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 4 of 7.
“I know that people do not like to hear this, but around £31 million has been spent to date; there are at least 200 civil servants working on the bill; and the Government has paid millions to KPMG and other private sector consultants, while not a single penny has gone towards increasing care packages. We need to ensure that the bill will be implemented, and the money is there to do that. It is, therefore, my sincere hope that lessons are learned after the bill is passed, and that the Government moves away from framework bills that have little detail and even less financial robustness. I move that we support Mr Whittle’s amendments. Maree Todd: I do not support either of the amendments in this group.”
“We need to know—and not assume—that the interventions that we pass in legislation in the Parliament are working, and that is especially true in an area as vital and personal as social care. Families, carers and workers deserve more than promises—they deserve proof that the system is improving. Amendments 81 and 87 would improve the bill. They would ensure that delivery would be not only monitored but measured. They are reasonable, proportionate and entirely consistent with the spirit of the legislation, and I commend them to Parliament. Jackie Baillie: I welcome Mr Whittle’s amendments, in the light of the concerns that have been expressed about the costs associated with the bill.”
“It would require that, before any regulation-making powers under section 47(2) are exercised, ministers publish a report on the estimated costs arising from the bill. That is not about second-guessing legislative intent; it is about equipping Parliament with the fiscal clarity that is needed to make informed decisions. There is a long-standing tendency in Governments of all colours to announce new powers and duties without having a clear sense of the full financial consequences. Amendment 87 seeks to counter that tendency with a straightforward principle: transparency first. Amendments 81 and 87 speak to the same concern: that we must move beyond input-driven policy making and focus squarely on outcomes.”
“It would include specific metrics, such as the number of carers’ statements that are produced within new statutory timescales; the uptake of short breaks; and the delivery of the digital health and care record. It would also include space for reflection on the broader impacts, especially around service standards and structural changes such as the new national social work agency. The timeframe of five-yearly reporting strikes the right balance. It would avoid overburdening Government or services with annual paperwork, while ensuring that each session of Parliament would see at least one comprehensive assessment of delivery. That would allow members, committees, stakeholders and— crucially—the public to hold Government to account. Amendment 87 complements that by addressing financial accountability.”
“As a Parliament, we are not particularly good at post-legislative scrutiny—in fact, that might be an understatement—and amendment 81 seeks to change that. What matters most is not the input, the money that we spend or the number of strategies that are published, but the outcomes that we deliver. How many young carers are now getting the breaks that they need? Are the adult carers seeing the support plans that they have been promised materialise on time? Are the new rights and services that the bill envisages being accessed equitably across the country? Are we, as we claim, improving standards in the workforce and achieving the integration of services? The report that amendment 81 would require to be produced would focus on precisely those types of questions.”
“Stephen Kerr: I will speak in support of amendments 81 and 87, both of which are in the name of my friend and colleague Brian Whittle. They seek to make modest yet essential additions to the bill. They are amendments that aim to strengthen accountability, embed transparency and—most important—shift our focus from what we spend to what we achieve. Amendment 81 would require the Scottish ministers to prepare and publish, every five years, a detailed report and evaluation of the intended outcomes, not as a bureaucratic exercise but as a practical tool for ensuring that the bill’s aspirations are not just articulated in law but delivered in practice. Far too often, we legislate with the best of intentions, only to leave the impact unmeasured.”
“My concerns and the concerns that were expressed by stakeholders during the committee evidence sessions about the cost of the bill are echoed by the Law Society of Scotland, which has said: “We remain of the view that the impact of the Bill on improving outcomes for the end users of social care services will depend on these details of implementation, which must be fully costed, evaluated and consulted upon to ensure that the Bill’s objectives are achieved without unintended consequences.” In the end, I think that the report that amendment 87 seeks to provide for would ensure that the Government was able to budget appropriately in the future so that the bill’s provisions would be fully funded. I say again that most of the details and data that would be required are already collected. I move amendment 81.”
“Amendment 81 is about providing the element of scrutiny that is needed with such a bill. Turning to amendment 87, I am aware from my meetings with the minister that the financial memorandum has been revised and that she has appeared at the Finance and Public Administration Committee to take questions on it. However, given the significant revisions to the bill, I believe that it is right that the cost of the bill is calculated and published before commencement.”
