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 4 of 14.
“No matter how it tries to justify it, it cannot take away from the essential fact that this is a tax on working people who, in the absence of reliable, affordable and 24-hour public transport, rely on their cars to drive to and from Glasgow to work in Glaswegian businesses, homes and public services and contribute to our economy. Without those people, whom the SNP would like to tax, Glaswegians will suffer. The SNP can pretend that the charge is for reducing congestion, but while public transport remains so woeful, every Glaswegian knows that it is just a money-raising scheme that the council has been forced into by its own party’s Government underfunding it. People in Hyndland, Partick and beyond now have to pay an emissions charge on top of their parking permit.”
“I am compelled to speak in the debate on behalf of Glaswegians like me who will be inadvertently impacted by a charge from the SNP council, which, although it is aimed at people living outside the city boundaries, will have an immensely negative impact on Glaswegians, too. I do not envy the SNP members in the debate having to defend a policy that will have such a negative impact on their constituents’ day-to-day lives. Everyone knows that that will include friends and family outside the city’s boundaries, as well as small businesses, which will not be thrilled at another council policy that makes it easier to stay out of Glasgow than spend money in it. The SNP Glasgow City Council’s proposals to introduce a congestion charge alongside a toll on the Clyde tunnel are fundamentally unfair.”
“Scottish Labour supports faith schools and parents’ right to make decisions about their children’s education. We respect the importance of involving children in decisions, and we understand the wish for legislation to address the issue. However, due to the significant problems with the drafting of the bill, as well as the lack of existing data, the pressure on already overstretched schools, the lack of consideration by the Government, so far, of how it will support and resource schools to implement it, and the lack of delineation between observance and education, I and my fellow Scottish Labour members will, regrettably, not be able to offer our full support for the bill at stage 1. 15:41”
“Although we cannot gather data on something that does not yet exist, we can gather better data on withdrawals as they stand now, so that we can better understand the extent of the demand that will be placed on school administrations. Respondents raised concerns that the bill does not distinguish between religious observance and religious and moral education, despite those things being very different. As has been said, RME is part of our curriculum and of children and young people’s education. It encourages pupils to learn about different beliefs, to open their minds to different views and to consider what they themselves believe. In that respect, it is a key pillar of the Government’s education framework. I think that we can all agree that religious observance is different.”
“Teachers watching the debate, many of whom are already shouldering more responsibilities than they have contracted hours in the day for, would want me to press the cabinet secretary on whether she believes that the financial memorandum would benefit from more relevant and comprehensive data to inform its projections—and, indeed, to inform workforce planning. The financial memorandum states: “There is no available evidence to inform an estimate of how often these disagreements will take place.” That means that it is impossible for the Government to quantify the amount of staff resource, time and energy that will be needed to ensure that the legislation can be enacted. Without understanding that, it is impossible for us, as members, to appreciate both what the burden could look like and what will be needed to mitigate it.”
“That means thinking about what a bill will look like when it leaves the Parliament and touches reality, and what impact it will have, intentional and unintentional, on the people who will be primarily affected by it—in this case, children, their parents, teachers and, as they are referred to in the report, the operator of the school. The committee report refers to the school as the body that will be asked to evaluate whether a child has the capacity to form a view. In practice, that means that people who we know are already hard pressed—teachers, school administrators and school leadership—will have to make difficult decisions on a new area. In that respect, I agree with the several respondents who spoke of the burden that the proposed legislation could place on schools. The Parliament must match ambition with resources.”
“The committee recommended that the Scottish Government should undertake research to understand how withdrawals are monitored. I believe that that data is key to members’ decisions on the bill as it moves through the Parliament, and it should have been available ahead of time. The gathering of that information is patchy, at best, and it could not in any way be called consistent across the country. Without those key statistics being gathered in such a way that they can be compared and contrasted accurately, it will be difficult, if not almost impossible, to assess the impact of the proposed legislation on the capacity of schools to deliver on its intention. Parliament has a responsibility to legislate in practice, not in theory.”
