Annabelle Ewing
Scottish National Party · Scotland
“Before we turn to the next item of business, I hope that members do not mind if I say a few words. I would like to say specifically what an honour it has been for me to serve in the Scottish Parliament, which, of course, was reconvened by my late mother, Winnie Ewing, in 1999.”
“There is one question to be put as a result of today’s business. The question is, that motion S6M-21180, in the name of John Swinney, on a motion of thanks, be agreed to.”
“I hope that members feel that I have discharged my duty. I thank you for having given me the opportunity to be your Deputy Presiding Officer, along with Mr McArthur, and I wish each of you all the very best.”
“Members! Màiri McAllan: Equally, the prospect of scrapping the land and buildings transaction tax or stamp duty land tax is for the birds, and I am afraid that it demonstrates that the Conservatives realise that their chances of implementing any such policies are, to put it politely, very slim.”
“Motion debated, That the Parliament recognises the importance of sport and activity as a force for good that goes beyond just physical health; considers that they have a significant impact on mental health, as well as contributing to community and national cohesion and wellbeing; believes that sport breaks down barriers of colour, race, r…”
“Motion debated, That the Parliament notes with concern the reported decision by the Lloyds Banking Group to close 11 Bank of Scotland branches between June and July 2026, including the Rutherglen branch; understands that this is the latest in a series of bank closures across the UK; believes that these closures will have a significant imp…”
The complete record
Every one of 792 lines we hold for Annabelle Ewing, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 16.
“I have the great pleasure of handing over the microphone to our Presiding Officer, who wishes to address the chamber. 16:48”
“There is one question to be put as a result of today’s business. The question is, that motion S6M-21180, in the name of John Swinney, on a motion of thanks, be agreed to. Motion agreed to, That the Parliament expresses its thanks to its Presiding Officer, Alison Johnstone, for her dedicated service to the Parliament; thanks her Deputy Presiding Officers, and pays tribute to all of those Members who are standing down at the end of this session. # Presiding Officer’s Closing Remarks 16:47”
“I hope that members feel that I have discharged my duty. I thank you for having given me the opportunity to be your Deputy Presiding Officer, along with Mr McArthur, and I wish each of you all the very best. [Applause.] The next item of business is consideration of motion S6M-21180, in the name of the First Minister, John Swinney, which is a motion of thanks. I call the First Minister to speak to and move the motion. 16:23”
“Before we turn to the next item of business, I hope that members do not mind if I say a few words. I would like to say specifically what an honour it has been for me to serve in the Scottish Parliament, which, of course, was reconvened by my late mother, Winnie Ewing, in 1999. As the MSP for Cowdenbeath, I have met so many inspiring people across my constituency, and I have tried my best, along with my hard- working staff, to fight their corner and to stand up for them. It has also been an honour to serve for the past five years as Deputy Presiding Officer. The role demands three things in particular: treating every member equally, without fear or favour; protecting the right to freedom of expression in our chamber; and gently, may I say, encouraging members to be the best parliamentarians they can be.”
“Members! Màiri McAllan: Equally, the prospect of scrapping the land and buildings transaction tax or stamp duty land tax is for the birds, and I am afraid that it demonstrates that the Conservatives realise that their chances of implementing any such policies are, to put it politely, very slim. The Deputy Presiding Officer: Fulton MacGregor has a supplementary question.”
“Motion debated, That the Parliament notes what it sees as the dangers that mobile phones and social media pose to children and young people, especially in relation to their physical and mental health; expresses concern regarding the potential safeguarding issues associated with the use of mobile phones, such as exposure to harmful content that is not age-appropriate; further expresses concern regarding reported studies that state that two in three 11- to 17-year- olds find it difficult to put down their phones, with teenagers spending, on average, five hours and 30 minutes each day on their smartphones, including four to five hours on social media, as well as research that reportedly found that one in five 16- to 18-year-olds say that social media has made them feel that “life is not worth living”; notes the calls for a Scotland-wide ban on the use of mobile phones on school premises; understands that schools across Scotland, including in the West Scotland region, and the rest of the UK that have implemented such bans have seen promising results, and that countries across Europe and around the world have taken extensive steps to limit the use of mobile phones in schools, and commends what it sees as the great work done by organisations such as Smartphone Free Childhood, Kids for Now, One Collective Power and Delay Smartphones, which are raising awareness of the potential dangers that come with mobile phone use.”
