Rhoda Grant
Scottish Labour · Scotland
“To correct the minister, I say that the agricultural funding was rolled up into the block grant rather than being Barnettised. The exact same amount of money is being received because of that. Stakeholders are concerned about the lack of detail in tiers 2 and 3 of the rural support plan.”
“It feels a little like groundhog day. South Uist and Barra face yet another chaotic holiday period. South Uist faces an 85 per cent cut in its ferry service during the Easter period. The First Minister knows that this community has suffered from cuts for years, and that has caused businesses to struggle.”
“We have given certainty about what the payments will look like between now and 2030. The funding has been Barnettised—it may well be rolled up into the block grant, but it has definitely been Barnettised. The funds from the United Kingdom Government have been frozen.”
“This will be my last speech in the Parliament, and it feels apt that it is about crofting, because the cross-party group on crofting was one of the first cross-party groups that I was involved in setting up, and it feels as though things have come full circle. It would be wrong of me, in my last speech, not to pay tribute to some people.”
“I thank Tim Eagle for his kind remarks. There will be a lot of thank yous in this contribution, because I also want to thank all those who helped us with our work on the bill, including Parliament staff on the committee and in the legislation team, as well as those who gave evidence to the committee and the bill team and the minister, for…”
“As MSPs, we should remember that we could achieve only a fraction of what we do were it not for those who work with us, so I thank them for their support. I also want to thank our Scottish Labour staff pool and the parliamentary staff who support us so well.”
The complete record
Every one of 428 lines we hold for Rhoda Grant, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 6 of 9.
“I wonder how we might bring forward those issues. In the Scottish Parliament, committees can introduce legislation, but that process has been used on only a small number of occasions. Perhaps the Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee could have a role in introducing some of the Scottish Law Commission reports as legislation in the future—that might be an issue for the next session of Parliament. The debate not only gives us an opportunity to pay tribute to the Scottish Law Commission’s work; it provides us with an opportunity to explore solutions to ensure that its work reaches fruition, thereby allowing the Scottish people to see, and experience in practice, the benefit of its work. 17:46”
“The commission’s work deals with those aspects, making the law clear and accessible to everybody. A large number of commission reports have not yet been actioned. That has been an issue for many years, and we need to find a way of tackling all those reports, because they have a purpose. They might not have political impetus, but they will provide a valuable service to the Scottish people. Sometimes, those niggly issues make life hard for people and use up their resources and energy, but they are not headline grabbing, because they might not have an impact on many people. For example, the Succession (Scotland) Act 2016 simplified inheritance rules, which was very important to people. Those issues are, as I said, never headline grabbing, and they do not find their way into manifestos, but they are essential to good governance.”
“The motion highlights some of the Scottish Law Commission’s work, but there is much more that it has done. Many of its interventions relate to property and contract law that was drawn up many decades ago and needed to be modernised to reflect current practices. For example, the Succession (Scotland) Act 2016, which was based on a proposal from the commission, simplified inheritance rules. The Scottish Law Commission works to ensure that the law keeps pace with modern innovations. Case law can interpret to an extent, but we should have law that is clear and fit for purpose. There are aspects of law that are so old that they have fallen out of use but are still on the statute book, and laws that have been adapted through case- law interpretation of modern circumstances. All those things need to be dealt with, and the law amended.”
“I congratulate Stuart McMillan on securing the debate and congratulate the Scottish Law Commission, its staff and its commissioners on its 60th anniversary. I, too, welcome Michael Clancy to the gallery—he has provided a lot of really good advice to members of this Parliament for many years. The Scottish Law Commission’s work is valuable, taking ancient legislation and updating it so that it is fit for modern circumstances. The commission builds trust not only across the Parliament but across society, because it does not have a political axe to grind; it is independent of Government. Its sole purpose is to have good law. The law is there to serve the people, but it needs to make sense in the modern age, and it needs to be transparent and understandable for people.”
“Will the First Minister intervene personally to ensure that, when the MV Isle of Lewis is retired, the people of Barra have a ferry that meets their needs? The Presiding Officer: Let us keep our questions and responses concise.”
