Tess White
Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party · Scotland
“It is scandalous that the Scottish National Party Government has spent millions of pounds funding self-identification groups while shutting sex-based women’s organisations out of public funding.”
“To ask the Scottish Government what discussions the social justice secretary has had with ministerial colleagues regarding the protection of people’s human rights in relation to new renewable energy infrastructure, including the proposed SSEN Transmission 400kV overhead power line in the North East Scotland region. (S6O-05604)”
“Does the First Minister agree with his Cabinet Secretary for Climate Action and Energy’s comment that, if people do not want pylons, battery storage or other destructive infrastructure in rural Scotland, they are on the far right? If he does not agree with her, will he apologise for her disgraceful remark?”
“Siobhian Brown: We have heard the consensus, and this is an issue that needs to be addressed in the next parliamentary session. A commission that can examine and consider the many issues that have been aired today and act quickly in the next session is the way forward ahead of legislation that the Parliament can scrutinise and amend, know…”
“Liam Kerr and Pam Gosal gave example after example of when time was made available at the beginning of the day or at the end. I am not allowed to say that the Scottish Government was lying, but it was a misrepresentation of the truth. I thank Ruth Maguire for her intervention on Maggie Chapman, because we were cringing at her speech.”
“I am clear that we cannot dismiss the comments from women involved in prostitution who are “terrified” of the proposals. That should make us all pause. Ahead of today’s debate, members received many briefings that highlight the risks, but I appreciate that opinion is divided on the issue.”
The complete record
Every one of 316 lines we hold for Tess White, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 7.
“The First Minister has said that he needs the gap in the law to be proven for non-fatal strangulation to be made a stand-alone crime, but is the data on NFS collected in Scotland? Markers are added to crimes if NFS has taken place but, as it is not always reported, there will always be underreporting. Many women are reluctant to come forward. A stand-alone crime would enable awareness and data collection to encourage women to report it to the police. However, data is collected in many countries, and a research report from the University of Exeter published in December 2025 found that an NFS law might have prevented 1,029 female intimate partner homicides. Crucially, such a law stops perpetrators before violence turns deadly.”
“Research has shown that 43 per cent of sexually active 16 and 17-year-olds and 35 per cent of 16 to 34-year-olds have experienced it. What was niche has now become part of the mainstream via increasingly extreme pornography. The issue has crept up on society unnoticed with unthinkable consequences. As we have heard, strangulation is a strong predictor of escalating domestic abuse and intimate harm. One woman in four accessing community and refuge services in this country reported that they had experienced strangulation or suffocation. However, strangulation often leaves no visible physical injury, which makes it difficult to assess and to prosecute under existing common- law assault offences.”
“I want to say a special thank you to Claire Baker for raising this topic and to Michelle Thomson for working on it over the past few years. Emily Drouet was in her first year of university when she met a boy who went on to become her boyfriend, to strangle her and to engage in such demoralisation of her as a person that, in 2016, she committed suicide. Scotland is the only part of the United Kingdom that does not have non-fatal strangulation as a stand-alone crime. I pay tribute to Fiona Drouet for her dedication and persistence in progressing her petition on non-fatal strangulation and to Beira’s Place for its insightful cross-party event with leading experts. Strangulation for sexual purposes is now part of our culture. It is especially common in the young.”
“What has sustained communities such as Brechin has been not Government strategy but community spirit, with volunteers, council staff and emergency services involved and neighbours helping neighbours. However, good will alone cannot replace leadership, and the Government should have matched the resilience of communities with real action and proper investment. At-risk communities such as Brechin deserve better. 17:43”
“The economic damage has been just as stark. Flooding has crippled local businesses, none more so than Matrix International. The company, which once employed about 100 people, was so badly flooded that it was forced to scale back its operations, and it ultimately closed. The Scottish Government’s flood recovery support amounted to just £3,000. I heard Emma Harper criticise Opposition members. I say to her and her colleagues that they should look at Audit Scotland’s report “Flooding in communities: Moving towards flood resilience”, which is damning. It confirms that there are serious gaps in funding, skills and capacity, and it states that the system for allocating flood defence funding is “not fit for purpose”. As a result, costs are rising, schemes are delayed and fewer communities are being protected.”
“Built just seven years before it was overwhelmed, it demonstrated that existing defences are not fit for purpose or keeping pace with extreme weather, but the Scottish Government has failed to properly strengthen or fund Brechin’s protections. Ministers were quick to appear for photo opportunities in the aftermath, but they have been far slower to deliver the funding and decisions that are needed to prevent a repeat. As a result, local government has been left to pick up the pieces. Angus Council wants to rebuild River Street and improve flood protection, but it cannot do so alone. The cost of a rebuild has been estimated at £15 million over 30 years, which is simply beyond the council’s means without Government support. That leaves Angus Council in an impossible position: it is responsible for delivery but is denied the resources to act.”