“However, as the bill establishes the national chief social work adviser—a new position—and the national social work agency—a new body—data has not previously been collected on them. In addition, a number of changes have been made in relation to rights to breaks for carers. Most of the data around carers is already collected via the carers census or is already held by third sector organisations or local authorities. Lastly, the bill seeks to be the legislative vehicle for information sharing and usage between individuals and organisations in the health and social care system to allow for digital integrated health and social care records. The digital health and social care directorate already provides updates on its work, but it is not required to do so by law.”
“Amendment 75 agreed to. Amendments 76 and 77 moved—[Carol Mochan]—and agreed to. Amendment 78 moved—[Mark Ruskell]—and agreed to. The Deputy Presiding Officer: Group 14 is on reports on bill costs and operations. Amendment 81, in the name of Brian Whittle, is grouped with amendment 87. Brian Whittle: Amendment 81 seeks to place a duty on ministers to prepare and publish a report on the outcomes of the bill. Quite frankly, I should not have to say any more than that. However, given the reluctance of the Scottish Government and the significant revisions that the bill has gone through, it is important that we are able to monitor and evaluate how the bill performs on the ground. Much of what I have said must be in the report is already collected.”
“For 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) 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) (Lab) Clark, Katy (West Scotland) (Lab) Coffey, Willie (Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley) (SNP) Cole-Hamilton, Alex (Edinburgh Western) (LD) Constance, Angela (Almond Valley) (SNP) Dey, Graeme (Angus South) (SNP) Don-Innes, Natalie (Renfrewshire North and West) (SNP) Dunbar, Jackie (Aberdeen Donside) (SNP) Duncan-Glancy, Pam (Glasgow) (Lab) Ewing, Annabelle (Cowdenbeath) (SNP) Ewing, Fergus (Inverness and Nairn) (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) Greene, Jamie (West Scotland) (LD) 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) 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) [Proxy vote cast by Rona Mackay] Marra, Michael (North East Scotland) (Lab) Martin, Gillian (Aberdeenshire East) (SNP) Mason, John (Glasgow Shettleston) (Ind) Matheson, Michael (Falkirk West) (SNP) McAllan, Màiri (Clydesdale) (SNP) [Proxy vote cast by Jamie Hepburn] 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) (Alba) Rennie, Willie (North East Fife) (LD) Robertson, Angus (Edinburgh Central) (SNP) Robison, Shona (Dundee City East) (SNP) Roddick, Emma (Highlands and Islands) (SNP) Rowley, Alex (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab) Ruskell, Mark (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Green) Russell, Davy (Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse) (Lab) Slater, Lorna (Lothian) (Green) Smyth, Colin (South Scotland) (Lab) Somerville, Shirley-Anne (Dunfermline) (SNP) Stevenson, Collette (East Kilbride) (SNP) Stewart, Kaukab (Glasgow Kelvin) (SNP) Stewart, Kevin (Aberdeen Central) (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) Wishart, Beatrice (Shetland Islands) (LD) Yousaf, Humza (Glasgow Pollok) (SNP) Against Balfour, Jeremy (Lothian) (Con) 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) Gulhane, Sandesh (Glasgow) (Con) Hamilton, Rachael (Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (Con) Hoy, Craig (South Scotland) (Con) Kerr, Liam (North East Scotland) (Con) Kerr, Stephen (Central Scotland) (Con) Lumsden, Douglas (North East Scotland) (Con) McCall, Roz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Mundell, Oliver (Dumfriesshire) (Con) Simpson, Graham (Central Scotland) (Con) Smith, Liz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Stewart, Alexander (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Webber, Sue (Lothian) (Con) White, Tess (North East Scotland) (Con) Whittle, Brian (South Scotland) (Con) The Deputy Presiding Officer: The result of the division is: For 91, Against 26, Abstentions 0.”
“Amendment 74 agreed to. Amendment 75 moved—[Katy Clark]. The Deputy Presiding Officer: The question is, that amendment 75 be agreed to. Are we agreed? Members: No. 17:30 The Deputy Presiding Officer: There will be a division. The vote is now closed. Alexander Stewart: On a point of order, Presiding Officer, I am still having difficulty connecting. I would have voted no. The Deputy Presiding Officer: Thank you, Mr Stewart. I will ensure that that is recorded.”
