Christine Grahame
Scottish National Party · Scotland
“To ask the Scottish Government what discussions it has had with the United Kingdom Government regarding whether any of the support announced in response to the increased cost of heating oil will help the agriculture sector and other rural industries in Scotland that are dependent on that fuel. (S6O- 05695)”
“At a recent First Minister’s question time, I raised the matter of the successful prosecution against the Hamiltons, who are part of the cruel puppy- farm trade. That case was concluded after a five- year investigation by the SSPCA that started when 33 puppies were found in dreadful conditions.”
“Of course, some can go online or use an app, but there will be many who cannot, and for them, it is essential that they speak to a real person at the bank, not a chatbot. Therefore, I would impress upon the Bank of Scotland the need for it to take up my suggestion of reintroducing mobile services, which I understand it abandoned in 2024.”
“My first prize at school was for an essay on animal welfare, but being a vet was out of reach for a girl from a council house scheme. However, I got to the right place at last, chairing the cross- party group on animal welfare for more than a decade, with two acts of Parliament—the Control of Dogs (Scotland) Act 2010 and the Welfare of Do…”
“I made my first speech in June 1999, and one Mary Scanlon, a Conservative, broke my peroration—I thought that I was doing rather well—with a point of order that challenged the relevance of my contribution to the motion. I was devastated, but I ploughed on.”
“The Scottish Sentencing Council is developing guidelines for environmental and wildlife crime, but companion and farm animal welfare cases, which make up the vast majority of investigations, are not included.”
The complete record
Every one of 727 lines we hold for Christine Grahame, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 4 of 15.
“Gillian Mackay: It is critical that we ensure that people have confidence that, if they attend appointments at the Queen Elizabeth university hospital, it is safe. We also need to ensure that whistleblowing is safe, which I will come back to later in my contribution. With new sites planned, such as University hospital Monklands in my region, we need to restore public confidence in the processes and reassure people that the new hospitals will be fully up to standard. We need to improve the culture across all boards because, as the Labour motion notes, NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde is not the only one to have been hit by scandal. There are consistent issues around governance and whistleblowing, with staff not being taken seriously.”
“We need to let people know that if they raise concerns, those will be taken seriously. We need to reassure patients and their families that if they seek treatment from NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, they will be cared for by its incredibly hard-working and compassionate staff. We also need to look to the future and consider how we ensure that the whole sorry episode is not repeated. Anas Sarwar: I whole-heartedly welcome the comments from Gillian Mackay. On that basis, will she accept that, in order to reassure families and patients at the Queen Elizabeth, it is important that the Government clarifies whether the hospital and all the wards have been validated and are safe? Will she also agree that the concerns that those three doctors are raising should be listened to right now?”
“I call Gillian Mackay to close on behalf of the Scottish Greens—[Interruption.] I ask members just to listen. I am the chair, and I find it really discourteous to have all this backchat when I am speaking. I do not know how other members must feel. I call Gillian Mackay, who is joining us remotely. 16:43 Gillian Mackay: We have heard many times from Government that we need to let the Scottish hospitals inquiry do its work, and to respect its outcome. I absolutely agree with that. Only then can we learn the lessons of what went wrong and how we can make sure that it never happens again. However, I believe that we need to take action now to restore confidence in the hospital and in the board. We need to communicate clearly and reassuringly to patients, families and staff that the hospital is safe.”
“Christine Grahame: I think that I heard something highly critical of Lord Brodie; I hope that the official report staff picked it up. Current political commentary on whom to ultimately blame is unavoidable—I accept that— but we should not be rerunning issues. I want to be strict, I want people to be blamed and I want the matter to be sorted, but that should happen in the inquiry and not in the heat of political debate in the chamber. The legal framework establishes independence, and the chair is independent, so I find it disgraceful that members—not only Mr Sarwar, but others in the chamber—seem to be undermining the entire independence of the process. That does a total disservice to grieving people. The Deputy Presiding Officer: We move to closing speeches.”
