Carol Mochan
Scottish Labour · Scotland
“I think that we could take a different approach in that area. A number of older people have been convicted of terrible crimes, but their risk to the general population is much lower than it used to be because of their age and circumstances.”
“Industrial conditions such as those that my constituents were exposed to show what the approach of big business and the insurance giants has been.”
“I am interested in the point about upstream measures, and I am particularly interested in women, because we know that they should not always enter the criminal justice system and prisons in particular. Perhaps there is more that the cabinet secretary could do in that area, because there is a lot of research on it.”
“Those who were members during the previous session of Parliament will know not only that Richard Leonard was a passionate and committed campaigner but that his speeches were also very passionate—as passionate as his beliefs. I thank him for his time in the Parliament, for his guidance and for his commitment to economic justice.”
“I support the Cape must pay campaign, which calls on the former asbestos manufacturer Cape plc, now Altrad, to donate £10 million to mesothelioma research. As my colleague Jackie Baillie said, that is a small amount to expect. Such companies and the state owe a great deal to individuals, families and communities.”
“For a number of years, I was a director of Turning Point Scotland, which is Scotland’s biggest social welfare charity, although I am not any more. Fifteen years ago, we commenced an initiative called housing first, which is primarily a way of dealing with homelessness.”
The complete record
Every one of 657 lines we hold for Carol Mochan, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 4 of 14.
“Jenni Minto: I agree that the evidence that we heard yesterday from the Patient Safety Commissioner was very powerful. Delivering safe and effective care for maternity service users is of utmost importance to the Scottish Government. In previous answers, I have laid out that the cabinet secretary regularly meets the Patient Safety Commissioner, who is a key member of the maternity and neonatal task force, which I chair. I will ensure that these questions, which are now all on the public record, are shared directly with the commissioner, and we will respond to them clearly.”
“The Patient Safety Commissioner made it clear that those with lived experience are not being listened to and that the health board has failed to reassure and support patients. Patient safety should be our number 1 priority. Where is the safety in turning away women in early labour to drive 70 miles home or in women leaving maternity services with post-traumatic stress disorder? Women are telling us that lives are at risk and that something needs to change. The Patient Safety Commissioner raised those concerns in a meeting of a committee of this Parliament. In the light of the community’s real concerns and the important evidence that the commissioner provided in the Parliament, what leadership will the minister show to ensure that services are made safe? Women need action, not more reports.”
“That is why we are setting up the co- chaired independent oversight group to provide that assurance to the public.”
“I find myself having to ask the same question as other members. Families deserve to know this: has every ward and every area been audited and validated as safe to be used today? Neil Gray: As I have said, what has been disclosed before the inquiry is a matter of public record. I will not second guess the conclusions of the inquiry. Improvements to the ventilation systems have been made where practicable, and the inquiry’s experts have given evidence that governance of the water and ventilation systems is now optimal. Robust air testing, reporting mechanisms, cleaning regimes and infection management are in place. Despite my assurances that the hospital is safe—on which I am clear—I am seeking to give additional assurance to Parliament, Mr Sarwar and all colleagues as to the current safety of the hospital.”
“Siobhian Brown: I am sorry, but we did not have the official support for a shadow bill team on this particular bill. The committee’s report clearly outlines the differing perspectives on the bill and offers a clear route map that should, I agree, lead to informed and deliverable next steps. Those next steps need to reflect and respond to how commercial sexual exploitation is taking place now, in 2026, and how the challenges of online activity— Ruth Maguire: On online activity, will the minister give way?”
“Those who provided evidence to the committee, and indeed the committee itself, have pointed to concerns that some women who are involved in prostitution say that their safety would be at risk. Without the necessary time to consult and to develop proposals to ensure their safety, we cannot support the bill as drafted. [Interruption.] The committee’s report clearly outlines the differing— Michelle Thomson: Will the minister take an intervention? Siobhian Brown: I will. Michelle Thomson: I appreciate the minister taking an intervention. The Government has provided a shadow bill team to assist with other legislation on which it is neutral. Given that the principle behind the bill is a long-standing Scottish National Party policy, why has it not done so in this case?”
“I appreciate the minister taking an intervention. You say how important this is and that you think that it could be a bill that we could work with. Are there any amendments that would enable us to move forward with the bill? The Deputy Presiding Officer: Always speak through the chair, please. Siobhian Brown: I will come to that. I do not believe that we can move forward with it, as we have only six weeks left. One of the issues is support. [Interruption.] There is no detail on support in the bill, and we would like to consult, especially with women who are currently in prostitution, on what support they would like. We would not have time to do that in the next couple of weeks, let alone months.”