“This week, I attended a meeting with constituents from Barra, CalMac Ferries and Caledonian Maritime Assets Ltd. It became clear during the meeting that it has long been recognised that Barra’s ferry, the MV Isle of Lewis, will be retired next year. Despite that, however, a practical alternative ferry has not been planned for the route. CMAL suggested a ferry with a lot less capacity, citing the population size of the isle of Barra, apparently ignorant of the fact that the islanders cannot get bookings on their existing ferry due to lack of capacity. Barra is the southern gateway to the Western Isles. The fact that decisions are made on assumptions held by distant bureaucrats rather than the available data indicates why our ferry provision is in such a mess.”
“In 2024, the United Nations special rapporteur on violence against women and girls, its causes and consequences, in her report on “Prostitution and violence against women and girls”, recommended that states “Adopt the abolitionist legal framework and its five pillars, including the decriminalization of women in prostitution; providing comprehensive support and exit pathways; criminalizing the purchase of sexual acts; criminalizing all forms of pimping; and implementing sensitization campaigns for sexual act buyers”. We must take that action, and I urge the Scottish Government to work with Ash Regan to ensure that we create a model for Scotland that combats exploitation and prostitution, in order to create a Scotland where women are truly equal. The Deputy Presiding Officer: We move to the open debate. 17:12”
“He gave her time and attention as well as drugs and alcohol. He groomed her into prostitution. In Scotland today, she is committing a crime but those who buy sex with her, from her boyfriend, are not. When people see the reality of prostitution, no one can be under the impression that it is harmless. Christian Action, Research and Education—CARE—for Scotland undertook a Savanta poll of more than 2,000 United Kingdom adults, which found that seven in 10 people back a ban on pimping websites that advertise sex for sale.”
“She battled anxiety and depression and was moved into supported accommodation for her own safety after a couple had groomed her into selling sex. Unfortunately, as is often the case, the accommodation was targeted by men who were looking to build relationships with young people and offer them drugs and alcohol in return for sex. She was approached there by a 20-year-old man who built her trust and offered her free drugs. Eva did not recognise that as grooming. She introduced her friends to him—they would gather at his flat for drink and drugs, and he asked her and her friends for sex as payment. He then had Eva sell sex to other men to help him out financially. She believed that he was her boyfriend, and she agreed to do that to help him. She did not get involved with that man to set up a business—she was vulnerable.”
“We need support services—including the police—to be readily available and properly trained to identify this abuse, to intervene and to support those who face exploitation. In 2020, University College Dublin examined the recent change of law in Ireland, reporting “an increased willingness amongst women to report crimes committed against them and in their improved relationship with Gardaí overall.” Similar outcomes have been reported elsewhere. That demonstrates that change needs to be met by a police force that is able to provide the right support. Many of those in prostitution have multiple vulnerabilities, including a lack of money and a history of childhood sexual abuse; looked-after children are particularly vulnerable. As an example, I highlight the case of Eva, who grew up with a chaotic home life.”
“Evidence shows that, in Sweden, the proportion of men who pay for sex had dropped from 12.7 per cent in 1996 to 7.6 per cent in 2008. That was the lowest level of demand in Europe. Public attitudes changed because the law acts as a deterrent to sex trafficking. Other aspects of their society also changed for the better, including the sharing of caring responsibilities and a narrowing of the gender pay gap. For such laws to be effective, we need to empower women and address vulnerability. No one chooses to sell sex as an easy option; it is a choice that is made when no other options exist and when there is no other choice. That makes selling sex inherently exploitative—one human being exploiting another’s vulnerability. Therefore, support to exit must include health support and it must also support empowerment to work and build a future.”
“Many women do not believe that they are being exploited because they came here of their own free will to try to find a better life and blame themselves for the situation that they now find themselves in. Others fear retribution from traffickers and flee. The police use pimping websites to identify trafficked women. The cross-party group on commercial sexual exploitation carried out an inquiry into those websites and found that although they enable violence against women they are subject to no redress at all. I am a member of the A Model for Scotland campaign group that campaigns for a law to effectively stop this exploitation. In 1999, Sweden became the first country to combat demand for prostitution by criminalising paying for sex while decriminalising the victims of sexual exploitation.”
