Meghan Gallacher
Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party · Scotland
“Shirley-Anne Somerville: One example of when cutting people’s benefits does not help involves the suggestion that we take away support from disabled people, which disabled people tell us helps them into employment. We need to bear that in mind.”
“I, too, thank Maggie Chapman for bringing the really important issue of our universities to the chamber. I want to cast members’ minds back to March 2025, when Douglas Ross, as the convener of the Education, Children and Young People Committee, challenged the former principal and vice-chancellor of the University of Dundee, Professor Iain…”
“As the cabinet secretary mentioned in her statement, the Scottish Government has spent billions of pounds on tackling child poverty, but it remains stubbornly high, with one in five children still living in relative poverty.”
“If we fast forward a year, we see that the University of Dundee has sadly found itself in the headlines for all the wrong reasons again. As Maggie Chapman said, that is not down to the lecturers or the students; it is down to the university’s governance and structures, as well as the financial situation that our universities and colleges…”
“On that latter point, I went to Fife Gingerbread this morning and spoke to families and their support workers about the work that that organisation and others do to ensure that women are supported into employment in a way that encourages their confidence, builds their skills and is sustainable and successful in the long term.”
“The former education secretary and now Deputy First Minister, Jenny Gilruth, said in January this year that teachers would need to relocate to where the jobs are. Mike Corbett from the NASUWT condemned those comments.”
The complete record
Every one of 420 lines we hold for Meghan Gallacher, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 6 of 9.
“She has indicated that she might have concerns about the second part of it and that she plans to come forward with regulations relating to the points that it raises. I would be grateful if I received an assurance from the cabinet secretary that she has the statutory basis for doing that and that the regulations will fully encompass the points that are being raised. 15:30 We need the law and the policy to give the necessary protections to those who stay at home when they are subjected to domestic abuse as well as to those who decide that they have to leave. The cabinet secretary has stated on a number of occasions, including in writing to me, that the Scottish Government’s position is that victims should have protections to be able to stay.”
“The purpose of those amendments is—as, indeed, the purpose of the bill should be—to ensure that those rights are definitely in law and that we are not reliant on individual social landlords up and down Scotland to develop their own policies that might or might not include them. I very much hope that the amendments will be agreed to today, or that social landlords are listening and that they will ensure that such rights are put into any policies that are developed, because we have to ensure that individual tenants who are subjected to domestic abuse have those protections. I welcome the fact that the cabinet secretary will come forward with regulations by Christmas to deal with what is in the first part of my amendment 328.”
“I will not speak to the rest of the amendments in the group, because they have already been spoken to. I will leave my remarks there. The Deputy Presiding Officer: I call Katy Clark to wind up and to press or withdraw amendment 309. Katy Clark: The cabinet secretary seems to be saying that amendments 309 to 312 and 329 are not required, because the bill will require that landlords adopt a domestic abuse policy and that the rights set out in the amendments are likely to be included in such policies. Of course, those specific rights might be included, but they also might not be.”
“It also inserts a cross-reference to the definition of “domestic abuse” in the Domestic Abuse Protection (Scotland) Act 2021. I understand some stakeholders’ concerns that work is already set to be undertaken in relation to the social housing charter next year. However, when it comes to issues such as domestic abuse, I believe that, if the opportunity to do so arises through the bills that we are discussing in Parliament, we should look at ways in which we can strengthen the charter and other pieces of legislation to ensure that we are protecting people who need protection and that survivors of domestic abuse hear the message, loud and clear from across the parties, that we are looking at all pieces of legislation in order to support them.”
“It is good to begin today’s housing bill proceedings on a positive note. I thank the previous cabinet secretary, Shirley-Anne Somerville, and Màiri McAllan for their work with me on amendment 111. I hope that it will give additional reassurance to survivors of domestic abuse that we are looking at all legislation to ensure that we are implementing measures that make it easier for people who have experienced, might experience or are currently experiencing domestic abuse. Amendment 111 will amend section 32 of the Housing (Scotland) Act 2010 to enable Scottish ministers, when setting standards and outcomes in the Scottish social housing charter, to include standards and outcomes relating to the support that social landlords should provide to tenants who are affected by domestic abuse.”