“Providing full transparency over this matter is the least that the Scottish Government can do for those whistleblowers and families, and it is the least that the patients, families and staff deserve. 15:55”
“I urge the Government to authorise the immediate and full disclosure and preservation of communications that relate to the contaminated water and inadequate ventilation systems and the premature opening of the hospital, as well as any further communications that relate to the issues that we are discussing. By not publishing those documents, we would risk abandoning transparency, diminishing the public’s trust and repeating the same mistakes. There were problems with the hospital from the very beginning. Long waiting times, staff vacancies and poor infrastructure. The SNP cannot deny its incompetence in overseeing the development and opening of a hospital that would go on to have so many problems. If the Scottish Government has nothing to hide, it should prove it.”
“Families were denied the truth about the role of the hospital in causing the infections and deaths of patients. The Scottish Government is refusing to take any accountability for the errors that were made under its watch. Accountability is what we must discuss, and the Scottish Government was accountable for what happened in our NHS. I cannot begin to imagine the pain and trauma that those who are affected by the scandal have faced; they are brave to have spoken out. To lose a child to an avoidable death or to have them suffer a severe infection is one thing, but to be denied the truth about the true cause of their death or infection is quite another. Patients and families are angry, and they should be. What they seek now is truth and justice, and that is what they deserve.”
“All those who were involved in decision making, be that operational or political, must be held to account—that is why we are discussing the issue in this debate. The culture of secrecy and cover-up must come to an end. Thirdly, NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde failed to accept that the water and ventilation systems could be the cause of infections. It failed to admit serious errors in judgment, and it failed to take accountability. In doing so, it prevented transparency and withheld the truth from patients and families. Staff were neglected, families were ignored, and the public were denied the truth. We are debating this issue today because the Queen Elizabeth university hospital was allowed to open before it should have. We must question that.”
“Given that the Government says that it was unaware of the issues in its brand-new super- hospital, it is clear that it failed to provide the oversight and effective leadership that was required. Secondly, proper procedure failed and the hospital was opened before it was ready. The failure to carry out proper checks resulted in the premature opening of a facility that was not fit for purpose. Evidence to the inquiry shows that the risk of waterborne infection was foreseeable and that it had been raised but was not acted upon. That was a serious error in judgment. The pressure to open the hospital on time and within budget, whether that came from within the hospital or above, must be heavily scrutinised. It is our job in the Parliament to scrutinise those issues.”
“The public inquiry heard first-hand accounts of management attempts to silence, threaten and belittle staff, and it is clear that whistleblowing procedures were not followed. The growing culture of ignoring staff and refusing to act on their concerns raises serious questions about management structures in and the leadership of our NHS. It also raises concern about this SNP Government’s oversight of our most valuable public asset. Problems with water systems were identified in 2015 and again in 2017, but the Scottish Government claims that it was first made aware of them in March 2018. However, as my colleague Anas Sarwar said, there are serious questions about whether that is true. We need some truth.”
“That is not only because the contamination of the hospital’s water and ventilation system caused serious infection in child cancer patients and four deaths, but because of the subsequent secrecy, covering up and silencing of staff who tried to expose the truth. The cabinet secretary is shying away from answering questions that relate to the here and now. Families were gaslit, dismissed and denied the truth. We do not want that to happen again. There are many failings that we can discuss in this debate—in leadership, accountability and transparency. First, the board failed to listen to the families, doctors and whistleblowers who raised concerns from the beginning about problems with the water and ventilation system.”
“Public trust in governance and decision making, whether at the local or national level, is crucial for our institutions and democracy. Transparency and accountability are equally as important. We in the Parliament would all agree that people who work in public service must strive to ensure that those values are upheld. In 2015, the Queen Elizabeth university hospital campus opened its doors for the first time. It was celebrated as a super-hospital and welcomed as one of the most advanced healthcare facilities in the world, yet, 10 years later, this flagship hospital faces a serious scandal.”