“What we are hearing is another speech from the same briefing; it is whataboutery— The Deputy Presiding Officer: Mr Kerr, I think that Ms Grahame has got the gist. Christine Grahame: I am trying to speak with my legal hat on—[Interruption.] If Anas Sarwar is saying that certain witnesses should have been called and have not been called, that, for me, is a challenge to Lord Brodie. How can it not be? I have said—[Interruption.] The Deputy Presiding Officer: Members, could we please— Christine Grahame: I hope that I did not overhear some— The Deputy Presiding Officer: I did not hear anything—I am just hearing a lot of noise. I would like to hear the member who has the floor, and that is Christine Grahame. Please continue, Ms Grahame.”
“Lord Brodie can call whom he wants and decide what documents and exchanges he sees, and he can compel any witness that he wants to come to the inquiry. The question in the chamber is, therefore: does the Parliament have confidence in Lord Brodie? That is a very serious question. Current political commentary on whom to ultimately blame is unavoidable, and I accept that—[Interruption.] Stephen Kerr: This is nonsense. Christine Grahame: I will take an intervention—[Interruption.] Is the member actually saying that Lord Brodie is incompetent to chair the inquiry? Stephen Kerr: Of course we are not suggesting that the judge is incompetent. What we are pointing to is the incompetence of the Government in not being able to give straight answers to straight questions.”
“This inquiry is chaired by Lord Brodie, who is a judge of the inner house, operating independently, but with the authority to call witnesses and review evidence, including from Government ministers, and to compel attendance of witnesses. I therefore take issue with the part of the Labour motion that says: “recognises that … many serious questions remain regarding the decision-making process and the role of the Scottish Government” and “considers that political decision making should be considered by the inquiry”. In fact, Anas Sarwar recently called for John Swinney and Nicola Sturgeon to give evidence to the inquiry. That is political interference. Is Anas Sarwar suggesting that Lord Brodie has failed to call witnesses, and that his chairmanship is questionable or inadequate and not independent of politics?”
“Commentary on the evidence is unavoidable, but commentary on the outcome is not helpful; for me, it undermines confidence in the independent inquiry process. I despair at anyone politicising this extremely distressful and serious issue, so I repeat that the cabinet secretary decides the remit and the terms of reference, consulting the appointed inquiry chair on those terms of reference before they are finalised and published. That is the end of the Government’s involvement in the running of the inquiry. From then on, the chair is wholly responsible for conducting the investigation within that agreed remit and those references. There is a robust legal statutory framework to guarantee, in the interests of everyone, the independence of a public inquiry.”
“I begin by sending my heartfelt condolences to the families affected, especially those with children. As a parent and grandparent, I cannot imagine their pain and loss, which I know will have no end. I thank those who fought for a full determination of what happened at the Queen Elizabeth university hospital. I have challenged Anas Sarwar on rerunning a live inquiry that is structured strictly in terms of the Inquiries Act 2005 and the Inquiries (Scotland) Rules 2007. It has taken five years, and that period was no doubt extended by the Covid pandemic. Evidence to the inquiry has just concluded with parties’ closing statements. I submit that the inquiry’s approach has been thorough. Its report is to be issued later this year.”
“I move, That the Parliament condemns the culture of secrecy and cover-up that has hidden the truth from patients, families and campaigners and denied them justice in many NHS scandals in Scotland in recent years; recognises that, as the Scottish Hospitals Inquiry draws to a close, many serious questions remain regarding the decision-making process and the role of the Scottish Government; considers that political decision making should be considered by the inquiry, and calls for the Scottish Ministers to authorise the immediate full disclosure and preservation of all communications connected to the contaminated water and inadequate ventilation system and the premature opening of the Queen Elizabeth University Hospital, as well as any subsequent communications relating to the handling of the infection and its cover-up. 15:19”
“The direct questions that I posed to the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care must be answered during the debate if the Government is to have a shred of credibility with the public. I urge MSPs to put aside their political affiliation and do what is right by patients and families by voting for the motion.”