“For 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) 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) (Lab) Clark, Katy (West Scotland) (Lab) Coffey, Willie (Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley) (SNP) Cole-Hamilton, Alex (Edinburgh Western) (LD) Constance, Angela (Almond Valley) (SNP) Dey, Graeme (Angus South) (SNP) Don-Innes, Natalie (Renfrewshire North and West) (SNP) Dunbar, Jackie (Aberdeen Donside) (SNP) Duncan-Glancy, Pam (Glasgow) (Lab) Ewing, Annabelle (Cowdenbeath) (SNP) Ewing, Fergus (Inverness and Nairn) (SNP) Fairlie, Jim (Perthshire South and Kinross-shire) (SNP) FitzPatrick, Joe (Dundee City West) (SNP) Forbes, Kate (Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch) (SNP) Fraser, Murdo (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) 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) Greene, Jamie (West Scotland) (LD) 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) 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) [Proxy vote cast by Rona Mackay] Marra, Michael (North East Scotland) (Lab) Martin, Gillian (Aberdeenshire East) (SNP) Mason, John (Glasgow Shettleston) (Ind) Matheson, Michael (Falkirk West) (SNP) McAllan, Màiri (Clydesdale) (SNP) [Proxy vote cast by Jamie Hepburn] 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) (Alba) Rennie, Willie (North East Fife) (LD) Robertson, Angus (Edinburgh Central) (SNP) Robison, Shona (Dundee City East) (SNP) Roddick, Emma (Highlands and Islands) (SNP) Rowley, Alex (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab) Ruskell, Mark (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Green) Russell, Davy (Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse) (Lab) Slater, Lorna (Lothian) (Green) Smyth, Colin (South Scotland) (Lab) Somerville, Shirley-Anne (Dunfermline) (SNP) Stevenson, Collette (East Kilbride) (SNP) Stewart, Kaukab (Glasgow Kelvin) (SNP) Stewart, Kevin (Aberdeen Central) (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) Wishart, Beatrice (Shetland Islands) (LD) Yousaf, Humza (Glasgow Pollok) (SNP) Against Balfour, Jeremy (Lothian) (Con) 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) Gallacher, Meghan (Central Scotland) (Con) Golden, Maurice (North East Scotland) (Con) Gosal, Pam (West Scotland) (Con) Gulhane, Sandesh (Glasgow) (Con) Hamilton, Rachael (Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (Con) Hoy, Craig (South Scotland) (Con) Kerr, Liam (North East Scotland) (Con) Kerr, Stephen (Central Scotland) (Con) Lumsden, Douglas (North East Scotland) (Con) McCall, Roz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Mundell, Oliver (Dumfriesshire) (Con) Simpson, Graham (Central Scotland) (Con) Smith, Liz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Stewart, Alexander (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Webber, Sue (Lothian) (Con) White, Tess (North East Scotland) (Con) Whittle, Brian (South Scotland) (Con) The Deputy Presiding Officer: The result of the division is: For 92, Against 25, Abstentions 0.”
“On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I would have voted no. The Deputy Presiding Officer: Thank you, Ms White. I will ensure that that is recorded. Bill Kidd: On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I got a connection error. I would have voted yes. The Deputy Presiding Officer: Thank you, Mr Kidd. I will ensure that that is recorded.”
“Angela Constance: The Scottish Government is taking action now, and that action is focused on ensuring that, come the issuance of guidance from the EHRC—which is, after all, the regulator—we are in a state of readiness to progress matters. That applies to the Government and to”
“Police Scotland’s review on the recording of sex and gender is on-going. However, that is not an excuse to kick the can down the road. The force provided assurances to the Scottish Police Authority that the timeline for review does not preclude any immediate improvements that have been identified and are required to internal practice or policy from being made. That is in stark contrast to what was said at the meeting that the Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Home Affairs held with the chief constable on 30 April, in which she emphasised that Police Scotland must await EHRC guidance on the Supreme Court ruling. Will the cabinet secretary’s Government get off the fence and finally issue an urgent directive to public bodies to comply with the law and put an end to this mess?”
