Maggie Chapman
Scottish Green Party · Scotland
“Our prison system is not working. Like so many other institutions, including our national health service and our schools, prisons reflect the society that they serve. That society is deeply unfair and profoundly unequal. Schools struggle to help young people to learn and thrive, as too many children arrive in the classroom hungry.”
“Overall levels of crime are about half what they were in 1991. However, we have left prisons, just like our schools and NHS, to pick up the pieces of failures elsewhere in society.”
“Far too often, we take people who have already been failed by society and place them in institutions that fail them again—institutions that are increasingly unable to guarantee basic standards of welfare, dignity and human rights.”
“For those who have committed less serious crimes and are serving shorter sentences, it makes no sense at all to spend, as the motion states, £52,000 per year on prison, given that we know that, in many cases, prison will not help them to stop reoffending.”
“With greater use of effective alternatives to custody, and sentencing that follows the evidence, we will need fewer but better resourced prisons that can genuinely support rehabilitation and reintegration. That approach is working right now in other countries.”
“It is no surprise, then, that prisons often perform worse than alternatives when it comes to reducing reoffending and preventing future harm. Short sentences for non-violent crimes, in particular, for which there are the clearest alternatives, result in some of the highest rates of prisoners leaving prison and coming into conflict with th…”
The complete record
Every one of 814 lines we hold for Maggie Chapman, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 17.
“With greater use of effective alternatives to custody, and sentencing that follows the evidence, we will need fewer but better resourced prisons that can genuinely support rehabilitation and reintegration. That approach is working right now in other countries. As is the case in Scotland, crime in the Netherlands has fallen over recent decades, but, unlike here, that has resulted in significant falls in the prison population. Between 2005 and 2010, there was a 44 per cent fall in the population of Dutch prisons, and the Netherlands closed 20 prisons. That is because they are making greater use of community sentencing and focusing on prevention rather than imprisonment.”
“For those who have committed less serious crimes and are serving shorter sentences, it makes no sense at all to spend, as the motion states, £52,000 per year on prison, given that we know that, in many cases, prison will not help them to stop reoffending. We cannot build our way out of this challenge, because building more prison places does not address why our prison population is so high in the first place. Therefore, we need to totally rethink what prisons should look like and what they are there to do. Scottish Greens believe that we need a justice system that relies far less than it does today on imprisonment and far more on prevention, restoration and rehabilitation.”
“It is no surprise, then, that prisons often perform worse than alternatives when it comes to reducing reoffending and preventing future harm. Short sentences for non-violent crimes, in particular, for which there are the clearest alternatives, result in some of the highest rates of prisoners leaving prison and coming into conflict with the law again. However, 73 per cent of the custodial sentences that were received in 2023-24 were for one year or less, and sentences of three to six months have been the most common over the past decade, making up 30 per cent of all custodial sentences in 2023-24.”
“Far too often, we take people who have already been failed by society and place them in institutions that fail them again—institutions that are increasingly unable to guarantee basic standards of welfare, dignity and human rights. Just yesterday, the Criminal Justice Committee heard that the United Nations’ Nelson Mandela rules, which lay out the bare minimum standards that are expected, are not being consistently upheld in Scottish prisons. We have also had instances of foreign courts refusing to extradite prisoners to Scotland because basic conditions are so poor. If our prisons cannot guarantee basic standards of safety, dignity and human rights, what confidence can we possibly have that they are doing the far more demanding work of rehabilitation?”
“Overall levels of crime are about half what they were in 1991. However, we have left prisons, just like our schools and NHS, to pick up the pieces of failures elsewhere in society. That does not serve prisoners well, it does not serve prison staff well and it does not serve the communities that will receive those prisoners after their incarceration well at all. As we have all accepted with the Promise, our care system is failing, and that shows up in our prisons, where about 30 per cent of prisoners have had previous experience of the care system. Nobody disputes that we have a major drugs crisis in our country, and it is no coincidence that most prisoners enter prison with drug challenges. Many prisoners will leave with a drug problem, too, prison having done little to help them.”