“The public inquiry is vital and must run its course, but it cannot be used as a shield for secrecy or inaction on the issues that confront patients today. That is why I am asking for the Parliament to vote for two things: first, the release of all ministerial and officials’ communication and discussions relating to the Queen Elizabeth scandal, and the taking of steps to ensure that none of the vital files—be they WhatsApp messages or messages on personal servers—are systematically deleted, as we know the Government likes to do; secondly, a real investigation into political decision making, because people deserve to know what happened and ministers should be held to account. Families deserve answers, accountability and justice.”
“Clinicians and staff who raised concerns were bullied and victimised by NHS managers, who are paid for by the public purse. Powerful institutions chose their reputations over their responsibility to patients. The health board and SNP ministers denied, downplayed and delayed. They did not put patient safety first. They did not put families first. They closed ranks. This is not about the NHS front-line staff—nurses, doctors, cleaners and porters—who care with compassion and professionalism under immense pressure every day. They are not to blame. The failure lies with senior leadership and a culture of secrecy and poor governance, enabled by incompetent ministers who repeatedly denied the scale of the problem and dismissed legitimate concerns.”
“If they believe that there is a link between infection and the loss of their loved ones, they deserve the truth and answers, just like any other family. Finally, although attention has been focused on the water supply, there must also be full scrutiny of the ventilation system and its potential link to infection and risk to life. When I say that this is the biggest scandal in the history of the Parliament, let me be clear about what has happened. Parents who should have been focused solely on supporting their child through cancer treatment were instead met with denial, delay and institutional self-protection. Whistleblowers were ignored, gaslit, lied to and punished for speaking out. Families were dismissed, patronised and made to feel as though they were making a fuss, when they just wanted answers about their children.”
“Kimberly has fought not because it will bring back her amazing daughter, Milly Main, but because she is determined that no other family should endure what she has endured. That takes unimaginable strength and courage. To Kimberly and to all the families: thank you. The dignity that you have shown has been extraordinary. You have fought for years to protect others, and you are the very best of Scotland. I will turn to a couple of other issues. Although, understandably, much of the attention has been on the children, infections in adults have not been given the level of scrutiny that they deserve. Those families still do not have answers; there has been no independent oversight of their concerns; and they are being asked to trust the same system that has failed other families.”
“If political decision making is not examined, ministers will attempt to use the final report of the inquiry as proof that the problems were contained entirely within the health board and could not have been prevented by Government intervention. That claim cannot be allowed to stand without proper scrutiny. Jeane Freeman has given evidence, and that is welcome, but she was appointed health secretary in 2019. We need those who were in office in 2015 to answer questions, too. I will speak directly about the families, who are among the most remarkable people that I have ever met. I have the privilege of calling Kimberly Darroch a friend. Although the whistleblowers helped us to get to this point, we would not be where we are without the courage of the families who refused to stay silent.”
“Christine Grahame rose— Anas Sarwar: We must know the truth behind the political decision making. The inquiry is vital and it must run its course, but new information has come to light in the past week, and no real scrutiny has taken place of the political decisions that were made before and after the hospital was opened. [Interruption.] You do yourself a disservice, Ms Grahame, I must say, in your response. The Deputy Presiding Officer: Speak through the chair. Anas Sarwar: Nicola Sturgeon, John Swinney and Shona Robison have not given testimony at the inquiry and have not been cross-examined. Without that, we will never have the full picture of what happened. There is a further risk.”
“The Deputy Presiding Officer: Thank you for your point of order, Ms Grahame. Were I to believe that he was stepping into an area that he should not be stepping into, I would step in. I do not consider that to be the case. Please continue, Mr Sarwar. Anas Sarwar: I have been raising these issues for seven years and, for seven years, I have heard the same nonsense that Christine Grahame has just recounted. I say to Scottish National Party members that hospital infections do not discriminate by political affiliation or by people’s constitutional position. Such infections contaminate people, whether they are a yes voter or a no voter, an SNP voter or a Labour voter, or a supporter of no party at all, so SNP members should care about these issues as much as Labour members do.”
