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 14 of 16.
“My understanding is that it has not raised it once in the dozens of discussions over the many months that our ministers have been discussing the future of Grangemouth. Beyond that, it has not even asked for it to be put on the agenda. If that is incorrect, I am very happy to be corrected by either the Deputy First Minister or Tom Arthur in summing up, but that is my understanding. If the Government wants the issue to be taken seriously, it needs to take it seriously itself. The fact that it has not put it on the agenda probably gives an indication of whether it is making a serious point or taking a bit more of an opportunistic approach, which has been foisted on it by the party’s leader at Westminster. Kate Forbes: Will the member take an intervention? Daniel Johnson: I will be happy to give way to the Deputy First Minister.”
“I do not want to go down the other rabbit hole of zonal pricing, but the reason for mentioning it is that DESNZ is looking at such things. That is important, but the main point is that we all need to acknowledge the roles that various Governments play. [Interruption.] I do not have time to take an intervention. The fundamental question that has been posed today is whether we should have considered the same factors in the case of Grangemouth as we did in relation to Scunthorpe. I have set out why I think that there are salient differences. However, I also gently point out to the Government that, if it had been so serious about the issue, it should have raised it with the UK Government.”
“Therefore, the fact that we have that structure in place is one of the reasons for our difficulty. The other aspect is infrastructure, in which we have failed to invest. The point that I was trying to make in my intervention on Mr Fraser is that, in 2017, we sold off our gas storage, which meant that we were more exposed to fluctuating gas prices than any other country in the western world. We had no resilience and no ability to smooth those prices. Taken in turn, those factors are the reasons we now find ourselves in the electricity price review. I remind Murdo Fraser that his party was in government between 2010 and 2015, when it could have done something about that but did not. The energy market review that is being undertaken by the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero is examining that.”
“We must look very seriously at our plan to deliver it, because we have to do so. I will accept the temptation to go down the rabbit hole of electricity prices, as Murdo Fraser invited me to do. First, he is right that the issue is not simply about electricity. However, he ignores the point that I have just made, about our gas consumption coming not only through electricity generation but through heating our buildings. That is a fact. Other countries are less reliant than the UK on gas to heat buildings. Secondly, the analysis shows that we mainly use the marginal cost of the last generating unit of power as the fundamental benchmark for the cost of our electricity. That means that the most expensive bid is the one that sets the price for everyone. Gas has been the most expensive source.”
“We should make no mistake: such a transition is vital. Fergus Ewing: Does Mr Johnson agree with, for example, Daniel Yergin, who has said that there is no chance of achieving net zero by 2030? Most Governments in the world, and most commentators, agree that, for a series of very practical reasons, any chance of achieving it by 2050 is also receding. Daniel Johnson: We must look at that very earnestly. First, let us be clear about the target for 2030, which is decarbonisation of our current electricity generation. We must also recognise that each household currently consumes three times as much energy in heating its building by gas as it consumes in electricity. The challenge presented by electrification, which is fundamentally what the transition is about, is huge.”
“Fergus Ewing is absolutely correct to say that, if we want our industry to be competitive, we must look very seriously at electricity prices and energy prices more generally. As long as those prices remain higher than those of our comparator economies, our business and industry will struggle to compete. That is, and has always been, a fundamental point. The reason that Britain was so successful in the 19th and early 20th centuries was that it had access to coal. The reason for the US being so successful throughout the 20th century, and the 21st century to date, is its access to cheap and reliable oil supplies. I agree with Lorna Slater that our future economies will be built by the countries that secure the most reliable and robust renewable energy supplies. Those matters are not in dispute. The question is, how do we get there reliably?”
“I know that Alex Cole- Hamilton never likes it when I claim that the Liberals are in some sort of pact with the Labour Party, but the Liberal result in Canada is something to hold on to as we hope for more enlightened and progressive forces in politics. We can all reflect on the fact that Mark Carney has done far better than any of us in becoming Prime Minister and being elected for the first time all in the same day. That is a very strong political performance. Let me attempt to draw the various strands of the debate together, because there are some points of consensus as well as some points of disagreement. Despite the fact that Lorna Slater and Fergus Ewing might be in disagreement, some of the most important points were made by those two members.”