“Our prison system is not working. Like so many other institutions, including our national health service and our schools, prisons reflect the society that they serve. That society is deeply unfair and profoundly unequal. Schools struggle to help young people to learn and thrive, as too many children arrive in the classroom hungry. Hospitals struggle to treat people with physical and mental health conditions that stem from the massive health inequalities that we still have not tackled. It is the same with our prisons. Our prisons are beyond capacity. That is because our imprisonment rate is significantly above the European average and is even above the rates of a string of non-democratic countries such as China and Saudi Arabia. It is not because crime is out of control in Scotland.”
“For those reasons, although we will not oppose the motion, we are not persuaded that the process that has been followed merits our support, and we will abstain. 17:40”
“The Government may believe that adequate safeguards exist, but Parliament has not had sufficient opportunity to test those claims, hear evidence or examine possible unintended consequences. The lack of scrutiny matters, because, although national security legislation is often enacted in response to genuine threats, its effects can extend well beyond the circumstances that prompt it. The Scottish Greens recognise the case for ensuring consistency in sentencing and release arrangements across the UK where these offences apply. We also recognise the importance of protecting our national security. However, we cannot ignore the inadequate process that has brought us to this point, nor the missed opportunity for proper consultation and scrutiny.”
“As the policy memorandum notes, there has been no opportunity for the Scottish Government to consult stakeholders on the effects of the changes to Scottish legislation. That is not how good law is made, which is a key reason why Scottish Greens cannot support the motion. We are also concerned about wider issues in the bill that deserve more scrutiny than the Parliament has been able to give them. The designation regime and the new offences relating to support, assistance and material benefit are very broad. Humanitarian organisations, peace-building groups, journalists and others working in conflict- affected areas will want reassurance that legitimate humanitarian engagement cannot inadvertently expose individuals to criminal liability.”
“The UK Government did not share the final text of the bill before it was introduced on 9 June, despite the fact that, for more than a year, it has had a report recommending that the actions be taken. The Scottish Parliament goes into summer recess tomorrow. Therefore, in practice, we have been left with only eight days to scrutinise proposals that will alter Scots law and the functions of the Scottish ministers. The justification for such a rushed process is not convincing. The UK Government has argued that the legislation is entirely reserved, but it should have been obvious—as it was obvious to Scottish Government lawyers—that the bill has consequences for Scottish sentencing, parole and release arrangements, and therefore that it requires a full and timely legislative consent process.”
“[Inaudible.]—the need to protect Scotland and the UK from hostile states, and, as it is framed, the bill covers state threats, it is ultimately individuals who will be investigated, prosecuted and convicted under the new offences that it creates. That means that we need to tread carefully in our scrutiny of the legislation. When we change the law, particularly criminal law, the Parliament needs time to consider carefully the justification for such changes and to assess their intended and unintended consequences. When those changes come from Westminster and legislative consent is required, we need time to consider all the issues properly. That has not happened here.”
“Well before the consultation finished, Ofcom wrote to the Constitution, Europe, External Affairs and Culture Committee saying that it was proposing to approve STV’s request. It sounds like it had already made up its mind. Ofcom’s decision is worrying for the precedent that it sets. Local and regional journalism is already under threat, with Reach plc hollowing out Scottish local press. If Ofcom does not reverse its decision, it might pave the way for attacks on local TV coverage in other areas of Scotland, such as ITV Border. Someone once said that all politics is local. That is true, but all news is local too. In many aspects of our life, we need a local news service that reflects the people, the environment, the society and the culture of our local areas. 18:49”
“Ofcom has correctly said that it has no role in imposing requirements on STV’s online content, yet it has repeatedly emphasised the mitigating role of online content in continuing to provide local coverage. Surely, if its role is only to regulate the TV element, it should not be taking the online element into account when ruling on varying the licence terms. That is also happening despite Ofcom’s 2025 report, “Online Nation” noting that one in five people in the UK aged 75 or above lacks home internet, and the fact that evidence from the Save STV North News campaign shows that the algorithms make local public service content hard to find online. I question how genuine Ofcom’s consultation was.”
“Media and journalism students at Robert Gordon University and North East Scotland College, who have shown their commitment to the area by studying there, should be able to stay in that area for work. Moving production to Glasgow will lead to a loss of those opportunities, and it will be hard to re-establish them once they have gone. The NUJ ran a truly inspiring campaign on behalf of its members, exposing the price that current and future news workers may have to pay for the mistakes made by management, and I thank it for its incredible work. Before closing, I want to say a few words about the role of Ofcom, which I think has been found wanting.”