“I move amendment S6M-20561.3, to insert at end: “; acknowledges that recent revelations surrounding the Queen Elizabeth University Hospital will have been distressing for patients, their families and staff; understands that this could create uncertainty and fear regarding the safety of Scotland’s hospitals and negatively impact staff morale; recognises that patient privacy has to be given the greatest consideration in the publication of any materials, and calls for the Scottish Government to outline how it will urgently restore confidence into the services delivered by NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde.” 15:43”
“The board has since clarified that there was internal pressure, but that begs the question of how we have reached the point that a health board feels so under pressure to deliver that it sacrifices patient safety for the sake of remaining on budget. What series of decisions were taken, and how can we prevent anything like that ever happening again? The on-going inquiries should be allowed to conclude in their own time, and any conclusions need to be acted on quickly and comprehensively. However, before those recommendations are available, we need to ensure that anyone attending the hospital can be fully confident that they are safe. The Scottish Government and the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care must lead the way on that.”
“Although NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde has accepted that its previous criticisms of the whistleblowers were neither helpful nor fair, it is clear that the whistleblowing system failed, and that will not be conducive to others coming forward with concerns in the future. The health board has a lot of work to do to assure staff that whistleblowers will be protected and, most importantly, taken seriously. Much has been made of the fact that NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde has admitted that pressure was applied to open the hospital on time and on budget, and it is now clear that the hospital opened too early.”
“Likewise, clinical staff deserve to know that they are working in a safe environment, so that they can get on with the incredible work they do. Their efforts should not be hampered by working in a building that threatens their patients’ safety. Frankly, they should not have to worry about that. It is not their job to do so, and they have been failed too. Whistleblowing staff have also been let down. One microbiologist said that she felt discouraged from speaking up at infection control meetings. Another senior doctor said that she was advised by a senior colleague to “pipe down” or she would find things hard professionally. She has previously said that she had been flagging concerns about the building since 2014 and was advised not to put anything in writing. Staff need to know that, when they raise concerns, they will be listened to.”
“I thank the member for her speech and for mentioning the families in the way that she has. It is much appreciated. Given what the member is saying, will she support our motion, in order to ensure that we get immediate disclosure of the information that we need? Gillian Mackay: I confirm that we will support the motion at decision time. Although extensive remedial work has been done to the building, people will have been frightened and worried by the series of headlines about infections. It is up to both NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde and the Scottish Government to reassure people that, when they are treated for a serious illness such as cancer, they will be safe. The poor communication between the health board and patients and their families has been a stand-out revelation during the inquiry.”
“That can only be a good thing, which is why Scottish Labour will support the bill at decision time. 14:53”
“Scottish Labour welcomes the ambition of the bill and the clear structure, guidance and accountability mechanisms that it would give to public bodies and other organisations. The fact that it complements the national performance framework should be welcomed, and the Government should view the bill as something that strengthens existing ambitions instead of something that is unnecessary. The world has entered precarious times, with some world leaders denouncing the UN’s sustainable development goals. Setting out a clear framework that embeds the principles of sustainability and wellbeing into the heart of public bodies’ decision making can only help to ensure that poverty and inequality, the climate and the wellbeing of future generations are consistently at the forefront of decision making instead of being an afterthought.”
“The Scottish Government has dismissed the bill, because it believes that its aims can already be achieved in the current policy landscape and that additional legislation would be unnecessary. However, despite what the minister said in his speech today, the Scottish Government has been promising a reformed and strengthened national performance framework for years. I believe that those promises were first made back in 2021, but we have yet to see them come to fruition. Instead, we are left with an outdated structure and legislation that is not delivering. The current approach is clearly not working— that is our position—and the committee’s report found that the proposed legislation is not incompatible with any of the planned reforms to the national performance framework, yet the Government still will not support the bill.”
“It is clear that, too often, short-term priorities drive decision making over long-term sustainability. The committee’s evidence sessions supported the value of creating statutory definitions and assisting public bodies to meet their wellbeing and sustainable development obligations. Evidence to the committee overwhelmingly supported the aims and ambitions of the bill. Indeed, organisations such as Oxfam have long backed calls for the bill and see it as a way of enhancing the national outcomes with decision making and delivery. They remain sceptical about whether non-legislative approaches will be sufficient to achieve sustainable development and wellbeing goals.”
“As other members have done, I thank my colleague Sarah Boyack for her ambition in and commitment to introducing the bill. A great deal of work has gone into the bill, and I commend her for her on- going dedication to protecting the environment, tackling poverty and promoting collective wellbeing. Scottish Labour agrees with the general principles of the bill and will support it at stage 1. The integration into legislation of definitions of “wellbeing” and “sustainable development” will not only improve policy coherence and guidance for public bodies but provide structure and accountability that will contribute to Scotland’s progress towards achieving the United Nations sustainable development goals. More must be done to further embed wellbeing and sustainable development principles into public bodies’ decision making.”
