Emma Roddick
Scottish National Party · Scotland
“Knowing all that I know about the high rate of comorbidity of ADHD and hypermobility, it did not come as a surprise when I was told in January this year that my mental health diagnosis, which came with a great deal of difficulty, stigma and, as it turns out, the wrong treatment over years and years, was misdiagnosed neurodivergence.”
“It might be that no one beyond the person’s GP is needed to manage the post-diagnosis situation. All that might be needed is guided self-management and the awareness of what their diagnosis is, which will give them the necessary confidence to ask for adjustments at school or the workplace.”
“A child with ADHD who can be managed with some changes to their school day should just have those changes made. Not dealing with those people creates urgent cases that never needed to become urgent.”
“I can now access the right people and I can read about my condition, not a label. What I cannot do is get help from the NHS. I have been advised to go private, which is something I hate seeing in a letter that is headed “NHS”.”
“I congratulate and thank Helen McDade for securing this important debate. I am glad to see that there are cross-party contributions this evening.”
“When someone feels like they do not fit in and they do not know why, they can start to resent the world and their peers, who think that the person is difficult and unfriendly instead of just quiet and busy thinking about 12 things at once.”
The complete record
Every one of 407 lines we hold for Emma Roddick, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 9.
“I hope that the Government is willing to be bold and not just keep doing what we have always done. We must support and resource the NHS and primary care to look at the person, not the waiting list, not how busy the diary is, and not whether someone meets level 3 criteria. Primary care must simply see that there is a person who needs help and ask how it can best offer that help. 18:23”
“It might be that no one beyond the person’s GP is needed to manage the post-diagnosis situation. All that might be needed is guided self-management and the awareness of what their diagnosis is, which will give them the necessary confidence to ask for adjustments at school or the workplace. They might need a prescription and some oversight, and they might need someone to go to in a crisis, but a regular appointment with a psychiatrist, once they are stable, might add little to their lives. We cannot expect NHS boards to make those changes on their own. If we want GPs to take more of an active role, which I hope we do, they must be given clarity about what they should do and the confidence to do it. That requires a review of national pathways and expectations when it comes to the long-term treatment of neurodivergent people.”
“A child with ADHD who can be managed with some changes to their school day should just have those changes made. Not dealing with those people creates urgent cases that never needed to become urgent. People who are forced to manage on their own and are referred to websites for support without a diagnosis end up with serious mental health issues and the loss of employment and relationships. They then cost the NHS more time and money than if they had just been dealt with when they first presented. We need to rethink how we manage patient lists, rethink what neurodivergence means and move away from the assumption that any patient will be a lot of work. Instead, we should just check what that person needs. Many people with neurodivergence will be able to manage with primary care.”
“I can now access the right people and I can read about my condition, not a label. What I cannot do is get help from the NHS. I have been advised to go private, which is something I hate seeing in a letter that is headed “NHS”. NHS Highland is taking only adult ADHD referrals that meet level 3 criteria, which I and many people in my caseload do not meet. Some people I am supporting are on the edge of becoming acute. They are struggling to work and get about their daily lives. They are feeling worse with each week that passes without intervention. Looking at the burden that is placed on NHS boards, it is not surprising that we have ended up here. Having ADHD or autism does not necessarily mean that someone needs to be on a psychiatrist’s books for life.”
“Knowing all that I know about the high rate of comorbidity of ADHD and hypermobility, it did not come as a surprise when I was told in January this year that my mental health diagnosis, which came with a great deal of difficulty, stigma and, as it turns out, the wrong treatment over years and years, was misdiagnosed neurodivergence. I have ADHD and I am likely autistic. I am lucky that, because, over the years, I have become very aware of what works for me, that has not changed my view of myself or how I manage my symptoms. My brain just works differently and that lets me get through volumes of correspondence, long briefings and arguments quickly. However, I now know that I should have been taking advice from those who understand ADHD, not from those who were looking at me through the lens of a condition that I do not have.”
“When someone feels like they do not fit in and they do not know why, they can start to resent the world and their peers, who think that the person is difficult and unfriendly instead of just quiet and busy thinking about 12 things at once. They can also resent the rules and expectations that nobody will write down for them but that people will quickly use as an opportunity to humiliate them if they get them wrong. I am not surprised that many neurodivergent people are in prison, that many develop unnecessary mental health or behavioural issues or that many withdraw from those social spaces that were quietly excluding them anyway.”