“Indeed, the law criminalises them and exonerates the perpetrator. I commend Ash Regan for bringing forward her Prostitution (Offences and Support) (Scotland) Bill. We need to decriminalise those who sell sex, who we recognise are being subjected to violence. We need to hold the sex buyers who perpetrate that violence and create demand to account. Although our law holds men who kerb crawl to account, it does not hold pimping websites to account, nor those who profit from prostitution by hosting the adverts and those who place them. According to police figures from 2020, 84 women were sexually exploited by trafficking gangs in Scotland. Nine of the women were underage, with the youngest being only 13 years of age. We know that that is a tiny fraction of those who are exploited.”
“I thank the members who signed my motion, which enabled this debate to happen. It has been a long-held view of the Scottish Government and the Parliament that prostitution is violence against women. It is the epitome of inequality when a man can buy a woman for their own pleasure—a pleasure that has, at its very core, the overpowering of another’s free will in return for money. It exploits the seller’s need for money to take their power and agency away from them. By its very nature, the payment is to negate the need for consent—but you cannot buy consent. We all know that prostitution is inherently dangerous. Those who sell sex often face rape and abuse from sex buyers. Despite the recognition that this is violence against women, there is little in our law that protects women from such violence.”
“The distribution of fishing quota remains the responsibility of the Scottish ministers. How will the cabinet secretary ensure that that public asset remains in public hands and is used to ensure that inshore operators and new entrants have better access to the industry in such a way that ensures that cases of modern slavery and human trafficking are consigned to history? Mairi Gougeon: Rhoda Grant raises several important matters that I am more than happy to follow up on specifically. We consulted on some of those matters recently and we always aim to do so in a fair and equitable way. On some of the substantive matters, I am happy to follow up in writing. Crown Estate Scotland (Borrowing Powers) 4.”
“Michael Matheson made the point that communities need to be nurtured and have confidence in investment, because huge risks are involved in it. The Deputy Presiding Officer: I encourage you to come to a conclusion, Ms Grant. Rhoda Grant: Many other excellent points have been made in the debate, and I could speak for another seven minutes in order to highlight them. Community energy provides 34 times the community benefit of privately owned energy. Therefore, we need to ensure that that benefit is returned to our communities. I urge the Scottish Government to ensure that all arms of government have a presumption to contract and support community energy producers. 16:39”
“We need to look at funding. Colin Smyth talked about the Scottish National Investment Bank. The Co-operative Party’s “Scotland’s green energy future” asks whether SNIB should have a dedicated fund. We need community investment. Audrey Nicoll talked about communities that have money to invest but not the land to develop. Could they invest in other community-owned wind farms or renewable generators? Douglas Lumsden talked about planning and how the same regulations were in place regardless of the planning application’s scale or ownership. That is something that we need to look at. A number of people talked about doubling the funding for CARES and ensuring that communities have confidence in the scheme.”
“We could also look at having a co-operative retailer for community energy, because one issue is that all the retailers are multinationals. How do community generators sell their energy into the grid at an affordable price in order to challenge fuel poverty? Community Energy Scotland tells us that all community-owned wind turbines that are operational will need to be replaced by 2038. Therefore, we need to get alongside communities and help them to meet the challenges. We need to look at how we can secure grid connections for developing community projects, which is a big issue, because community projects cannot develop a number of projects and then sign up to grid connections. They must have the grid connection before that point, so they are not being counted when it comes to grid infrastructure. That needs to change.”
“I ask the Scottish Government to ensure that there is a presumption in favour of community ownership in scenarios in which a community organisation is willing to take on such a project. Like Colin Smyth, I am a proud Scottish Co- operative Party member, and I am therefore committed to co-operative ownership. Co- operative Development Scotland, which is a wing of Scottish Enterprise, is supposed to support the growth of co-operatives and community-owned businesses. It could play an important role in assisting the development and scaling up of community energy organisations throughout Scotland, but that is being limited due to inadequate funding and resources. The Scottish Government should specifically commit to increasing CDS funding, which is ring fenced from the Scottish Enterprise budget, so that it can do that work.”
