Pam Duncan-Glancy
Independent · Scotland
“I know that because I have been all the people I have described. They live in fear every single day, worrying about what new limit someone else will put on their life and what little power they will have to change it. They live every single day without choice at all.”
“It is the lack of support, and the lack of options, that makes me feel like I cannot go on. Disabled people do not have real choices in life. There will be countless disabled people in our constituencies tonight who have not had the choice to have a shower in weeks.”
“During the pandemic, my husband and I were so scared of other people’s power over our lives— lives that we could see others devaluing daily— that we wrote letters to each other making it clear that we wanted to be resuscitated.”
“From fighting to go to the same nursery as my sister to delaying university for two years because I could not get a care package, and from fighting to be allowed to travel on the same bus as my husband to fighting to get a bathroom adapted so that I could have a shower, absolutely everything that I have has been a fight.”
“The bill will not only put sick and disabled people at a risk that cannot be mitigated in one bill or by one policy, including the risk from coercion, but will serve to reinforce the internalised ableism that we live with every day of our lives, and legitimise the view that a life such as ours—a life of dependence and, often, pain—is not…”
“I, too, thank Liam McArthur for the way in which he has engaged on the bill and with me. Last week, we considered the specifics of what the bill would mean in real life. For 25 hours, we heard personal reflections and experiences as well as some of the difficulties in the detail.”
The complete record
Every one of 665 lines we hold for Pam Duncan-Glancy, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 11 of 14.
“The Government is absolutely committed to building a system of school-age childcare that meets the needs of all children, families and communities. Through projects that we have been funding with our investment to date, we are learning what is needed to provide high-quality, affordable activities and childcare provision for children with multiple and complex disabilities, as well as for children with additional support needs. The projects include those supported by our access to childcare fund and our early adopter communities in Fife, Shetland, Glasgow, Clackmannanshire, Inverclyde and Dundee.”
“I hope that Mr Marra and members across the chamber will welcome that measure. Jeremy Balfour: I do welcome that announcement, minister, but will you also commit to meeting the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities as soon as possible before the summer holidays to find out what is happening on the ground and what extra help the Scottish Government could give local authorities for this summer? The Deputy Presiding Officer: Always speak through the chair, please. Natalie Don-Innes: Again, what I will touch on at the end of my speech will address that point directly, but I have regular meetings with Councillor Tony Buchanan, the COSLA spokesperson, and I am more than happy to discuss the issue with him at my next meeting, which I believe will be arranged in due course.”
“For example, I know that Dundee City Council has undertaken work to map its term-time and holiday services in order to show where providers can deliver a service for children with additional needs. However, as members have pointed out, that is not necessarily happening in the same way across all local authority areas, and that will need to be addressed. Mr Marra has noted this already, but I am pleased to say that, in order to support local authorities in delivering provision for children during the holidays this year, we have committed in our programme for government to providing an additional £1 million of funding that will be targeted at holiday play schemes and activities for children with a disability. That investment will be distributed across local authorities, and it is to be delivered this summer.”
“Will the minister take an intervention? Natalie Don-Innes: Of course. Pam Duncan-Glancy: I pressed the wrong button to indicate that I wanted to make an intervention, but I thank the minister for taking it anyway. On the point about consultation, across Scotland but particularly in Glasgow, parents tell me that they do not feel engaged with local authority decisions on support for their children with additional support needs. What is the Government doing to monitor how local authorities engage with parents on that? Natalie Don-Innes: I am disappointed to hear that. What I will say at the end of my speech about what the Government is doing will directly address that point. Local consultation should help local authorities to understand the specific needs of families with a child who has a disability or additional support needs.”