“More than two years have now passed since storm Babet devastated Brechin, but far too many families have still not returned home. What should have been a period of recovery has instead become a case study in delay, deflection and abandonment by the SNP Government. Eighty-five council houses were ruined by flooding and might not be rebuilt until 2030 at the earliest. More than 30 privately owned homes were also affected. Empty properties are costing more than £6,000 a week in lost rent, while remaining residents feel trapped in uncertainty. Many have told me that, every time it rains, they fear that the nightmare will begin all over again. That constant anxiety is an often overlooked human cost of inaction. The failure of the Brechin flood prevention scheme should have been a wake-up call.”
“I have constituents who face similar situations. One has had to leave her children behind and has no access to them. However, even though she is on the minimum wage, she earns too much to access legal aid, so again he has coercive control and control of the children. That is why the committee strongly recommended removing means testing for civil protection order and homelessness cases and exploring wider access to non-means-tested legal aid for domestic abuse cases. The legal aid system is broken. Our committee report involved such a lot of work and effort by so many people, but it will now go on the shelf, as we are only a few months from the end of the session. That is wrong and disrespectful to the Scottish people. The Presiding Officer: I call”
“How can it be that the former chief executive of the Scottish National Party and husband of the former First Minister can receive legal aid when the most vulnerable in our society are denied it? Our committee was told about a survivor of domestic abuse who had to flee for her own safety and that of her 12-year-old son. Sara is legally married. Her husband has the financial means and resources to employ solicitors, who have been advising him. There are two properties from the marriage, but Sara has no access to those without legal assistance, and no solicitor will take on her case without payment. Her husband—the abuser—has recourse to the law, which has enabled him to retain all the assets from the marriage while Sara is left with no assistance whatsoever to help her in her situation, thereby enabling coercive control to continue.”
“The Human Rights Consortium Scotland highlighted the existence of “advice deserts” in “areas of the law such as domestic abuse, discrimination and human rights.” As we heard from the convener, Grampian Women’s Aid told us that it is making between 50 and 60 calls just to find one legal aid solicitor. We had evidence that it had taken 117 calls for one domestic abuse survivor to find a legal aid solicitor. Women who are fleeing domestic abuse face additional barriers, particularly around financial eligibility and paperwork. Many have experienced financial abuse or fled without documentation. SLAB told us that there were flexibilities in the system, but awareness of that is low, and reliance on that so-called flexibility has not been sufficient to help the most needy.”
“Andy Sirel told the committee: “This afternoon, I will probably go back to my office to negotiate with SLAB over sums of money as small as £7.50”, or that SLAB might say: “‘You had a meeting that lasted one hour. We think it should only have lasted 45 minutes.’”—[Official Report, Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee, 13 May 2025; c 35.] Witnesses told the committee that such processes are having a negative impact on the relationship between lawyers working in legal aid and the Scottish Legal Aid Board. The Scottish Government has repeatedly promised reform. The programme for government 2021-22 pledged that legislation on legal aid would happen during this parliamentary session, but progress has stalled, key stakeholders withdrew from engagement and, once again, reform has been kicked into the long grass.”
“Legal aid policy is set by the Scottish Government, which oversees SLAB, yet, time and time again, we heard that SLAB’s bureaucratic processes and poor engagement are a major barrier to offering and accessing civil legal assistance. Siobhian Brown: [Made a request to intervene.] Tess White: I say sorry to the minister, but I will make progress. Administrative requirements were described as “burdensome”, “disproportionate” and “damaging” to SLAB’s relationships with the legal profession. Individuals cannot access legal aid unless they go through a solicitor, and legal aid is not available to groups. JustRight Scotland gave the committee an illustration of the kind of administrative processes that solicitors are required to engage in with SLAB.”
“Regarding SLAB, the committee had intended to publish this report before the summer recess, but just as we were due to consider a first draft, we received late correspondence from SLAB suggesting that some of the evidence that we had taken was based on what it described as “demonstrable misunderstandings”. The letter was described by the committee as “disappointing”. That is an understatement, not because it delayed our work, but because SLAB had ample opportunity to respond to evidence during oral evidence sessions or through timely follow-up submissions. In my view, submitting that correspondence at a late stage was disrespectful to the committee and only served to reinforce the concerns that we heard about SLAB’s poor stakeholder engagement and its methods.”