“On the question about joined-up support, as we consider how the ask and act duties will be implemented, the work of occupational therapists and others will be critical. They are one of the cornerstone touch points at which people come into contact with our systems, and the ask and act duties are about understanding the contacts that are made with people and using them better to recognise housing precarity and the risk of homelessness, so that we act as early as possible to avoid it.”
“If we truly hope to co-ordinate housing support services with wider public services, including health services, we must recognise the vital role that occupational therapists play in assessing housing needs. However, that workforce faces growing demand, a lack of financial stability and very high vacancy rates. What is the Government doing to improve OT numbers across Scotland? Does it recognise that additional recruitment will improve not only health outcomes but the links with housing support for constituents? Màiri McAllan: I absolutely echo the importance of occupational health as part of determining somebody’s needs and advocating for them. As MSPs, we all know how often that issue crosses our desks, and I am equally conscious of that in my role as Cabinet Secretary for Housing.”
“The budget that is currently before the Parliament proposes an additional £7 million of investment specifically for neurodevelopmental support services. I encourage members to engage constructively with the budget process so that we can pass that budget and get that money into the system. The Deputy Presiding Officer: I ask members to be briefer, please.”
“In my south Scotland region, people in the NHS Ayrshire and Arran health board area are stuck waiting too long for ADHD and autistic spectrum disorder assessments. Although my constituents can often access support without the need for formal diagnosis, continued funding cuts for integration joint boards and the long-term decline of council budgets are placing all services under immense pressure. Does the minister recognise that such cuts only limit the amount of support that can be provided through local services? Does the Government have any plans to give people living with autism and ADHD something to be positive about, rather than cuts? Tom Arthur: I recognise the issues that Carol Mochan has raised. When I announced the establishment of the cross-sector task force, it was aligned with £500,000 of additional investment in this year.”
“However, I make the point that the journey to that stage was by no means easy. Their mum had to fight hard for treatment—she knew that it was readily available in other parts of the UK and in Europe. Her experience was that the guidelines and best practice were not easy to navigate or consistent for people and families. Scottish patients appear to be getting treated differently, and mums who have had the kind of positive experience that I just described want other families to get that benefit. That experience is probably not unique, and it is an important example of why we have to hear from the minister whether she can look into the matter and ensure that patients in Scotland receive more equitable treatment. 17:32”
“Following successful treatment, their daily protein tolerance increased from 10g to 28g, before increasing to 38g and 39g respectively. Their mum had to talk to the medics about increasing that further. I will try to give members some perspective on what grams of protein actually mean. When the boys were on 38g and 39g of protein, they could eat only some vegan diets, and dairy-free and gluten-free products, and they still took about 150 tablets a day. Now, they have managed to increase their tolerance, by using the drug, to 68g and 72g of protein respectively. That has given them real freedom, and they are now on only 36 tablets a day. It is truly remarkable to hear about treatments that make such a difference and about how much people’s lives have changed since the drug was assessed and approved.”
“That experience really gave me a feeling for how one’s family life can be changed by just one event. Having a family member with PKU means that people think about and look at food in a very different way. Their daily timetable changes, and the things that they enjoy change. That is why families are so concerned to ensure that modern treatments are available for their loved ones to use. I will talk about the experiences of a mum who reached out to me ahead of the debate. She has two sons who were diagnosed with PKU as newborns and began receiving sapropterin after it was approved in 2022. I will check the Official Report to ensure that the correct drug is there, spelled correctly, because—as we know—a lot of the medications have similar-sounding names.”
“However, the complexity of the PKU diet—as we have heard—means that people have a really restricted intake of food and quite a different life when it comes to the things that we all take for granted. It is the human element in all this that we are discussing today: what impact does that have on people’s lives? Members will know that, many years ago, I worked as a dietician in the NHS. I have heard other members talk about the role of dieticians, and people who have contacted me have highlighted that important role. During my time as a dietician, I supported a small number of people with PKU and their families. At that time, not only was the dietary regime very restrictive—I remember that—but the amino acid substitute was very difficult to take.”