“It is worth saying that the fact that, in its response to the bill, the Government outlined that this is its third attempt at making changes in accordance with the UNCRC shows that, yet again, it is legislating in panic mode. That is no way to address such fundamental issues as children’s rights. The committee and witnesses all outlined concerns about the foundations on which the bill rests, the lack of data on the number of withdrawals and what schools put in place for such withdrawals, the burden on schools and a child’s capacity to form a view, and the conflation of religious observance and religious and moral education. The committee has identified other gaps. I encourage anyone who has not had a chance to read the report to refer to it to get a picture of the concerns and flaws in the bill.”
“I thank the Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee for its scrutiny of the principles and basis of the bill. From reading through the committee’s report and having listened to members’ contributions, it is clear that the committee covered a lot of ground in preparing for the bill to be debated today. The committee and members from across the chamber have identified areas that should be explored further before my party and I can comprehensively consider supporting the bill. The report shows gaps in the foundations of the bill that should have been filled before the Parliament was asked to draw conclusions.”
“I know that that is a matter that Ms Duncan-Glancy takes seriously, so I hope that she will engage with some of the proposals and share any thoughts that she has about how we can lighten the load on our teachers and let them get on with teaching our children and young people.”
“Jenny Gilruth: I am surprised that Ms Duncan- Glancy did not listen to the answer that I gave to Mr Kerr, whereby I set out that, on the day that the announcement was made, a paper was shared with the SNCT. Of course, it is for the SNCT to consult on that tripartite arrangement and its basis. There have been no changes on how that will be agreed to. It is important that the Government commits publicly to its vision for how we might reduce teacher-class contact, and I want the teaching profession to hear the ways in which that might be delivered. That includes a four-day teaching week, which would help to reduce teacher workload.”
“Teachers have been waiting for action on workloads since the Government made them promises four and a half years ago, yet there was no movement until, in a desperate attempt to act at pace, it made a rushed announcement. The trade unions have said that the announcement appears to “undermine the established SNCT negotiating machinery”, and has caused dismay on the teachers’ panel, which says that the cabinet secretary has circumvented “the well-established collective bargaining structures of the SNCT”. What does the cabinet secretary intend to do about that, or will collective bargaining be the latest casualty of this Government’s incompetence?”
“That fund supports third sector organisations that help autistic adults reach their full potential and supports them, their carers and their families to understand what neurodivergence means for them and to improve their wellbeing. Rural Crime 2.”
“Parents and adults who are not parents in the Glasgow region have approached me because they are very worried about access to ADHD assessments for adults. They have been waiting a long time for a pathway to support, and some of them are struggling to continue with work and other responsibilities. What reassurance can the minister give that pathways will be available for people in the Glasgow region to access adult ADHD assessments? Maree Todd: I understand the member’s concern. Long waits for support are unacceptable, and I am committed to improving timely access to support, diagnosis and support for autistic people and people with ADHD. In July, we announced the reopening of our £2.5 million multiyear autistic adult support fund.”
“I apologise to members and, in particular to Bob Doris and Jamie Hepburn, for getting the two confused in my closing remarks in the previous debate.”
“The Deputy Presiding Officer: That concludes the debate on Scotland’s skills system. There will be a slight pause before we move to the next item of business to allow for a changeover of front- bench members. Education”
“simply cracked on”.—[Official Report, Education, Children and Young People Committee, 5 February 2025; c 11.] That is not how a skills system should run. If the minister cannot even accept the facts, it is little wonder that the only response that we have to the skills gap is to rejig quangos. While businesses are crying out for skilled staff, young people are being blocked from accessing opportunities by a system that does not work for them or for the economy, and people are failing to obtain opportunities to upskill. Scottish Labour has a plan to overhaul our broken skills system and to better link education with the world of work, so that young people and career changers across Scotland can fulfil their potential. In contrast, it is clear that the Government has no plan.”
“However, instead of colleges being supported, campuses have closed and staff have lost their jobs, with staffing levels falling to their lowest level since devolution and 30,000 fewer students benefiting from the teaching that our colleges provide. I am afraid that, as Brian Whittle said, we have been seeing the systematic dismantling of the college sector. The Government should break the habit of almost two decades and intervene. Not to do so would be a failure to accept reality; it would also show up the lack of coherence in the system. These vital institutions have been left without leadership from the Government. In that vacuum, colleges have stepped up and published their own cases for the sector. As North East Scotland College put it in committee, “in the absence of direction, our college ...”