“Throughout the committee’s inquiry, we heard consistent and deeply concerning evidence about the growing difficulty that individuals face in finding a solicitor who is willing or able to take on legal aid cases. Solicitors are leaving legal aid work, and those who remain face rising case loads, financial insecurity, stress and burnout. The pressure on those professionals is intense, and the consequences are borne by the most vulnerable in our society. What was striking to me and the committee was not only the strength of feeling in the evidence, but the fact that many of the concerns have been raised for years—in some cases, since at least 2017. What is required is structural reform of a system that is no longer fit for purpose. There is a lack of any change leadership, and there are serious issues with the system that is managed by SLAB.”
“The obvious impact on the women is shocking, but the idea that a five, six or seven- year-old would be expected to fulfil the role that should otherwise be provided by the state—of acting as an interpreter to recount the experiences that their mothers were subjected to—goes far beyond anything that is remotely acceptable in Scotland in 2025. On that point alone, I committed very firmly to the Sign LOUD team—which comprises researchers from Heriot-Watt University and the University of Edinburgh, as well as various experts on domestic abuse and deaf communities—that I will take on board their recommendations and respond seriously, certainly before the election.”
“I have very much committed to the Sign LOUD team that I will take on board the recommendations that it has put forward, which are specifically about supporting deaf women, reducing domestic abuse and ensuring that there is adequate support. The point that struck me—these things sometimes stay with us, and I could not get over it—was the overreliance on children to act as interpreters in a case of domestic abuse. We are exposing children to these horrendous experiences because of a lack of adequate interpreters.”
“There are two parts to that: first, ensuring that there are enough interpreters—full stop; secondly, ensuring that all public sector employers take responsibility for that provision. Mr Briggs mentioned Maree Todd, who is sitting beside me. She formerly had responsibility for BSL, so she brings that experience and background to her new role. A lot of mention has been made of domestic abuse and the justice system. Marie McNair talked about the fact that deaf women are two to three times more likely to experience domestic abuse. That comes through in the work of the Sign LOUD programme, whose event, which Karen Adam hosted, I attended last week.”
“One is a very integrated approach within the health service for deaf BSL users. Staff training is the responsibility of a public sector employer. We expect public sector employers, such as health boards, to undertake their own impact assessments and ensure that they operate in line with their public sector equality duties, so that there is safe, effective, inclusive and high- quality care provision. Separate to that is the wider question about enabling a BSL user to book an interpreter and have the comfort that that is being done. That is part of the reason for developing SignPort, which is a really easy and simple app that ensures that people can book an interpreter.”
“Miles Briggs: I want to ask for another action. It has been welcome that the former Minister for Social Care, Mental Wellbeing and Sport has also been in the chamber for this debate, but a lot of the points that have been raised around access to health services point towards a lack of help to navigate our health services. Given that the Government has made good progress on the cancer strategy and the single point of contact service to help cancer patients to navigate health services, is the Government looking at designing something similar for those deaf patients who continually tell us that they are not able to access interpreter services within our health services? Kate Forbes: The short answer is yes. I am sorry for repeating, to an extent, what I said to the committee, but I think that there are two answers to that question.”
“However, I would caveat that by saying that there are very understandable requests for BSL education for children who do not need BSL for themselves but who, if they could use BSL, would be able to communicate with other young people and reduce their isolation and loneliness. Sometimes, when we have a target, we think that we have succeeded when we hit the target, but a general increase in the numbers is also important. However, I will certainly take that point away. That leads me to the last action that I was going to talk about, which concerns opportunities for pupils to learn BSL within the current programme of curriculum qualifications and assessment. I realise that I am over time—although I was encouraged to speak for a generous period—but I want to turn to the very serious issues in and around domestic abuse.”
“That is in response to a point that has been made by the committee and others in relation to the provision of teachers who do not have sufficient fluency in BSL. For example, I was told about a maths student who was given an interpreter who had only a level 1 qualification and therefore could not help. Similarly, in primary and secondary schools, a BSL teacher might be trained to only a low level and therefore cannot teach the children at the right level. Tess White: Does the Deputy First Minister think that having a target for deaf BSL teachers, as we do for GPs, would be the right thing to do? Kate Forbes: I am open to that. We know how many deaf children there are, so it makes sense to say that we know how many children need access to BSL teachers—that is, every one of those deaf children.”
“A point that was made in the committee’s report concerned placements for trainee teachers in specialist deaf teaching provision or other places that expose trainee teachers to BSL. That has a lot of merit. Fourthly, we are promoting Contact Scotland BSL, which supports video-relay interpreting, and the SignPort app, which will address digital exclusion and rural access. A number of colleagues took great interest in the new contract for Contact Scotland BSL. I am pleased that it was successfully relaunched on 1 December. There was extensive work in the run-up to that, to draw awareness to the changes. SignPort sits alongside that, making it easier to book interpreters. Next, we are undertaking a review of additional support for learning, and we are revising guidance on appropriate qualifications for teachers of the deaf.”