“That issue involves complicated, ongoing issues that require coverage from informed teams of journalists who are embedded in the region. With the best will in the world, TV news programmes with up to 70 per cent generic or shared content will just not be able to do justice to issues that are more local and, in some cases, more remote. We know that jobs are on the line. Reducing coverage and moving production from Aberdeen to Glasgow will lead not only to an immediate loss of jobs but to an ongoing running down of jobs and training opportunities. People from privileged backgrounds are already overrepresented in the industry, so it is vital that we keep alive routes for underrepresented groups to get work experience in TV.”
“Would it not have shown more honesty on the part of everybody involved if STV had simply surrendered the licence and allowed Ofcom to attract someone else to provide that service? Maggie Chapman: I agree with that point. The abrogation of duty under that licence agreement is a real concern, and I will say a little bit more about that in a moment. We know that the north of Scotland, as such a diverse part of our country, needs dedicated local coverage that reflects the challenges of the communities to whom it broadcasts. My region, North East Scotland, is hugely dependent on oil and gas, and my constituents rightly want to be kept up to date on how the just transition to a net zero future is or is not going.”
“It has covered the inspiring community campaign to save St Fittick’s park from development and the fight to highlight the miseries faced by residents affected by the reinforced autoclaved aerated concrete situation. STV North has served our Highland and Island communities well, too, with issues around ferries, depopulation, housing availability and the benefits and challenges of tourism being aired and discussed because of the journalists and camera crews in communities. Stephen Kerr: Maggie Chapman is making an important point about the distinctive nature of local news coverage. That was the whole point behind there being a separate licence for STV North. The decisions that Ofcom has made in support of the STV management have completely undercut all of that.”
“I thank Jack Middleton for securing this debate. I was pleased to support STV workers in the last session, when plans to cut STV North were first announced, and I remain as resolutely against these cuts and behind those workers now as I was then. As others have said, high-quality local news is crucial to supporting local and regional identities, building communities and strengthening our democracy. That is especially important in our country, where so much focus is on Glasgow, Edinburgh and the central belt. Our TV coverage should reflect life in all parts of Scotland. Based in Aberdeen, STV North—formerly Grampian Television—has been providing local news by and to the north of Scotland for just three months short of 65 years.”
“I will end by speaking directly to staff and students. You are not responsible for this crisis and this decision making. You should not be made to pay the price for the failures of governance, financial mismanagement or short-term decision making. I hear your concerns, I hear your anger and I stand in solidarity with you. I stand with the staff fighting for their jobs, the students fighting for their education and the trade unions demanding transparency, accountability and fair work. If staff decide that they must take industrial action to defend their institutions, as I think University of Dundee staff have decided today, they will have my support and solidarity, because staff and students are not the problem—they are the future of Scotland’s universities and they deserve far better than what they are getting today.”
“If institutions are receiving substantial support, the public has a right to expect transparency, engagement and adherence to fair work principles. Finally, I want to say something to the Scottish Government. The warning signs have been visible for years. This crisis is not confined to one university, nor is it confined to the universities of Dundee and Aberdeen—it is sector wide. There are warnings that demand a serious response. We cannot continue to lose expertise, damage morale and undermine institutions that have taken generations—centuries, in some cases—to build. On the crisis at the University of Dundee specifically, the Scottish Government has already provided substantial support to the institution and we need to see a return on that investment, not just a knee-jerk return to job cuts and course cuts.”
“Repeated restructuring exercises, repeated severance schemes and repeated threats of redundancy are acts of harm. We must also ask serious questions about equality impacts. Many of the disciplines that are facing cuts are disproportionately staffed by women. We need transparency about who is being affected and whether institutions are properly assessing those risks before further decisions are made. There is the wider question of accountability, too. Universities must be accountable. Courts must be accountable. Executive leadership teams must be accountable, and so too must the Scottish Funding Council. Consultations on the issue need to be genuine: they need to consider the full range of options, not just a return to cuts. Public confidence depends on robust scrutiny and meaningful oversight.”