“David Dunbar Buick, the Arbroath-born plumber, became an icon in the United States after founding the Buick Motor Company. Along with Thomas Glover, those individuals were self-starters, adventurers and visionaries, and they are testament to the incredible spirit of the north-east. Arigato. 12:59”
“Aberdeenshire councillor, Wendy Agnew, working with local MP Andrew Bowie, spearheaded the project and helped to see it through over a four-year period. It has been enchanting residents and visitors ever since. Wendy thanks the consul general and the whole of Japan for what she said is a very generous gift to Stonehaven. On behalf of the community, she would like to invite the Japanese consul general to place a plaque in the garden when the blossoms are out in spring next year. As we underline the importance of Thomas Blake Glover, we can also take the opportunity to think about many Scots who left Britain to start inspiring adventures on the other side of the world. The Davidson family from Aberlemno, near Brechin, moved to Wisconsin in the USA and, with Englishman Bill Harley, became the founders of the Harley-Davidson Motor Company.”
“In 2021, pupils from Mill O’Forest, Arduthie and Dunnottar primary schools worked with the Stonehaven sea cadets and the Stonehaven Horizon group to plant 120 cherry blossom trees in Mineralwell park. The garden was dedicated to the memory of Glover and is a living testament to his ingenuity and legacy. As part of the Sakura cherry tree project, the garden has joined more than 1,000 parks, gardens and schools across the United Kingdom in marking 150 years of Japan-United Kingdom friendship and the continued co-operation between our two nations. The project was launched by the Japanese former Prime Minister, Shinzō Abe, and the UK Conservative former Prime Minister, Theresa May, in 2021. There are always strong community champions behind such brilliant initiatives.”
“Konnichiwa. I thank Karen Adam for securing the time for today’s members’ business debate. As we have heard, Thomas Glover was a truly remarkable man with roots that run deep in the north-east of Scotland. A strategist and an industrialist, he is lauded for his role, as we have heard, in establishing the Mitsubishi Corporation, a powerhouse of the Japanese industrial revolution. Known as the Scottish samurai, Glover is venerated in Japan for his key contribution to industrialisation and modernisation, and that is why he was awarded the order of the rising sun, an extraordinary accolade for a man who hailed from the Broch. As we have heard, Glover was born in Fraserburgh in 1838 on Commerce Street and educated in Aberdeen. Stonehaven, too, has a strong link to the man known as the Scottish samurai.”
“At the current glacial rate of investment, it would take the SNP Government until 2083 to spend the so- called just transition fund. The cabinet secretary will be 114 years old, and the minister will be 112 years old. Against that background, could the minister outline how the SNP Government will meet the remaining commitment for the fund in the next session of the Parliament? Alasdair Allan: It would be ungallant to try to work out what the member’s age would be in that scenario, were I to accept the premise of the question, but I do not accept the scenario or the premise. The commitment of up to £500 million over this period has been given. Our track record in providing other investment, such as the £125 million for Aberdeen and that area, shows that our commitment is real.”
“That is why, as I committed to do on my visit in February, we are doing everything possible to support the health board. That process starts with escalation to stage 4.”
“NHS Grampian is part of the same funding arrangements as the rest of the health boards across Scotland and has a similar level of funding to them through the NHS Scotland resource allocation committee. I recognise that there are financial challenges, which is why we have escalated NHS Grampian through the framework and why we are supporting it with the whole-system diagnostic provided by KPMG to look at options for providing better financial stability. We have taken the step of escalating NHS Grampian to stage 4 because of the concerns about performance, ambulance turnaround times and unscheduled care pathways, to which Tess White referred, and because we were not convinced that a plan was in place that would be sufficient to improve that situation or to improve the financial position.”
“The health board has a history of chronic underfunding, persistent understaffing, the lowest bed base in Scotland per head of population and a national treatment centre on ice. There are massive cuts to health and social care partnership budgets for caring for the elderly and vulnerable. General practitioner practices are folding and major injuries units are on restricted hours. The Scottish Conservatives have repeatedly warned the SNP Government about this perfect storm. With underfunding of a quarter of a billion pounds, how can NHS Grampian be expected to pay back a Government loan? What is the trigger point for escalation to stage 5? Neil Gray: I do not accept the characterisation that Tess White has set out.”