“I congratulate and thank Helen McDade for securing this important debate. I am glad to see that there are cross-party contributions this evening. I am also glad that we are getting a better understanding of how widespread neurodivergence is, that we are seeing parents get help after realising that their child’s neurodivergence is not a first for the family, and that children in schools are getting support that can help them to thrive in education rather than just scrape by, with folk assuming that they are difficult or stupid. I am glad, too, that people who were previously stigmatised are learning that their brain simply works differently and that, with a bit of help, they do not need to struggle.”
“Does the First Minister share my concerns about the planned withdrawal of Loganair services between Inverness and the northern isles and about the potential impact that that could have on jobs in Inverness and Nairn—both jobs that are connected to Dalcross and Highlands and Islands Airports Ltd and those of the skilled workers who must be able to travel to the inner Moray Firth to support our growing energy sector?”
“To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to the BiGGAR Economics report, “Building a Sustainable Future for the North Coast 500”. (S7O-00027)”
“To ask the Scottish Government what assessment it will undertake of any impact of its planned public sector reform on employment in Inverness and Nairn. (S7O-00003)”
“Further details of the scheme will, of course, be made available before it opens at the end of June. That will include information about how we have worked with lenders to give exactly the types of reassurance that Emma Roddick has suggested.”
“I am pleased to see the support for first-time buyers and the recognition of how difficult it can be to pull together a deposit when you are living rent payment to rent payment. Will the Government explain how it will work with mortgage providers to ensure that deposit requirements are not simply uplifted as a result of the scheme? Shirley-Anne Somerville: Emma Roddick makes the important point that we need to work with mortgage lenders and those with an interest in the first-time buyers market to ensure that we support people and that that support makes a genuine difference to them. Such schemes have been available in the past, but, as I said to Mr Rennie, this one is more targeted. We take very seriously the lessons that we have learned from those schemes about how we work with lenders.”
“It will be for them, after this debate, to explain to their constituents not only why they do not believe in independence, which it is their right to oppose as much as it is my right to support, but why they believe that their constituents should not have a vote on it and that this Parliament should not have the power to put that question to the public, meaning that Scotland does not have a route by which to leave. That is what they must explain, and I do not envy them that. I am far more comfortable sitting in amongst my SNP colleagues, calling for democracy, hope and a country with ambitions that can be met. The Deputy Presiding Officer: I call Craig Hoy—up to a generous six minutes, Mr Hoy. 15:55”
“How things change: I do not necessarily think that that is true any more, but, even worse, we have a Labour Government that has failed to devolve more powers to this place, failed to join us in tackling child poverty and failed even to meet its own campaign commitments. It does not matter who is in power in London. Our voices are never heard strongly enough and our people are never given the attention and the respect that they deserve. All that Anas Sarwar and his colleagues can offer is that an ambitious future can and should be achieved through the devolved powers of this Parliament. Well, my ambitions are greater than that, and I think that Scotland’s should be, too. This is not a voluntary union—if it were, Opposition members in the chamber would be able to answer the simple question of how Scotland can leave it.”
“I am confident that we will, but I am clear that, in order to do the best that we can on all the priorities that our constituents have and all the events and crises that will present themselves over the next five years and beyond, we need more power in this room. The suggestions in the weak unionist amendments today will not even touch the sides. Many people have declared to me that they want to see more powers devolved to this Parliament. Not all of them are SNP, and not all are even close to being convinced about independence. Labour members in Scotland used to be among those people. Where are they now? In a similar debate last session, I pointed out to the Labour speakers who were claiming that all would be well once we had a Labour Government that Governments do not last forever and that the Tories would be back in at some point.”
“I felt very motivated today, listening to some of our new members’ first speeches, because that aspect has been shining through. The contributions of Kate and Michelle in particular—our new Campbells—really had me feeling echoes of that 2014 campaign. People have come here with purpose and a deep understanding of the why, not just the what, and an ability to convince people in the way that I was convinced in 2014, including the hundreds of thousands who—just as Craig Hoy did not get to vote for a Green candidate—have not yet had the opportunity to vote on independence. We have to demonstrate that we can do better.”