“16:37 Daniel Johnson: I will begin my summing-up contribution in the same way that I began my opening one. We all need to think about the 400 workers at the refinery at Grangemouth: this will be a very difficult day for them, as operations cease. Indeed, I wonder what those workers would make of today’s debate. [Interruption.] It will perhaps ring a little bit hollow, and we need to be mindful of that. [Interruption.] I am very happy to take interventions, but it is a little bit distracting if people speak in my left ear from a sedentary position. To go off on a bit of a tangent, I would also like to reflect on what Elena Whitham said at the beginning of her speech.”
“Indeed, the main challenge noted in the conclusion was that of a mature and reliable supply of hydrogen, which is clearly a significant opportunity for Scotland. The production of green hydrogen requires cheap electricity and water— something in which Scotland is abundant. Many of the problems noted with Scotland’s challenges in industry could be resolved by our rejoining the EU. It is about access to research funding, access to labour and skills, access to the results of research, and access to the European common market—all of which would improve our economy and our industrial strategy. If the UK cannot be prevailed upon to rejoin the EU, Scotland should be given the choice and allowed to do so. The Deputy Presiding Officer: I call Daniel Johnson to close on behalf of Scottish Labour.”
“However, he is not doing that. He is still a proponent of the market-based energy system, and so that is what will happen. The way that we manage our emissions is to reduce demand for gas in Scotland through, for example, insulating our homes properly, getting people out of cars and taxing aviation. Those are all things that we could do in Scotland to rapidly reduce our dependence on oil and gas. In fact, I would agree with many members about the importance of steel production and the importance of unlinking that from fossil fuels. A feasibility study undertaken by British Steel and EDF in 2022 on using hydrogen for steel production had good results. It said: “A full conversion of TBM’s furnace to hydrogen could reduce its direct CO2 emissions by 94% or 71,000 tonnes based on 2021 emissions data.”
“Surely it makes sense to use the methods of production that reduce to an absolute minimum the carbon emissions from production. Why does Lorna Slater consistently ignore those facts? Lorna Slater: The member consistently ignores the facts of the international market. We do not control American policy on gas extraction, but the Americans sell that on the market to our gas suppliers here, based entirely on price. I absolutely am sceptical about the ability of capitalism and global markets to tackle climate change, but the member cannot suggest that that is a way to reduce carbon emissions, because our energy suppliers in the UK will buy the cheapest gas available. If he is proposing that the UK implement some sort of law requiring gas providers in the UK to buy lower-carbon production, that would be interesting to contemplate.”
“Fergus Ewing rose— Lorna Slater: I will come to the member in a moment. Tackling climate change is a collective endeavour. Our individual emissions are trivial on the global scale, but every one of us around the world needs to do our bit to meet the collective challenge. Saying that we should get away with bad behaviour while expecting others to behave well is cynical and will not resolve the problem of climate change, as is needed. Fergus Ewing: The point is that it is good behaviour. For example, the analysis of Rosebank shows that it will emit 14kg of carbon per barrel and that, if electrification of the platform—another innovative method of cutting carbon emissions— takes place, that will go down to 4kg. President Trump’s fracked gas produces 78kg of carbon. Not all oil and gas is equal.”
“It seems to me that the piece of the economic puzzle that we are missing in Scotland is support for those SMEs—I am thinking specifically of engineering-related businesses, because that is the industry with which I am most familiar—to scale up to supply not only Scotland but countries that are further afield. There seems to be substantial agreement across parties that increased UK Government investment is required and that the cost of energy is a major barrier. Unlinking the artificial connection between gas prices and electricity prices in the UK would go a long way to resolving some of those problems. I feel a great deal of dismay at Fergus Ewing’s intervention, which ignores the UK’s historical emissions and contribution to climate change in the world. At least Murdo Fraser acknowledged the offshore component of our emissions.”
“There are big challenges to shifting a whole economy, as Donald Trump is trying to do, back to manufacturing, but there are areas in which Scotland is already good. I have previously spoken, as I did at the Business for Scotland conference, which Murdo Fraser referenced earlier, about scaling up already successful Scottish businesses. In Scotland, we already have—[Interruption.] I will come to the Deputy First Minister in a second—or was that an accident? Many successful small and medium-sized enterprises in Scotland already supply components to the renewables industry and to the oil and gas industry and have the scope to scale up.”
“I do not think that anyone wants the Trumpian vision of hordes of Scottish people assembling shoes and small electronics, but high-value manufacturing is a possibility. Members will recall from my entry in the register of members’ interests that I used to work for Orbital Marine Power. It—we—built in Scotland the world’s largest tidal turbine, in the port of Dundee. Its components were assembled in Scotland and were launched and are now operating in Orkney. Many of the high-value components—gearboxes, generators and so on— were sourced from Europe. They were not manufactured in Scotland, which is a shame. Some of the components were manufactured in Ireland and some in England, but not in Scotland. However, we assembled them here.”