“There are teacher recruitment issues in key subject areas that are needed for the economy; there is a persistent gender bias, which Lorna Slater mentioned; and the numbers of disabled people engaging in apprenticeships are not what they should be. All that bias starts in people’s early years. Of course, as many members have highlighted, demand often far outstrips supply. Angela Cox, the chair of Colleges Scotland’s college principals group, told the Education, Children and Young People Committee that far more apprenticeships could be delivered in Ayrshire, but that they have had to turn hundreds of candidates away, especially in engineering. Alex Rowley was spot on when he highlighted the crucial role that colleges play.”
“There is no significant coherence across portfolios, including transport, education and the economy, and the Government must address that crucial matter. As I said, the fact that nearly a quarter of a million young people are not in work, and that that trend is worse in our areas of highest deprivation, is representative of the Government’s failure. That figure is not erroneous; I believe it to be a fact. It is also a scandal. Young people’s opportunities in life should not rely on who they know. When they need advice on how to achieve their dreams, the Government and the state should be there to support them. That is before we take into account the barriers to accessing apprenticeships that still exist for many young people.”
“The fact that nearly a quarter of a million young people are not in work—and that, significantly, many of them are from our areas of highest deprivation—shows that the Government is failing to mark out those paths clearly for all. Carol Mochan: I know that we are running out of time, but I want to make a point about young people in more rural areas losing out. The lack of connectivity across Government portfolios such as transport is a real issue in my area. I wanted to put that point to the cabinet secretary and to express my hope that we could work together to resolve that for people. Pam Duncan-Glancy: Lack of coherence across policy areas is one of the reasons why Scotland has the problems and skills gaps that it does.”
“I am sure that, with support, they could make an even greater contribution. The impact of the Government’s approach has not just been seen in skills gaps in industry. It is letting down young people and workers across Scotland, who are missing opportunities that would quite literally change their lives. I must say gently to the minister that that is not erroneous—it is, indeed, a fact. Young people and workers cannot wait for two, three or four years for another report, for another working group that goes nowhere or for outcomes that are aspired to but never achieved. As the Government stalls, young people are growing up without opportunities to gain skills that would serve them throughout their working lives and beyond, and people who are already in careers are failing to access the opportunities to upskill that they deserve to have.”
“Sadly, Bob Doris and Fulton MacGregor pointing fingers elsewhere rather than at what their own Government is doing will not help us to address such gaps. Willie Rennie: Skills are provided not just by colleges or through apprenticeships but by universities. The significance of artificial intelligence has not really been referenced in the debate. We must have a broader view of what the skills base is, especially as we move towards having greater demands for AI-related skills. I hope that the member agrees with that point. The Deputy Presiding Officer: Ms Duncan- Glancy, I can give you time back for that intervention. Pam Duncan-Glancy: I agree whole-heartedly with Mr Rennie’s point. Scotland’s universities have an incredible contribution to make towards our skills base—indeed, they already do so.”
“Apprenticeships are key to plugging our skills gaps, and we must broaden our thinking on how we can provide opportunities for learners to earn and learn. I agree with Claire Baker, Willie Rennie and others that we must do that with a focus on the whole economy. More school leavers than ever tell me that they want to work and train on the job and to secure their independence. We need to facilitate that. It is the Scottish Government’s responsibility to look ahead to the challenges that our society will face in the future and do its best to prepare for them now, but it has failed to do so. Daniel Johnson’s opening remarks about AI and construction highlight just two critical sectors in which skills gaps are yawning.”
“Secondly, the system must be dynamic, adaptable and tailored to the needs and ambitions of pupils. Learners from the ages of 12 to 52 should have pathways available to them that give technical and vocational learning parity with academic pathways. That includes teaching Scottish industry standards in high schools, giving a clear pathway to jobs and offering a digital skills passport so that everyone can recognise skills consistently. Thirdly, our skills system must be at the heart of expanding opportunities for young people. That means making it easier and faster to approve new apprenticeship frameworks, widening access to those frameworks and creating a clearing system—Bob Doris was right to draw comparisons with universities in that sense. I note that any such clearing system would have to be bespoke.”
