Paul O'Kane
Scottish Labour · Scotland
“It is clear that any ban on phones will have to involve young people. They will have to help to co-design it and they will have to be at the heart of how we implement it—we should not forget that in the debate. There are already myriad discussions about how we might do that.”
“That is why we have advocated for a national charter on behaviour and standards and national leadership on discipline in schools, to empower headteachers to set out consequences, look at the issue of community partners such as campus cops and restore the relationships that now do not exist in many local authorities.”
“I am pleased to contribute to the debate, and in doing so, I thank Pam Gosal for bringing the issue to the chamber, and I wish her well. Pam was one of the first MSPs I met when I was elected to this place; we were in the same little group on the first day.”
“I am sure that many of us who watched the first day of proceedings in 1999 never thought that we would sit in the chamber and help to form the next part of the story of the Scottish Parliament.”
“Her work with me and others across committees on drug deaths and drug harms was very important. I hope that we will all continue to focus on that in the next session of Parliament. She can be assured that her contribution in that space is very valued. I also pay tribute to you, Deputy Presiding Officer.”
“Given that it is the last day of the parliamentary session and that we are about to enter an election period, colleagues will expect some politics from me. It is clear that the Government has failed to grip these issues during this session.”
The complete record
Every one of 463 lines we hold for Paul O'Kane, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 6 of 10.
“I am grateful for the opportunity to contribute to the debate. At this stage of the evening, I am pleased to be following so many considered, passionate and powerful speeches by colleagues from all parts of the chamber. This is a serious bill and a serious debate. In many ways, it is one of the most serious issues that we will deal with in this session of Parliament. It is the culmination of four years of debate in this session and of a wider debate long before that. We have heard much of that debate rehearsed this evening. Like colleagues, I pay tribute to Liam McArthur. The manner in which he has steered the passage of the bill has been thoroughly decent, collegiate and patient. His contribution in opening the debate today continued in that vein.”
“When we do so, I will think of all those who gave their lives and those who gave so much of the life that they had after the war to building this country. I will think of my gran and all those people who stood with her, whom we remember today, on VE day. 16:18”
“They are the generation who rebuilt this country from the ashes and rubble of war. They are the generation who turned their shoulder to the wheel, having faced the storm. Under the reforming Labour Government of Clement Attlee, they gifted us institutions such as the NHS and the welfare state, new towns and access to education. They did it in their own ways, washing floors or putting bricks and mortar together. They fed children and helped the ill and disabled. In doing that, they also gave us something more fundamental. They gave us values that endure to this day: the values of standing with and helping our neighbours, of hard work and dedication, of keeping calm and carrying on and of never giving in. This evening, I will join people in my community of Neilston as we light a beacon for peace.”
“She would tell us stories frequently about the blackout, rationing, carrying your gas mask to school, and the work that she did for the local co- operative society in her teenage years during the war. I was also thinking about how she would have left that close in Craighead on VE day to join the celebrations in the community of Barrhead. I remember the sense of relief and joy that she expressed that war in Europe had finally come to an end. There is something else important that I have been thinking today about my gran and her generation. We have heard it articulated already in speeches. My gran’s generation—the generation who lived through the war—not only gifted us freedom and security but went on to gift us so much more of the things that we value in this country today.”
“The scars run deep in those communities, even to this day—whether they be scars in the minds of people who survived, physical scars or the scars that were inflicted on the landscape, which would never look the same again. Many of us have brought personal stories and we have heard very eloquent ones. Those stories are important. Many of us have loved ones who lived through and perhaps served in the war. I have been thinking a lot about my grandmother, who would have been 95 if she were still alive. She did not live to see me be elected to the Scottish Parliament. When she passed, she left me a painting of Craighead in Barrhead, where she was born and where she grew up. It sits in my office upstairs. I was thinking about that painting today, because it shows the house from which my grandmother experienced the second world war.”