“Does she agree that face-to-face contact is important in terms of the cultural, spiritual and emotional development of someone’s use of a language? Kate Forbes: Absolutely. At the moment, BSL users can become registered teachers through one of the 46 active initial teacher education courses that currently exist. I am told that support is provided on a case-by-case basis for ITE students using BSL, but that provision needs to be appropriate, and the BSL users need to be able to access the right kind of support if they are going to train to become BSL teachers. That approach needs to be taken forward through careful engagement with all the relevant professionals and organisations, including the General Teaching Council for Scotland, ITE course providers, deans of education, local authorities and Education Scotland.”
“Thirdly, we will explore engaging with education professionals to develop new guidance to support BSL users to become registered teachers. I take squarely on the chin Tess White’s point about the number of teachers, but, irrespective of the specific number, I accept that there are not enough teachers. We need far more BSL teachers. There are different routes and a number of different initiatives for someone who wants to become a teacher, so we will ensure that the guidance is as clear as possible, and we will change what BSL stakeholders want to be changed in it. Martin Whitfield: Does the Deputy First Minister recognise the subjective point of view of friends of mine that the teaching of BSL through online videos is not adequate, particularly when we are talking about access for young, developing people?”
“In some areas, there is a need to improve a service that already exists, but other areas may still be looking for the service to exist. Secondly, we will explore and cost a national BSL tutor course for Scotland in engagement with education and BSL partnerships, to look at how it would fit with the existing provision. I am very interested in that approach. I spoke at committee about the fact that there are a number of different initiatives. That has come across in the debate: Martin Whitfield spoke about tutors and teachers, and we have just heard from Tess White about teachers. I have heard consistently that, although teachers are important in schools, there is also a need for tutors outside the school setting, to enhance young people’s learning and attainment, and that we need to look at something that could be provided nationally.”
“I will start with the difference that the committee’s debate and its report will make and the actions that the Scottish Government will take as a direct result of the points that have been raised by colleagues in the report as well as in the debate. The first action is our commitment to funding a BSL network to enable listed authorities to share best practice and provide support to improve local BSL plans. I mentioned that in my opening speech, but it is in direct response to the points that have been made about monitoring, reporting and the postcode lottery, which have come through quite clearly in my engagement. Experiences in the heart of Dundee or Edinburgh, for example, differ markedly from experiences in more rural areas, which Carol Mochan referenced.”
“The committee asked the Scottish Government to consider a national BSL centre for excellence. I realise the time, Presiding Officer, so I will come to my final comments. Unless there is sufficient national oversight, issues around a shortage of qualified interpreters, deaf BSL teachers, limited resources and a lack of enforceability will not improve. In conclusion, although the 2015 act has brought significant benefits, the committee recognises that there are substantial challenges and that, as our convener said, substantial opportunities still remain. The Deputy Presiding Officer: I call the Deputy First Minister, Kate Forbes, to close on behalf of the Scottish Government. 16:32 Kate Forbes: I thank colleagues for the debate so far.”
“However, despite the Deputy First Minister’s insistence that the plan is clear and ambitious, in reality it faces a number of issues, particularly with its lack of focus and measurable goals. Alexander Stewart cited Deaflink, which said that there has been a “dearth of appropriately trained Deaf BSL Tutors in Scotland”, which is having a huge impact on the development of BSL users. When my committee members asked me whether I was going to raise the issue with the Deputy First Minister, I said, “Too right I am.” I asked the DFM and her officials how many deaf BSL teachers there were and whether the position had improved from 10 or even five years ago, but neither the Deputy First Minister nor her officials had the figures to hand, which is a case in point. Data capture is important: we cannot manage what we do not measure.”
“Can members imagine how bad it is, when someone has been abused and the police are coming to the door, to have to deal with those feelings of isolation, loneliness, threat and fear? That came across very powerfully. Even when there is an interpreter, many deaf survivors feel more comfortable speaking to someone whose first language is British Sign Language. We have explored in the debate the lack of national oversight, which is an issue that needs to be addressed. I am grateful to the Deputy First Minister for taking my intervention on that and for saying that the issue is very much on the radar. As Karen Adam said, the Scottish Government’s second national plan received mixed responses at committee.”