“Because this is the first opportunity that I have had to do so, and because we are discussing skills, I congratulate the incredible skill that Scotland’s men’s football team showed last night in getting through to the world cup. I recognise the importance of that skill. [Applause.] I am pleased to close the debate for Scottish Labour. We believe that education and skills are keys to unlocking potential. In their contributions, members across the chamber have highlighted how important the issue is. Scottish Labour's approach to unlocking that potential is underpinned by three clear principles. First, skills reform should be industry led, with education providers and employers working in lockstep to harness expertise and get young people ready for the jobs of today and tomorrow.”
“I move amendment S6M-19756.2, to leave out from first “believes” to end and insert: “agrees that there needs to be greater partnership between education and industry, with better careers advice in schools central to it, and clear and coherent Scottish pathways to link school and college courses to future careers, improved placements for secondary school pupils, and better information on career choices, job prospects and earnings, alongside an ongoing commitment to apprenticeships; acknowledges the significant progress made over the years to deliver a record number of apprentices in training at the end of 2024-25; notes that, despite the impact of Brexit and a failing UK economic model, resulting in workforce challenges and barriers to trade, Scotland is the best performing part of the UK for inward investment outside of London, has a lower unemployment rate than the UK, and has near record positive destinations, and agrees that independence offers the best opportunity for Scotland’s economy to grow and create wealth and prosperity for all.” The Deputy Presiding Officer: I remind members who wish to participate in the debate but have not already pressed their request-to-speak buttons to please do so now.”
“Will the minister take an intervention? The Deputy Presiding Officer: The minister is concluding. Ben Macpherson: This year, we also have a record number of more than 110,000 vocational and technical qualification awards. There is more to do. That is why the primary legislation is important. If we bring all the provision in to one institution, for higher and further education and apprenticeships, we can increase the offer and the efficiency and we can create flexibility, new opportunities and the agility to deal with the technological challenge, more opportunities for retraining—which will only become more important—and parity of esteem for people who are starting or changing their career. There is so much more that I could say, but I will leave it there.”
“In the short period of my tenure in this role, I have sought to engage proactively and reactively with trade unions. For example, this week I have met the University and College Union and the Educational Institute of Scotland, and this morning I attended a Scottish Trades Union Congress event. I want to engage with trade unions on the issues that come under my responsibility. On the specific points that the member raised, if either she or the trade unions— or both—want to write to me about those matters, I will consider that correspondence carefully.”
“Trade unions have highlighted major concern about engagement during the Government’s reforms to skills. This week, they have contacted me specifically to say: “It is clear that decisions affecting the workforce are being made in forums where neither staff nor representatives have a voice.” They have requested representation on project boards but that has not been prioritised. They are also unclear whether the changes will result in compulsory redundancies. Does the minister believe that the trade unions should be represented in the process, including on the project boards? Will he take the opportunity now to guarantee that there will be no compulsory redundancies? Will he publish a detailed workforce impact assessment before any changes take effect? Ben Macpherson: I thank the member for raising those important points.”
“In a BBC article about the film, John said that the “film raises awareness but ... also gives people the grit and determination to keep going”. He then asks people to “fight on for their kids, go to schools, go to your local MPs”, because “We need people to stand up and listen.” His words have now been said in Parliament and are on the parliamentary record. It is incumbent on us all to do as he asks—to stand up and listen, so that people can understand a little more about Tourette syndrome and how we can all work to improve the lives of people who are living with it. 13:12”
“Such films are important—I want to see more and more films on our screens that tell the story of disabled people and people living with conditions such as Tourette’s. I thank not only the film producer, but the executive producer, John Davidson, who the film is about, for making the film and for sharing the story far and wide. It is worth noting that the actor Robert Aramayo, who plays John Davidson, said that John was his most important resource in playing that role. However, his importance in the role of executive producer extends beyond that, because having more people living with those conditions both on screen and working in screen is crucial. On this occasion, the involvement of the Tourette’s community in the film shows real leadership by those who made it. I will end with words from John Davidson.”
“If the Government were to agree to the calls from Tourette Scotland to deliver a national plan for support services and to raise awareness across education, health and social care and the wider public, inclusive communication could be a key feature of such a plan. We are shining a light today on the experience of families who are living with Tourette’s, not just because of the work of organisations such as Tourette Scotland, the campaigners and activists who we have heard about today and my colleague Sarah Boyack, but because of the release of the new film “I Swear”, which sets out, as films so often do, to help others to see the beauty in difference, as well the challenges and stigma that surround it.”