“Like most people, I have never seen independence as an end in itself. It is a means to the end of allowing us to do better in all those areas and more. We are doing everything that we can to eradicate poverty, to support those who most need help and to create a country that is prosperous and responsible in meeting its global obligations and moral duties to tackle climate change and to uphold human rights for everyone. Over the past 12 years, I have seen far too much progress held back, far too many decisions taken on our behalf against our wishes, and far too many people struggling who do not need to struggle. I agree with the Green amendment’s point that we have a clear majority, not just for independence-supporting parties but for progressive values.”
“That is the kind of hope that was illustrated by Kayleigh Kinross-O’Neill earlier, when she spoke powerfully about barriers, and it is the hope that I want to give to all those who have become eligible to vote in the past decade and to all those who voted in 2014 but have since seen Brexit, Covid and every other difference between Scotland and the UK highlighted since we last got a chance to vote on the constitution. I do not want those people to feel like I once felt—that this place, politics and having a view are not for them. When I knocked on doors over the past year, people told me that their priorities were the cost of living, transport, the NHS and housing. Independence came up now and again but, like me, their immediate priorities were the cost of living, transport, the NHS and housing.”
“I was not supposed to be here—something that I was reminded of by my Facebook memories the other day, as a post from my younger self during the higher exams season came up, explaining my teachers’ reactions when I announced that I was going to take up a job in politics instead of what they had hoped I would do, which was to become a musician or an engineer, respectively. In learning about the arguments for and against independence, I gained true hope for a country where we make our own decisions—where the people we elect to represent our communities in this place can make decisions about energy, employment, social security and many other issues on which we are currently hamstrung and where young people’s voices are heard, disabled people matter and pensioners get a deal that they really deserve.”
“When I look at today’s motion, I feel a deep sense of hope, optimism for what we can do, and joy that, yet again, the people of Scotland have chosen to elect an SNP Government that uses its time and power in this place to tackle poverty and be ambitious, not just for those who are already well off and well placed to be successful, but for absolutely everybody who we represent. I joined the SNP because I had never felt as much hope as I did during the 2014 referendum campaign. It was the first time that I, as a young person growing up in an area of deprivation and attending a school that I was advised not to mention in job applications, felt that politics was something that I had a right to have a view on, and felt that somebody was listening when I shared that view.”
“The first eight speakers are all making their maiden speeches and, therefore, there will be no interventions. Whoever is in the chair will remind members of that as we progress. The first person to speak in the open debate will be Kate Campbell, who has a generous seven minutes. 14:54”
“I said that Iceland went independent in 1944 after a 98 per cent vote in favour, and that we had a vote in 2014 and only 45 per cent of people voted for independence. She said that it is difficult enough to launch an independent country with 96 per cent support and it cannot be done with 45 per cent. The fact is that the majority of Scots do not favour separation. This debate is just a performative ritual that rolls around every five years. The SNP has only got itself to blame for this. I think that, in the future, it will look back on the previous 25 years of Government and wonder why on earth it did not advance the cause by making Scotland indy ready and why, instead, all it ever did was talk and blame Westminster. The same old SNP—always the victim. The Presiding Officer: We move to the open part of the debate.”
“To quote the First Minister, how can that be presented as “compelling and demonstrable” evidence that Scots want to separate from the UK? I do not see it myself. I will finish with this little anecdote. When I was a Scotland Office minister, I went to the Arctic Circle assembly in Iceland. My job was to shadow “air miles” Angus Robertson. At every meeting that he went into, I had to go in afterwards, as he ran around the world telling everyone how monstrous Westminster was and that it would not let Scotland go. The Icelandic Prime Minister said to me that Mr Robertson had just been in and complained about Westminster being nasty to him and not letting Scotland have independence. I said that, in my reckoning, Norway went independent in 1905 after a 96 per cent vote in favour. She agreed.”
“I say to the Scottish National Party that Alex Salmond did a pretty admirable job in moving support for the independence movement from 30 per cent to 45 per cent. I would argue that when he passed the baton to Nicola Sturgeon, he was entitled to think that she and John Swinney would move it from 45 per cent to 60 per cent, but what has actually happened? To answer the two interventions, polling in 2014 showed that 1.4 million Scots would vote for the separatist parties. In 2021, in the Holyrood election, that number was 1.3 million Scots. Three weeks ago, on 7 May, 1 million Scots voted for separatist parties. That is less than a quarter of the electorate voting for separation. How can that ever be considered a mandate to break up the UK?”