“However, institutions appear trapped in a cycle in which cutting staff becomes the default response—the ideological response—to every challenge. That is not strategy; it is managed decline. It is like ordering men on the western front to walk out very slowly at the German machine guns, just hoping that the result will be positive. To put it another way, it is like the medieval doctor bleeding a patient with leeches, then prescribing more leeches when the patient fails to recover. The patients, in this case, are the people who make our universities what they are—the people who make them successful but who are being made to pay the price. The impact on wellbeing cannot be ignored. Staff speak of stress, burnout, anxiety, uncertainty and real physical and psychological harm.”
“A society that cannot think critically about itself is a society that is poorer in every sense. I will outline a specific issue in relation to that. At the University of Aberdeen, the savings target—or cuts target—that the school of language, literature, music and visual culture has been told to make would require the loss of 36.7 per cent of its current staff, and that is on top of the 40 jobs that were lost during the modern languages debacle two years ago. The target is more than double that for any other school, yet that school made a £4.1 million surplus last year. Cutting jobs and courses will not lead magically to financial sustainability. Staff have repeatedly raised alternatives, including continuing professional development, knowledge exchange, entrepreneurship, business partnerships and other forms of genuine income generation.”
“When people try to raise concerns, some of them are threatened with disciplinary action. That is not partnership, it is not transparency and it is certainly not fair work. I want to speak a bit about what universities are for. Too often, the debate on this issue is reduced to balance sheets and budgets. Of course, universities matter to our economy—they create jobs, attract investment and drive innovation—but they also matter for a much deeper reason. They help us to understand ourselves and the world around us. They teach us how to think critically, how to question, how to challenge and how to imagine something better. That is why I am so concerned by threats to disciplines such as philosophy and languages. Those subjects are not luxuries—they help us to engage with questions of democracy, ethics, culture, identity and human flourishing.”
“The tragedy is that none of this should come as a surprise. Over recent years, we have had review after review—the Gillies review, the Gordon report and the work done by SUMS Consulting—all of which identified problems around governance, transparency, oversight and engagement. The problem is not that we do not know what is wrong; it is that the recommendations keep gathering dust while the same mistakes are repeated. The lessons from Dundee should have been learned long ago. Executive power without effective challenge is dangerous. Governance without scrutiny is dangerous. Excluding staff voices is dangerous. Yet, here we are again. Staff, students, senates, general councils and trade unions repeatedly raise concerns while decisions at various institutions continue to be driven from the top down.”
“At the University of Aberdeen, up to 111 academic posts remain at risk through restructuring and cost- cutting proposals. Behind every one of those numbers is a person—a lecturer, technician, librarian, researcher, cleaner, professional services worker or student wondering whether their course will exist when they are due to graduate. I hear from staff and students not just concern but exhaustion, anger and a profound sense of betrayal. One member of Dundee staff described what is happening as “wanton vandalism” of the university and the city. Another simply said, “I feel completely betrayed.” Can we blame them? Time and again, the staff have raised concerns, proposed alternatives and been told that they are valued. However, when the biggest decisions are made, they are too often excluded from them.”
“I remind members of my entry in the register of members’ interests: I am the rector of the University of Dundee and a member of the university court. A less than five-minutes-long Teams call with no opportunity to respond is how staff at the University of Dundee heard that their jobs, the courses that they teach and their livelihoods might be at risk. I ask members to think about that for a moment. Years of service, decades of expertise, research programmes, student support, careers and families were all reduced to a one-way broadcast. That tells us something important about the crisis that we are facing. We are not really talking about money; this is a crisis of governance, leadership and accountability. At Dundee, more than 650 staff have already gone. Now, a further 190 job cuts are planned.”
“He takes up office at a time when public confidence in our institutions, access to justice and the protection of fundamental rights remain of vital importance, and all of those are at risk, so I look forward to seeing the contribution that he will make in that role. I wish both appointees well, and I hope that they will continue the work of building a justice system that is fair, compassionate, accountable and accessible to all. They have my support now and I look forward to working with them over the coming session of Parliament. 17:28”
“She has brought considerable legal expertise to the office and has played an important role in supporting the work of Scotland’s law officers during a period that has been marked by significant constitutional, social and legal challenges. The office of Lord Advocate occupies a unique position in Scotland’s constitutional arrangements. It requires not only legal excellence but judgment, independence and a commitment to the public interest. Ruth Charteris brings those qualities to the role, and I wish her every success as she takes on those new responsibilities. Likewise, I welcome BJ Gill KC as Solicitor General.”