“The next item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S6M-20881, in the name of Pam Gosal, on a Scotland-wide ban on the use of mobile phones in schools. The debate will be concluded without any question being put.”
“Motion debated, That the Parliament notes with concern the reported decision by the Lloyds Banking Group to close 11 Bank of Scotland branches between June and July 2026, including the Rutherglen branch; understands that this is the latest in a series of bank closures across the UK; believes that these closures will have a significant impact on local residents, businesses and organisations that depend on high street banks for cash access and essential banking services, particularly older people, disabled people, small businesses and charities; considers that the closure of banks is hugely detrimental to the viability of local high streets, and notes the calls on the Lloyds Banking Group to reconsider its decision. 18:22”
“The final item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S6M-20791, in the name of Clare Haughey, on the closure of Bank of Scotland branches. The debate will be concluded without any question being put. I invite those members who wish to speak in the debate to press their request-to-speak buttons, and I call Clare Haughey to open the debate.”
“The next item of business is a debate on motion S6M-21103, in the name of Ivan McKee, on the Visitor Levy (Amendment) (Scotland) Bill at stage 3. Before we move to the debate, I call Shona Robison to signify Crown consent to the bill.”
“Motion debated, That the Parliament recognises the importance of sport and activity as a force for good that goes beyond just physical health; considers that they have a significant impact on mental health, as well as contributing to community and national cohesion and wellbeing; believes that sport breaks down barriers of colour, race, religion and creed by bringing individuals and communities together through a common shared interest and passion; recognises that, by promoting sport and activity, the Scottish Government can positively impact on confidence, resilience and aspiration which, in turn, can positively impact on education and benefit the economy, and notes the view that the Scottish Government should do everything that it can to make sport and activity available for all, in the South Scotland region and across the country, irrespective of personal circumstances.”
“Good morning. The first item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S6M- 20497, in the name of Brian Whittle, on sport and activity as a force for good. The debate will be concluded without any question being put. I advise members that the debate is oversubscribed, so there is no time in hand. In the open debate, members must stick to their agreed speaking slots of up to four minutes. The opening speaker and the minister must stick to up to seven minutes each. If members wish to accept interventions, those will have to be absorbed within the time constraints that have been set forth.”
“Section 1—Enabling environmental uses of crofts The Deputy Presiding Officer: Group 1 is on duties and enforcement. Amendment 1, in the name of Beatrice Wishart, is grouped with amendments 2 to 4, 38 to 42 and 25.”
“The next item of business is stage 3 proceedings on the Crofting and Scottish Land Court Bill. In dealing with the amendments, members should have the bill as amended at stage 2—that is, SP bill 71A—the marshalled list and the groupings of amendments. The division bell will sound and proceedings will be suspended for around five minutes for the first division of stage 3. The period of voting for the first division will be 30 seconds. Thereafter, I will allow a voting period of one minute for the first division after a debate. Members who wish to speak in the debate on any group of amendments should press their request- to-speak button or enter the letters RTS in the chat function as soon as possible after I call the group. Members should now refer to the marshalled list of amendments.”
“Motion moved, That the Parliament agrees that, during stage 3 of the Crofting and Scottish Land Court Bill, debate on groups of amendments shall, subject to Rule 9.8.4A, be brought to a conclusion by the time limits indicated, those time limits being calculated from when the stage begins and excluding any periods when other business is under consideration or when a meeting of the Parliament is suspended or otherwise not in progress: Groups 1 to 3: 45 minutes Groups 4 to 6: 1 hour 35 minutes Groups 7 to 9: 2 hours.—[Graeme Dey] Motion agreed to. Crofting and Scottish Land Court Bill: Stage 3 16:15”
“The next item of business is consideration of business motion S6M-21147, in the name of Graeme Dey, on behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau, setting out a timetable for the stage 3 consideration of the Crofting and Scottish Land Court Bill. I ask any member who wishes to speak to the motion to press their request-to-speak button.”
“Amendment 33 disagreed to. Section 10—Commencement Amendments 14 to 16 moved—[Ivan McKee]— and agreed to. Schedule—Consequential and minor modifications of the 2024 Act Amendments 17 to 24 moved—[Ivan McKee]— and agreed to. The Deputy Presiding Officer: That ends consideration of amendments.”