“Most of all, a new direction for education is one that broadens horizons and smashes the glass, class and stepped ceilings that are in the way of opportunity being spread for all. If Scotland is to have the best future, we must start by investing in all the people who will shape it. We must act now—not with delay or deflection but with determination. That is what young people in Scotland deserve. 15:57”
“The solutions have been proposed time and again yet, year after year, ministers choose to step back instead of step up. Education is the central task of Government, because how we support young people today will decide what kind of Scotland we wake up to tomorrow. That is why Scottish Labour would take a new direction in education. We would build a system that inspires young people to learn, be curious and progress. It would be a system that supports teachers to teach and learners to learn by rebuilding support for young people, including in the health and care system. It would be a system that prepares young people with the skills that they need for tomorrow’s world of work.”
“I will tell you which people pay the price for the SNP’s failure: the pupil who is sitting in a crowded classroom without a support teacher, the teenager who is leaving school with no qualifications or next steps and the young adult who is being turned away from college because the course has been cut. They are not statistics; their lives are shaped by political choices. The programme for government could have been a turning point away from all that; it could have been a moment of honesty and a plan for recovery. Instead, it is more of the same: delay dressed up as delivery and slogans in place of solutions. Scotland’s young people are ambitious, capable and brimming with potential. That is why Scottish Labour is clear that this cannot go on.”
“They are being moved off NHS waiting lists for child and adolescent mental health services and diverted to provision that is not NHS or statutory—they are left in limbo. All the while, schools are being left to pick up the pieces. The First Minister says that the programme for government is about fairness, but let me be clear: there is no fairness without opportunity, and there is no opportunity without investment in education, skills and the people who our children become. Once, Scotland’s young people had access to a world-class education system. Now, they are subject to a patchwork of pilot schemes, hollowed- out colleges, missed targets and rebrands instead of reforms. The SNP used to say, “Judge us on this.” Well, 18 years on, the attainment gap is not closing, the system is not improving and opportunities are being squandered.”
“The Government promised transformational expansion but, instead, costs for under-threes in Scotland remain higher than the average in the UK. The current provision, which is a pilot in six communities, falls short; it is a national policy reduced to a postcode lottery. Parents of children with additional support needs struggle to access funded childcare at all. On ASN, the Government’s approach and delivery have been branded intolerable. One in three pupils now has an additional support need, and a report out today says that the figure in Glasgow is as high as half of all pupils, yet the number of specialist teachers has plummeted. Teacher unions and third sector organisations have been warning of a crisis in ASN for years, and parents are at the end of their tether. Children are being denied support.”
“Instead of delivering the skills that we need, the Government has presided over skills gaps in key areas of the economy. Colleges are pivotal to that. The Government calls them anchor institutions, yet decisions that the SNP has taken have put colleges in crisis. Staffing has fallen by 28 per cent since 2007, enrolments dropped by 62,000 last year alone and courses are being cut. That is not renewal; it is managed decline or, worse, as one college leader has said, it is unmanaged decline. We hear of pilot projects for offshore wind and engineering, but there is nothing—no vision—to fix the college sector. All of that leaves thousands of young people from the poorest backgrounds and care-experienced young people not in education, employment or training. Today, the Deputy First Minister mentioned childcare.”
“There is nothing of that scale on the B that the First Minister spoke about either—behaviour. Violence in classrooms is rising and misogynistic abuse is growing. The Government’s new action plan on that has not even got as far as to define the problem, let alone solve it. Meanwhile, staff are burning out and children are suffering in silence. Finally, the First Minister said that C is for curriculum. However, what we have seen is narrowing subject choice, underresourced vocational routes and reform that has been delayed, diluted and discredited. The Government’s announcements yesterday on rationalising qualifications have only added confusion and mistrust. That brings me to a letter that the First Minister did not offer yesterday: D for delivery. Let us look at delivery on skills.”
“In yesterday’s programme for government statement, the First Minister spoke of returning to “the ABC of education”. I would like to use my time to test the Government further on that, because I believe that education is fundamental to building a strong foundation for the future. The First Minister said that A is for attainment and attendance, yet more young people than ever before are leaving school with no qualifications, the attainment gap at higher level is growing and the most disadvantaged young people are falling further behind. All the while, attendance is falling. However, instead of bold action to address all that, all that we get is a campaign on attendance and sticking plasters. There is nothing that recognises the whole-scale systemic change that is needed to get young people back to school.”