“I certainly look forward to never hearing Reform MSPs speak in this Parliament about reserved matters, but I am very keen that the member answers the earlier question—if this is a voluntary union, how does Scotland leave? Malcolm Offord: It is very nice of the member to lead me exactly to that point. There has been no answer on any of these matters: currency; the deficit—we have a 12 per cent deficit, but the EU needs a 3 per cent deficit; a hard border with England when 60 per cent of our exports from Scotland go to England; pensions, when Sottish pensioners are greatly protected by the umbrella of 65 million rather than 5 million contributors; and defence, when we have Russian submarines circling Scotland right now.”
“I make this affirmation under protest in order to sit in this Parliament, where my allegiance will be to the people of Inverness and Nairn. I, Emma Roddick, 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. Tha mise, Emma Roddick, gu sòlaimte is fìrinneach a’ cur an cèill agus ag innse gum bi mi dìleas agus fìor umhail do A Mhòrachd An Rìgh Teàrlach, a oighreachan agus a thànaistean, a rèir an lagh.”
“There is a lot of work to do to ensure that people in the Highlands and Islands and young people like me who are homeless and struggling or disabled and fighting are supported to be contributors and to be happy, healthy and productive individuals—maybe even leaders or MSPs. 14:26”
“Much as I will miss the contributions of many colleagues who do not plan to return, including the cabinet secretary, Elena Whitham, and Joe FitzPatrick, whose contribution at First Minister’s questions I welled up listening to earlier, and much as I value the work that we all do here, I will head home on Friday morning, and I cannot wait to look ahead and see that bridge. I will spend the next six weeks working hard to come back here and represent that incredible Highlands and Islands constituency, and I hope that anyone who does so takes the issues just as seriously. I know that society and the Parliament are best when protected characteristics and geography do not limit our ambition.”
“I will never forget amending what is now the Housing (Scotland) Act 2025 to allow us to collect data that will allow future Parliaments to make better decisions, better policy and better law. When I look back at all that and look forward to the work that remains, I am proud of what has been achieved, but I have a deep feeling of unfinished business. I, the SNP and the Parliament have more to do to ensure the sustainability of rural and island areas and the whole of the Highlands and Islands region, so that locals can access high-quality public services. On the day I made my first speech in June 2021, I also spoke about how, no matter which direction I am travelling in, I look out for the Kessock bridge lights in the distance and know that I am nearly home.”
“That is what I did. It was so meaningful to me to serve as the minister with responsibility for addressing depopulation. I am so proud of the addressing depopulation action plan that I published then, and the scale of the work that went into it from the communities that I worked with, many of which were rural or island based. I worked with the transport secretary to ensure that young islanders benefit from our free bus travel scheme, which has now been extended to interisland ferries. From this week, my constituents are benefiting from a £2 fare cap for single bus journeys; I am delighted that the trains that I travel on every week are due for an upgrade next year; and now that we have a set timescale for the Nairn bypass, I look forward to seeing spades in the ground for that very soon.”
“When I made that speech, only 137 days had passed since my mother died of Covid and 44 months had passed since I was homeless. That was now 1,758 days ago, and I have learned so much since then, from the finer points of goose management to the difficulties in delivering island housing developments. However, my outlook on the core issues that we face has not changed, nor has my passion for addressing them. The day I made my first speech, I told the Parliament that I would spend the next five years doing everything in my power to improve the lives of others who make the Highlands and Islands their home, that I would work with colleagues across the chamber to make sure that we are getting it right, and that I would use my lived experience to contribute to discussions because I deeply understand the issues faced by my constituents.”
“I thank Jamie Halcro Johnston for allowing us to debate, on the final day of the parliamentary session, the many issues that he and I have fought most hard on over the course of it. I have been really lucky with my regional colleagues—Rhoda Grant, Edward Mountain, Ariane Burgess and Tim Eagle in particular. Whether through bumping into each other on surgery tours or working together on committees, they have had a frequent and usually positive influence on my working life. Although Jamie Halcro Johnston and I have interacted less often, we have never clashed outwith this chamber. That is the kind of collegiate working across parties that we should be promoting. In my first speech in the Parliament, I spoke about the mental health crisis in our region.”