“Kaukab Stewart: As I have stated, we, in the chamber, all have a responsibility to use our leadership and our language very carefully and respectfully. Meghan Gallacher has raised that incident before, and I responded to it. I accept that it is an appalling situation. At this point, I would like to share the stories of young Pakistani girls who are getting attacked and racially abused on their way to school, and of old- age pensioners who are now too frightened to go out in various communities. We need to be very careful not to pit communities against themselves but to use our platforms to bring people together.”
“When the Scottish Conservatives led a debate on hotels and housing asylum seekers, I said that discussions about illegal immigration—no matter how difficult—are important. I also raised the horrific attack on a 15-year-old girl in Falkirk, in my region, who was raped by an asylum seeker who entered the UK illegally. Distrust in politicians, locally and nationally, is rising because they are choosing not to listen to the valid concerns of communities. Today’s debate does not address questions about the pressures on public services that are fuelling division in our communities. Minister, what is your response to my constituents who are concerned about what happened in their community, and what additional protections— The Deputy Presiding Officer: Always speak through the chair. Minister.”
“In turn, that would worsen the housing emergency, so I hope that Maggie Chapman does not move those amendments. Amendments 284 and 284A would require landlords to pay removal costs to tenants. They would impose unreasonable financial burdens, even in eviction cases that were lawful and accepted as necessary. We cannot afford to risk discouraging property letting, particularly among small-scale landlords, which could further reduce the housing supply. It would also add complexity and potential for dispute, which would strain the tribunal system even further. There are other amendments in the group, but I will leave my remarks there for timing reasons. I move amendment 79.”
“Given our time considerations, I will briefly speak to a couple of other amendments in the group, but I do not intend to speak to them all, because we are up against it. Maggie Chapman’s amendments 7 and 44 were also lodged at stage 2. Although I understand her argument, I still believe that the amendments are unworkable. I hope that, if they are moved, members will vote against them, because they could create more problems with evictions before the period begins or ends, which could put pressure on other housing options such as social housing. Amendments 197 and 197A, on protection against eviction in the first 12 months of a tenancy, have prompted stark warnings from industry bodies. I have gone on the record to say that such a provision would be a gift to rogue landlords and would drive more good landlords out of the sector.”
“The “Dying in the Margins” research study by the University of Glasgow and Marie Curie, which documents the direct impact of financial hardship on terminally ill people, has been central to informing the amendments. In particular, there is the story of Stacey and Joost, who faced significant issues in getting an accessible home that met Stacey’s need, followed by a decision to evict Stacey’s widower from their home just 12 days after Stacey died. The amendments will go some way to preventing such instances from happening again and ensuring that everyone is treated with dignity throughout their end-of-life experience. We need to thank the wonderful team at Marie Curie for raising the issue with me and other MSPs and for its tenacity in continuing to improve conditions for people with a terminal illness.”
“I thank Marie Curie for the exceptional work that it has carried out in trying to gain cross-party consensus on the issue. It has been working hard alongside colleagues and speaking to MSPs about how we look at evictions in a compassionate way. I will speak briefly about the evidence that Marie Curie has found and what led to the amendments being lodged. Every year, approximately 27,600 people in Scotland have to move home because of a close bereavement. The amendments will make huge improvements for terminally ill tenants and will provide bereaved families with every opportunity to succeed a property or remain in their own homes.”
“The amendments that I have lodged in this group will strengthen the bill to include provisions on terminal illness when we are dealing with evictions. I thank the cabinet secretaries—Shirley- Anne Somerville and Màiri McAllan—and their officials for not only being sympathetic to my proposals at stage 2 but working with me to produce amendments to support families who are living with a terminal illness. We have a lot of amendments to get through this afternoon, so it is not my intention to go through each and every one of my amendments. They will add provisions to the bill so that, when the courts or the First-tier Tribunal for Scotland are looking at evictions, they can consider the impact on a tenant or a member of the tenant’s household who has a terminal illness. That is a compassionate way to look at evictions.”