“In particular, I acknowledge her efforts to help rebalance justice in favour of the marginalised and of victims/survivors of crimes of abuse of power, such as sexual violence. Whether in relation to victims of crime, survivors of abuse or people whose voices have historically been overlooked within legal processes, she showed a clear understanding that justice is not simply about procedure, but about fairness, dignity and—importantly—humanity. For that service, she deserves our recognition and our thanks. I also want to recognise the work of Ruth Charteris KC as Solicitor General. Over recent years, she has built a reputation for diligence, professionalism and the deepest integrity.”
“I am pleased to speak in support of the motion recommending the appointment of Ruth Charteris KC as Lord Advocate and BJ Gill KC as Solicitor General for Scotland. Before I turn to the appointments before us, however, I will take a moment to recognise, as other members have, the significant contribution of Dorothy Bain KC during her time as Lord Advocate. The role carries immense responsibility, and it is often undertaken under intense public and political scrutiny. Throughout her tenure, Dorothy Bain demonstrated a deep commitment to the rule of law, to the independence of the prosecution service and to ensuring that our justice system works for those who too often find themselves excluded from it.”
“Amendment disagreed to. The Presiding Officer: The next question is, that amendment S7M-00356.3, in the name of Morven-May MacCallum, which seeks to amend motion S7M-00356, in the name of Shirley-Anne Somerville, on strengthening Scotland’s partnership with the third sector, be agreed to. Amendment agreed to. The Presiding Officer: The final question is, that motion S7M-00356, in the name of Shirley- Anne Somerville, on strengthening Scotland’s partnership with the third sector, as amended, be agreed to. Are we agreed? Members: No. The Presiding Officer: There will be a division. The vote is closed.”
“On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I am not sure whether my vote was recorded; I would have voted no. The Presiding Officer: It was recorded—thank you. For Bannerman, Max (Highlands and Islands) (Reform) Beresford, Senga (South Scotland) (Reform) Bland, Amanda (Central Scot and Lothians West) (Reform) Briggs, Miles (Edinburgh and Lothians East) (Con) Carson, Finlay (Galloway and West Dumfries) (Con) Currie, Victor (Highlands and Islands) (Reform) Findlay, Russell (West Scotland) (Con) Fraser, Murdo (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Gallacher, Meghan (Central Scot and Lothians West) (Con) Hoy, Craig (Dumfriesshire) (Con) Kerr, Liam (North East Scotland) (Con) Kerr, Stephen (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Kerr, Thomas (Glasgow) (Reform) Kirkwood, David (South Scotland) (Reform) Langan, Jamie (South Scotland) (Reform) Lindsay, Amanda (Central Scot and Lothians West) (Reform) MacDougall, Julie (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Reform) Massey, Duncan (North East Scotland) (Reform) McDade, Helen (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Reform) Offord, Malcolm (West Scotland) (Reform) Ross, Angela (Edinburgh and Lothians East) (Reform) Schmulian, Kim (Glasgow) (Reform) Simpson, Graham (Central Scot and Lothians West) (Reform) Against Adam, George (Paisley) (SNP) Adamson, Clare (Motherwell and Wishaw) (SNP) Ahmed, Irshad (Edinburgh and Lothians East) (Lab) Anderson, Heather (Dundee City West) (SNP) Arthur, Tom (Renfrewshire West and Levern Valley) (SNP) Baillie, Jackie (Dumbarton) (Lab) Baker, Claire (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab) Barratt, David (Cowdenbeath) (SNP) Baxter, Andrew (Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch) (LD) Beattie, Colin (Midlothian North) (SNP) Bibby, Neil (West Scotland) (Lab) Black, Dawn (Angus North and Mearns) (SNP) Bonnar, Steven (Uddingston and Bellshill) (SNP) Bouse, Gary (Falkirk West) (SNP) Brown, Alan (Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley) (SNP) Brown, Siobhian (Ayr) (SNP) Bruce, Holly (Glasgow Southside) (Green) Burgess, Ariane (Highlands and Islands) (Green) Campbell, Kate (Edinburgh Eastern, Musselburgh and Tranent) (SNP) Campbell, Michelle (Renfrewshire North and Cardonald) (SNP) Chapman, Maggie (North East Scotland) (Green) Chou Turvey, Yi-pei (North East Scotland) (LD) Clark, Katy (West Scotland) (Lab) Cole-Hamilton, Alex (Edinburgh North Western) (LD) Constance, Angela (Almond Valley) (SNP) Day, Martyn (Falkirk East and Linlithgow) (SNP) Dijkstra-Downie, Sanne (Edinburgh Northern) (LD) Doris, Bob (Glasgow Kelvin and Maryhill) (SNP) Duane, Iris (Glasgow) (Green) Dunbar, Jackie (Aberdeen Donside) (SNP) Dunlop, Duncan (South Scotland) (LD) Fagan, Joe (South Scotland) (Lab) Fairlie, Jim (Perthshire South and Kinross-shire) (SNP) Flynn, Stephen (Aberdeen Deeside and North Kincardine) (SNP) Gethins, Stephen (Dundee City East) (SNP) Ghani, Zen (Glasgow Cathcart and Pollok) (SNP) Gibson, Patricia (Cunninghame South) (SNP) Gilruth, Jenny (Mid Fife and Glenrothes) (SNP) Goodlad, Hannah Mary (Shetland Islands) (SNP) Gray, Neil (Airdrie) (SNP) Greer, Ross (West Scotland) (Green) Griffin, Mark (Central Scot and Lothians West) (Lab) Hagmann, Katie (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley) (SNP) Harley, Adam (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (LD) Harvie, Patrick (Glasgow) (Green) Haughey, Clare (Rutherglen and Cambuslang) (SNP) Hepburn, Jamie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (SNP) Johnson, Daniel (Edinburgh Southern) (Lab) Kerr, Alex (Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse) (SNP) Kerr, Calum (Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale) (SNP) Kinross-O’Neill, Kayleigh (Edinburgh and Lothians East) (Green) Kumar, Simita (Edinburgh South Western) (SNP) Leask, Kristopher (Highlands and Islands) (Green) Linden, David (Glasgow Baillieston and Shettleston) (SNP) Long, Joe (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab) MacCallum, Morven-May (Highlands and Islands) (LD) MacGregor, Fulton (Coatbridge and Chryston) (SNP) Mackay, Gillian (Central Scot and Lothians West) (Green) MacKinnon, Donald (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (Lab) Macpherson, Ben (Edinburgh North Eastern and Leith) (SNP) Manivannan, Q (Edinburgh and Lothians East) (Green) Marra, Michael (North East Scotland) (Lab) Martin, Gillian (Aberdeenshire East) (SNP) McAllan, Màiri (Clydesdale) (SNP) McArthur, Liam (Orkney Islands) (LD) McKee, Cara (West Scotland) (Green) McKee, Ivan (Glasgow Easterhouse and Springburn) (SNP) McLennan, Paul (East Lothian Coast and Lammermuirs) (SNP) McMillan, Stuart (Inverclyde) (SNP) McNair, Marie (Clydebank and Milngavie) (SNP) McNeill, Pauline (Glasgow) (Lab) Melville, Lloyd (Angus South) (SNP) Merrick, Colm (Glasgow Anniesland) (SNP) Middleton, Jack (Aberdeen Central) (SNP) Minto, Jenni (Argyll and Bute) (SNP) Mitchell, Laura (Moray) (SNP) Mochan, Carol (South Scotland) (Lab) Moodie, Laura (South Scotland) (Green) Nevens, Kate (Edinburgh and Lothians East) (Green) Oswald, Kirsten (Eastwood) (SNP) Rennie, Willie (Fife North East) (LD) Roddick, Emma (Inverness and Nairn) (SNP) Ruskell, Mark (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Green) Sangster, Katherine (Edinburgh and Lothians East) (Lab) Sarwar, Anas (Glasgow) (Lab) Simpson, Mark (North East Scotland) (Reform) Slater, Lorna (Edinburgh Central) (Green) Smith, Alyn (Stirling) (SNP) Smith, David (West Scotland) (Reform) Somerville, Shirley-Anne (Dunfermline) (SNP) Stafford, Pauline (Bathgate) (SNP) Stevenson, Collette (East Kilbride) (SNP) Sweeney, Paul (Glasgow) (Lab) Todd, Maree (Highlands and Islands) (SNP) Torrance, David (Kirkcaldy) (SNP) Young, Jenny (Central Scot and Lothians West) (Lab) The Presiding Officer: The result of the division on amendment S7M-00356.4, in the name of Murdo Fraser, is: For 23, Against 96, Abstentions 0.”