“Members will be making a decision on the proposal that, starting at the start of the next session, conveners should be elected in the way that is outlined in our report and in the proposed amendments to standing orders. The final part of what we are recommending is that the operation of the proposed system of elected conveners be reviewed not later than halfway through the next session. With that, I rest. I move, That the Parliament notes the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee’s 8th Report, 2026 (Session 6), Standing Orders rule changes – Elected Conveners (SP Paper 1033), and agrees that the changes to Standing Orders set out in Annexe A of the report be made with effect from 11 May 2026. The Deputy Presiding Officer: The question on the motion will be put at decision time. Motion without Notice 19:12”
“I am not clear about issues such as anonymity of voting and so on. I just want to know what we will be voting on tonight. The Deputy Presiding Officer: I ask the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee to reinforce the point that members should always speak through the chair. Martin Whitfield: I believe that the Deputy Presiding Officer is fully aware that the committee that will follow the present Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee, which had its final meeting today, would be open to any such recommendation. The vote tonight is on a proposed standing order rule change that will amend rule 6.3 and insert after rule 11.10A rule 11.10B, which provides for the election of subject and mandatory committee conveners.”
“Such a review should include consideration of the operation of the standing orders relating to temporary, deputy and acting conveners of committees. That would allow for consideration of the matter that Christine Grahame raised. [Interruption.] Christine Grahame: Will the member give way? Martin Whitfield: If the intervention is very quick. The Deputy Presiding Officer: I will allow a brief intervention from Christine Grahame, but I encourage other members to settle down a bit. Christine Grahame: This is a really stupid question, because I am really tired. I want to check something. Is it the case that, if we vote for the committee’s report, we will not be voting for all the elements within it, and that, at some point, the Parliament will debate the recommendations in your report?”
“If only one member is nominated and there are no objections, they would become convener. If there is an objection, a secret ballot would be held. In addition, it is proposed that, “If more than one chair role is being considered in a single meeting, no member may be nominated for more than one role”. The proposed new rules detail the manner in which votes would be cast at the election for the convener, which would depend on the number of candidates in the election. Under our proposals, “Committee members can vote to recommend removal of a convener, but that removal only occurs if a motion is agreed by the Parliament.” Should the proposed changes be agreed to, we have recommended that they be reviewed during the first half of session 7.”
“Martin Whitfield made a comparison with the election of deputy presiding officers. Will he confirm that he does not envisage more rounds of exhaustive balloting for every single committee convener? Martin Whitfield: I am very grateful for that intervention, which gives me the opportunity to thank Emma Roddick for her service on my committee and to draw me back to the purpose of the proposals that we are considering tonight. It is right to say that it is not envisaged that there will be many rounds of elections for the post of convener. Only a member of the party that holds the pen of convenership of the committee in question will be able to put themselves forward to be nominated, but their nomination will require the support of a member of another political party or a member who is not a member of a political party in the Parliament.”
“That can only help to ease pressure at peak times, including during the early morning surge for appointments, so I thought that that would have been welcomed across the chamber. Child Poverty (Falkirk Council) 6.”
“The Scottish National Party’s budget provides welcome investment in Scotland’s primary care service. Can the cabinet secretary say any more about how the investment in new walk-in centres will address the 8 am rush and increase access to primary care? Does she agree that Labour members should welcome that ambitious move instead of opposing it for opposition’s sake? The Deputy Presiding Officer: I ask the cabinet secretary to respond on matters within her responsibilities. Shona Robison: I think that everyone should welcome the increased investment in primary care. We have provided general practice with a £531 million three-year funding deal to recruit more general practitioners and improve access, and, as Emma Roddick referred to, we have provided £36 million for new walk-in GP services in communities across Scotland.”
“Grid connections and other projects that are waiting for the green light are in the hands of the UK Government. We have to ensure that they are expedited as much as possible, so that we can ensure that energy is available to Scotland for our business communities in the Highlands and Islands and the rest of the country.”
“Defence experts cited in a recent RenewableUK report have urged for there to be an acceleration of renewables development in order to shield against further geopolitical shocks. Does the minister agree that it is more important than ever for Scotland to develop renewables generation and storage capacity in order to enhance our energy security for businesses and households across Scotland? Richard Lochhead: Emma Roddick raises an important issue. It is ironic that, in energy-rich Scotland, we are facing rising energy bills. As the member has said, we do not have enough measures in place to shield Scotland and to ensure that we can take advantage of the massive energy resources, particularly renewable energy resources, which are on our doorstep. I agree that we have to accelerate the development of renewables.”