“Today, on the 80th anniversary of VE day, we paused to reflect on all those from our communities who gave their lives in the course of the second world war, for the freedom and liberation of Europe and for the peace and security of us all. The war memorials in our towns and villages are etched with the names of those who fell—on land, at sea and in the air—and who made the ultimate sacrifice for the things that we value so much. Today, I am also thinking of those who suffered so much and who lost their lives here in Scotland and in the communities that I represent across West Scotland. I am thinking of the terrible toll that the blitz took on communities in Clydebank, Greenock and so many other industrial towns across the west coast.”
“To ask the Scottish Government what its position is on its own reported assessment that its target of delivering 110,000 affordable homes by 2032 is at risk. (S6O-04639)”
“It is clear that there is a will among members across the chamber to get this right and provide adequate support not only so that the children and young people have a rich experience, but to support their parents, who are experiencing stress and anxiety and, as we have heard in the debate, are having to make choices about their working life that are detrimental to our wider economy in Scotland. It is important that the Government offers its response today and that we, as a Parliament, take the issue seriously, do not forget it and continue to work to ensure that solutions are in place. 13:16”
“I am sure that members recognise the excellent provision that is available in many communities. However, because of significant cuts to council budgets over many years, funding decisions have meant that many opportunities for childcare and support have been reduced. For example, in my time in the council, we had to take decisions to reduce the extended school day and the summer holiday programme. None of us wanted to do that, but we were forced into that position by the inadequate funding from the Government. The Government needs to take cognisance of that and of its decisions—[Interruption.] I think that the minister is saying something from a sedentary position. I hope that she will address that point in her summing up, because it is important.”
“It was clear in the work that was done by Enable Scotland that when parents were asked about their experience, they used words such as “battle” to describe their daily experience of getting provision for their child or young person. They talked about the anxiety and dread—which we have already heard about from colleagues— around accessing the support that they need during the summer holidays or other holiday periods. I am concerned that we have not addressed many of the recommendations in the report. I approach the issue as a former convener of the education committee at East Renfrewshire Council. In East Renfrewshire, we were very fortunate to have excellent provision at the Isobel Mair school in Newton Mearns. I pay tribute to the school for all the excellent work that goes on there.”
“It laid out 22 recommendations for the Government at that time, which encouraged it to think about how young people with additional support needs could be better included in the school day, the supports that are required in relation to wraparound childcare and how children with ASN could be included in activities such as sport, drama and all the other things that we would want all of our young people to be able to access. There were clear recommendations about how we need to support mainstream provision better to ensure that it can be more inclusive and that we have specialist provision. Since that 2016 report, we have moved backwards on many of the issues that were outlined. That is a matter of great regret, and the Government needs to take it very seriously.”
“It is in those guises that I approach the debate, as well as being a member for the West Scotland region who has had representation from many parents, children and young people with a learning disability or additional support needs who are struggling right now. I have been reflecting on Stuart McMillan’s comments. He gave a very good speech, and he has carried out his own survey work. I am reminded that, back in 2016, Enable Scotland produced an important report called “#IncludED in the Main?!”, which looked at inclusion across education and childcare.”
“I am very pleased to be able to contribute to the debate. I thank my friend Michael Marra for securing debating time on this important topic and for the way that he opened the debate by outlining issues that many members from across the chamber will recognise from their constituencies and regions. It is important that we take this time to discuss those issues and to hold the Government and local authorities to account for a lack of action to deal with them or to move things forward. At the outset of my remarks, I declare an interest as a former employee of Enable Scotland and a former education convener in a local authority.”
“We have set out that our investment in the NHS will be focused on addressing the priorities of the people, which is to reduce waiting times and improve access to GP services. The Government will deliver on those commitments. Housing (Scotland) Bill 3.”