“I cannot support the introduction of legislation that would target support for one specific group over another, recognising that, in meeting local housing needs, local authorities will require to balance the needs of a much fuller range of priority groups, as informed by their housing need and demand assessment. Therefore, although I understand the intention, I cannot support the amendments.”
“Amendment 239, in the name of Graham Simpson, and amendment 370, in the name of Pam Duncan-Glancy, seek to amend current legislation in respect of local housing strategies by making specific reference to students when local authorities are assessing housing provision and related services in their area. Amendment 370 would also require ministers to produce specific guidance on purpose-built student accommodation and local authorities to have regard to that. I understand the intention behind the amendments, but I do not believe that there is a need to specify that in primary legislation, because the existing legislative requirements on authorities are clear that they relate to the housing needs of all people in the area.”
“We committed to considering how existing avenues of support could be strengthened as a more cost-effective alternative, and I would like to update members on that. My officials are carrying out a mapping exercise to increase our understanding of guarantor support, which will help us to identify gaps in provision, barriers to access and any possible solutions. Once completed, I would like the exercise to form the basis of more detailed work with local authorities, student housing providers in particular and members on how we can formulate a more consistent approach, whether that is a national framework or guidance. For that reason, I ask Maggie Chapman not to move amendment 222 but to work with me on a comprehensive and detailed piece of work.”
“In addition, I must flag up the fact that treating different groups of people differently on account of their national origin could amount to discrimination under the Equality Act 2010 and article 14 of the European convention on human rights. I am absolutely committed to further work on guarantor support, but I cannot support the formulation of amendment 221. Amendment 222, in the name of Maggie Chapman, was also lodged at stage 2 and was not agreed to. It would require ministers to establish a public body, through regulations, to act as guarantor for non-UK domiciled students. I cannot support the amendment, given the on-going financial implications that it would necessarily have.”
“Amendment 221, in the name of Edward Mountain, would increase the maximum limit for tenancy deposits from two months to three months for international students, where they are not required to provide a guarantor. I understand that, for international students, there can be barriers to accessing the private rented sector, such as difficulty with providing a United Kingdom-based guarantor. However, I do not think that the introduction of an increased deposit amount in place of the guarantor requirement would be sufficient to address some of the concerns of landlords. Indeed, we can envisage a scenario in which that could arguably make matters worse for international students, by requiring them to provide even larger deposits to satisfy landlords.”
“It seeks to gather additional information on non-United Kingdom students and tenancy deposits, which I understand would support the use of a proposed regulatory power that is also provided for in the amendment. As we set out previously, there are significant practical issues with obtaining that data in the way that is proposed, which lacks a clear remit or purpose. The tenancy deposit schemes do not currently collect information from tenants that would enable them to establish whether a tenancy deposit was for a non-UK domiciled student. Placing a requirement on the schemes to do that would be a significant change, which would have resource and cost implications. I therefore cannot support amendment 220.”
“As I have said, the student accommodation sector operates very differently from the mainstream private rented sector, and rent increases in student tenancies do not generally take place mid-tenancy; instead, they are for a fixed-term duration, which is aligned with the academic year. Edward Mountain’s amendments seek to treat student tenancies the same as tenancies in the PRS when it comes to restrictions on in-tenancy rent increases, and they do not take account of the inherent differences. In addition, as far as I understand it, there has been no consultation with the sector. I therefore cannot support those amendments. Amendment 220, in the name of Maggie Chapman, is identical to an amendment that was considered and disagreed to at stage 2.”
“The amendments in my name will remove reference to student tenancies from part 1 of the bill, and I urge members to support them. Amendment 150, in the name of Maggie Chapman, is very similar to Graham Simpson’s stage 2 amendment 59, in that it seeks to allow for student tenancies to be covered by rent control. I reiterate that I do not consider that to be appropriate. Student tenancies should not be covered by rent control, and I cannot support amendment 150. Amendments 179 to 191 and amendment 258, in the name of Edward Mountain, are similar to his amendments that were lodged at stage 2. They seek to replicate the regulatory requirements in relation to rent increases in the private rented sector for student tenancies. Ultimately, they appear to create a rent increase process and a means by which rent increase could be challenged.”