“Will Anas Sarwar take an intervention? Anas Sarwar: I will not, because if anyone should intervene and answer those direct questions, it should be the health secretary, whose job it is to know the answer to such questions. That is why, alongside the demand to release the files, I am making a further demand today. Christine Grahame: On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I hesitate to intervene in this way, but I have concerns about the fact that although the inquiry has yet to report, what I am hearing, to some extent, is a rerun of the evidence and the suggesting of other evidence. The whole point of the inquiry is to be wholly independent of any political nuances, suggestions or whatever. I seek your guidance on whether you consider that Mr Sarwar is now stepping into an area that he should not step into.”
“I note that John Mason may, subject to what is said in reply, consider them to be probing amendments, but I thank him for bringing the issue to the attention of the chamber, and I hope that we make progress on it.”
“I rise to speak on amendments 24 to 26, in the name of John Mason, who made a persuasive argument regarding the St Kilda sheep in particular. However, I also note Edward Mountain’s comments, which are significant. John Mason and I would argue that the St Kilda sheep should be considered not as wild but as feral, given that their ancestors were a domestic flock. However, I note that the National Trust for Scotland, which is the responsible body and owns the animals, has noted that there is an issue with their welfare. I also note that the Scottish Animal Welfare Commission is now paying attention to that particular issue. In those circumstances—and there may be other failings in the amendments—it might be premature to import them into this particular bill.”
“What is missing—perhaps the minister will provide an explanation—is a breakdown by parliamentary region and more detailed data on new entrants, farm types and so on for both successful and unsuccessful applications. I do not think that that would breach data protection even if it was broken down to actual farms. That information may be available, but I have not been able to find it.”
“I found the minister’s answer of 4 December to Liam McArthur’s question in that regard most helpful. I will quote it briefly, given the time: “priority status alone did not guarantee funding; investments also had to demonstrate strong alignment with scheme objectives and deliver measurable outcomes.” He added: “Many applicants from priority groups applied for standard items of agricultural equipment, mainly for general livestock management, which, while not deemed ineligible, when assessed against other capital investments did not demonstrate strong delivery against the scheme’s objectives.”—[Written Answers, 4 December 2025; S6W- 42129] There followed a detailed list of items supported and the cost to the fund.”
“I looked at the Government’s website, which provided information on applying to the scheme and guidance on how to apply, and I note that the 42 per cent figure does not distinguish between applications that failed on eligibility, those that failed on verification and those that failed on both. Separation of that data would help us to determine whether the guidance needs to be revised. I note from the answer to a freedom of information request that artificial intelligence was not used to determine eligibility. By the way, I thank Liam McArthur for advising that “AI” has a different connotation in the farming community. I must not get the two things muddled. Because of the high demand and disappointment, there was quite naturally a sense among those who were rejected—they may be right; I do not know—that allocations may not have been fair.”
“I will go through some statistics. The scheme opened for applications on 14 July 2025 and closed on 22 August that year. The indicative budget allocation started at £14 million, but it increased to over £21 million because of high demand. I note that 7,852 applications were received and that, after sifting for eligibility and verification, 4,462 met the criteria for assessment. Of those, 1,794 applications were ultimatelyprioritisedand offered a grant. Overall, about 42 per cent of applications did not pass one or more eligibility or verification checks.”
“I thank Liam McArthur for bringing this debate on the future farming investment scheme to the chamber. In this context, I will defer to members who have much more in-depth knowledge of the sector than I have, but I note that I have had not one email on the issue from a farm in my constituency, although I expect and hope that I will get some emails after making this speech. Post-Brexit, other funding mechanisms have had to be established for the agricultural sector. In that context, the FFIS was a capital grant scheme for farmers and crofters that offered up to 100 per cent funding for equipment such as handling systems, feed trailers and so on. It was a competitive scheme that prioritised new entrants, young farmers, and small and tenant farms, with applications generally being made via the rural payments portal.”