“The First Minister tells us that the programme for government is about building Scotland’s best future but, after 18 years of the SNP Government, Scotland’s young people are still waiting for their future to begin. They were told that education was the top priority but, instead of opportunity, they have been handed broken promises, over and over again. The result is that 84,000 young people in Scotland are not in training, education or employment. Earlier, I intervened on the Deputy First Minister to ask about the Government’s skills agency’s view on the SNP’s plans to fix the issues on training and skills. In short, that agency’s view was that it fears that the plans are not enough and are unlikely to effect change for 10 years.”
“The Deputy Presiding Officer: I advise members that there is no time in hand, so members will be required to stick to their speaking allocations. I call Murdo Fraser to speak to and move amendment S6M-17437.4. Mr Fraser, you have up to nine minutes. 15:03”
“I move, That the Parliament recognises the actions outlined in the Programme for Government 2025-26 to grow the Scottish economy and eradicate child poverty; further recognises that these missions are inextricably linked, with a strong economy providing access to fair work opportunities and supporting investment in public services and ambitious climate and anti-poverty measures; notes that, over the year ahead, the actions within the Programme for Government will build on Scotland’s economic strengths to address the additional challenges the country faces from economic volatility, capturing the economic opportunities ahead to drive improvements in living standards, reduce child poverty and build a strong foundation for the future, to weather the global economic uncertainty; welcomes the Scottish Government’s continued focus on delivering action across the drivers of child poverty reduction, to increase earned incomes, reduce the costs of living and maximise incomes from social security and benefits in kind, and commits to working together to grow the economy, and deliver on the 2030 child poverty targets unanimously supported by the Scottish Parliament.”
“Our three enterprise agencies are cornerstones to our efforts to develop Scotland’s entrepreneurial strengths and boost innovation. The figures are remarkable. Last year alone, they supported the creation or safeguarding of more than 19,600 jobs and unlocked a record £2.3 billion of planned capital investment. I will draw my comments to a close. We are very clear that our actions to support the economy are a means of tackling poverty and that those two things go hand in hand. We are proud of our strengths and of the progress that we are making on reducing poverty.”
“We will provide further certainty and stability by supporting better engagement and robust business and regulatory impact assessments as well as by reaffirming our commitment to having no further divergence from UK Government income tax policy for the rest of this parliamentary session. That will ensure that the majority of Scottish taxpayers continue to pay less income tax than those in the rest of the UK. The programme for government sets out a range of planning commitments, such as to reverse the decline in professional planners working in public authorities and to address delays through the planning hub to help tackle poverty through good new homes and making our communities more attractive and sustainable places to live and do business.”
“Last month, I was at Glasgow airport welcoming the £1.5 billion investment that is being made by PSP Investments Ltd and AviAlliance into AGS Airports Ltd. We are taking an investor-friendly approach to being a globally competitive destination by engaging with priority investors alongside the Scottish National Investment Bank to send a clear signal that Scotland offers huge opportunities and the right conditions for investment. In the coming year, we will launch investScotland to showcase significant investment opportunities, building on the First Minister’s global offshore wind investment forum. We will also implement the recommendations of the housing investment task force. We have a critical role in making it easier to support local domestic business by providing certainty and stability to taxpayers.”
“Our global image blends rich culture and heritage, innovation, resilience, natural beauty, and top-class food and drink, attracting millions of tourists, investors and international connections to Scotland—I am immensely proud of what our businesses and communities achieve in this country. As well as trading outwards, we welcome investment inwards. We understand that we will not achieve our ambitions for growing the economy, tackling the climate emergency, reducing child poverty or improving public services without investment flowing into Scotland. We are already a prime destination for capital investment. For multiple years in a row, we have continued to be the most attractive place in the UK for inward investment outside London and the south-east. In other words, investors have confidence in the Scottish economy.”