“Does the cabinet secretary understand that introducing rent controls in the way that the Scottish National Party Government has done in recent years has left the purpose-built student accommodation sector as the only fruitful market for investment? That is why the SNP Government should be extremely cautious in how it proceeds with rent control legislation. Màiri McAllan: My amendments seek to remove an erroneous Conservative amendment that was agreed to at stage 2, which immediately caused considerable upset and concern in the sector. A little humility would therefore go a long way. In addition, the rent controls that we seek to pass in the bill are evidence led and locally led, and will give sufficient protection to tenants; however, I have also been clear on exemptions, which I know are critical for investment.”
“Front and centre of that is unpacking a situation in which thousands of young people each year enter and, in large numbers, pass construction courses of varying types in our colleges, but only about 15 per cent go on to work in the sector. We need to get to the bottom of that. I hope that that gives Meghan Gallacher a degree of reassurance about how seriously we should treat that. The Deputy Presiding Officer: A number of members want to ask supplementary questions. I doubt that I will get through all of them, but I will do my best.”
“I very much welcome the measured and constructive approach by the Federation of Master Builders and the Chartered Institute of Building, especially their recognition that, in order to resolve the challenges that Meghan Gallacher highlights, they need to work more closely with the Government and training providers. I advise members that my officials have invited the FMB on to the short-life working group, because the FMB clearly wants to find solutions of the type that Meghan Gallacher alludes to. As I have said previously, this is not only about trying to deal with the immediate term, when Brexit, among other things, has had a detrimental impact on workforce availability; it is about the medium to longer term.”
“How does the minister plan to speed up the process of trying to get young people into the construction industry, making it a viable workforce and an area where young people feel confident that their jobs will be there for life? Graeme Dey: The short-life working group that I referred to resulted from a round-table meeting that I convened recently involving the Construction Industry Training Board, colleges, the SFC, the Scottish Qualifications Authority, Skills Development Scotland and the career services collaborative to explore how we can deliver short, medium and long-term solutions to the issue.”
“In parallel, a working group of the ministerially chaired Construction Leadership Forum is exploring measures to support the sector. Those efforts are part of a broader commitment to creating a more responsive and effective system of workforce development in construction. Meghan Gallacher: The minister will be aware that we are in a housing emergency. We have a shortage of homes, and we need the skills to build those homes throughout the country. The minister referred to the Scottish Government’s skills investment plan for construction, yet the warning signs about an ageing workforce, declining numbers in key trades and the urgent need to attract young people through schools and apprenticeships were there years ago.”
“To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on any steps it is taking to expand the availability of training and apprenticeships in the construction sector, in light of reported industry concerns about a growing skills gap. (S6O-04961) The Minister for Higher and Further Education; and Minister for Veterans (Graeme Dey): The Scottish Government is committed to addressing skills gaps in the construction sector. As the member may know, we are introducing a new Government-led approach to skills planning to better meet the needs of individuals, employers and the economy. Additionally, the Scottish Funding Council is leading a short-life stakeholder group to better understand industry needs and identify areas for action.”
“The First Minister: The way to solve the housing crisis in Scotland is to build on the strong record of this Government, which has built— [Interruption.] The Presiding Officer: Members. We have many members wishing to ask questions. Let us hear one another. The First Minister: Let me explain my point: between 1999 and 2007, an average of 5,448 affordable homes were built each year under the Labour and Liberal Democrat Government. Under this Government, it is an average of 7,734 each year. The SNP Government has built more houses on average per year than our predecessors. That is because we are prepared to take the action to deliver on the housing emergency when everyone in the Labour and Conservative parties just postures. The Presiding Officer: We move to general and constituency supplementaries. Scotland’s”
“The First Minister: What builds homes is the combination of private investment—and the Government has made changes to the Housing (Scotland) Bill to enable that to be sustainable— and public expenditure. The public expenditure for housing in the Government’s budget in 2025-26 is £808 million, which is £251 million more than it was last year. Meghan Gallacher was one of the Conservative members who, like the Labour Party, did not vote for that provision. This is another example of members of Parliament not being prepared to vote for the provisions that will solve the problems that they are raising with me at First Minister’s questions. That is not a way to solve the housing crisis—[Interruption.] The Presiding Officer: Let us hear the First Minister.”