“When we look at the delivery of pledges on waiting times in our national health service, as I indicated in my earlier answer to Mr Findlay, we pledged to conduct 64,000 additional appointments by the end of March 2025. We did not do that; we delivered 105,500. In addition, we have put in place investment, but the Labour Party could not bring itself to support that in the budget. The point that I am making to the Parliament is that the Labour Party comes here to complain about issues, but it will not do the heavy lifting to support the budget that makes the investment possible. I point out to the Labour Party that it voted against record investment of £21 billion in the national health service, yet it comes to chamber to complain to me about different issues. That is the hypocrisy that I am highlighting from the Labour Party.”
“At Aberdeen royal infirmary, one ambulance was stuck outside for more than 15 hours. In Ayr, another ambulance waited nearly 15 hours. In Elgin, the wait was 12 hours. Car parks have been turned into A and E wards; corridor care is now a normality; 800,000 people are stuck on waiting lists; and a record number of Scots are being forced to go private. Is it not the case that the party that created Scotland’s NHS crisis cannot be the one to fix it? The First Minister: On performance in our hospitals, significant challenges remain in the national health service, which I have acknowledged in all my answers to First Minister’s questions. On the four-hour A and E targets, the latest data shows that there has been an improvement in performance and that it has strengthened over recent weeks.”
“He has stood up and apologised for the bad language, because that is not how he operates, but he has just complained that we are whinging about homelessness. [Interruption.] Shelter Scotland called the programme for government a “programme for homelessness”, and he should wake up and listen to what it has to say. The deadly situation in our NHS, caused by the SNP, is vast, but whole areas were omitted from the First Minister’s programme for government. I take just one example—our ambulance service. Today, Scottish Labour can reveal shocking new figures that show that ambulances are being left to queue up outside hospitals for hours on end, turning car parks into makeshift accident and emergency wards across Scotland. Sick patients are receiving life-saving treatment in parking bays outside hospitals.”
“He has done it again! The Presiding Officer: Let us hear one another. The First Minister: On GP appointments, the Government is taking a number of measures. We are delivering 100,000 additional appointments for GPs. We are also expanding pharmacy first services to reduce pressure and demand on GP services, and we are expanding the availability of allied health practitioners in front-line health services. Those measures will deal with the issues that have been raised about the 8 am rush by reducing pressure on GP services. That is the plan that the Government is taking forward, and that is what the Government will implement. Anas Sarwar: John Swinney has just exposed himself all over again. On Tuesday, he said, shamefully, that we should “find something else ... to moan about”—[Official Report, 6 May 2025; c 29.] other than homelessness.”
“Coming on to the subject of wages, I note that, when I intervened on the Deputy First Minister, she was unable to answer the point about Scotland having lower wage growth than the rest of the UK. That has to be faced up to; the figures are based on her Government’s figures, which show that wage growth here has not kept pace with that in the other nations and regions in the United Kingdom. There is serious concern on that front.”
“Kate Forbes: I am intervening in part to tell Paul O’Kane that he might have been leaving secondary school when the First Minister started delivering programmes for government, but I was still in secondary school. Apart from that minor point, when it comes to productivity improvements, I am very happy to claim credit for the £1.89 billion of investment and the 16,700 jobs that have been delivered in the past year alone by Scottish Enterprise, because of our focused policies. Paul O’Kane: I in no way meant to make the Deputy First Minister feel old, because she certainly is not, but the reality is that she has experienced those 18 years and has supported her party through that time, so she must take some ownership of that.”
“I recognise much of what the Deputy First Minister has said about international headwinds and the challenges faced by the UK and Scottish Governments, but the reality is that she always seems to want to point to UK policy and blame the UK Government for the circumstances in which the Scottish Government finds itself. Is it not the truth that Scotland lags behind the rest of the UK on 10 out of 13 productivity indicators, including business investment and business research and development spend? Is it not the truth that after 18 years, the Scottish National Party has built a low- growth, low-pay economy, and that all of Scotland is paying the price for that?”