“I am particularly pleased with some of the commitments in the programme for government, not least the £2 million for the Clyde maritime cluster, which is specifically designed to support people who are furthest from the job market into skilled employment. We are working with the private sector on that. The country of Adam Smith has always looked outwards—when our economy grows, we do not just create wealth; we export our creativity and turn our global connections into local opportunity. Scotland boasts many global economic strengths, such as in renewable energy, its world leading financial services sector, whisky exports, advanced manufacturing, life sciences and tech innovation.”
“The new approach to national skills planning means that employers, colleges, universities and others come together to ensure that post-school provision becomes more responsive to our economy’s needs and priorities. Pam Duncan-Glancy: Will the Deputy First Minister take another intervention? Kate Forbes: A really brief one. Pam Duncan-Glancy: In evidence to the Education, Children and Young People Committee this morning on the Government’s plans for skills reform, Skills Development Scotland said that it believes that “the timescales for current reform mean that any benefits or unintended consequences of the programme will not be understood for a decade.” Kate Forbes: I disagree with that, because although we work to reform and future proof the system on a long-term basis, we are acting now to support more immediate skills needs.”
“If the member shares more information with me, I will be happy to look at the specifics of the case—I know that the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care is already aware of it. We are committed to helping hard-pressed families with the costs of childcare as well, because ensuring that people continue to get the right support and skills to flourish once they are in work is a key part of our plans for growth. This coming year, we will create even more funded breakfast, after-school and holiday club places for families who need them, through a £3 million bright start breakfasts fund and the expansion of the extra time programme.”
“Will the Deputy First Minister therefore share my concern that a really successful programme for supporting disabled people into employment in Glasgow through the Glasgow Centre for Inclusive Living has not been able to have as many internships for disabled people in the national health service this year, as a result of what it has been told are recruitment freezes? What could the Deputy First Minister do with me to help to address that? Kate Forbes: The example that the member has cited is precisely the kind of opportunity that we are supporting and are keen to continue to support. The employability support that I just outlined is very much focused on maximising the opportunities for disabled people.”
“Due to the global shortage of medication, many services in Scotland are focusing on maintaining medication for those who are already established on medication, rather than on initiating new patients. Again, I would be more than happy to pick up that conversation outside the chamber. The Deputy Presiding Officer: I require briefer contributions, particularly from the ministerial team. Breast Reconstruction Surgery (Access and Waiting Times) 3.”
“The reality is that, outwith CAMHS, diagnosis has become a private-only service. That is what has happened to a seven-year-old constituent in my region of Glasgow. Is the Government content that the only route for people to get ADHD support just now is through private healthcare? Maree Todd: Not at all. As Mr Ruskell indicated, some people are waiting for medication for ADHD support. The challenge with ADHD is that there is a global shortage of medication because of the rise in the number of people who are seeking a diagnosis. That issue is not unique to Scotland. There are challenges with providing a sustainable route to diagnosis and support in Scotland, and there are challenges with triaging and starting people on medication.”
“To ask the Scottish Government what progress it has made on implementing the land use and agriculture measures set out in its “Climate change action: policy package”, published in April 2024. (S6O-04615)”
“I can assure Pam Duncan-Glancy that the Government is taking every step that we can to strengthen attendance and participation in education.”
“On primary pupils’ attainment, the literacy gap among pupils in primaries 1, 4 and 7 combined is at its lowest level ever, at 20.2 percentage points. That debunks what Pam Duncan-Glancy is saying to me. When it comes to behaviour interventions, the Government is taking steps, which have been consulted on in Parliament, to support the teaching profession in tackling unacceptable behaviour in our schools. Further steps are being taken to address the issue of absence from schools, which I recognise, and the Government accepts, is unacceptable at its current levels, because it deprives young people of their engagement in learning. The Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills is bringing forward measures to ensure that the attendance issue is addressed by our communication and engagement with school communities in that respect.”