“The more we hear about women who experience domestic abuse and the fabric of lies that the domestic abuser makes and shares with the police, the more shocking it is. Carol Mochan: That is absolutely beyond belief, and I suppose that it does not come to us until we hear it in black and white. Was there any evidence on how Police Scotland or other organisations hope to combat the issue? Tess White: I know that Dr Gosal met Chief Constable Jo Farrell this week and mentioned her bill, so it is now very firmly and squarely on the table as a result of that committee work. In addition to the issue that Carol Mochan raises, there was powerful input from a deaf advocate and survivor of domestic abuse, who told the committee that finding an interpreter is always at the front of a deaf woman’s mind.”
“When we heard that powerful evidence at committee, we were all taken aback. That issue has not yet been mentioned in any of the speeches in the debate. The national plan has also been silent on the issue. I hope that Government officials will take that away from the debate and that, under the leadership of the Deputy First Minister, we have it in the plan moving forward. It was harrowing to hear what Dr Gosal said at committee about meeting a survivor who had slurred speech while putting together her Prevention of Domestic Abuse (Scotland) Bill. Dr Gosal shared with us today that, when the police arrived at the survivor’s home, the abuser told authorities that she was drunk, so she was not taken seriously. That is absolutely horrific. When we heard that in committee, it was almost unbelievable.”
“I hope that the committee report and the way in which the Deputy First Minister has engaged with the issue ensures that that work continues. She said that it is really for the next session of Parliament, too, so I hope that, in her handover, she makes sure that it does. One issue that has been identified in the debate by several members—Marie McNair raised it very powerfully—is the issue of access to the legal system for deaf women. I thought that women who are deaf were twice as likely to experience domestic abuse, but Marie McNair said that they are two to three times more likely, which is even more alarming. Dr Pam Gosal highlighted the issue of deaf survivors of domestic abuse, and she cited the evidence from committee that deaf women often assume that domestic abuse is normal behaviour, which is absolutely shocking.”
“Kate Forbes: It is not a cheeky intervention. To reflect on the period, let us say, before devolution and over the past few centuries, and as I shared in committee, I am struck by the history of the BSL community in Scotland and how BSL users have pioneered many global solutions over the past 300 years. I am happy not to take any credit, but I still credit Scots as being leaders in the area. Tess White: I would like to come back on that. It was very interesting to hear the Deputy First Minister share with the committee that Scotland was the world leader for the deaf community centuries ago but it lost its way. I was looking at Mark Griffin’s evidence from when he first introduced the bill, and he compared Scotland with Finland to show how Scotland had fallen behind Finland on the number of teachers and tutors for the deaf community.”
“As Martin Whitfield said, it is really important that we have a Parliament that is accessible to everyone, so I am delighted to see people in the gallery who had an important input to our committee. The evidence was powerful and impactful, and it resonated deeply. I also thank the Deputy First Minister, who cares deeply about this subject and the importance of language to communicating, to being understood and to reducing the sense of isolation. Each MSP who has spoken today recognises that some progress has been made in Scotland. I share the Deputy First Minister’s aspiration. I think that she said that Scotland has been a leader. I would say that Scotland definitely will be a leader if all the committee’s recommendations are implemented. Kate Forbes: Will the member take an intervention? Tess White: Yes, of course.”
“I thank the committee clerks and support staff and the organisations and individuals who gave evidence to the committee. As our convener, Karen Adam, said, we all want to express our sincere gratitude to all those who gave evidence. It was very impactful for me to have Karen Adam as our convener, because she is a role model for the deaf community. She shared with the committee, including in private sessions, information that I did not know, such as about the word “CODA”. I watched the film “CODA”, which was very impactful. The inquiry raised my interest and understanding of the importance of BSL, so I would like to thank our convener. Her personal life experience made the whole committee experience enriching.”
“That point struck me, and that is why the Scottish Government remains committed to the actions in our BSL national plan, taking on board Martin Whitfield’s call for greater momentum, working on a cross-party basis and to delivering as many of the committee’s recommendations as quickly as possible. 15:30”
“I am keen to take the committee’s report and move at pace to implement and deliver some of the recommendations that are perhaps easier to deliver than others, as well as exploring some of the other recommendations that require that element of consultation or detailed analysis work. The conversations that I have had with BSL users this year have been inspirational and have also shaped my thinking on the Scottish Government’s actions in the national plan. The BSL users I have met have reflected on their educational journeys and the improvements that could have been put in place to better support them, and they have highlighted the importance to them of various initiatives. Someone who worked tirelessly to shape the 2015 act asked why deaf and deafblind people have to continue to always fight for their rights.”
“Since the national plan was published, we have launched the new Contact Scotland BSL service, which will include a pilot of video remote interpreting for the first time; we have provided £375,000 to develop and launch the SignPort app, which will make booking interpreters easier; we have established the BSL justice advisory board to bring together justice sector representatives and the BSL community, which touches on a theme that was raised by a number of committee members; and we have continued to fund BSL organisations through the equality and human rights fund.”