“The truth is that the Scottish National Party has had 18 years to get a grip of Scotland’s worsening housing shortage. Figures that were released this week show that the number of families in temporary accommodation has increased by 6 per cent, 10,000 children remain trapped in temporary accommodation, and rough sleeping is on the rise—[Interruption.] The Presiding Officer: Let us hear Ms Gallacher. Meghan Gallacher: They do not want to hear it, Presiding Officer, but the figures speak for themselves. Can the First Minister tell the Parliament when the housing emergency will end? Is he confident that his Government can achieve the target of 15,000 affordable homes, especially when we are debating a housing bill next week that will not result in one single home being built?”
“First, the furlough funding will be made available only once there is evidence of new orders. As I said to Jackie Dunbar, that gives the company the time to source materials. Essentially, that is the timescale that the company has identified as required for it to prepare for the work to arrive. Secondly, that order book needs to be constantly updated and refreshed. In other words, we do not want to end up in the same place again, which is why there needs to be intensive work to ensure that there is a longer pipeline of work in the medium to long term. Thirdly, on the procurement changes and the Subsidy Control Act 2022, I have gone through the technical details, but there is an appetite from our side of the chamber to work collaboratively to see whether changes can be delivered by the”
“The Deputy First Minister mentioned in her statement that the furlough support scheme is time limited to a maximum period of 26 weeks. What will happen at 27 weeks, should the strategy not work? As members have mentioned, decisive procurement reform is needed. Does the Deputy First Minister accept that, if procurement reform does not give domestic manufacturers a fair chance to win contracts, it will result in the offshoring of vital jobs and skills? What contingency plans are the Scottish Government considering, should the strategy not work, to ensure that we do not lose vital skills and jobs? Kate Forbes: I am determined that it will work. In response to the substance of Meghan Gallacher’s question, I think that there are some important elements to consider.”
“He and I are very closely engaged in the suite of planning adjustments that are being made as part of the Government’s programme for government, and also in those that I included in my statement last week—specifically, the new planning direction that ministers will give for the monitoring of the application of national planning framework 4, which will give us the ability to intervene in that process. That will sit alongside our expectations of proportionality, customer service and delivery.”
“Regulation provides us with some of the best homes in the country. For example, those that are being built under our affordable housing supply programme are warm, modern and efficient. However, regulation needs to facilitate progress and not hinder it. I am very mindful of the cumulative effect of regulations in respect of house building, as I am with planning. In response to the point about cross- Government working, absolutely; I am undertaking that, not least with Ivan McKee, the Minister for Public Finance.”
“The cabinet secretary will be aware of the report that was published by Homes for Scotland on 17 June. In it, Homes for Scotland recommended an overhaul of Government regulations to reduce the cost and complexity for SMEs that are trying to build more homes across the country. However, I will ask the cabinet secretary about planning hold-ups, specifically. I was appreciative of the cabinet secretary’s previous commentary in response to Michelle Thomson’s question, but 96 per cent of SME house builders still believe that the planning process is slow. Is the cabinet secretary working cross-Government, with different portfolios, to ensure that we speed up the planning process and that SMEs are not disadvantaged when they try to build more homes? Màiri McAllan: In general, regulation and planning are good things.”
“Meanwhile, in Scotland, more than 1,500 asylum seekers are being housed in hotels—that is almost a quarter of the number that are in the system. Across the UK, the number of those in hotels still stands at more than 32,000, despite repeated promises to reduce it.”
“Too many hard-working people who live and work in Scotland are feeling ignored by Governments—I use that word in the plural— that have completely failed to get a grip on the issue. We need to look at the demographics of the people who are arriving in Scotland. Across the UK, 62 per cent of asylum claims are from adult males, whereas just 21 per cent are from adult females. For small boat arrivals, the imbalance is even greater: around 75 per cent are adult men, while only 10 per cent are children. They are not families fleeing together—they are overwhelmingly single men of working age. People see those demographics and wonder why women and children are not being prioritised as part of the asylum system.”
