especially when processing factories have fixed costs, contracts and a workforce that cannot simply be switched off and on. That is why I welcome the Scottish Government’s decision to introduce an emergency measure for 2026 by amending the economic link licence condition.”
“I am grateful to Alasdair Allan and congratulate him on bringing the debate to the chamber. The unfairness that his motion describes is felt from the Western Isles to the north-east of Scotland. In Banffshire and Buchan Coast, fishing is not just an abstract sector; it is boats leaving before first light, processors keeping lines moving and families whose weekly wage depends on what lands at the quayside. That is why the UK Government’s approach to the £360 million fishing and coastal growth fund is so hard to justify. Scotland is being allocated, as has been said, around £28 million—under 8 per cent—because the distribution is based on population and not on the scale of our fishing industry. Barnett, as has been said, counts people; it does not count ports, processors or the real costs of keeping coastal economies working.”
“Today, we have announced that fishing licences will change for 2026, so that Scottish vessels must land 70 per cent of their mackerel and 70 per cent of their herring into Scotland. That will take effect from 1 January 2026 and will help to protect jobs in our fish processing sector and wider supply chains during this challenging period, and provide stability and position the sector well for when stocks recover. Those measures will apply for 2026 and will be kept under review. The Presiding Officer: That concludes First Minister’s question time. Portfolio Question Time Social Justice and Housing 12:47”
“Fish processors in my constituency are under serious economic pressure due to quota cuts. There are fears that local jobs may be lost and that businesses will suffer. Will the First Minister set out how the Scottish Government will help to drive economic stability for the fisheries sector, especially in my constituency, where livelihoods depend on it? The Presiding Officer: I ask that members always have their camera on when they are contributing remotely. The First Minister: The Scottish Government values our fish processing sector and is committed to a sustainable and prosperous seafood industry. Due to the exceptional fish quota cuts for mackerel, the Scottish Government will act.”
“It is therefore welcome that the Scottish Government is working with partners to update the existing qualifications guidance for teachers of children with sensory impairments. The committee looks forward to considering the results of the recent consultation on proposed revisions to the guidance when available, as well as the outcomes on the Scottish Government’s review of the curriculum.”
“Deaf Links described the poor experiences that many deaf adults have had as children. It told us: “They do not want another generation suffering in the way that they have suffered: not being able to get a job or an education; being treated like a second-class citizen; not being able to access the hearing world in any way, shape or form; and having their life chances reduced because they are deaf and use BSL.”—[Official Report, Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee, 3 June 2025; c 13.] For many deaf people, BSL is not an additional language but their only language, which is a crucial difference. Although investment in Gaelic schools is absolutely rightly celebrated, parity of esteem has not been extended to BSL, despite the fact that deaf children simply cannot choose another language in order to get on in society.”
“The committee agrees with stakeholders such as Deaf Links, which described that data as “extremely disappointing.” I therefore welcome confirmation that funding will be made available to the ALLIANCE to deliver a BSL network to strengthen monitoring, data collection and accountability. Nonetheless, that is not the BSL board that the committee recommended, and in summing up, I welcome the Deputy First Minister’s reflections on how we can help to ensure democratic accountability and how it will compare with the BSL board under the UK act. One of the most important policy areas for BSL users is education, with a particular focus on early years provision. We heard that some deaf children start school or nursery with no knowledge of the language, and that is unacceptable.”
“In respect of local plans for public bodies covering areas including health, education and justice, the committee notes the need for local flexibility to address specific needs and the importance of raising local ambitions on BSL. We welcomed positive examples of meaningful engagement with BSL users and collaborative working with relevant partners, but we noted that, unfortunately, not all listed authorities adopted that approach. We also heard from the Health and Social Care Alliance Scotland that, three months after the statutory deadline of 6 May 2024, only 72 per cent of listed authorities had published plans in English, with only 62 per cent having published them in BSL.”