“I thank the cabinet secretary for advance sight of his statement. Neil Gray visited Aberdeen royal infirmary in February this year. He promised that he would do everything that he could to improve the situation there. However, we have only to look at this week’s ambulance waiting times to see that it is getting worse. With lives at stake, it does not give a single person here any pleasure at all to point out that the Scottish National Party has failed NHS Grampian and its patients. The reasons for such a dire performance and stage 4 escalation are not the junior doctors, nurses, paramedics and porters—they are trying their absolute level best. No, NHS Grampian is in such trouble because it has been hollowed out by successive SNP Governments.”
“The bill that we are debating and voting on today is not the one that existed at the start of the process. The Scottish Legal Complaints Commission’s consumer panel is clear that the bill will make the current regulatory landscape even more complex and difficult to understand. We had an opportunity to overhaul that landscape, but the bill simply tinkers around the edges of a byzantine system. Secondly, there has been considerable debate on who should regulate the legal profession. The Roberton review concluded that there should be a single independent regulator and a single streamlined complaints process. I note that, in its stage 3 briefing on the bill, Consumer Scotland echoed that call.”
“There are two key issues. The first is that the bill fails to consolidate the existing legislative landscape into a single act, which the Law Society of Scotland called for in order to simplify that fragmentation. At stage 2, the bill was the most heavily amended in the Scottish Parliament’s lifetime. Siobhian Brown: Does Ms White appreciate the history of the bill and how matters have progressed since 2010? If the bill is not passed today, we will go back to scratch and there will be no reform of the legal profession. Tess White: When the bill process started, there was an unacceptable situation, which the legal profession reported directly to Scottish ministers. It was absolutely absurd and threatened the independence of the judiciary.”
“I am a member of the Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee, which has been hearing about huge issues with access to justice. The whole system is frustrating for regulatory bodies, but it is often the consumer who bears the brunt of its failings. The committee has heard that, sometimes, consumers have to try 100 solicitors before they find one who will act on their behalf. The system is crying out for modernisation. Scottish Conservatives believe that the bill truly represents a missed opportunity, which is why we will vote against it at decision time. In the brief time that is allocated to me, I want to explain our reasoning carefully, because I understand that the legal profession has expressed strong feelings on the subject. However, it is vital that the consumer's voice is heard during the process.”
“I thank all the individuals and organisations who have supported and contributed to the parliamentary passage of the Regulation of Legal Services (Scotland) Bill. I also thank the minister, who engaged constructively with members ahead of stage 3. I appreciate that, for many stakeholders, the bill is long overdue, and I hope that my amendment 137, which secures a review of the act, will reduce the timescales for change in the future. It is clear that the current system, which covers entry to the profession, professional practice, complaints and financial compliance, is not fit for purpose. Much of the relevant legislation is more than 40 years old, but the legal services market is constantly evolving. However, the corresponding regulatory regime is clunky and inflexible.”
“I am confident that the Regulation of Legal Services (Scotland) Bill can deliver a robust regulatory framework that serves both the interests of the legal profession and the people of Scotland, and I urge all members to support it. I move, That the Parliament agrees that the Regulation of Legal Services (Scotland) Bill be passed. 17:28”
“We have taken great care to ensure that the regulatory framework that the bill provides is proportionate, balanced and sensitive to the autonomy of the legal profession while ensuring that the public interest remains at the heart of the regulatory process. This bill is a vital piece of legislation that has the potential to reshape the legal services landscape in Scotland, which I am sure we all welcome. Ultimately, the bill is about improving the everyday experience of people who need legal help and ensuring that legal services are delivered in a way that is fair, equitable and accessible for all. It is about empowering both consumers and professionals to build a stronger, more resilient legal system that reflects the values of our society and meets the expectations of our citizens.”