“That is an example of the creation of a space in which to share good practice among listed authorities, to share resources and to identify solutions to challenges around the implementation of local BSL plans. The network will have its first meeting with listed authorities on 15 December, and I very much look forward to seeing the work that comes out of it. Of course, that complements the work of the British Deaf Association Scotland, which we fund to work with listed authorities to foster community connections and share information on how best to engage with BSL users.”
“I have tasked the relevant team of my officials with initiating that informal consultation and those conversations with BSL users. I think that I confirmed at committee that I would be keen that we build up the initial detailed work that could then be taken forward by the new Government after the election, which could implement the measure if it has widespread support. We recognise that, to deliver on our ambition, it is important that we work together to deliver collective action to strengthen outcomes for BSL users. One point that came through the committee’s scrutiny concerned local experience and whether there is adequate monitoring and reporting of that varying level of access at a local level. That is why we have established the listed authority network, which was delivered on our behalf by the ALLIANCE.”
“The Deputy First Minister has said that the quality of provision differs across Scotland, so can she explain why she does not support the establishment of a national oversight board? Kate Forbes: I think that I mentioned in committee that we are certainly interested in exploring that further. For me, the key is not whether I think that it is a good idea—I have seen how that model, in a slightly different guise, operates in relation to Gaelic, for example, with Bòrd na Gàidhlig—but what the community thinks. If there is widespread support from BSL users, the Government is not going to stand in the way and is not averse to the establishment of such a board. However, for us, it is critically important that we identify whether that is an approach that is of interest to the BSL community.”
“The Presiding Officer: The next item of business is consideration of business motion S6M- 20069, in the name of Graeme Dey, on behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau, on timetabling of a bill at stage 2. Motion moved, That the Parliament agrees that consideration of the Natural Environment (Scotland) Bill at stage 2 be completed by 12 December 2025.—[Graeme Dey] Motion agreed to. Parliamentary Bureau Motions 17:35”
“Motion agreed to, That the Parliament agrees— (a) the following programme of business— Tuesday 16 December 2025 2.00 pm Time for Reflection followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions followed by Topical Questions followed by Stage 3 Proceedings: Dog Theft (Scotland) Bill followed by Stage 3 Proceedings: Schools (Residential Outdoor Education) (Scotland) Bill followed by Committee Announcements followed by Business Motions followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions 6.00 pm Decision Time followed by Members’ Business Wednesday 17 December 2025 2.00 pm Parliamentary Bureau Motions 2.00 pm Portfolio Questions: Rural Affairs, Land Reform and Islands; Health and Social Care followed by Ministerial Statement: Protecting Children from Harm followed by Criminal Justice Committee Debate: Cybercrime followed by Motion on Legislative Consent: Pension Schemes Bill – UK Legislation followed by Business Motions followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions 5.30 pm Decision Time followed by Members’ Business Thursday 18 December 2025 11.40 am Parliamentary Bureau Motions 11.40 am General Questions 12.00 pm First Minister’s Questions 12.45 pm Parliamentary Bureau Motions followed by Portfolio Questions: Social Justice and Housing followed by Stage 1 Debate: Contract (Formation and Remedies) (Scotland) Bill followed by Motion on Legislative Consent: Sentencing Bill – UK Legislation followed by Business Motions followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions 3.10 pm Decision Time followed by Members’ Business Tuesday 6 January 2026 2.00 pm Time for Reflection followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions followed by Topical Questions followed by Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee Debate: Legal Aid followed by Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee Debate: Petition PE2018: Recognise the value of swimming pools and provide financial relief to help keep pools open followed by Committee Announcements followed by Business Motions followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions 5.00 pm Decision Time followed by Members’ Business Wednesday 7 January 2026 2.00 pm Parliamentary Bureau Motions 2.00 pm Portfolio Questions: Constitution, External Affairs and Culture, and Parliamentary Business; Justice and Home Affairs followed by Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party Business followed by Business Motions followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions 5.10 pm Decision Time followed by Members’ Business Thursday 8 January 2026 11.40 am Parliamentary Bureau Motions 11.40 am General Questions 12.00 pm First Minister’s Questions followed by Members’ Business 2.30 pm Parliamentary Bureau Motions 2.30 pm Portfolio Questions: Education and Skills followed by Stage 1 Debate: Building Safety Levy (Scotland) Bill followed by Financial Resolution: Building Safety Levy (Scotland) Bill followed by Business Motions followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions 5.00 pm Decision Time (b) that, for the purposes of Portfolio Questions in the week beginning 15 December 2025, in rule 13.7.3, after the word “except” the words “to the extent to which the Presiding Officer considers that the questions are on the same or similar subject matter or” are inserted.”