“The first national plan was widely praised for the collaborative work that went into it, although concerns were also raised about inconsistent implementation, lack of enforceability and insufficient funding. However, feedback on the second national plan was more mixed. Many stakeholders felt that it lacked measurable goals, timelines and accountability. Some expressed disappointment that their recommendations had been watered down or omitted, and they called for clearer targets and better resource allocation. The committee regretted that the collaborative spirit of the first plan had not been fully carried forward, and it recommended greater transparency and stakeholder engagement in future planning.”
“The committee strongly welcomed the positive feedback that was received with regard to empowering BSL users and increasing visibility of the language, but was equally mindful that significant challenges remain and that more needs to be done to address them. For example, the shortage of qualified interpreters in rural areas remains a significant barrier. I turn to the substance of the committee’s report. We covered a wide range of key policy areas. I intend to focus on the three that received the most feedback from stakeholders: education, health and justice. I look forward to listening to contributions from other members in the chamber, who I am sure might reflect on other policy areas. I will briefly discuss our conclusions on the local and national plans that public bodies are required to publish under the 2015 act.”
“Deafblind stakeholders explained how they often feel marginalised as a smaller community, of which there is less understanding among public and professionals alike. They therefore called for tactile BSL to be routinely included and placed on an equal footing to BSL, and not just treated as an afterthought. Stakeholders widely acknowledged the 2015 act’s positive impact in raising awareness, increasing visibility of BSL and empowering deaf communities. Initiatives such as Contact Scotland BSL, a 24/7 video interpreting service, were praised as being transformative. Examples of improved service access include better interpreter support, deaf awareness training and inclusive recruitment practices.”
“I thank the Deputy First Minister for her written response to our report, and I was pleased to see that the Scottish Government had accepted, or partially accepted, the vast majority of our recommendations. The committee took evidence from organisations representing deaf people, academics and others working to minimise barriers. We also held informal engagement sessions with deaf and deafblind people with first- hand experience of using BSL, to hear about the challenges that they can face. Those discussions were invaluable in shaping the committee’s scrutiny, and I would like to place on the record the committee’s sincere gratitude to all who assisted us. It is important to note that the 2015 act covers deafblind users of tactile BSL, in addition to those signers with whom many of us will be more familiar.”
“We welcomed the British Sign Language (Scotland) Act 2015 when it became law. As a result of the 2015 act, the Scottish Government and listed public authorities are required to publish national and local plans every six years. The second national plan, which was published in November 2023, set out a range of actions to tackle barriers that BSL users face, with the aim of helping to make Scotland the best place in the world for them to live, work, visit and learn. That is an aspiration with which the committee fully agrees. From the outset, we sought to approach our inquiry in a constructive manner and to make informed recommendations on areas where further concrete actions could benefit BSL users across Scotland.”
“I welcome the opportunity to open the debate on behalf of the Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee on our recent report on the British Sign Language (Scotland) Act 2015. A decade has passed since the bill was enacted, in what marked a significant milestone in promoting the use and understanding of BSL across Scotland. The committee agreed that this was an opportune moment to consider the impact of the 2015 act and to identify where further improvements could be made. As most people in the chamber know—and as I will now sign—I am what is called a CODA, which is the child of a deaf adult. My father is deaf and I grew up around deaf people and in and around their community, so I know and understand how important it is for deaf people to have inclusive language—first language—to be able to live inclusively in their society.”
“To ask the Scottish Government what assessment it has made of the impact of the energy profits levy on energy jobs and the energy supply chain in the north-east. (S6O-05287)”
“On that note, does the cabinet secretary share my concern that industry modelling has consistently shown that the biggest threat to oil and gas jobs remains the Tories’ energy profits levy, which is now continued by Labour? Kate Forbes: Absolutely—I could not agree more. The biggest threat—those are not my words, but the words of multiple employers—to jobs in the energy sector in the north-east is the energy profits levy. That was introduced by the Conservatives and extended by the Conservatives, and it has now been extended by Labour. We all hoped that, at the recent budget, Labour would suspend and replace the levy, but the UK Government obviously does not appreciate the level of threat that is facing our energy industry right now.”