“I, too, thank Fulton MacGregor for bringing the debate to the chamber, and I welcome the guests in the public gallery. I also thank the people who came to the Parliament—I think that it was last week or the week before—to update us on this important issue. As other members have said, PKU is a rare but treatable inherited disorder that prevents the normal breakdown of the amino acid phenylalanine, which is a natural component of protein. That results in build-up in the blood and the brain. As other members have said, the condition is managed through a specialist diet that avoids foods that are very high in protein, such as meat and dairy. As Fulton MacGregor indicated, however, that is immensely complex. Delays in treatment can cause long-term health problems, which is why early diagnosis is crucial.”
“I recognise the arguments that Claire Baker highlighted—I, too, was at that round table—from people who have cautioned against introducing a stand-alone offence, given the potential unintended consequences. We could look for a quicker alternative approach, but it might not be as effective and might fall short in addressing the core problems. Tackling violence against women and girls must and should always be a priority for the Parliament. In my view, it is absolutely worth exploring the creation of a stand-alone offence, as it could send a message. It is important for Scotland that we see this as our absolute priority. I thank Claire Baker and other members for their contributions. 13:09”
“Capturing and recording that data is important in a medical sense; it is important for research, which will allow us to change the impacts; and it is important at an individual level, too, at the point at which a victim presents at a hospital. Therefore, it is very important that we get the data right, because doing so will help us increase public awareness of the dangers. A strong case can be made that a stand-alone law would improve education and awareness of the effects of strangulation and could help improve the long-term safety and wellbeing of the victims. Underreporting is such an issue, and a stand- alone law might help if people really understood what we were trying to record.”
“I believe that exploring how and where improvements can be made might significantly improve outcomes for victims. If we cannot fully capture the offence, we cannot get improvements. I want to recognise the bold and world-leading action that the Parliament is taking to tackle violence against women and girls. That has been done, because we work on a cross-party basis and listen to each other. I think that that should be put on the record. As non-fatal strangulation is currently recorded under a range of offences, there is an issue with the recording of—and, indeed, the lack of—data. That is an important element; I do not need to explain just how important data is. It is important not only because it allows us to understand the scale of the problem and to increase awareness, as I have said.”
“As we have heard, it can have serious and long-term side effects, including brain damage, organ failure and mental health issues. It has potentially life-threatening consequences and can cause extreme trauma for victims. In her speech, Tess White showed the shocking reality and why we have to highlight it. As the motion highlights, non-fatal strangulation often leaves no visible injuries, but it is a strong predictor of future lethal violence and is becoming increasingly more common, particularly, as we have heard from other contributors, among younger people, who might not fully understand the consequences. Although non-fatal strangulation is prosecuted as a criminal offence in Scotland under the common law of assault, as we have heard, that common-law route does not always work and can fall short of fully capturing the offence.”
“I thank Claire Baker for bringing this important debate to the chamber, and I thank all those who have contributed so far. I associate myself with the remarks that everybody has made about the importance of cross-party working, particularly in this area, and of the quality of the research in this area. That research might be limited, but its quality is so important. Today’s motion asks the Parliament to recognise and consider the benefits of creating a stand-alone offence for non-fatal strangulation, which, in my view, could see significant improvements to public awareness, data collection, and victim safety and support. Non-fatal strangulation is a severe form of domestic abuse that is predominantly carried out by men against women.”
“Earlier this week, reports revealed that the A and E department at Crosshouse hospital in NHS Ayrshire and Arran exceeded capacity by 50 per cent this December. Staff had no choice but to care for and treat patients in corridors. To be clear, this is not just a winter issue—Crosshouse A and E exceeded capacity during seven months of last year. What progress has been made in capturing data on corridor care at both a national and local level, so that we might finally understand the true scale of that risk to staff and patients?”
“I welcome the fact that people in Scotland are living longer, but they are not always living in good health for longer. In East Ayrshire in my South Scotland region, the total burden of disease is estimated to have increased by 2.6 per cent between 2016 and 2019. Will the Government provide an update on the targeted work that it is doing to promote healthy living across Scotland, particularly in our more deprived communities? Tom Arthur: That is a really important point. Of course, we are concerned not just with life expectancy, but with healthy life expectancy, and that is a key component of our population health framework. I assure Carol Mochan and the whole Parliament that that is a priority for the Government. Domestic Abuse (Healthcare Professionals) 3.”