“Today, every small, medium and large business needs a message from a Parliament that is unified in voice and which says to them, “We are on your side, we will help you thrive and we will facilitate your growth—no ifs or buts.” I assure members that, on the Liberal Democrat benches, those businesses will have a listening ear on my part, because towns such as mine can ill afford anything less than a laser-sharp focus on rejuvenation and growth. 16:31 Lorna Slater: The debate has revealed quite a lot in common across parties. There seems to be a consensus that a proactive industrial and energy strategy is required and that we would like the return of high-value manufacturing to Scotland.”
“That is not how to create a vibrant and flourishing economy. In fact, both of Scotland’s Governments need to knock their heads together and come up with a long-term industrial strategy that works for all our communities. Scotland punches above its weight in many industries, but that plan must include a strategy on how we will meet the needs of tomorrow. Our five key growth areas are renewables, life sciences, financial services, creative industries and the digital and technological sectors. Those five industries alone currently employ more than 300,000 people and contribute more than £27 billion of GVA to the Scottish economy, alongside AI, biotech, satellite, space, precision medicine and—yes—defence. All those industries will advance Scotland’s economy and restore our place in the world on an industrial scale.”
“The CBI wants the Scottish Government to use the full range of policy levers at its disposal to address long-standing barriers to growth; to improve infrastructure and connectivity, which involves digital, new homes and key roads; to ensure that Scotland’s economic strategy puts long-term growth ahead of short-term revenue raising; and to announce a skills strategy and a plan on how we will develop the workforce of tomorrow’s labour markets. I agree with all those points. I believe that the last one is the most important, because Scotland urgently needs to address its labour and skills shortages. Recently, Scottish Engineering produced a report that talked about the “stark situation” that is faced by the engineering sector. Half the engineering companies in Scotland are facing difficulties due to the lack of skills in the marketplace.”
“No matter how resilient people are—and people in working-class communities generally are resilient—we all face the same issues, including the ageing population and lower or sluggish economic activity, which are the root causes of so many of the societal issues that we debate in this place. I would go as far as to say that the compound effect of flagging local economies, such as those in the region that I represent, is tantamount to a national economic emergency. It is a silent economic crisis about which nothing is being done. However, the decline of our economy is not inevitable. I talked about the CBI’s policy calls on us in my opening speech, but I will repeat them for the benefit of those on the Government benches.”
“Deindustrialisation and the continuous loss of big local employers have had an absolutely devastating effect in other parts of Scotland. Places such as Inverclyde, which is my home community, have suffered decades of neglect by successive Governments. Over many years, Inverclyde has lost major local employers, including Amazon, Berry BPI, EE, IBM, National Semiconductor and RBS, that have simply closed up shop, packed up and gone. In the past 18 months alone, 1,200 jobs in the local economy have been lost, which is just as devastating to that area as what is happening in Grangemouth is to the economy there.”
“There are also many things in the Conservative amendment that I agree with, including that party’s support for Grangemouth and the fair point that condemns Labour’s national insurance hike. The one amendment that I cannot bring myself to support is the Green amendment, and that is simply because I believe that private industry is needed for Scotland’s just transition. By that, I mean that private businesses need to be seen as part of the solution and not solely as the problem. Lorna Slater: Will the member take an intervention? Jamie Greene: I will not. I have a lot to get through. By its nature, industrial strategy means different things to different people. In today’s context, we are talking about the sheer magnitude of intervention, particularly financial intervention, that will be needed in the oil and gas sectors.”
“Murdo Fraser mentioned the costs of regulation of the energy market, and we must also consider business grants and loans, corporation tax, other business incentives and the shortages in education and skills, which Alexander Stewart mentioned. Some of those areas are reserved and some are devolved, but businesses and their workers do not care about that; they just want support. The debate has been both insightful and productive. We will support the Government’s motion because we agree on the value of Scotland’s heavy industrial and manufacturing sectors. I hope that that is a shared view. Equally, we will support Labour’s amendment, which calls on the Scottish Government to publish a detailed timeline relating to the implementation of the project willow recommendations.”