“Listening to the Deputy First Minister open this debate and the debate yesterday and the First Minister’s statement, one would think that today was day 1 of a new Government. I am disappointed that the First Minister is not in his place, because I enjoy making him feel old, but some of us in the chamber had just left secondary school when he started delivering programmes for government. The reality is that what we have seen today is yet another attempt by the Scottish National Party Government to reinvent itself, but we have had 18 years of it, and we know that its record speaks for itself. In today’s debate, we are focusing on the economic challenge.”
“Over the past two years, Scotland has had the lowest wage growth of any region or nation in the United Kingdom. The Deputy First Minister talks about increasing incomes and security, but what in the programme for government will address that? Kate Forbes: I am intrigued as to which figures Paul O’Kane is using, because, in March, Scotland’s claimant count—the unemployment rate—was 3.7 per cent, which was lower than the UK rate of 4.6 per cent, and our overall economy grew more quickly than the UK economy did last year. When I look at the policies and initiatives that are in place in Scotland, which are driven not least by our enterprise agencies, I see significant and strong growth.”
“The Deputy Presiding Officer: You will need to bring your remarks to a close. Paul O’Kane: Having been generous to other members, I will now conclude. I again thank the Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee, and I hope that the Government will listen to what has been said. It is important that members can express their views about what happens in this Parliament and how we can make legislation more robust for the people of Scotland. The Deputy Presiding Officer: I always encourage members to be generous, but I point out that, from now on, if a member wishes to accept an intervention, they will need to do so within their allocated time. 16:14”
“It is, of course, important that there is flexibility, but that cannot simply be an excuse for not going through the more detailed process that I have outlined, or for queueing policy up to come in at a later date, rather than dealing with it immediately in the bill that has been presented to Parliament. Although flexibility and broad powers might be required for legitimate purposes, I encourage the Government to pay particular attention to paragraphs 264 and 265 of the committee’s report, on the use of mechanisms such as the super- affirmative procedure, which Edward Mountain mentioned. The use of such mechanisms is necessary not only to provide adequate scrutiny of secondary legislation but to push the Government to move faster to deliver the action that has been promised through the use of framework powers.”
“Sometimes Mr O’Kane’s position will prevail, if he can persuade Parliament that that should be the case. Paul O’Kane: I am pleased that the minister has given me the opportunity to say that I have successfully amended bills in this Parliament. Jamie Hepburn: Well, there you go. Paul O’Kane: I am not sure that the minister is listening to the substantive point that I am making, which is that the Government, in particular, should set things out in a bill to avoid confusion or uncertainty about what is the intention behind that bill. The criticism that the Government has not done that in framework bills is levelled throughout the committee’s report, and I think that the minister must take cognisance of that point. I accept that there has been a focus in the debate on ministers saying that there is a need for flexibility in legislation.”
“The issue is not simply one of me getting my own way or colleagues getting their own way; it is about the more important question of the sorts of amendments that we seek to lodge on behalf of the people whom we represent. Jamie Hepburn: Will the member take an intervention? Paul O’Kane: I am feeling very generous, so I will give way to the minister once more. Jamie Hepburn: It is not particularly helpful to say that it is not a question of people getting their own way. Mr O’Kane suggested, rather superciliously, that I was being “typically collegiate”. The point that I was trying to make is that the breadth of any legislation is in the hands of Parliament, collectively. Sometimes the Government’s position will prevail, and sometimes it will not.”
“It is an important broader point in the context of the discussion that we are having about what should be included in bills. When detailed provisions are not included in a bill, that presents a challenge, because the people with whom we discuss legislation, the people whom we consult and the people whom we help to draft amendments that they wish to be made to bills—as is their right as constituents and people who are engaged in public life in Scotland—often say that they are unclear about what the Government’s intention is in its proposed legislation and that they do not know what the Government’s thinking is in the area in question. Even at stage 1 of the bill process, it can be hard to get that out of ministers, to have a proper debate and to reach a consensus.”