“On the curriculum, after years of reviews, consultations and rebrands, subject choice is narrowing, vocational routes are underresourced and reform has been delayed and diluted again. Can the First Minister tell us this: after 17 years of broken promises and the squandering of a generation of young people’s opportunities in the process, will he now admit that his Government has failed on education? The First Minister: No, I will not. Subject choice is very extensive in Scottish education, and Pam Duncan-Glancy does a disservice to the education system to suggest otherwise. On attainment—[Interruption.] The Presiding Officer: Members, let us hear one another. The First Minister: It is factually accurate, Mr Marra, believe you me.”
“I thank the First Minister for advance sight of the statement. The First Minister talks of the ABCs of education, so let me test his Government’s record on them. On attainment, more pupils than ever are leaving school with no qualifications and the attainment gap in relation to a variety of measures is growing. On absence, rates are up and the Government has announced that it will monitor the data—so, when families needed action, they got simply observation. On behaviour, violence is up and misogynistic abuse is growing, but, instead of addressing staff workload or pupil needs, the Government talked about a new action plan that has not even defined the problem yet.”
“The First Minister: I come back to one of the points that I made to Mr Sarwar in my earlier response, which is that not all of those young people require a diagnosis to make progress in addressing the circumstances that they face. Therefore, we must have available a range of community-based interventions, supported by some of the financial assistance that I have set out, to ensure that the needs of those young people are met at the earliest possible opportunity. As a consequence of that, the Government is working to ensure that we have those mechanisms available in all localities so that young people can access those services. That is what the funding that I set out in my response to Mr Mountain is designed to achieve. Council Housing Allocations (Suspension) 6.”
“The First Minister has set out the factors that are addressing the issue, but there are currently 9,000 school-age children awaiting a diagnosis in Glasgow. At the same time, the cuts to the integration joint board in Glasgow mean that planned attention deficit hyperactivity disorder pathways have been shelved and vital pilot programmes have been cancelled. The First Minister can say that there are pathways, but those 9,000 children are stuck waiting, some of them for years. What does the First Minister say to the 9,000 people who are on the waiting list in Glasgow? Exactly what pathways are available to them, and when can they expect to get their diagnosis?”
“The decision is not irreversible. I believe that we can act, and we have to do so with urgency, purpose and a clear commitment to the future of Scotland’s creative economy. 13:22”
“Without that, there will be a vacuum, and without paying due regard to the people or places in the institutions that are affected, we cannot fully appreciate the impact of the decision. Today, like other members, I ask the BBC to change its mind and to do what it has so far refused to do: to reconsider the decision; to provide clarity on its decision making; to engage with the Parliament and with stakeholders; and to bring forward a renewed decision or a credible plan. I ask the Scottish Government to take the matter seriously; to support our educators; to work with the industry; and to use the powers and influence that it has to prevent “River City” from ending. The decision has not yet fully taken effect. We can save the show, and I urge the Government to take every step that it can to ensure that that happens.”
“It is crucial that a strategy for ensuring that the training, skills and access-to-work pipeline that it provides is protected. It is also crucial that decisions are taken in consultation with the Parliament, the sector, creatives themselves, the trade unions and the institutions that now find themselves scrambling to adjust to the potential consequences if the decision goes ahead. It is simply not good enough. The screen industry is a sector of national importance—it is a driver of jobs, creativity, education and opportunity, and of our national identity, and that future cannot be delivered without investment in “River City”, the skills that it offers and the proper infrastructure that comes with it.”
“The Theatre School of Scotland has provided testimony—which speaks for so many—that “River City” offers a rare chance for young actors to see themselves on screen and take their first steps into the industry. What do all those things have in common? They all speak to the same thing: that “River City” is more than a programme—it is a platform. It is, as the head of programming at the BBC called it—as Jackie Baillie referred to—“a star factory”, and its closure would leave a vacuum that we are not yet currently prepared to fill. The BBC has suggested that it will make space for new projects and build on the work of the “River City” training academy. However, it is hard to see how that can be replicated without the presence, scale or permanence that “River City” provides.”