“Amendment disagreed to. The Presiding Officer: The next question is, that motion S6M-20068, in the name of Graeme Dey, on behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau, setting out a business programme, be agreed to.”
“On a point of order, Presiding Officer. My app would not work. I would have voted yes. The Presiding Officer: Thank you, Ms White. We will ensure that that is recorded. For Balfour, Jeremy (Lothian) (Ind) Briggs, Miles (Lothian) (Con) Burnett, Alexander (Aberdeenshire West) (Con) Carlaw, Jackson (Eastwood) (Con) Carson, Finlay (Galloway and West Dumfries) (Con) Dowey, Sharon (South Scotland) (Con) Eagle, Tim (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Findlay, Russell (West Scotland) (Con) Fraser, Murdo (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Gallacher, Meghan (Central Scotland) (Con) Golden, Maurice (North East Scotland) (Con) Gosal, Pam (West Scotland) (Con) Greene, Jamie (West Scotland) (LD) Gulhane, Sandesh (Glasgow) (Con) Hamilton, Rachael (Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (Con) Hoy, Craig (South Scotland) (Con) Halcro Johnston, Jamie (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Kerr, Liam (North East Scotland) (Con) Kerr, Stephen (Central Scotland) (Con) Lumsden, Douglas (North East Scotland) (Con) McArthur, Liam (Orkney Islands) (LD) McCall, Roz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Mountain, Edward (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Mundell, Oliver (Dumfriesshire) (Con) Rennie, Willie (North East Fife) (LD) Ross, Douglas (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Simpson, Graham (Central Scotland) (Reform) Smith, Liz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Stewart, Alexander (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Webber, Sue (Lothian) (Con) Wells, Annie (Glasgow) (Con) White, Tess (North East Scotland) (Con) Whittle, Brian (South Scotland) (Con) Wishart, Beatrice (Shetland Islands) (LD) Against Adam, George (Paisley) (SNP) Adam, Karen (Banffshire and Buchan Coast) (SNP) Adamson, Clare (Motherwell and Wishaw) (SNP) Allan, Alasdair (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (SNP) Arthur, Tom (Renfrewshire South) (SNP) Baillie, Jackie (Dumbarton) (Lab) Baker, Claire (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab) Beattie, Colin (Midlothian North and Musselburgh) (SNP) Bibby, Neil (West Scotland) (Lab) Boyack, Sarah (Lothian) (Lab) Brown, Keith (Clackmannanshire and Dunblane) (SNP) Brown, Siobhian (Ayr) (SNP) Burgess, Ariane (Highlands and Islands) (Green) Callaghan, Stephanie (Uddingston and Bellshill) (SNP) Chapman, Maggie (North East Scotland) (Green) Choudhury, Foysol (Lothian) (Ind) Clark, Katy (West Scotland) (Lab) Coffey, Willie (Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley) (SNP) Constance, Angela (Almond Valley) (SNP) Dey, Graeme (Angus South) (SNP) Don-Innes, Natalie (Renfrewshire North and West) (SNP) Doris, Bob (Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn) (SNP) Dornan, James (Glasgow Cathcart) (SNP) Dunbar, Jackie (Aberdeen Donside) (SNP) Duncan-Glancy, Pam (Glasgow) (Lab) Ewing, Annabelle (Cowdenbeath) (SNP) Fairlie, Jim (Perthshire South and Kinross-shire) (SNP) FitzPatrick, Joe (Dundee City West) (SNP) Forbes, Kate (Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch) (SNP) Gibson, Kenneth (Cunninghame North) (SNP) Gilruth, Jenny (Mid Fife and Glenrothes) (SNP) Gougeon, Mairi (Angus North and Mearns) (SNP) Grahame, Christine (Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale) (SNP) Grant, Rhoda (Highlands and Islands) (Lab) Gray, Neil (Airdrie and Shotts) (SNP) Greer, Ross (West Scotland) (Green) Griffin, Mark (Central Scotland) (Lab) Harper, Emma (South Scotland) (SNP) Harvie, Patrick (Glasgow) (Green) Haughey, Clare (Rutherglen) (SNP) Hepburn, Jamie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (SNP) Hyslop, Fiona (Linlithgow) (SNP) Johnson, Daniel (Edinburgh Southern) (Lab) Kidd, Bill (Glasgow Anniesland) (SNP) Lennon, Monica (Central Scotland) (Lab) Leonard, Richard (Central Scotland) (Lab) Lochhead, Richard (Moray) (SNP) MacDonald, Gordon (Edinburgh Pentlands) (SNP) MacGregor, Fulton (Coatbridge and Chryston) (SNP) Mackay, Gillian (Central Scotland) (Green) [Proxy vote cast by Ross Greer] Mackay, Rona (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (SNP) Macpherson, Ben (Edinburgh Northern and