“From individuals who are seeking advice in family law matters to businesses that are navigating complex commercial disputes, the demand for accessible, efficient and accountable legal services is growing. However, as we know, the landscape of legal services has changed dramatically over the past decade, and that change has accelerated in recent years. The rise of technology, the increase in diverse legal needs, and the challenges that consumers face have highlighted the need for reform. The bill is a direct response to those challenges and a recognition that, although our legal services sector is one of the best in the world, it is not without areas for improvement. Throughout the consultation process, many views were expressed on the idea of having a single independent regulator.”
“Finally, the bill will increase access to justice, as it will introduce provisions to widen access to legal services. It will enable innovative service delivery models, including alternative business structures. This change will help to ensure that legal services are available in a way that meets the needs of a modern, diverse society. The bill also removes restrictions on third sector bodies, to allow them to employ solicitors and represent some of the most vulnerable in society. Let me also reflect on the broader context within which this legislation has emerged. Scotland’s legal sector plays an integral role in maintaining the rule of law and upholding justice.”
“The bill aims to remedy that by establishing clearer processes for consumers to seek redress and hold legal providers accountable. The bill also strengthens the consumer voice by providing the consumer panel with a robust footing and a wider remit. The bill will also ensure improved oversight and accountability. As the ultimate regulator of Scotland’s legal sector, the Lord President is empowered by the bill to oversee and improve the functions of legal services. For example, I lodged amendments at stage 2 in order to transfer to the Lord President the ability to review a regulator’s performance. I have also lodged amendments that would require the Lord President’s consent to be gained before any changes may be made to the regulatory category of a regulator.”
“However, I hope that, as we move forward today, we have achieved that. The framework delivered by the bill aims to balance the interests of stakeholders—who, although they have differing views, all support this bill—and ensure that Scotland’s legal sector remains trusted, transparent and effective in meeting the needs of those that it serves. I will briefly remind members of the bill’s key provisions. It will provide a more consumer- focused approach by introducing a more flexible and consumer-focused regulatory structure that ensures that individuals who seek legal services receive high standards of service and clarity on their redress options. For too long, consumers of legal services have struggled to understand the complexities of the complaints system.”
“There is huge concern that consumers have been forgotten in the bill. What is your view on that? Siobhian Brown: I know that Tess White has become a member of the committee only recently. Throughout the bill’s passage, it has been incredibly difficult to find a balance between the legal profession and the consumer side, starting from day 1, when it was suggested—before my time as minister in charge of the bill—that there be an independent regulator, and we decided not to pursue that. We have engaged constructively with the legal profession, and—as Tess White will know—on some of the amendments that have been considered today, to strengthen the consumer side. I am not going to say that the process has been easy—it has been difficult to get the bill through and find that balance.”
“15:58 On resuming— The Deputy Presiding Officer: We will proceed with the division on amendment 117, in the name of Paul O’Kane, which will be a one-minute division. Members should cast their votes now. The vote is closed.”
“Although I intend still to move forward in that regard, I understand and respect what the minister said about her revision to the explanatory notes and her willingness to accept the Law Society’s wording on the issue, which will go some way to finding the compromise that we are looking for. However, given the significant concerns that have been raised by the Law Society in its correspondence, I will press amendment 117. The Deputy Presiding Officer: The question is, that amendment 117 be agreed to. Are we agreed? Members: No. The Deputy Presiding Officer: There will be a division. As this is the first division of the stage, I suspend the meeting for five minutes. 15:50 Meeting suspended.”
“My questions have been asked, Presiding Officer. The Deputy Presiding Officer: In that case, I call Paul O’Kane to wind up and press or withdraw amendment 117. Paul O’Kane: The minister discussed the Law Society’s view and the exchange of letters that happened yesterday. She mentioned unintended consequences a number of times, but it is not clear from my discussions with the Law Society what those would be. It is concerned that it does not have clarity on what the minister has referred to. Indeed, it is keen that we take what I have described as a belt-and-braces approach by putting the issue at the forefront of the bill.”
“It also means listening to communities and pursuing alternatives to monster pylons and huge substations. I urge my SNP and Labour colleagues to see sense before it is too late. 17:14”
“To rub salt into the wound, the SNP and Labour have been pushing to muzzle the voices of communities by removing the right to a public inquiry. Countries such as the Netherlands and Germany are undergrounding cables to great effect and Denmark is developing energy islands to act as an offshore energy base. We undergrounded the pipes in the 1970s—why can we not do it again? The Scottish Conservatives’ commonsense plans balance the needs of today and those of tomorrow. We recognise that we will need to use our oil and gas for years to come. We know that Scotland’s oil and gas workers and renewables ambitions can go hand in hand. That means scrapping the ban on new oil and gas production and embracing innovation in order to cut emissions while preserving jobs.”