“Since the decision was announced, I have heard from educational institutions across Scotland about how crucial the programme is to learning and teaching in their creative courses. Glasgow Caledonian University’s master of arts course in television fiction writing—the only course of its kind in the UK—has for years relied on its relationship with “River City” to give students their first professional credits. Dozens of graduates have gone directly into jobs on the show. At the University of St Andrews, its master’s degree in playwriting and screenwriting was on the brink of forming a partnership with the production team, with the aim of giving students experience in a working story room—something that would not exist anywhere else in Scotland at that scale.”
“Make no mistake: this is not about just one television programme and one studio; it is about opportunity and the very infrastructure that will be relied on to train and support the next generation of talent in Scotland’s creative industries. “River City” is one of the only year-round, high-volume production environments in the country. It offers stable work and training, with on-the-job opportunities, and that work is a crucial part of the college and university offer in the creative industries across Scotland. Crucially, it offers access, especially for people who cannot easily access the creative industries, including those who do not have the networks or resources to break into them on their own— women, disabled creatives and early-career creatives to name but a few.”
“I begin my contribution, as others have, by thanking my colleague Neil Bibby for bringing this important debate to the chamber and for his tireless work in standing up for Scotland’s cultural sector. I also thank Equity, the union, for working closely with us to highlight the impact of the decision and for working day in, day out for its members and for workers’ rights. The decision to end “River City” is a blow for fans of the show and has wide-ranging consequences for many who worked on it: the actors, crew, producers, educators and, most of all, the young people and early-career professionals who stood to benefit from the opportunities that it could have provided in the future.”
“If he does not recognise the economic carnage that was wrought by Liz Truss and Kwasi Kwarteng or the horrendous inheritance that the Labour UK Government received from the Tory Government, frankly, I do not think that he is reading enough of the right papers, and he has his eyes closed and his ears shut. We must ensure that we can build a better economy that serves far more of the people in this country who require it, and that has to be based on work. We must ensure that we take some of the difficult decisions to make that happen. As my colleagues Pam Duncan-Glancy, Claire Baker, Paul O’Kane and Martin Whitfield have set out, yes, we must make tough decisions but, in doing that, we must ensure that we hold people’s dignity at our core. 16:40”
“However, the cabinet secretary seems to take that one step further and to fully reject the idea that we should have any fiscal rules. That is of little surprise, given that this Government made £70 billion of spending demands ahead of the autumn budget and rejected £45 billion of revenue raisers. That would be £115 billion of fiscal adjustment—more than double Liz Truss’s impact on the UK economy, which laid low the financial system in the UK. That brings me to Craig Hoy’s rather fantastical account of recent economic history in this country.”
“Maggie Chapman: Does the member agree with Anas Sarwar, who said earlier this week that a wealth tax is not an option? If the member is talking about redistribution, we must look at taxation not only of income but of asset wealth. Michael Marra: I take the point. We know that, across Scotland, we will have to increase the amount of public revenue raised over the next couple of decades if we are to sustainably fund our public services while meeting the increasing demands of demographic challenges and climate change. In the short run, a wealth tax is not possible. The finance secretary has taken a decade to put in place a tax on sand, which is exactly the same tax as the one that applies in the rest of the UK. The idea that we can solve these problems with a wealth tax in this Parliament in the next few years is, frankly, for the birds.”
“We have to ensure that we see the picture in the round. The sustainability of our public services depends on the sustainability of our public finances. We have to be sure that we can invest in social security. The social security bill in this country and across the UK will continue to rise for years and years to come. That is absolutely clear, and that investment will be made. Maggie Chapman mentioned the position of the UK Government. I draw her attention to the Office for Budget Responsibility’s analysis of the autumn budget, which set out that it was the most redistributive budget in recent history. The people who benefited most from it were in the bottom decile and the people who were paying the most were at the top end of that scale. That is redistribution.”