“Tourette Scotland and others have highlighted those issues and believe that there is an urgent need for national guidance and consistent support for teachers and school staff to ensure that pupils with Tourette syndrome are supported to reach their full potential. The Scottish Government is reviewing wider additional support for learning, so perhaps it could consider specifically the needs of that group of young people when it does so. Another solution to support people who live with Tourette syndrome is inclusive communication. That must be a feature of all of our Government’s work, so that everyone can enjoy the right not only to learn but to participate in every aspect of society.”
“It can also make it really difficult to maintain concentration. It is crucial that we support young people to relax, to be themselves and to help others to understand when and how their condition affects them, so that they get the best possible chance at learning. There are also specific adjustments that can be made at school that will help pupils. Writing can sometimes take a little longer for those with Tourette syndrome, and simple solutions can help, such as the provision of worksheets, rather than having to copy things down, or a list of tasks, rather than having to remember what is being asked. Assistive technology can help, too.”
“As with many conditions, it can be difficult for people to consider that more than one issue can affect people at any one time. We are, of course, all multidimensional, and we need our systems and services to recognise and support that in all of our diversity. That includes the education system. However, for young people with Tourette’s, including in the Glasgow region, the system falls below what we would expect. Some pupils do not get the additional support in schools that they need, which has a huge impact on their life. Although many young people with Tourette syndrome have no additional difficulties at school, some may struggle. The form that that takes can be wide-ranging and includes the discomfort of holding tics in, which uses up a lot of energy and concentration and can distract from school work.”
“I thank my colleague Sarah Boyack for bringing this important and, indeed, milestone debate to the chamber, as Christine Grahame has pointed out. I also thank Tourette Scotland for providing support, advocacy and education for people living with Tourette syndrome and their families, including in my region of Glasgow. As has already been said, with one in 100 school-age children affected by Tourette’s, the issue affects every part of society. However, as yet, it is not fully understood. That is why debates such as this are important. One thing that is not commonly understood about the syndrome is that it rarely comes alone. As other members have mentioned, most people who have a Tourette’s diagnosis also have other complex conditions, such as ADHD, OCD, anxiety or autism spectrum disorder, to name but a few.”
“Those drugs target cells and can improve outcomes for women, yet the Scottish Medicines Consortium has rejected them for use on the NHS here, leaving a situation in which only women with money can afford to access them. Those drugs are used elsewhere, and women are rightly wondering, “Why not here?” I ask the minister whether she can set out why that is the case and what she might do to try to ensure that women in Scotland can access the same life-changing therapy as women elsewhere.”
“Much of that strain was health related, as one would expect, but it was also financial. Attending appointments, taking time off work, spending money on travel to and from healthcare and support centres and lower take-home pay as a result of time off work all affected my constituents’ finances, and still do. That is why I believe that, in addition to ensuring that social security supports people, employers must be supported to ensure that their processes, policies and sick-pay schemes are appropriate for someone with a terminal diagnosis. When someone is living with cancer, tight finances affect not just day-to-day life—sadly, all too often, they affect treatment choices, too. The women I spoke to today told me that there are drugs available on the NHS for free in England that they cannot access in Scotland.”
“Organisations such as Make 2nds Count, Breast Cancer Now, Maggie’s, Marie Curie and the Beatson West of Scotland Cancer Centre in Glasgow work tirelessly to support women, and some men, who are living with breast cancer, and I put on record my thanks to those organisations. They support patients and families such as two of my constituents who have recently come through their breast cancer journey: a mum and daughter in the same family. Cancer rocks families to the core, as it did that family—it was no different for those two brave women. Its weight puts a strain on families and on their resilience and recovery. For my constituents, that strain was eased hugely by family and friends, and—crucially—as a result of the work of organisations such as those that I mentioned.”
“Without that data, people with incurable secondary breast cancer are not properly planned for and are not guaranteed to be able to get the treatment that they require. That is the message that I heard when I spoke to women in the Parliament cafe this afternoon. I agree whole-heartedly with the women who spoke to us today that improved national data collection is crucial so that we can detect and support people who are living with the condition. I ask the minister to reflect on the importance of that, and on the likelihood of fulfilling the Government commitment on data collection and the importance of doing so by March 2026.”