“Will she give me an example of how the Conservatives are doing that? The Deputy Presiding Officer: Meghan Gallacher, I will give you the time back. Meghan Gallacher: We are trying to have a grown-up debate in the Scottish Parliament. The public are not extremists—they are asking fair questions. We are trying to bring the debate to the chamber in order to talk about the wider issues surrounding asylum seeker hotels and the issues that could alleviate some of the tensions, such as housing, which I will come on to discuss. One of the banners at the protest read “Migrants adored, pensioners ignored”. That sentiment is completely blunt, but it captures what I believe many people in Scotland are feeling. The pressures of both legal and illegal immigration expose the failures in housing, healthcare and public services.”
“Irrespective of the people I represent, the plain fact is that a young girl was attacked by someone who illegally entered the UK. Protests have taken place outside migrant hotels in my region. The use of hotels has become a flashpoint and has fuelled anger and disgust, but we cannot brand everyone who raises concerns as racists. We, as politicians, must listen. Kaukab Stewart: The crime that Meghan Gallacher describes is absolutely disgusting and appalling, and I totally condemn it. She went on to say that people who are raising concerns should not be tarnished or categorised. Does she also accept that we should not tar asylum seekers and refugees who are fleeing war and persecution with the same brush and that we need to be very careful to use our positions of leadership to calm the tensions?”
“This afternoon, we have heard that local authorities are struggling to house the surging number of asylum seekers in Scotland. Communities, especially in my Central Scotland region, are feeling the consequences of that and tensions are rising. The debate is important because we have a duty to confront our constituents concerns, however difficult that is. We cannot simply dismiss them. In October 2023, the rape of a 15-year-old girl in Falkirk by an asylum seeker who had entered the UK illegally left the community shaken. As part of the perpetrator’s defence, his lawyer cited cultural differences and language barriers as reasons why he did not understand his action but did not say that they were an excuse for the crime that was committed.”
“With regard to housing, I urge a bit of humility and perhaps self-reflection on the part of Meghan Gallacher and her colleagues. If it were not for the Conservatives, with their relentless austerity agenda, their complete mismanagement of the United Kingdom’s economy and their pursuit of the hardest of hard Brexits, the prevailing economic conditions in this country would not have been so unfavourable in recent years and households would not have been pushed to the brink in the way that they have been, which has increased homelessness across this country. I encourage Meghan Gallacher to have another look at my statement and see how it speaks to creating favourable conditions for investment, and to come back to me if she wants to have a sensible conversation.”
“Rather than increasing the affordable housing supply, the Scottish National Party has pressed ahead with a housing bill that will not build a single home. It has imposed disastrous rent controls on the sector, and nearly 5,000 landlords have exited the market in the past year. That figure is likely to rise unless the SNP makes housing a more attractive area for investment. If the cabinet secretary is serious about tackling the housing emergency, will she commit to going further than she has today in attracting and utilising private finance to achieve the target of providing 15,000 affordable homes per year? Màiri McAllan: Meghan Gallacher does herself absolutely no credit with her comments about international affairs. The issues for discussion are very important to the people of Scotland and they should be heard in this Parliament.”
“I thank the cabinet secretary for providing advance sight of her statement. I welcome the fact that the Scottish Government is discussing an issue that is devolved to this Parliament, in a week in which we will spend three hours of valuable parliamentary time discussing foreign affairs. It has been more than a year since the Parliament declared a housing emergency. At the time, many of us hoped that that would create an imperative on the Scottish Government to build more homes more quickly. Instead, just 7,444 affordable homes were completed in 2024-25, which was a decrease of 22 per cent on the previous year. That is around half the 15,000 affordable homes that housing charities say that we need to meet current demand.”
“Along with what happened at Grangemouth, the situation with Alexander Dennis represents a double blow to the people of Falkirk, and my thoughts are with them. Following the loss of 400 jobs in Grangemouth, up to 1,600 jobs are now on the line as a result of Alexander Dennis being forced to relocate to Scarborough. When will the Scottish Government publish an economic impact assessment for the area? Kate Forbes: We do not want to lose those jobs, so all of the focus right now is on saving them.”