“When something is not set out in the bill, we end up in a situation in which we go through various amendments to get to the point that could have been better established had we had that more collegiate approach that I am calling for in my speech, which I am sure that the Government will take note of. Michelle Thomson: Even if something is included in a bill, there is no guarantee that that means that it is accurate. I distinctly remember it being mentioned in a conversation on gender recognition reform that, if a certain provision was included in the Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill, that would in no way affect the Equality Act 2010. I am not sure how that worked out. Paul O’Kane: I will resist the temptation to relitigate that legislation, but Ms Thomson has put her point on the record.”
“However, to return to my earlier point, if the member can persuade a majority of Parliament, he will be successful, the Government will not prevail and his amendment will be part of the primary legislation. Paul O’Kane: That is a typically collegiate approach from the minister. In a Parliament of minorities, which we are told about so often, of course the Government has a right to introduce its legislation. Edward Mountain referred to skeleton bills and jellyfish bills. All too often in this Parliament, legislation turns into Christmas tree bills.”
“We have already heard that many members have experienced frustrations, as I have, during our time in Parliament, when we lodge amendments and attempt to put what we consider to be important details or provisions into a bill, only for ministers to respond that they do not consider those issues to be important enough to put into primary legislation. I will perhaps reflect on areas where that has happened. For example, we have already heard about the challenges that were posed in pieces of legislation such as the National Care Service (Scotland) Bill. Jamie Hepburn: I hope that the member would reflect that the Government is not obliged to agree with him when he brings forward an amendment. We are perfectly entitled to respond and say that we do not think that it needs to go in the bill.”
“I am pleased to contribute to the debate. It is an important debate, because it allows members to express their views and opinions about how we operate in this Parliament and how we pass legislation. That is perhaps not something that we always have the opportunity to pause and do. That is why both today’s debate and the Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee’s work is important. For the work on its framework legislation and Henry VIII powers report, I thank not only the convener and members of that committee, but all the clerks and all those who have supported the work that Stuart McMillan spoke about in his opening remarks.”
“However, we know that, at present, 84,000 young people in Scotland are not in education, employment or training. We also know, thanks to research by the Scottish Parliament information centre and the Fraser of Allander Institute, that the disability employment gap in Scotland is wider than it is in the rest of the UK. We know that nearly 300,000 working-age people in Scotland are out of work because of illness.”
“It would mean abandoning any proposals to scrap the work capability assessment, which has long been called for by many campaigners who seek reform of the social security system. It would mean failing to progress any proposals to introduce a right to try work, which would allow individuals to attempt employment without the risk of losing the social security that they rely on. As I have said, it would also mean failing to advance the plan to invest £1 billion into employability support to ensure that people are properly supported in sustainable, well- paid employment. I am disappointed that we are not having that broader debate today. It is right that we focus on what is happening in Scotland. The cabinet secretary made reference to employability and the work that is being done in that regard in Scotland.”
“On supporting people into work—I will come on to talk about this—we must ensure that the investment of £1 billion that the UK Government is planning to make is focused on young people. We know that there is a huge challenge with that cohort of young people, because, if they do not work by the time they are 24, it is very unlikely that they will ever work. As I have outlined, it is important that those people who cannot work are given the support that they need to live. I am concerned that we are not having a rounded debate and that the Government has decided, as set out in its motion, that the green paper should be completely dismissed out of hand. That would mean, for example, that we would not consider increasing the payment rate for the standard allowance of universal credit, which will benefit people who are out of work.”
“If he agrees with that, what are those people supposed to do in that time period, if they have no money coming in? Paul O’Kane: The point that I was about to make is that the green paper contains a range of proposals. The cabinet secretary now wants to pick and choose and debate individual proposals, but, in her motion, she says that she wants to scrap the paper in its entirety and not have a broader debate about the issues that are contained in it. There are nuanced issues in relation to the cohort of young people under 22. We have to look at how to go about increasing the age at which people receive support and at how they can receive differentiated support—for example, by moving the age from 18 to 16—and at how people are more supported in the round. That is important.”