“For 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) Ewing, Fergus (Inverness and Nairn) (Ind) 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) Halcro Johnston, Jamie (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Hamilton, Rachael (Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (Con) Kerr, Liam (North East Scotland) (Con) Kerr, Stephen (Central Scotland) (Con) McCall, Roz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Mountain, Edward (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Mundell, Oliver (Dumfriesshire) (Con) Ross, Douglas (Highlands and Islands) (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) Against Adam, George (Paisley) (SNP) Adam, Karen (Banffshire and Buchan Coast) (SNP) Allan, Alasdair (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (SNP) Arthur, Tom (Renfrewshire South) (SNP) 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) (Ind) Clark, Katy (West Scotland) (Lab) Coffey, Willie (Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley) (SNP) Cole-Hamilton, Alex (Edinburgh Western) (LD) 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) (Ind) 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) 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) Mackay, Rona (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (SNP) Macpherson, Ben (Edinburgh Northern and Leith) (SNP) Maguire, Ruth (Cunninghame South) (SNP) 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) McArthur, Liam (Orkney Islands) (LD) 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) Rennie, Willie (North East Fife) (LD) Robertson, Angus (Edinburgh Central) (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) Somerville, Shirley-Anne (Dunfermline) (SNP) Stevenson, Collette (East Kilbride) (SNP) Stewart, Kaukab (Glasgow Kelvin) (SNP) Stewart, Kevin (Aberdeen Central) (SNP) Sturgeon, Nicola (Glasgow Southside) (SNP) Sweeney, Paul (Glasgow) (Lab) 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) The Deputy Presiding Officer: The result of the division is: For 26, Against 84, Abstentions 0.”
“I advise members that we have passed the agreed time limit for the debate on this group to finish. I exercise my power under rule 9.8.4A(c) of standing orders to allow the debate on this group to continue beyond the limit in order to avoid the debate being unreasonably curtailed. I call the minister to wind up. Ivan McKee: I have nothing to add. Amendment 13 agreed to. After section 5A Amendment 33 moved—[Tim Eagle]. The Deputy Presiding Officer: The question is, that amendment 33 be agreed to. Are we agreed? Members: No. The Deputy Presiding Officer: There will be a division.”
“Section 1—Basis on which levy is to be charged The Deputy Presiding Officer: Group 1 is entitled “Visitor levy scheme modifications: basis and setting of levy”. Amendment 1, in the name of the Minister for Public Finance, is grouped with amendments 2, 3, 7, 17 to 22 and 24.”
“The next item of business is stage 3 proceedings on the Visitor Levy (Amendment) (Scotland) Bill. In dealing with the amendments, members should have the bill as amended at stage 2—that is, SP bill 79A—the marshalled list and the groupings of amendments. The division bell will sound and proceedings will be suspended for about five minutes for the first division of stage 3. The voting period for the first division will be 30 seconds. Thereafter, I will allow a voting period of one minute for the first division after a debate. Members who wish to speak in the debate on any group of amendments should press their request-to-speak button or enter RTS in the chat function as soon as possible after the group has been called. Members should now refer to the marshalled list of amendments.”
“Visitor Levy (Amendment) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 3 15:00”
“The next item of business is consideration of business motion S6M-21148, in the name of Graeme Dey, on behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau, which sets out a timetable for stage 3 consideration of the Visitor Levy (Amendment) (Scotland) Bill. I call Martin Whitfield, on behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau, to move the motion. Motion moved, That the Parliament agrees that, during stage 3 of the Visitor Levy (Amendment) (Scotland) Bill, debate on groups of amendments shall, subject to Rule 9.8.4A, be brought to a conclusion by the time limits indicated, those time limits being calculated from when the stage begins and excluding any periods when other business is under consideration or when a meeting of the Parliament is suspended or otherwise not in progress: Groups 1 to 3: 25 minutes Groups 4 to 6: 1 hour.—[Martin Whitfield] Motion agreed to.”
“Section 1—Restraint and seclusion The Deputy Presiding Officer: Group 1 is on the scope and application of restraint and seclusion provisions. Amendment 1, in the name of John Mason, is grouped with amendments 3 and 6.”