“We are reviewing policies, guidance and legislation potentially impacted by the judgment.” It went on to say: “The Scottish Government’s approach is aligned with that of the UK Government and Welsh Government in awaiting the EHRC’s revised statutory code of practice.” I must say that that is a rather peculiar statement. In a meeting this morning, which my colleague Tess White mentioned, the EHRC was crystal clear that the Scottish Government can get on with it and that it should comply with the law now. We need to find out today why the Government is, in my view, unnecessarily delaying the implementation of the Supreme Court ruling. Alex Cole-Hamilton: Will the member give way? Meghan Gallacher: I am not entirely sure whether I have time.”
“Paul O’Kane, Ben Macpherson and others talked about the attitudes of boys and young men and how we can improve outcomes for women by tackling issues such as violence against women and girls. I will finish on a point that Tess White raised about sex and gender, which is important because we are talking about women and girls and sex- based rights. My point relates to the Supreme Court ruling on single-sex spaces. Last night, the Scottish Government issued a response, which said: “The Scottish Government has been clear that we accept the Supreme Court judgment.”
“We are talking about getting our economy moving and getting women back into work if they want to do so, so that would be widely welcomed and, I am sure, supported by parties across the chamber. Justice issues have been raised throughout the debate, but I will not have time to go through all of them. I will move to the equality strategy, about which members raised a lot of issues. We have issues in relation to widening pay gaps, and the misogyny bill has been dropped, which is yet another Scottish Government promise that has not been maintained in this parliamentary session. Some people will feel desperately let down that that bill is not coming to the Scottish Parliament in this session. Sharon Dowey was right that there is a lot of talk but not so much action on inequality issues. That is where improvements need to be made.”
“I will always stand up for Lanarkshire mums who want to go to Wishaw to receive that service if they and their babies need it. I will move on to childcare. I have already gone off on a tangent, as per my usual approach. Childcare was mentioned by a number of MSPs. We have 30 hours of free or funded childcare. The cabinet secretary said that that was the most generous offering in the United Kingdom, but the Scottish Government also promised to roll that out for children who are nine months and older, yet we have not seen any progress on that. It is incumbent on the Government to update Parliament on whether that is still its ambition or whether it is no longer its ambition to have free or funded childcare from nine months onwards.”
“Moving on to childcare-related issues— Paul O’Kane: Before Meghan Gallacher moves on to talk about childcare, can she say whether she recognises the importance of neonatal services for women and, in particular, the issues that we have debated on the Government’s downgrading of the neonatal service at University hospital Wishaw, which is of serious concern to a number of Lanarkshire members in the chamber, not least my colleague Davy Russell, the member for Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse? Does she recognise the importance of that to women? Meghan Gallacher: I had a members’ business debate on that exact issue. Wishaw is in my region and I believe passionately that women should have access to neonatal services as close to home as possible.”
“Meghan Gallacher: Anything that can be done to try to increase the uptake is more than welcome, and I am sure that it would receive cross-party support. It is about protecting young women and girls from being diagnosed with cervical cancer later in life. No one wants that. We heard from Alex Cole-Hamilton about transvaginal mesh issues, which have been raised many a time in the Parliament. Many MSPs in the chamber feel passionately about that issue and have driven it forward to get results. However, we have to keep driving it. We cannot stop now, because we need to ensure that anyone who has been impacted by the issue receives the support that they deserve because of what has happened to them.”
“Earlier, I said “PVG vaccine” instead of “HPV vaccine”, so I apologise for that. Shirley-Anne Somerville: I agree with Meghan Gallacher on the important issue that she raised. I hope that I can reassure her that work has been undertaken to identify the barriers to that and to deal with them. We have the screening inequalities fund to look at those issues. There is also the work that has been done by the cervical cancer elimination group to look at exactly what the challenges are and why they exist. If we get that right, there is an immense opportunity for women and the public purse. We therefore need to ensure that we tackle those barriers. I thank Meghan Gallacher for raising that issue today.”