“I am inclined to support that if it would be required in the first instance and even through those five- year review periods, but if we needed to change a single line in the guidance document and it had to come back for a resolution of Parliament, I would be a bit worried about whether that was onerous. I would be grateful if Liz Smith could clarify how she believes that that system would operate. On that point, I will close and ask members to support amendments 259 and 270. I move amendment 259.”
“If it passes on Tuesday, key details of that would be filled in by the UK Government via section 30 and section 104 orders. It is unclear what, if any, role Parliament would have in that, other than the final veto that we could wield through the commencement regulations. I have a couple of questions for Liz Smith, so I think that it would be best to ask them now, ahead of her speech, rather than to intervene later and break her flow. My questions are about how her proposed system would operate. Would the resolution be required just for the first edition of the guidance? Would it be required for any subsequent editions or even for any small revisions that were made in between those five- year periods? I want to make sure that it would be quite easy for us to keep the guidance up to date.”
“I do not want to pre-empt what Liz Smith is going to talk about, primarily because I have not yet decided on how to vote, but I am particularly interested in what she is proposing, because I think that it would provide that accountability and scrutiny mechanism that gets at what Emma Roddick is suggesting. Briefly, to reassure supporters of the bill, amendment 270 is not intended to provide anything that would be unworkable or particularly onerous. On that, I point to the fact that Dignity in Dying supports amendment 270. It is unusual for us to be in a position in which we could potentially have guidance that requires a resolution of Parliament, but this bill places us in a very unusual position because of the complicated issues of legislative competence.”
“Liz Smith proposes that it could be used only as a result of a resolution of the Parliament, which would give us a route for accountability. As part of the five-year review process, there would be an opportunity to do that. Yesterday, we agreed to amendments that would change the way in which the advocacy service would be provided, to give the Government mechanisms to ensure that those providing the service provided it in line with what would essentially become their contractual obligations. There is a wider need for on-going review and scrutiny.”
“I have a note from the Mental Welfare Commission, which found that strategies for monitoring and reviewing existing independent advocacy services are “variable”. The bill is quiet on how that system would be monitored and reviewed, so is the member confident that independent advocates would do their job and do what he intends with his amendments, without steering into pressuring patients or promoting assisted dying? Ross Greer: That intervention straddles a couple of points and it takes me on to what I was about to get on to. I do not want to pre-empt Liz Smith’s amendments 268 and 269, because I am undecided on how to vote on them, but I am particularly interested in them because of the accountability and the power that they would give Parliament in that regard. The guidance would be produced by the Government.”
“I had to cancel my final surgery in Peebles, which meant a lot to me after 27 years, but that is nothing. The other issue that I want to raise is that we cannot arrange this so that we are reprinting the Assisted Dying for Terminally Ill Adults (Scotland) Bill as amended a few days or even a day before we debate it. There must be sufficient time for members to consider the bill as amended, because there are lots of amendments coming from different places. I do not know what the bill will look like at the final stage. I would certainly like to have time to reflect on and consider it before I am involved in voting on the bill as amended. 21:45”
“I appreciate that it might be easy to misunderstand the point about a member being able to get home tonight or after business finishes tomorrow, but that is not the case for everyone. In order to vote and take part in business remotely, a member would need to travel home, which will not be possible for all members between 10 o’clock one night and 9 o’clock the next morning. Christine Grahame: As I said, I cannot respond to every individual case in the Parliament. I go back to my point that my broad understanding is that Friday is a working day. We have needed to tweak the schedule. I have been inconvenienced over and over in the past few days, and I accept that. [Interruption.] The Presiding Officer: Let us hear one another. Christine Grahame: I have had to cancel meetings.”
“I again make it clear that I expect regular updates from the health board to ensure that that work is taken forward.”
“A common thread throughout all the reports, as well as conversations in wider society, is the importance of a respectful culture when discussing or working in mental health services. How is the Scottish Government working to champion the rights of vulnerable children and young people? Tom Arthur: Culture is of the utmost importance. In this specific case, it was clearly highlighted as a key concern in the reports, which is why the actions around culture are so important. I have touched on the importance of ensuring that we have more permanent staffing, which we have seen since the inspections in August last year. Further to that, I have alluded to the work that is under way to improve the culture in Skye house. I have received assurance from the health board that that work will continue to be implemented.”