“To ask the First Minister, regarding the proposed expansion of wind turbines, battery storage facilities and pylons across the Scottish Borders, whether the Scottish Government has carried out an assessment of the potential cumulative impact on the wildlife and the landscape, in light of the importance of tourism to the area. (S6F-04609)”
“To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to encourage all cyclists to ensure that they are visible, particularly during the winter period, and that they comply with the requirements of the highway code. (S6O-05384)”
“I am minded to accept a motion without notice, under rule 8.14.3 of standing orders, to extend the debate by up to 30 minutes. I invite George Adam to move such a motion. Motion moved, That, under Rule 8.14.3, the debate be extended by up to 30 minutes.—[George Adam] Motion agreed to. 18:18”
“It is not just about the roar of Hampden, the glamour and dreams of competing in—let alone winning—the premier league or being in a national team. It is about the local parks that are bursting with excitable young girls. It is about being part of a team and not sitting in front of a computer, and it is about running about, even on a dreich day—playing to win, of course, but also for the challenge and the sheer fun of it. It is about learning about the thrill of winning, dealing with defeat and growing from those experiences. It is also about life skills, not just football skills—we might even say that it is a bit of a rehearsal for life itself. The Deputy Presiding Officer: I am conscious of the number of members who still want to participate.”
“It is built, as many such clubs are, on volunteers, families and local sponsors, and it runs more than 20 boys and girls teams. It gives girls a place to belong, with the early touches team for the teeny weenies, through to the teens. Hundreds of girls turn out week in, week out to play football. Teams are supported and sponsored not only by the invaluable volunteers but by local businesses. Girls football in Gorebridge is also booming, with dedicated squads and multiple age groups, matching the national picture. Female participation is now at a record high at Arniston Rangers Youth Football Club, which has 300 youngsters, with its girls section playing across age groups. We can talk about football even if we are not a fan of the game and do not get overexcited or weep at defeats, and we can see how valuable it is to others.”
“It is not that long ago that girls were not even considered to play football, and, even at a competitive level, it is only recently that the stands have begun to fill up. That is partly due to the successes of the Lionesses and Scotland’s women’s national football team—which qualified for the FIFA women’s world cup for the first time in 2019 and, as of June 2025, is 24th in the FIFA women’s world rankings—which have worked their magic and their inspiration, as have Scottish Women’s Premier League teams Aberdeen, Celtic, Rangers, Hamilton Academical, Hearts, Hibs and many others. All that high-profile activity has encouraged development where it really matters—at grass roots. That brings me to Penicuik Athletic Football Club, which has been part of the town since 1888.”
“Why is that always said just before I rise to speak? I, too, congratulate George Adam on securing the debate, although it was, of course, too much to hope that it would be a Paisley-free zone when that would be his specialist subject should “Mastermind” ever come knocking. He made at least eight references to Paisley. I have confessed previously in public that sport, whether as a participant, a referee or a fan, is not in my DNA, so colleagues might wonder why I have opted to speak in the debate. Football remains a foreign land with a language of its own: to VAR or not to VAR—that is the question. Names of people have been mentioned that mean absolutely nothing to me. I will focus on the extraordinary turnaround in the attitude to women and girls in football—words that we would never have seen previously side by side on the page.”
“Under Willie Collum, the head of refereeing at the SFA, and Tommy Murphy, the deputy head of refereeing, we have Martin Atkinson, who came from the English Football Association and is helping us with VAR. We have some of the top officials from previous years now involved in the recruitment and retention of today’s officials, and I hope that that will continue in the future. In a debate about football, I think that it is important that our match officials are also mentioned and recognised. I say again that refereeing is a great opportunity: anyone who wants to be involved in the game but who, like me, lacks any ability to play football can referee—as you have shown yourself, Deputy Presiding Officer. The Deputy Presiding Officer: You are exposing my conflict of interest, Mr Ross, but I heartily endorse those sentiments. 17:59”
“There is continuous work within the Scottish FA to try to iron out some of the problems with VAR, but—more often than not—it will correct mistakes that we, as humans, make, and I think that that is a good thing. I know that my time is up, Deputy Presiding Officer but I want to say something briefly. We are seeing some great achievements in refereeing in Scotland—for example, Nick Walsh was recently promoted to the elite level in European refereeing. Our match officials in Scotland on the international list are performing, as they have been for many years, at the highest level in European competitions. Recently, Molly Alexander, who was formerly an international female official based up in the Highlands, joined the SFA’s referee committee in Scotland, which is another positive move.”