“I thank Emma Harper for bringing this important debate to the chamber. I also take a moment to thank Christina McKelvie and note the incredible work that she, too, did for breast cancer awareness. I thank the women from Breast Cancer Now and the Make 2nds Count campaign who took time to speak with us today, many of whom are in the public gallery. In my region of Glasgow, NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde has one of the highest rates of cancer incidence in Scotland, so this matter is deeply personal for my constituents. Secondary breast cancer is one of the leading causes of death among women under 50 in the United Kingdom. It affects around 4,000 people in Scotland, but gaps in data collection mean that we do not yet have the full picture.”
“Last week, one of my constituents waited for more than six hours, after presenting at A and E with significant blood loss and severe pain. Not only was he left for hours, but he was kept on a plastic chair with no blanket or pain relief. Having lost blood, he was extremely cold and could have become hypothermic. Another constituent attended A and E following gallbladder removal. She had been vomiting, was in agony and had not been to the toilet for ages. She was left sitting in a corridor without pain relief or medical attention for an entire day. Those constituents do not need apologies—they need action. What specific action will the First Minister take to ensure that my constituents get seen quickly, are warm, comfortable and given appropriate pain relief, and are not abandoned in a corridor to fend for themselves while they wait?”
“The action that we are taking is robust. It ensures that there can be an immediate, live response to those concerns, and we can see the improvement as the challenges are unearthed through Healthcare”
“It is right that those inspections should continue at pace so that we can make immediate improvements, instead of initiating a review in place of those, which would be potentially lengthy and require us to wait for the findings to identify where changes can be made. Jackie Baillie: A national investigation would not be in place of the work that is going on—it would go alongside that and would recognise that this issue does not just affect one hospital or one maternity service but is a Scotland-wide problem. Neil Gray: I recognise the point that Jackie Baillie makes. I believe that the HIS inspection regime allows us to get into greater detail at local levels and allows us to consider those reports through the task force. Should that task force recommend a national review, I would be more than happy to accede to that request.”
“Members will be aware that I intend to convene a meeting with NHS Lothian’s chief executive and MSPs from across the chamber so that they can ask directly any questions that they might have. I hope that we can use the debate to agree the need for members of all parties—the Government included—to work collaboratively together to bring about the improvements that we all want to see. The Government’s amendment, in my name, is intended to set out clearly that we are open to a wider national review of maternity services. However, a series of local inspections of every maternity unit in Scotland is already under way.”
“Will the cabinet secretary take an intervention? Neil Gray: I will try to come back to Pam Duncan-Glancy. I want to make progress, but I also want to ensure that colleagues have the opportunity to have their say. I will not repeat all the points that I set out in my statement last week, but I want to be clear from the outset that the Government remains absolutely open and willing to do everything necessary to improve the services that women and babies use across Scotland. I have been very clear with NHS Lothian about the urgent improvements that I expect to see before the end of this year, and the First Minister reiterated the importance of boards responding timeously to any concerns that were raised about maternity services when we met NHS chief executives last week.”
“I ask members to vote against the blank cheque to make it easier to choose to die and, instead, to continue to fight for a better world where we can all choose to live, and a world that supports us to do that well. 16:44”
“To change that context, we need fundamental changes in health and social care, housing and much more to improve the lives of our constituents. Spending money—a lot of it, according to evidence—on assisted suicide reduces money for other areas. Voting for the resolution is therefore, I say again, not a neutral act. We would be licensing Governments to spend money on assisted suicide in a world where we so desperately need money in public services that help people to live. No matter how hard or intolerable life can be, there must always be hope for a better world—one where we have the right to practical assistance and support to lead ordinary lives.”
“vary significantly according to a number of factors.” We do not know the cost of making the bill safe, but we do know that we cannot amend the bill to fix the crises in social care, housing or the national health service. The costs of doing those things are huge, and rightly so, because this is life or death. Today, colleagues are being asked to support a blank cheque for assisted suicide, and whatever the costs of that are in the end, it means money diverted away from services that are designed to support constituents to live well to a service that makes it easier for them to choose to die. I have said all along that the risks of the bill are real, and they are. The bill is proposed in a context in which the NHS is in crisis, social care is creaking at the seams and one in four people do not get the palliative care that they need.”