“The next item of business is stage 3 proceedings on the Restraint and Seclusion in Schools (Scotland) Bill. In dealing with the amendments, members should have the bill as amended at stage 2—that is, SP bill 61A—the marshalled list and the groupings of amendments. The division bell will sound and proceedings will be suspended for around five minutes for the first division of the stage 3 proceedings. The voting period for the first division will be 30 seconds. Thereafter, I will allow a voting period of one minute for the first division after a debate. Members who wish to speak in the debate on any group of amendments should press their request- to-speak buttons or enter RTS in the chat function as soon as possible after I call the group. Members should now refer to the marshalled list of amendments.”
“The next item of business is portfolio question time. This afternoon’s portfolio is climate action and energy, and transport. Question 1 has been withdrawn. Oil and Gas Supply Chain (Job Losses) 2.”
“The Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee has also recommended changes to standing orders that would require an introduction deadline for members’ bills that is six months earlier in the parliamentary session than it currently is. That recommendation was intended to give more time for scrutiny and to work through the bill process, and we hope that it will ease some of the bottlenecks that some members have faced. Parliamentary Business (Scheduling) 2.”
“Could we have a question, please, Mr Stewart? Kevin Stewart: I would like the corporate body to look at the matter very seriously, and I would like assurance that that will be done so that we can have an NGBU that works for members in the future. Maggie Chapman: The corporate body has produced guidance on members’ bills for all members for session 7. In doing so, we have sought to ensure that the system is as equitable and efficient as it can be. In addition, the corporate body is not directive as to the specific number of posts or grades of posts in individual teams within any area of the Parliament. There is always opportunity to flex across the clerking team if the NGBU is facing particularly high pressure at certain times of year.”
“Amendment 31 moved—[Natalie Don-Innes]— and agreed to. After section 6 The Deputy Presiding Officer: Group 9 is on permanence. Amendment 134, in the name of Fulton MacGregor, is grouped with amendment 135.”
“Through the introduction of regulations, the duties will be given a power and import that guidance does not have, which will go some way to allay the concerns of many in the care‑experienced community that guidance often results in a postcode lottery. That is what we are trying to get away from through the Promise. I thank the minister for her support for my amendments and I ask members to support them. I press amendment 118. Amendment 118 agreed to. Amendments 119 and 120 moved—[Nicola Sturgeon]—and agreed to. Amendment 121 moved—[Roz McCall]—and agreed to. Amendments 122 to 126 moved—[Nicola Sturgeon]—and agreed to. Amendment 30 moved—[Natalie Don-Innes]— and agreed to. Section 6—Guidance under section 5: further provision 17:15 Amendments 127 to 133 moved—[Nicola Sturgeon]—and agreed to.”
“However, in response to the point about confusion and complexity, I note that it will be up to the Government to ensure that the regulations are as clear and coherent as possible. I will therefore support amendments 118 to 120 and 122 to 133, and I ask members to vote for them. I also support amendment 121, in the name of Roz McCall, which is the only other amendment in the group, and I encourage members to vote for it. The Deputy Presiding Officer: I call Nicola Sturgeon to wind up the debate and press or withdraw amendment 118. Nicola Sturgeon: I recognise Willie Rennie’s concerns, but they are not insurmountable, particularly those around consistency. The minister is absolutely right: it will be incumbent on the Government and the Parliament to ensure that inconsistencies do not occur.”
“It would be far better if there was a definition in the bill, but there is not, so we need to ensure that we put in place the most effective way to implement what the care-experienced community is desperately looking for. Natalie Don-Innes: Amendments 118 to 120 and 122 to 133 seek to update sections 5 and 6 to require Scottish ministers to lay regulations, instead of statutory guidance, in relation to care experience. I thank Nicola Sturgeon for setting out the rationale behind the amendments. I understand the strength of feeling on the idea that placing requirements in regulations will provide a greater degree of compliance and consistency in public authorities adhering to those requirements. I agree that there is a difference in perception between regulations and guidance. I understand many of the concerns that Mr Rennie raised.”
“For some care- experienced people, regulations are themselves a compromise, but they are better than guidance. I say from experience in Government that there is a difference between guidance, even with a “due regard” duty, and regulations in the way that public authorities perceive that they are required to abide by them. Willie Rennie: I fully understand the perception in this area and the disappointment in the sector, but we have a responsibility in the Parliament to implement law that will be most effective and will help care-experienced people in the way that they would like. We need to understand that introducing such regulations could make the process more complicated and create division and greater complexity as a result, which is why I am cautious about doing it in that way.”