“As has been well rehearsed today, the news from Grangemouth is a warning to each and every one of us that time is simply not on our side when it comes to supporting Scottish industry. I am actually surprised that so many people are surprised by today’s news, because it has been a long time coming. The business warned both Scotland’s Governments for many years of its pending potential doom. The reality is that, if our Governments do not prepare Scotland’s historic industries for the economic landscapes of both today and tomorrow, they are failing in their duties. It is not good enough to maintain the simple line that it is up to the private sector to make do and survive. That is an unsustainable position, particularly when Governments manage the levers that accommodate and nurture industries.”
“We need the powers to shape our future. Westminster has had its chance but, decade after decade, promise after promise has been broken. It is time that we had the powers, because the best people to make our decisions are those who live here in Scotland. That is why the only way forward for our country is to be in control of our own destiny as an independent country at the heart of Europe. The Deputy Presiding Officer: We move to the closing speeches. I note that a member who spoke in the debate is not present, which is discourteous to all the other members who spoke and to the chair, so I expect an apology. 16:24 Jamie Greene: As the Deputy First Minister said in her opening speech, this debate could not be more timely.”
“The member will be bringing his remarks to a close very shortly. George Adam: Down in Westminster, they have found the cash to redevelop Old Trafford but have not found a penny for Scotland’s industrial future. Enough is enough. Scotland deserves better than to be treated like an afterthought. Here is the thing. Despite all of that, Scotland is outperforming the UK. Our economy is growing, we lead the UK in foreign direct investment and we are a hub for high-tech, green tech, AI and life sciences—you name it, we are good at it. Towns such as Paisley are filled with talent, innovation and resilience, so just imagine what we could do with the full economic powers of independence. That brings me to my closing point. In these turbulent times, rattled by war, tariffs and broken promises, Scotland needs more than sticking plasters.”
“Published in Edinburgh by the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body, the Scottish Parliament, Edinburgh, EH99 1SP All documents are available on the Scottish Parliament website at: www.parliament.scot Information on non-endorsed print suppliers is available here: www.parliament.scot/documents For information on the Scottish Parliament contact Public Information on: Telephone: 0131 348 5000 Textphone: 0800 092 7100 Email: sp.info@parliament.scot”
“There is one question to be put as a result of today’s business. The question is, that motion S6M-17074, in the name of Stuart McMillan, on behalf of the Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee, on its inquiry into framework legislation and Henry VIII powers, be agreed to. Motion agreed to, That the Parliament notes the conclusions and recommendations contained in the Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee’s 21st Report, 2025 (Session 6), Inquiry into Framework Legislation and Henry VIII powers (SP Paper 762). The Deputy Presiding Officer: That concludes decision time. Meeting closed at 17:01. This is the final edition of the Official Report for this meeting. It is part of the Scottish Parliament Official Report archive and has been sent for legal deposit.”
“Motion debated, That the Parliament notes with regret the reported decision by BBC Scotland to end the programme, River City, which it understands is Scotland’s only homegrown soap; believes that this will have a disproportionately negative impact on performers in Scotland, many of whom, it understands, get their first TV job on River City, as well as on the wider Scottish production landscape; considers that the reported £9 million annual budget for the show is excellent value for money, given the hours of programming produced throughout the year for what it sees as a successful show, which, it understands, attracts a regular audience of 500,000 per episode, outperforming other TV series by more than two and a half times; believes that the Glasgow-based show is well loved by Scottish audiences and enjoys strong ratings, with it winning Best Drama at the Royal Television Society Scotland 2023 awards for its 20th anniversary episode; notes what it sees as BBC Scotland’s failure to inform the Constitution, Europe, External Affairs and Culture Committee of its reported plans to close the BBC studios in Dumbarton and end River City in its annual report to the Parliament in January 2025; further notes the calls for BBC Scotland to recognise its public broadcasting duty and explain how its current proposals to replace River City will provide the same good jobs, training and apprenticeships currently available at the BBC’s Dumbarton studios to performers and crew in Scotland, and ensure that the reported £9 million budget will be spent on Scottish drama; considers the BBC’s Dumbarton studios to be an important asset, which has been used for a number of other productions, including Vigil and Shetland; understands that the owner of the studios site is open to renewing the lease, and notes the calls, in light of this, for BBC Scotland to revisit its reported decision to end River City and close its Dumbarton studios.”
“The next item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S6M-16978, in the name of Neil Bibby, on BBC Scotland’s decision to end “River City” and close its Dumbarton studios. The debate will be concluded without any question being put.”