“The small local businesses that will be populating Union Street and many other high streets the length and breadth of Scotland disproportionately employ and procure locally, and the wealth that they generate therefore remains within their communities. Such an initiative, which involves working in partnership with the business improvement district, is consistent with community wealth building. Of course, community wealth building is now on the statute book, and we can look forward to its implementation over the course of this parliamentary session.”
“One of the lessons of regeneration in previous decades has been that, although it is possible to come in with significant capital investment to improve infrastructure and buildings, if there is not accompanying work to rewire local economies, we can sometimes, 10, 15 or 20 years later, find ourselves back at square 1. Regeneration must be about more than coming in and improving just the façade and appearance of an area; it must be sustainable. The points that Maggie Chapman made about retaining the wealth that is generated in a place are crucial in that regard. This week is Scotland loves local week.”
“The welcome investment in Our Union Street should not simply regenerate buildings but empower communities and ensure that the wealth created by Union Street’s revival is retained locally for the benefit of the people of Aberdeen. Will the minister commit to ensuring that the investment in Our Union Street is accompanied by practical support for community asset transfers, co-operative enterprise and social economy initiatives, so that the town centre first approach delivers not only physical regeneration but democratic ownership and community wealth building in the heart of the city? Tom Arthur: Maggie Chapman raises important points.”
“To ask the Scottish Government what action it will take to address reported concerns that implementing recent Equalities and Human Rights Commission guidance on single-sex spaces will put at increased risk both transgender people and cisgender people who present in gender non- conforming ways. (S7O-00013)”
“I move amendment S7M-00228.2, to insert at end: “; recognises that issues in hospitals cannot be solved without addressing the crisis in social care, reducing health inequalities and tackling poverty; believes that social care workers should be paid at least £15 an hour, and calls on the Scottish Government to address long term workforce planning to support current staff and patients.” 14:48”
“That is why our amendment calls for social care workers to be paid at least £15 an hour. For the Scottish Greens, good care and fair work go hand in hand. We cannot build a resilient care system on low pay, insecure contracts and workforce shortages. If we truly value care, we must value the people who provide it. The NHS remains one of Scotland’s greatest collective achievements, and protecting it means more than funding hospitals. It means investing in prevention, tackling poverty, reducing inequality, supporting staff wellbeing, strengthening social care, creating sustainable career pathways and valuing every member of the workforce. If we want a renewed NHS, we must also build a fairer Scotland. That is the spirit of the Scottish Greens’ amendment, and I urge colleagues to support it.”
“If we want services to be designed around prevention, rehabilitation and person- centred care, the voices of those allied health professionals must be present wherever decisions are made. Perhaps nowhere is the connection between workforce pressures and patient outcomes clearer than in social care. For too long, social care has been treated as the neglected partner of the NHS, yet delayed discharge, pressure on hospitals and growing waiting lists are all connected to a care system that is underfunded and undervalued. Care work is skilled work, and it is essential work. It enables people to live independently, with dignity and choice. It supports families and prevents avoidable hospital admissions, and it helps to ensure that people can leave hospital safely when they are ready to do so.”
“Too often, discussions about NHS leadership focus solely on a narrow group of professions, despite the enormous contribution that is made by allied health professionals. Physiotherapists, occupational therapists, speech and language therapists, radiographers, podiatrists and many others play a vital role in helping people to recover and to maintain independence, and in enabling them to avoid unnecessary hospital admissions. The Allied Health Professions Federation Scotland has rightly called for genuine representation of allied health professionals at every level of leadership and decision making, alongside creating parity of esteem with nursing leadership.”