“If we are to have a serious debate on the issues, I do not think that the Government motion, which effectively calls for the UK Government to scrap the green paper in its entirety, is a particularly credible way to go about it. We should look at the separate reforms that are proposed—the cabinet secretary outlined in her speech her issue with many of them—because I do not think that we can just take the entire paper and throw out everything that is contained in it. Shirley-Anne Somerville: The day before the proposals were unveiled, Mr O’Kane and I were on a panel together, and he did not want to speculate. We do not have to speculate any more—we know what is being proposed and what is being consulted on. I will pick one example. Does he agree that no health top-up should be paid to people under 22?”
“Liz Smith: I entirely agree with that point, but how does that sit with the UK Labour Government’s intention to put more and more costs on to employers, who are the very ones who can help people back into work? Paul O’Kane: Liz Smith and I have debated the national insurance increase before, as she has with Mr Marra and other members in the chamber. That choice was made so as not to put the burden of taxation on to working people and other individuals and to ensure instead that, for example, the Parliament could receive a £5 billion uplift in the budget. Those are decisions that we have made and that we have debated in the chamber. We must look at the issues and the system in the round. That is what part of the debate today should be about. I recognise the concerns.”
“There are serious questions to be asked and answered about how we support people into good work and about how our social security systems can be built with resilience for the longer term. We know about the significant challenges that will exist in relation to demographic pressures and wider issues. I recognise the concerns that have been expressed about some of the proposed reforms, and I acknowledge, as I have in my amendment, the need for consultation and listening. We must ensure that any reform to social security, whether across the UK or here in Scotland, is fair and is balanced by considering how we support people into work, because that is a right and good thing to do—it should be the aspiration of us all in this Parliament—how we help people to thrive when they are in work, and how we support those who cannot or will not work.”
“During the debate, we have already acknowledged the complexity of social security and the complexities of having a devolved system and a reserved system that interact and interlock. Liz Smith outlined much of that in a credible way, as she always does, which perhaps helps us to focus our thoughts and comments. I welcome the opportunity to discuss the reform of social security and employment support. We have debated such issues many times in the chamber. Each time we have done so, I have called for a serious debate on the issues. I have done that consistently throughout my time in Parliament, particularly in relation to the devolved social security system, which we as a Parliament are collectively responsible for and on which the Government brings forward its policies.”
“He opened doors in the church and in the world to mercy, compassion and hope. He was a Pope for our environment. “Laudato si’” was a transformative document that called on us all to be “stewards” of the world and the environment that we live in. The Pope also spoke out passionately and with compassion on the situation in Palestine and Israel. Indeed, most recently, on Easter Sunday, he called for a ceasefire, for a release of hostages, for aid to get through to starving people and for an end to the killing and the violence. We have also heard how the Pope spoke with the parish priest in Bethlehem each and every day of the conflict right up until he died. We should all rededicate ourselves to following the Pope’s example. We must not forget the corners of the world where there are conflicts, and we should unite as a Parliament to do that.”
“What we heard time and again from people we met in places such as Sarajevo and Srebrenica was how quickly we forget. For a period of time in Europe, we saw stability and peace that we thought was the consensus, but the reality is that that has been shattered once again. It is important that we all take the issues in Ukraine seriously. We have also reflected today on the passing of Pope Francis. I add my voice to the tributes that have been paid across the Parliament, because he was another constant in an uncertain world. The global situation was never far from the mind, the words and the actions of Pope Francis, because he was a Pope who prioritised leadership on the world stage and ensured that people could find reflected in him their aspirations for a better world. He was a Pope for the poor and the dispossessed.”
“I am pleased that, on Holocaust memorial day, the Scottish Government made a commitment to on-going funding for wider genocide education. We recognise the importance of Holocaust education within that and of the work that is being done across Scotland to tackle rising antisemitism. Daniel Johnson: My friend Paul O’Kane talks about education. One of the things that I remember about the Bosnian conflict was that it was seen as war returning to Europe, but we seem to have treated it as almost an aberration. With the war in Ukraine, does he agree that we need to take the matter and the prospect of war in Europe much more seriously, and that that is the real lesson from the Balkans conflict of the 1990s? Paul O’Kane: Daniel Johnson is absolutely right.”