“[Laughter.] Douglas Ross: There was—I knew that I was going down that road, and that I probably should not. In the short time that is left to me in the debate, however, I want to say how important VAR is. I made an error in that match: I wrongly flagged a Dundee player offside when the footage showed that he was onside. My error was corrected on the pitch and a decision was taken so that my mistake did not have an impact on the game. That is why I support the use of VAR—I think that the match officials should not be the only ones in a stadium who can see that a mistake has been made. I have gone to games where people have seen on their phones, straight away, that a goal was offside and should not have been given, and now we are able to correct that. There are still problems with VAR, and I hope that it can be improved.”
“My sons now ask me about those players, and I can say that I have shared a pitch with them. I was on the pitch on Sunday, at the match between Dundee and Heart of Midlothian, where fans of football across the clubs say that Craig Gordon made one of the best saves ever seen in Scottish football. I was lucky enough to be on the pitch to see that. I say that by way of encouraging future referees, and to highlight that, apart from playing, there are other opportunities to get involved in and see football at the highest levels, including some of the greatest sporting achievements by individuals and clubs. It is a great opportunity. George Adam: At the game at which the member officiated on Sunday, was there a VAR decision that had to be made?”
“I am very encouraged now that my two boys are involved in a mini dribblers group and are practising far earlier than I did; I hope that they will have more opportunities to play. Given my complete lack of talent at playing football, I had to look for an opportunity to still be involved in the game. There was a small article at the back of The Press and Journal—I have mentioned the P and J in the chamber already today—looking for recruits to come on board and take refereeing classes. I did those classes in Elgin and I refereed my first matches down in Ayrshire, where I was at college; those were under-14s and under-15s school matches. I went from there to officiating—as I still do—in the premiership in Scotland and going to world cup and European qualifiers and champions league matches, officiating with players such as Ronaldo and Messi.”
“Will the member give way? Douglas Ross: I give way to Christine Grahame, who is perhaps a recruit to refereeing. Christine Grahame: Well, we must stick it out and see, but I am genuinely interested: why did you choose to be a referee rather than a player? [Laughter.] It is a serious question. Obviously I am out of my depth, but there we go. The Deputy Presiding Officer: Always through the chair, although I am a match official as well. Douglas Ross: Of course—we have another qualified referee here, in the Deputy Presiding Officer. Christine Grahame asked why I chose to be a referee. It was not so much a choice, but a decision that I could take only because I had no ability whatsoever to play football. My skills are extremely limited, and no club would ever have me, down to the lowest leagues—I was so poor that I could not get involved.”
“Doing that at the moment would ease pressure. Has Transport Scotland ever considered that? If not, will it? Shona Robison: I am not aware of whether Transport Scotland has considered that specific option, but the Cabinet Secretary for Transport is in the chamber, and I am sure that she has heard what Christine Grahame has said and will follow up with her directly. Budget 2026-27 (Prostitution Support and Exit Services) 3.”
“I, too, have a vested interest in the Sheriffhall roundabout, because the A7, from my constituency, ends up there. I hear what the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government has said, and I heard what the Cabinet Secretary for Transport said on 1 December last year. However, I am still waiting and, like Miles Briggs, I will be keeping my eye on the timetables. Will the finance secretary convey to the transport secretary that, in the interim, a partial solution could be achieved? As cars approach the Sheriffhall roundabout from the A7, the road becomes two lanes only as they get to the roundabout, so cars bump up on to what we might call the hard shoulder or rough ground in order to make a second lane. Therefore, something could be done. Currently, only three cars can get through if they are travelling west or going straight on.”