“Given the complexities of the legal definition of care experience, there would be a risk of splitting different aspects between regulation and guidance, which could leave a definition that is less clear, not more. It also appears that including the definition in regulations rather than guidance would not bind public authorities any more than sticking with guidance would. Therefore, it is not clear what real benefit the amendments would bring, and they must be weighed against the potential for delays to implementation. Nicola Sturgeon: I have great respect for Willie Rennie on these issues. Does he recognise that there was a considerable degree of disappointment in the care-experienced community that a definition of “care experienced” did not appear in the bill?”
“I urge members to support amendment 121. We support all the other amendments in the group. Willie Rennie: This is not getting personal, but I object to Nicola Sturgeon’s amendments in this group as well. She has already anticipated my objections, but I want to reiterate my concerns. Her amendments relate to defining care experience in regulations instead of guidance. I understand that the amendments have been lodged with the intention of strengthening the definition, making it more binding on public authorities and better influencing future policy. However, I am concerned that, in practice, the amendments could have the opposite effect. Even with regulations, guidance would still need to be issued.”
“Amendment 121 would allow for the care-experience guidance to promote best practice for public authorities in respecting the rights of those with care experience and taking a trauma-informed approach when delivering services. I consider that that would strengthen the position that was agreed to at stage 2. The guidance will be key to shaping day-to-day practice, ensuring a shared and consistent understanding of care experience across services and settling on a national and consistent direction for the language that is used in and around the care system. It is therefore essential that the rights of those with care experience are respected; that the guidance allows for interactions to take into account the effects of any trauma; and that it seeks to avoid further trauma or the reoccurrence of past trauma.”
“To go back to an earlier intervention from Jeremy Balfour, with regulation, the interpretation is far better understood and everyone follows it. Nicola Sturgeon: Martin Whitfield puts it perfectly. That sums up the reasons for my amendments. Regulations are binding in a way that guidance—even guidance with a due regard provision in legislation—is simply not. One of the important objectives in the delivery of the Promise is to ensure that it is delivered consistently right across Scotland. Only if that happens will the process have the confidence of the care- experienced community. I move amendment 118. The Deputy Presiding Officer: I call Roz McCall to speak to amendment 121 and other amendments in the group. Roz McCall: My amendment 121 builds on an amendment that I lodged at stage 2 and which was agreed to by the committee.”
“The challenge is to get the regulations right so that they have the confidence of the care-experienced community. Crucially, as regulations, they will be binding and not optional. They will have to be complied with consistently and in all parts of Scotland. That is important for building trust and confidence and for ensuring that we do not have the kinds of variations in care that we have seen all too often. However esoteric the proposal might seem, I think that it will help us with the overall delivery of the Promise and help to build confidence in that delivery as we go on. Martin Whitfield: In other areas where guidance is relied on, we have seen the postcode lottery that Nicola Sturgeon has spoken about.”
“I will take a moment to address the concerns that have been raised about the amendments, which I am sure will be raised during the debate. The first is that regulations take longer to prepare, conclude and issue than guidance does. I recognise that, although I would say, from some experience in Government, that there is no hard and fast reason why regulations cannot be passed at pace. Also, with parliamentary engagement, what emerges from that process will be stronger and more likely to stand the test of time. The other concern that I anticipate being expressed is that regulations are more difficult to change in future than guidance is. However, if the Parliament gets the regulations right in the first place and if they command confidence, they will not need to be regularly changed.”
“Let me be candid: I realise that this might seem a bit esoteric, but it goes to the heart of one of the biggest issues that I have heard time and again from care‑experienced people over the years—namely, a lack of trust among care‑experienced young people that public authorities will always do what they are supposed to do. We can argue about whether that criticism is justified, but it is very real in the minds of many care-experienced people, past and present, across the country. There are concerns about variation and postcode lotteries of care, and there are concerns that what is meant to happen in theory does not always translate into practice. Those are perennial problems and concerns. They operate to undermine trust and confidence, and, on occasion, they have a real impact on the day- to-day experience of care-experienced people.”
“Amendment 29A agreed to. The Deputy Presiding Officer: I call the minister to press or withdraw amendment 29, as amended. Natalie Don-Innes: I press amendment 29, as amended. Amendment 29, as amended, agreed to. Section 5—Guidance in relation to care experience The Deputy Presiding Officer: Group 8 is on guidance in relation to care experience. Amendment 118, in the name of Nicola Sturgeon, is grouped with amendments 119 to 133. Nicola Sturgeon: My amendments in this group relate to sections 5 and 6 and the duty on ministers to issue guidance to public authorities about care- experienced people and their lived realities, and the duty on public authorities to have “due regard to” such guidance. The amendments will replace references to “guidance” with “regulations” throughout the sections.”