“We can broaden that point—many speakers have—and apply it our public services more generally. For example, one in six people are stuck on NHS waiting lists. We know that 300,000 people of working age are unable to go into work because of illness. That is a function of the interaction between what is, frankly, our illness service in Scotland and the social security system here and across the UK. There are tensions between the short-term solutions for fixing our NHS and the long-term trends. Willie Rennie spoke about some of those issues. There are tensions between the costs of poverty in the longer run and the actions that might be taken in the shorter run, including whether they might be to reduce costs. That was set out well. There are tensions with regard to where the burden falls on other parts of our public services.”
“As colleagues have pointed out, the motion in front of Parliament calls for the entirety of the reform programme to be scrapped. On that basis, the SNP does not support the increases in the universal credit standard allowance. It does not believe that we should scrap the work capability assessment. It does not want to introduce a right to try work with no risk to welfare support. It is also opposed to the £1 billion in employability support that is set out in the green paper. That comes as little surprise, given the cuts that the Scottish Government has made to its employability programmes. Key themes have emerged in the debate. How the systems interact and some of the challenges that arise from that was a point that was well put by Liz Smith, which I think has been acknowledged by speakers across the chamber.”
“People want to work—they crave that purpose— and that work can mean a better life for those in our communities. Outcomes for people, for our communities and for the country as a whole are not good enough, and they are going in the wrong direction. The number of young people who are economically inactive has surged in recent years. It is a massive problem; some days, I wonder whether it is a bigger problem than Trump’s tariffs. The squandering of human potential in our country has a long-term cost; it affects our potential to have a better economy. We know that economic inactivity among young people is higher in Scotland than it is across the rest of the UK; that, in general, we are not supporting enough people into work; and that economic inactivity in Scotland has been higher than that in the UK in every quarter of the past five years.”
“I thank the member for recognising—as have others—the challenging aspects of the green paper and the impact that those will have on disabled people. Does he agree that all changes to the support for disabled people must have dignity and respect at their heart, and that involving disabled people in those decisions is absolutely essential? Michael Marra: I could not agree more with that sentiment. The consultation that is being carried out on the green paper has to hold those principles at its heart. I recognise the huge amount of work that my colleague Pam Duncan-Glancy has done over many years as an advocate for disabled people in Scotland and that she has also done in the Parliament. As a party, we are clear that change is necessary. Far too often, people are being trapped in inactivity rather than being supported into work.”
“Their GP told them that nothing more could be done until a diagnosis was made, but there is no clarity on when that will happen. It beggars belief that this is happening at a time when services are facing dramatic cuts. In my region, families and professionals are raising serious concerns about a reported £1.5 million cut to crucial mental health and care services— services that are already stretched. One impact will be that the planned ADHD pathway that was going to be put in place will no longer go ahead. Another impact will be that planned health checks for people with learning disabilities will not go ahead—against the backdrop that they are likely to die 25 years earlier than others. That is unfathomable. Such cuts do not reduce need; they delay care, deepen distress and could result in the most terrible of consequences.”
“I recently met a grandmother who is the kinship carer of a young boy with autism. She told me that he had gone weeks without sleeping properly, that he had stopped eating and that he had become increasingly distressed and aggressive. She said that she had done everything right: she had contacted services, followed up and asked for help, but, months later, she was still waiting to hear back, including from child and adolescent mental health services. She is doing everything that she can to support him, but she is exhausted and still has no support. She is not alone. Another family told me that they had been waiting more than two years for an ADHD diagnosis for their son. Without that, he cannot access sleep support or medication; without those, his wellbeing and that of his whole family are deteriorating.”
“I thank Daniel Johnson for bringing the debate to the chamber and for sharing his personal experience, because that really does matter. I also thank organisations such as the National Autistic Society, the Scottish Commission for People with Learning Disabilities, Enable Scotland, Scottish Autism and Differabled Scotland in my region of Glasgow—to name but a few—for their tireless work on the rights of people with learning disability and neurodivergence. This is an issue that I and, I suspect, many of us hear about regularly from constituents. I will use my time today to share some of their voices and stories. Although the Parliament has made welcome commitments, I think that we can all agree that there remains a huge gap between those aspirations and the everyday reality.”