“However, I say to Fulton MacGregor that the good thing about members’ business debates—I do not like it when we have members’ business debates that are controversial and really party political, but this debate is not one of those; PKU is deserving of a debate, as was the subject of Tourette’s, on which we had a debate a few months back—is that we can bring a very serious and important minority issue into the public arena. As I said, I am going to put a link to this debate on my Facebook, I am going to ask about it and I am going to find out what is happening in my constituency. I say to the guests in the public gallery that they have educated a politician, which is no mean feat, and that that politician will endeavour to educate her constituents. I hope that that will be helpful. 17:51”
“After the debate, I intend to put a link to the debate on my Facebook and to ask people who know about the issue to tell me what is happening in their area. I will also write to NHS Borders to ask what facilities it has in place. We all know about allergies, such as peanut allergies, milk allergies and this, that and the oatcake, but it is a sadness that people do not know about PKU, which is a fundamental, very serious and devastating inherited disease.”
“That will place huge stress on the person who is dealing with it. As I understand it, that is usually the women in the family. It means that people have to give up their work and therefore lose income. The ripples are enormous, and the challenges are huge. I have heard that there are certain therapies and drugs that might alleviate the condition, although I do not think that they have gone before the Scottish Medicines Consortium yet. I also heard about dieticians, and I heard from the colleague who has been a dietician about what is required. I represent the Borders and Midlothian, and I have no idea how many people in my constituency have PKU or what the facilities are, but that is not the end of the matter, because I am going to find out.”
“It is inherited, it is incurable and the damage is neurological and very serious. The condition means that people have to calculate what they are eating and how they are eating it, almost down to the single frozen pea. An example was given of a toddler. It is bad enough feeding a toddler at any time, but imagine feeding a toddler and having to calculate what they have eaten, knowing that it could have devastating effects if it is not done properly. That took me onwards to think about what happens when children go to nursery, and then to primary or secondary school. What happens when they go to a pal’s birthday party? There is a ripple that extends throughout their childhood. For a very long time, children will not understand why they have to do that, and they will certainly resent it.”
“I congratulate the member on securing the debate and I welcome the guests in the public gallery. I apologise for being unable to be at the event in December. I will come clean and say that I knew nothing about PKU until I heard about this debate but, after I spoke to Fulton MacGregor briefly and asked him what it was about, I wanted to find out more. I have been here for 27 years and I have never heard PKU mentioned—nobody has mentioned it to me. A bit like Douglas Ross said, that was the pricking of the heel, and I now want to tell my constituents about the issue. My summary might have mistakes, because it has been gleaned from members’ contributions, and I will not even try to pronounce the clinical terms. However, as I understand it, broadly, the condition is to do with a failure to process proteins appropriately.”
“The NTS is undertaking a full review, and we will, of course, engage and work closely with it on that. Homelessness 2.”
“I have to say that I very much support John Mason’s case. It seems to be a case of out of sight, out of mind. After all, we put the sheep there in the first place and left them to their fate, and their fate is most unpleasant. I am pleased to hear that the NTS is reviewing the situation, and I hope that it will take steps to ensure that those sheep are regarded as feral, not wild. Mairi Gougeon: I appreciate the points that have been made by Christine Grahame and John Mason. I have set out quite clearly the Government’s position on how the Soay sheep on St Kilda are regarded and the protections that are afforded to them under the 1996 act. As Christine Grahame touched on, and as I said in my initial response, the National Trust for Scotland, as the owner of St Kilda, has responsibility for the sheep that inhabit it.”
“It is also a step in building the institutions that we need for a prosperous future in which we make our own decisions and reap the benefits of them. The proceeds of those bonds will be used to fund capital investment in key infrastructure, including housing. I would be glad to meet with Christine Grahame to discuss those matters.”
“Christine Grahame: That is a heartening response, because it is estimated that there is currently some £250 billion of investment funding available from institutional investors across the United Kingdom, some of which could be available for investment in social housing. For example, pension funds require a return of about 6 or 7 per cent and, of course, security in their investments. That could be provided by social and affordable housing. The cabinet secretary has met with all those people, but will she meet with me to discuss a firm proposal that would involve—but not necessarily require—Scottish bonds as a vehicle for taking the matter forward in 2026? Màiri McAllan: The Government is on track to issue our first bonds next year, which is a reflection of the strength of Scotland’s economy.”