“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) Baker, Claire (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab) Beattie, Colin (Midlothian North and Musselburgh) (SNP) Boyack, Sarah (Lothian) (Lab) Briggs, Miles (Lothian) (Con) Brown, Keith (Clackmannanshire and Dunblane) (SNP) Brown, Siobhian (Ayr) (SNP) Burgess, Ariane (Highlands and Islands) (Green) Burnett, Alexander (Aberdeenshire West) (Con) Callaghan, Stephanie (Uddingston and Bellshill) (SNP) Carlaw, Jackson (Eastwood) (Con) Carson, Finlay (Galloway and West Dumfries) (Con) Chapman, Maggie (North East Scotland) (Green) Choudhury, Foysol (Lothian) (Ind) 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) Dowey, Sharon (South Scotland) (Con) Dunbar, Jackie (Aberdeen Donside) (SNP) Duncan-Glancy, Pam (Glasgow) (Ind) Fairlie, Jim (Perthshire South and Kinross-shire) (SNP) Findlay, Russell (West Scotland) (Con) FitzPatrick, Joe (Dundee City West) (SNP) Forbes, Kate (Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch) (SNP) Fraser, Murdo (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Gallacher, Meghan (Central Scotland) (Con) Gibson, Kenneth (Cunninghame North) (SNP) Gilruth, Jenny (Mid Fife and Glenrothes) (SNP) Gosal, Pam (West Scotland) (Con) 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) Gulhane, Sandesh (Glasgow) (Con) Halcro Johnston, Jamie (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Harper, Emma (South Scotland) (SNP) Harvie, Patrick (Glasgow) (Green) Haughey, Clare (Rutherglen) (SNP) Hepburn, Jamie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (SNP) Hyslop, Fiona (Linlithgow) (SNP) Kerr, Stephen (Central Scotland) (Con) Kidd, Bill (Glasgow Anniesland) (SNP) Leonard, Richard (Central Scotland) (Lab) Lochhead, Richard (Moray) (SNP) Lumsden, Douglas (North East Scotland) (Con) MacDonald, Gordon (Edinburgh Pentlands) (SNP) MacGregor, Fulton (Coatbridge and Chryston) (SNP) Mackay, Gillian (Central Scotland) (Green) Mackay, Rona (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (SNP) Macpherson, Ben (Edinburgh Northern and Leith) (SNP) Maguire, Ruth (Cunninghame South) (SNP) 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) McCall, Roz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) McKee, Ivan (Glasgow Provan) (SNP) McLennan, Paul (East Lothian) (SNP) McMillan, Stuart (Greenock and Inverclyde) (SNP) McNair, Marie (Clydebank and Milngavie) (SNP) Minto, Jenni (Argyll and Bute) (SNP) Mochan, Carol (South Scotland) (Lab) Mountain, Edward (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Mundell, Oliver (Dumfriesshire) (Con) 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) Ross, Douglas (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Rowley, Alex (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab) Russell, Davy (Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse) (Lab) Slater, Lorna (Lothian) (Green) Smith, Liz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Somerville, Shirley-Anne (Dunfermline) (SNP) Stevenson, Collette (East Kilbride) (SNP) Stewart, Alexander (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) 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) Torrance, David (Kirkcaldy) (SNP) Tweed, Evelyn (Stirling) (SNP) Villalba, Mercedes (North East Scotland) (Lab) Webber, Sue (Lothian) (Con) White, Tess (North East Scotland) (Con) Whitfield, Martin (South Scotland) (Lab) Whitham, Elena (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley) (SNP) Whittle, Brian (South Scotland) (Con) Yousaf, Humza (Glasgow Pollok) (SNP) Against Balfour, Jeremy (Lothian) (Ind) Cole-Hamilton, Alex (Edinburgh Western) (LD) McArthur, Liam (Orkney Islands) (LD) Rennie, Willie (North East Fife) (LD) The Deputy Presiding Officer: The result of the division is: For 103, Against 4, Abstentions 0.”