“The Royal College of Nursing has highlighted the continued pressures that nursing staff face with many reporting exhaustion, unsafe staffing levels and care being compromised because demand exceeds capacity. The British Medical Association has similarly raised concerns about doctors’ wellbeing, burnout and the need for workplace cultures that support staff rather than pushing them beyond breaking point. I acknowledge the work that was done earlier this year to avert industrial action by doctors and to engage constructively with staff representatives. Meaningful dialogue, fair pay and staff wellbeing matter, and creating workplaces where concerns can be raised openly and safely matters, too. A sustainable NHS depends on valuing every part of its workforce.”
“For years, professional bodies, trade unions and staff have warned that Scotland lacks the long-term workforce planning that is needed to meet rising demand. We need a sustainable workforce strategy that supports staff today while building the workforce that we will need tomorrow. That means investing in education, training and career development and creating more routes into health and care professions, including high-quality apprenticeships. The Royal College of Occupational Therapists has highlighted the importance of those things in building a sustainable workforce and addressing future staffing needs. However, workforce planning is not simply about numbers; it is also about valuing people.”
“If we ignore those realities, we will never relieve the pressure on our NHS workforce. That is particularly true in the north-east. Constituents across the region that I am privileged to represent continue to experience challenges in accessing healthcare, while NHS Grampian and NHS Tayside face significant workforce pressures, recruitment difficulties and growing demand. Rurality, ageing populations and the challenges of retaining staff in key specialties all place additional strain on services. The staff working in those board areas have continued to deliver under immense pressure, but they cannot be expected to carry ever-increasing burdens without the support, investment and long-term planning that they need. That brings me to workforce planning.”
“Health is shaped by whether someone can afford to heat their home, whether they have secure housing, whether they can access nutritious food, whether they are supported in their communities and whether they can get help before a crisis develops. That is why our amendment highlights the need to reduce health inequalities and tackle poverty alongside reforming health services. We must also focus on prevention, community services and reducing those health inequalities, not simply managing illness after it has taken hold. Too often, the people who rely most heavily on NHS services are those who have been failed elsewhere. We see the consequences of poverty in our hospitals, those of poor housing in our GP surgeries and those of precarious work in our mental health services.”
“I welcome the cabinet secretary and her ministers to their new roles. I begin by recognising the extraordinary dedication of our health and social care workers across Scotland. Every day, doctors, nurses, allied health professionals, porters, cleaners, administrators, care workers and countless others provide care, compassion and expertise in extraordinarily challenging circumstances. They deserve our thanks, but they also deserve honesty. If we are serious about investing in, protecting and renewing our NHS, we must recognise the fundamental truth that the challenges that our hospitals face cannot be solved within hospital walls alone. The Scottish Greens have long argued that health is not simply about what happens when someone reaches an A and E department, joins a waiting list or goes to their GP.”
“On a point of order, Presiding Officer. In my haste to ask my first question of the session at First Minister’s question time, I did not put on the record my entry in the register of members’ interests. I am rector of the University of Dundee. Apologies—I should have done that before I asked my question.”
“Will the First Minister agree to meet the campus unions as soon as possible?”
“The First Minister will remember the publication of the Gillies report last year, which contained recommendations about university governance and financial management, including on issues of transparency and staff engagement. Today, Aberdeen university court is discussing restructuring, job cuts, increasing staff workload and more, yet staff have not been properly engaged, unions have not received the information that is required about fair work and other questions, and the university senate has not been properly consulted. What is the First Minister’s view of how the Gillies recommendations are being understood and implemented by institutions, and the fact that public money is being used in ways that will have significant negative impacts on staff and students in Aberdeen and elsewhere?”
“This is feminist economic policy, green economic policy and, fundamentally, humane economic policy. Let us build a childcare system that is rooted not in patchwork fixes or postcode lotteries but in equality, dignity and collective responsibility—a system that values children, parents and, finally, truly values care. I move amendment S7M-00128.1, to insert at end: “and further agrees that as a first step towards this expansion, the Scottish Government and COSLA must work together to ensure that cross-border placements are available across Scotland, that all children can access the current funded hours the week rather than term after the child's relevant birthday, and that the required flexibility in provision will only be achieved with proper workforce planning.””