“Motion debated, That the Parliament notes the reported concerns regarding challenges that NHS Grampian is facing in relation to staffing shortages and resource limitations, which it understands has contributed to delays in patient care and increased pressure on existing medical personnel; acknowledges that, in September 2024, NHS Grampian reported that over 3,000 patients were waiting over two years for hospital treatment, which it believes was the highest number among Scottish NHS boards; understands that, in November 2024, NHS Grampian declared a board level critical incident, which led to the diversion of ambulance patients to hospitals outside the region due in part to sustained pressures at Aberdeen Royal Infirmary; notes that, in late November 2024, NHS Grampian experienced a significant rise in delayed discharges, with 199 cases, which according to the NHS board accounted for 13% of all beds in the region; believes that hospitals in the area are using outdated medical equipment, including an MRI scanner and an X-ray machine that are 15 and 27 years old, respectively, and notes the calls for the Scottish Government to develop an urgent plan to tackle what it regards as the ongoing issues within NHS Grampian that are impacting on patient care and service delivery.”
“The final item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S6M-17011, in the name of Douglas Lumsden, on addressing waiting times in NHS Grampian. The debate will be concluded without any question being put, and I invite members who wish to speak in the debate to please press their request-to-speak buttons.”
“The next item of business is a Scottish Government debate on the international situation. I invite members who wish to speak in the debate to please press their request-to-speak buttons. I call the First Minister to open the debate. First Minister, you have up to 13 minutes. 15:41”
“The final item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S6M-16901, in the name of Jamie Halcro Johnston, on Scotland’s islands. The debate will be concluded without any question being put. Motion debated, That the Parliament recognises what it sees as the social and economic importance and contribution of Scotland’s islands, their residents and their businesses; further recognises what it considers are the challenges of living on and running a business on islands and delivering public services to island communities, but believes that islanders, including many from across the Highlands and Islands region, have remarkable entrepreneurship that has fostered advancements in a varied portfolio of sectors, including distilling, manufacturing, space exploration and a growing number of micro and social enterprises; values the distinctive and often unique cultural contribution of the islands to Scotland, the rest of the UK and the world; believes that island communities provide many opportunities, but notes concerns that they can face many unique challenges, including the threat of depopulation, without the provision of adequate housing, healthcare, transport links and connectivity.”
“The next item of business is a debate on the impact of the United Kingdom Government’s spring statement on Scotland. 16:29”
“The next item of business is a statement by Shona Robison on the impact on Scotland of the United Kingdom Government’s spring statement. The statement will then be debated, so there should be no interventions or interruptions. I call the cabinet secretary. You have up to 20 minutes. 16:08”
“The matter has been agreed by the bureau, and it has also been approved by the Parliament. The other point that is worth making is that there will be no opening speaker—”
“Good afternoon. The next item of business is portfolio questions, and the first portfolio is rural affairs, land reform and islands. Scotch Whisky 1.”
“The next item of business is a debate on motion S6M-17003, in the name of Angela Constance, on the Criminal Justice Modernisation and Abusive Domestic Behaviour Reviews (Scotland) Bill at stage 1. I ask members who wish to speak in the debate to please press their request-to-speak buttons. 14:54”
“The next item of business is a debate on motion S6M-16789, in the name of Liz Smith, on the Schools (Residential Outdoor Education) (Scotland) Bill at stage 1. I note that a Scottish Government minister does not appear to be in the chamber. We will nonetheless need to continue, because this is follow-on business. 15:24”
“The next item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S6M-16128, in the name of Liz Smith, on 300 years of the Black Watch. The debate will be concluded without any question being put. Motion debated, That the Parliament marks the tercentenary of the origins of The Black Watch; understands that, in 1725, six companies were raised by General George Wade, comprising of “loyal” clans, including the Campbells, Grants, Frasers and Munros, and formed the Highland watches to police the Highlands following the 1715 Jacobite rebellion; notes that a further four companies were raised in 1739 to form the Regiment of the Line, which first mustered at Aberfeldy; understands that, throughout this period, the companies began being referred to as Am Freiceadan Dubh or The Black Watch; believes that this term was likely due to the dark tartan uniform that was worn by its soldiers; recognises what it sees as the significance of the regiment’s involvement throughout the UK’s most important and consequential military campaigns, ranging from, but not limited to, the Seven Years’ War, the American War of Independence, the Napoleonic wars, the Crimean War, the Boer War, the First and Second World Wars, the Korean War, the Troubles in Northern Ireland and the Gulf Wars; acknowledges what it sees as the fearless and renowned reputation that The Black Watch established and reinforced over the course of these conflicts, as well as the countless stories of individual gallantry, particularly the 14 soldiers who received the UK’s highest military decoration, the Victoria Cross; commemorates all who have served and died in the historic regiment, who have predominately come from across Perth and Kinross, Fife, Dundee and Angus, but also the rest of Scotland and beyond, and offers its full support to the veterans, and their families, who are alive today.”