“As no member wishes to comment, I call the minister to wind up. Natalie Don-Innes: I have nothing further to add. I press amendment 28. Amendment 28 agreed to. After section 4 Amendment 29 moved—[Natalie Don-Innes]. Amendment 29A moved—[Nicola Sturgeon]. The Deputy Presiding Officer: The question is, that amendment 29A be agreed to. Are we agreed? Members: No. The Deputy Presiding Officer: There will be a division. Members should cast their votes now. The vote is closed. Shona Robison: On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I could not connect to the app. I would have voted yes. The Deputy Presiding Officer: Thank you, Ms Robison. Your vote will be recorded.”
“The next item of business is a debate on motion S6M-21100, in the name of Jenni Minto, on the Non-surgical Procedures and Functions of Medical Reviewers (Scotland) Bill. I invite those members who wish to speak in the debate to press their request-to-speak buttons, and I call the Minister for Public Health and Women’s Health, Jenni Minto, to speak to and move the motion—up to seven minutes, please. 15:59”
“Although I support amendment 28, I note that it lacks detail, particularly when considering the specific support that will be given to businesses and the guidance that will be given to the sector. I turn to other amendments in the group. I support amendments 25, 26, 33 and 37 in the name of Sandesh Gulhane. They seek to introduce proper checks and balances regarding the available capacity of HIS, which will be enforcing the bill. During stage 1, the committee heard concerns about resources and enforcement challenges as HIS is given new powers to enter, search and seize in registered premises. Therefore, it seems reasonable to ask that a review of HIS capacity is carried out, because enforcement is a large part of the bill. The Deputy Presiding Officer: I call Stuart McMillan to speak to amendment 28 and other amendments in the group.”
“It would also require an assessment of the “training opportunities available to providers to assist them to upskill”, including “qualification and accreditation pathways for practitioners, including those who are non-medical”, and of the “guidance provided in relation to minimum training and competence requirements”. During stage 1 of the bill, the committee raised concerns about provision in remote and rural areas and financial costs to providers. Therefore, a review must also consider those points. At stage 2, the Scottish Government was widely supportive of the principles of amendment 27. I recognise that Stuart McMillan’s amendment 28 shares a similar objective to that of my amendment 27. It outlines what a review of the bill should include.”
“I call Carol Mochan to speak to amendment 27 and other amendments in the group. Carol Mochan: My amendment 27 seeks to add further detail to what the review of part 1 of the bill should include. The amendment comes from concerns about the support and guidance that will be given to the industry once the bill comes into force, and it touches on points that were made in the debates on the previous groupings. Amendment 27 states that the review of part 1 should “include an assessment of … support provided to providers of non-surgical procedures, including providers that are … independent, and … non-medical”.”
“We must do everything that we can to strengthen the opportunity for people to conscientiously object, particularly given that much of what was originally in the bill in that area has now been stripped out of it. As we heard from Jackie Baillie, her amendments are largely technical and are presented on behalf of Hospice UK. I am very happy to support them. I press amendment 256. The Deputy Presiding Officer: The question is, that amendment 256 be agreed to. Are we agreed? Members: No. The Deputy Presiding Officer: There will be a division. The vote is closed.”
“Palliative care and hospice care have been mentioned previously, and it is right for parliamentarians to ensure that, should the bill be passed, we have done everything that we can to protect this crucial area of funding. On John Mason’s amendment 257, his contribution about conscientious objections reminded me of the point that Keith Brown made last night during the debate on Mr McMillan’s amendment. He said that a constituent had said to him that, if the bill were passed, she would give up her job as a GP, because, with reference to their Hippocratic oath, she does not want to be associated in any way with legislation that would allow people to take away someone’s life.”
“Given that there are some concerns about Mr Ross’s amendment 256, despite my sympathies for it, might Jackie Baillie’s amendments be an appropriate way to take the matter forward? Douglas Ross: I will be supporting Jackie Baillie’s amendments, but I believe that my amendment 256 is a perfectly acceptable one. I listened to the cabinet secretary’s concerns relating to IJBs, but I do not share them. We have come to different conclusions on the issue. Members will have the chance to vote for my amendment or Jackie Baillie’s amendments—or, indeed, they could vote for both, and we can see how things end up in the bill. We need to take a bit of time on this matter. We have had a long debate—we are now into the 21st hour of the debate on the stage 3 amendments.”