“Their mental health is already suffering and they are fearing the health impacts, lost livelihoods and plummeting property values from the explosion of that new energy infrastructure. The bottom has dropped out of their world. Farmers are ringing alarm bells over serious safety concerns about overhead lines and farming machinery. Audrey Nicoll: Will the member give way? Tess White: I am sorry, but I have only four minutes. They are, rightly, worried about the loss of agricultural productivity and the impact on their businesses, the health and safety of their animals, the crop yield and overall food security. It is environmental vandalism, and this is just the start. It cannot be the vision of a so-called just transition.”
“Even its chairman, Juergen Maier, said that it would take 20 years to deliver the 1,000 jobs that have been promised. That is an utter sham. SNP ministers tout a clean energy future, but they will not even define what “clean” means, scaring off the investment that we need for an affordable transition. The SNP Government ploughed ahead with a ScotWind gold rush, selling off vast swathes of the sea bed on the cheap with no real plan for grid infrastructure. Meanwhile, Scottish and Southern Electricity Networks wants to puncture our prime agricultural farmland and rural landscapes with monster pylons up to 230 feet tall, leaving residents feeling betrayed and disenfranchised.”
“I speak today on behalf of my constituents who rely on the energy sector for their livelihoods. The job losses at Harbour Energy are the tip of the iceberg. Why? Because the SNP and Labour are directly harming the industry with a presumption against new oil and gas exploration in the North Sea and a punitive fiscal environment. Hostile left- wing politicians are presiding over the industrial decline of Scotland’s oil and gas sector. Russell Borthwick of Aberdeen and Grampian Chamber of Commerce is right: if the SNP Scottish Government and Labour UK Government do not change course, recent lay-offs will be “just a tiny fraction of what’s to come”. The so-called just transition risks becoming a jobless transition. It will not be fixed by gimmicks such as Great British Energy.”
“To ask the Scottish Government whether it will undertake a review of Historic Environment Scotland before the end of the current parliamentary session. (S6O-04643)”
“To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to the announcement that NHS Grampian has been escalated to stage 4 of NHS Scotland’s national performance framework for finance, leadership and governance. (S6T-02523)”
“After that rah-rah by the Scottish Government minister. To ask the Scottish Government— The Presiding Officer: Ms White, I have called you to ask question 2 of topical questions, and I would you ask you to restrict yourself to that, thank you. NHS Grampian 2.”
“Shirley-Anne Somerville: I recognise the work that was undertaken to produce the independent report—the Sullivan review. I have already pointed to the work of the office of the chief statistician and the wider UK work that is being undertaken. On particularly sensitive subjects such as this, I welcome the fact that, across the UK, statisticians are looking at the issue exceptionally seriously and are continuing with that work as we speak. It is important that we allow those statisticians to carry on with that sensitive work. The Presiding Officer: We are only halfway through the questions, and time is moving on, so I would be grateful for concise questions and responses. School Examination Season Stress (Support for Parents, Carers and Pupils) 5.”
“As we have heard before, biological sex has been erased in data collection across our public institutions. However, this is not just about integrity of statistics—it is about safety. Recommendation 12 of the Sullivan review called for the national health service to stop allowing people to change their gender marker—especially children, as the review said that that poses a “serious safeguarding risk”. Shockingly, the Scottish National Party Government has already confirmed in writing that there are no plans to stop that practice. Will the cabinet secretary accept that the Government must now hit the brakes and commit to working with the Minister for Public Health and Women’s Health to urgently implement that recommendation?”
“Surely resourcing NHS Tayside is the best outcome, with a focus on recruitment and retention rather than the erosion of healthcare. Finally, if even one tragedy can be averted by having a full local NICU, why take the risk? The Deputy Presiding Officer: I call the minister, Jenni Minto, to respond to the debate. 18:22”