“The next item of business is a debate on motion S6M-16892, in the name of Mairi Gougeon, on the Land Reform (Scotland) Bill at stage 1. 15:20”
“Motion debated, That the Parliament acknowledges reports that Peel Ports Clydeport is planning to introduce a conservancy fee for leisure craft sailing in the Clydeport area; understands that the boating sector has expressed concerns that such a charge could impact the marine tourism economy, including in the Greenock and Inverclyde constituency, as it could discourage boaters from sailing in Clydeport’s waters; believes that boaters have also expressed their anger at what it understands is Peel Ports’ lack of meaningful dialogue with the sector about these plans; further believes that this has led to questions arising over how the fee will be spent; understands that members of the Cross-Party Group on Recreational Boating and Marine Tourism have agreed that their collective position is that these plans should be abandoned, and that a public petition has been launched to attract support for this view, which, it understands, has attracted over 4,600 signatures so far, and notes the view that Peel Ports should scrap its proposal and work with the sector to address any issues.”
“The final item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S6M-16854, in the name of Stuart McMillan, on Peel Ports’ conservancy fee plans for Clydeport area. The debate will be concluded without any question being put.”
“The next item of business is a debate on motion S6M-16923, in the name of Angus Robertson, on “Scotland—a fair trade nation”. I invite members who wish to speak in the debate to press their request-to-speak buttons. 15:02”
“To ask the Scottish Government when it last met the chief executive of Fife Council to discuss the housing emergency. (S6O-04463)”
“Motion debated, That the Parliament considers that single-sex spaces for women and girls across Scotland’s public services are being eroded, with worrying implications for their rights and safety; acknowledges what it sees as the fundamental importance of the dignity, privacy and safety of women and girls in sanitary and changing facilities, as well as in hospital settings where women and children are often at their most vulnerable; highlights the Women’s Rights Network Scotland report, How safe are our Scottish hospitals?, authored by Carolyn Brown and Mary Howden and published in March 2025, which found that, over a five- year period between 2019 and 2024, 276 sexual assaults and 12 rapes took place across 57 hospitals; considers that the actual figures will likely be much higher given that, it understands, data is not routinely kept by all Scottish hospitals; notes in particular that 22 sexual assaults and one rape reportedly took place in NHS Grampian over this period, while 17 sexual assaults and three rapes reportedly took place in NHS Tayside, with, it understands, a high number occurring on hospital wards; believes that hospitals should be a place of safety for patients and staff, and notes the view that urgent action should be taken to address any sexual violence on the NHS estate, and further notes the view that such action should include the introduction of robust and transparent record keeping procedures to help inform preventative practices, as well as accommodating women on single-sex wards wherever possible and protecting single-sex spaces for biological female patients and staff.”
“The final item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S6M-16705, in the name of Tess White, on addressing sexual violence in Scotland’s hospitals. The debate will be concluded without any question being put.”
“The next item of business is a debate on motion S6M-16845, in the name of Claire Baker, on reforming Scotland’s west coast ferry services. I invite those members who wish to speak in the debate to press their request-to-speak button. 14:52”
“However, for too long, too many people in Scotland have lacked access to nutritious food, exposing deep inequalities. That is why the decision not to embed the right to food in the Good Food Nation (Scotland) Act 2022 was deeply disappointing. It was a missed opportunity. The SNP and Greens assured us that it would be addressed in a forthcoming human rights bill, but whatever happened to that? Our food and drink sector has the potential to grow further, creating more jobs, boosting our economy, and strengthening Scotland’s global standing, but that will not happen without the right support. 16:09”
“For example, that plan should set out how we will embed farming, fishing, and food production at every level of education and place a stronger emphasis on procuring and promoting local food and drink. The Scottish Government, local authorities, and public bodies spend £16 billion annually on goods and services, including food. However, for too long, public procurement has prioritised cost over sustainability. We should consider, for example, clear targets for increasing the percentage of locally sourced, sustainable, nutritious food that is bought by the public sector. Supporting local supply chains not only boosts businesses but reduces our carbon footprint and helps to tackle food insecurity. Food and drink are not just economic assets; they impact public health, the environment, and standards of animal welfare.”