“When I worked in the health service, much of my experience involved working with people experiencing degenerative neurological conditions. In that role, I understood the power of language, the need for people to be understood and how speech, language and communication are the cornerstone of many of our interactions as human beings. Language and communication are crucial because they are the foundation of learning, they are key to relationships and relationship building and they help us to understand the world around us, particularly the shared world. They enable us to share ideas, build connections, develop empathy and succeed in our lives, whether that is in education, at work or in our social lives.”
“They want the condition to be understood, for parliamentarians to find ways to encourage understanding and patience, as Emma Harper said, and to support training in our businesses, the public sector and the wider community. They want people to understand that individuals with aphasia are not stupid or unable but just need some time to find the words. As others have said, aphasia is a language and speech disorder that happens when the language centres of the brain are damaged. It is a long-term and life-changing condition—that is what many people shared with me today. It is mostly a disorder of older adults, and stroke is the major cause of adult aphasia, but it can also arise from brain injury or neurological disease.”
“The people we meet in this place often shape us, and I found this meet-up useful in helping me to discuss policy in this area, and it was also heart-warming to be able to meet people who are so passionate about the issues that they wish to raise with us as MSPs. Of course, I had prepared a speech for this debate, but I think that it is probably far more beneficial to share some of the information that was shared with me earlier today. I will use some of the language and the words that people used with me. What do sufferers and their families want? As with so many of our constituents, they are not asking for too much at all.”
“I thank Rona Mackay for bringing this debate to the chamber. As others have said, it is a historic first debate about the condition. I also welcome the visitors to the gallery, many of whom I met this afternoon. I want to give a special mention to Eileen Smith, who Rona Mackay mentioned, because we worked together almost 20 years ago. Eileen was a physiotherapist and, like many of our NHS staff, she gave her absolute all to support the clients we worked with, and it was a great privilege to work alongside her. I thank all the visitors from Chest Heart & Stroke Scotland for meeting me and for the opportunity to hear their stories and to gain an understanding of some of the difficulties that they and their loved ones face.”
“Many families talk about supporting their loved ones, about them becoming settled in their preschool and then needing to move, and about having to go through the transition again, so it is so important that we address that issue. There is much more to say, as others have mentioned. I hope that the Government places an emphasis on this issue and that it is committed to tackling the barriers for young BSL users and their wider families. This is a really important piece of work, so I look forward to a cross-party response to the committee’s work, which Kate Forbes spoke about. 15:43”
“Others have mentioned—and constituents have spoken to me about—how difficult it is to enter early years provision and then move into primary and then secondary education. Martin Whitfield: Is it not at those transitional periods—when children from the BSL user community are going into school and nursery for the first time, going to high school and going from the broad general education into higher education with assessments—that far more work needs to be done and a far better understanding from the education community of the differentiated needs is required? Carol Mochan: I thank Martin Whitfield for that intervention. I was going to make that point. Martin Whitfield: Sorry. Carol Mochan: No, it was a very welcome intervention.”
“We need to do much more work to make sure that people are trained in providing them. We know that living in a remote and rural area can also increase feelings of isolation and loneliness. Will the Government outline any work that is being done to support the key roles of groups and facilities such as deaf clubs, which aim to bring communities together, and to ensure that all people feel supported and included? I know that it can be difficult in my area to secure premises, to get people together—because of issues with transport—and to make sure that people know that such facilities are available. I would like to address many areas of the committee’s report, including those on the challenges around early years provision and equal access to education.”
“I am sure that the action plans that the Deputy First Minister set out will help with that. People who live in rural areas face a particular disadvantage when it comes to accessing services, due to a shortage of interpreters. In those communities, getting an interpreter can often involve travel over really long distances as there might not be suitably qualified people in the local area. Pam Gosal made the point that, in certain circumstances, BSL users often want to have some relationship with the person they are speaking to. I recognise the challenges that local authorities face, particularly in rural areas. However, living in remote and rural communities should never be a barrier to accessing the care and services that people need; everybody should have equal access to those services across Scotland.”
“That is a failing by the local authorities—the step that they should be taking is quite clear. I understand that the Scottish Government does not have a regulatory function under the 2015 act, but we should have serious concerns about the fact that we have passed legislation that is not being complied with or properly monitored. We must have a discussion in the Parliament about how we can help with that important matter. I hope that the Scottish Government can set out what further action it will take to ensure that any legislation, including the statutory duty placed on listed local authorities, is complied with and that consideration is given to how best to support authorities to fulfil legislative requirements. As a Parliament, we should think about how we can support local authorities.”