Leith) (SNP) Maguire, Ruth (Cunninghame South) (SNP) Martin, Gillian (Aberdeenshire East) (SNP) Mason, John (Glasgow Shettleston) (Ind) Matheson, Michael (Falkirk West) (SNP) McAllan, Màiri (Clydesdale) (SNP) McKee, Ivan (Glasgow Provan) (SNP) McLennan, Paul (East Lothian) (SNP) McMillan, Stuart (Greenock and Inverclyde) (SNP) McNair, Marie (Clydebank and Milngavie) (SNP) McNeill, Pauline (Glasgow) (Lab) Minto, Jenni (Argyll and Bute) (SNP) Mochan, Carol (South Scotland) (Lab) Nicoll, Audrey (Aberdeen South and North Kincardine) (SNP) O’Kane, Paul (West Scotland) (Lab) Regan, Ash (Edinburgh Eastern) (Ind) Robertson, Angus (Edinburgh Central) (SNP) Robison, Shona (Dundee City East) (SNP) Roddick, Emma (Highlands and Islands) (SNP) Ruskell, Mark (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Green) Russell, Davy (Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse) (Lab) Sarwar, Anas (Glasgow) (Lab) Slater, Lorna (Lothian) (Green) Somerville, Shirley-Anne (Dunfermline) (SNP) Stevenson, Collette (East Kilbride) (SNP) [Proxy vote cast by Fulton MacGregor] Stewart, Kaukab (Glasgow Kelvin) (SNP) Stewart, Kevin (Aberdeen Central) (SNP) Sturgeon, Nicola (Glasgow Southside) (SNP) Sweeney, Paul (Glasgow) (Lab) Swinney, John (Perthshire North) (SNP) Thomson, Michelle (Falkirk East) (SNP) Todd, Maree (Caithness, Sutherland and Ross) (SNP) Torrance, David (Kirkcaldy) (SNP) Tweed, Evelyn (Stirling) (SNP) Villalba, Mercedes (North East Scotland) (Lab) Whitfield, Martin (South Scotland) (Lab) Whitham, Elena (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley) (SNP) Yousaf, Humza (Glasgow Pollok) (SNP) The Presiding Officer: The result of the division on amendment S6M-20068.1, in the name of Douglas Lumsden, is: For 34, Against 89, Abstentions 0.”
“To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on the impact of its export growth strategy, “A Trading Nation”, including what metrics it has used to assess this. (S6O-05262)”
“It is important to note that, in July 2020, the United Kingdom Government introduced e-scooter trials in England. The trials were originally due to end in November 2021, but they have been extended, with the latest extension going to May 2028. Action from the Scottish Government is long overdue. The problem simply cannot be ignored. 18:36”
“The sooner riders and drivers are made aware of just how hazardous this is and the effects of isolation, because they are afraid to go out, on visually impaired folks, the better.” According to research by Guide Dogs, 78 per cent of people with sight loss had had a negative experience with e-scooters, 80 per cent had had an e-scooter rush past and frighten them, 12 per cent reported that their guide dog had been disturbed by an e-scooter, 10 per cent had been hit by an e-scooter and 2 per cent had been hit and injured by an e-scooter. The number of people who have already been involved in a collision is deeply worrying. Those results are deeply alarming. I am delighted that Guide Dogs has contributed to my speech, because I feel that it is very important for the minister to hear that research.”
“My dog’s harness was clipped recently as a rider passed much too close. I have a young dog, not yet three, and he now stops when he is aware of a rider in front or even coming from behind. I carry third party insurance and it would be good if cyclists and e- scooter riders were similarly insured. At least if I was injured, my care home costs would be paid. A collision is a daunting prospect for me and I would appreciate you writing to local councils in respect of stopping parking on pavements and e-scooters and bikes.”
“The training centre for Guide Dogs Scotland is in Forfar, in my region, and the organisation has a campaign called scoot aware to raise awareness of the alarming effect of e-scooters on people with sight loss. As we have heard today, fast, heavy and powerful e-scooters are being ridden in an antisocial way, and that is already having a significant and detrimental impact on the lives of people with sight loss. E-scooters can reach high speeds and are relatively silent. One guide dog owner said: “My guide dog ... and I were ... hit by a rider. I could hear two voices getting closer and the next thing I knew I was hit with such a force that I was knocked over” the dog. One of my constituents in Aberdeen said to me: “E-scooters and bikes are a genuine hazard on the pavement for guide dog owners.”