“They need the support of the international community and for it to stand with them and not to forget about them, and to offer a degree of protection and support that will ensure that, in the future, we do not see the aggression that we have seen in recent years in the regions in and around Ukraine and bordering Russia. I wanted to put all of that on the record because the experience that I had in Srebrenica will not leave me—those rows and rows of white stones that mark where so many Muslim men and boys were massacred. There is a stillness and a sadness there, and there is evidence of the reality of what human beings can do to one another when they do not heed the calls of history or the need for us to understand one another better.”
“In particular, one man I met spoke about how he feels more afraid now than he did at points as a child growing up in the 1990s, and he is worried about what the future holds for his children. He told me that, when the war in Ukraine started, he went out and bought a gun. When I asked him why, he said, “I do not know how to use a gun and I am not sure that I ever will. I just need to know that I have done something to try to protect my children.” That brought home to those of us who were speaking with him how people feel in that region of the world.”
“There have been attempted coups in parts of Bosnia-Herzegovina, particularly in the Republika Srpska, and there are still people walking the streets of communities side by side with those against whom they would have carried out horrendous acts. The plea from everyone I met in Bosnia- Herzegovina was not to forget about the Balkans, Bosnia-Herzegovina and the real challenges that exist and persist. I had the opportunity to speak with many people who are afraid of the current context of the international situation. They are deeply concerned about the actions of Russia and Vladimir Putin—as we know, they live very close to countries that border Russia and, indeed, to the conflict in Ukraine.”
“The opportunity to visit those sites and to meet people who experienced the war and the genocide to gain a better understanding of their experience and of the issues that persist in that country today was hugely moving, but it was also hugely informative for me and for those who joined the delegation. Today, there are far too many people in Bosnia- Herzegovina and that part of the world who engage in denial of what happened at Srebrenica. There are actors in that complex country, in relation to which a complex agreement was made after the war, who seek to diminish and reduce the stories of the genocide to nothing more than what they would call rumour.”
“I will offer a few reflections on some of the corners of the world that are acutely in our minds at the moment and on some areas on which we often do not focus as much as we should. In March, I had the opportunity to travel to Bosnia-Herzegovina with a delegation of people from the Parliament, public life in Scotland, academia and the media, along with the excellent Beyond Srebrenica organisation, which will be known to many colleagues across the chamber. Bosnia-Herzegovina and the Balkans are a part of our world that have truly experienced the darkest moments of humanity through a long conflict in the 1990s, the ramifications of which continue today, and the people who lived through the experience of genocide at Srebrenica and other places around Bosnia-Herzegovina still feel the impact of those events.”
“A lot of people around the world find constancy in their faith, which is rooted in their hope for a better world. Recently, we have also marked Eid, Passover, Vaisakhi and other festivals, as the seasons change and winter gives way to spring and darkness gives way to light. I mention that at the outset of my speech because we live in a world where, all too often, our respect for and understanding of one another’s beliefs and one another’s faith have, in some ways, been forgotten. We have forgotten how to co-exist, how to live together peaceably and, I think, how to disagree better. Therefore, it is important that we start by acknowledging the sense of hope that is felt by so many people in the world.”
“As we come together this afternoon to discuss the international situation, it is clear that we live in very uncertain times. Already, many of the speeches have highlighted the backdrop of conflict and violence—particularly violence against women and girls—that we see in the world, and the harmful rhetoric that we see in online spaces, as well as the fact that the global economic consensus, which we have known for so long, is, in essence, being turned upside down. It is in that context that we hold this debate, and uncertainty is the key theme. In times of uncertainty and in an ever-changing and uncertain world, people will cleave to constancy. We gather today as we return from our Easter recess and after the great Christian festival of Easter, which speaks about hope, faith and endurance.”