“In answer to a question, the Scottish Government admitted that no wind farms in our national forest and land are community owned or community run. Of the 25 operational wind farms that are on Scotland’s national forest and land, which are managed by Forestry and Land Scotland, none is community owned, in whole or in part. That means that 1,300MW are being generated through private ownership. Alex Rowley, Patrick Harvie and others cited the example of the Cruach Mhor wind farm, which is on Forest and Land Scotland land in the Cowal peninsula. The community was keen to take on the farm when it was put out to tender again, but its bid was totally rejected by Forestry and Land Scotland.”
“We need to pursue research and development in relation to storage and alternative methods of transmission to ensure that none of that energy goes to waste and that it goes where it is most needed. Sarah Boyack and many other speakers talked about community benefit. The Aquatera report for Point and Sandwick Trust said: “In cash terms, the average payment from the community owned wind farms in our study is £170,000 per installed MW per annum compared to the private industry standard of £5,000 per installed MW per annum.” That is a huge difference. There is 34 times more benefit from community-owned generation than from privately owned generation. Perhaps the cabinet secretary will take someone from Forestry and Land Scotland aside and point out which model provides the best community benefit and return.”
“Community owners such as the Galson Estate Trust are looking at how to retail their community-generated energy at an affordable price to local people in their community, many of whom suffer from fuel poverty. A number of members have rightly mentioned Point and Sandwick Trust, which has also led the charge in that regard, by helping members of its community to become more fuel efficient and therefore to cut their fuel bills. We see community generation doing that all the time. Sarah Boyack talked about the amount of money that is paid in constraint payments. When those payments are made, the energy is being wasted at the moment. She suggested that the energy should be used for not-for-profit heat networks, which is an excellent idea.”
“Energy is a key resource, and community ownership of energy has empowered communities and provides resources for on-going investment in community wellbeing. I welcome the investment that has been announced by Great British Energy and the Scottish Government in the community energy generation growth fund. That is very much appreciated, but we possibly have to go further than that. Alex Rowley talked about fuel poverty, which is often the crux of the matter. Community-owned energy provides an opportunity to tackle fuel poverty. Renewables are often developed in areas of the highest fuel poverty but, when that is done by private investors, local communities do not really see the benefit. Community ownership could be a vehicle to provide that.”
“We also need to review legislation and build post- legislative scrutiny into our processes. There might be opportunities to do that at the start of a parliamentary session, when legislation has not yet been introduced. We need to consider using that time to train committee members, as well as let them review previous legislation. That would give them an insight into that committee’s work. 16:00”
“I am sure that every woman in the Parliament would argue that we already work harder than men as it is, and that we would not want to work any harder than that. Not only would it be incredibly disappointing if we had single-sex parties; a single-sex party could not prevent a committee from being single sex if it were the last party to nominate. That would cause problems for other parties. Should they forego their committee membership? Should another woman step in? What should happen then? The simple way of avoiding that is to ensure that all parties pursue gender equality in their MSP group. Having taken a number of interventions, I am now running out of time. It is essential that we review and refresh our procedures to keep our Parliament responsive to the needs of our communities. We need to review our committees.”
“Would the member be comfortable if a committee had all female members and a good, female committee member had to be taken off to be replaced by a male? Rhoda Grant: I really look forward to the day when that must happen—[Laughter.] I cannot conceive of it, but I sincerely hope that it does. If that were the case, I would be willing to come off the committee. Our Parliament should be representative of the communities that we represent. If we had gender balance in the Parliament, single-sex committees would not be an issue at all. However, signing up to the ideal of no single-sex committees without challenging parties to have better gender equality means exactly what Jackie Dunbar and Jackson Carlaw have talked about—that women would end up working harder than men.”
“We must also not shy away from setting up short-life committees. Sometimes the committee structure is so stuck that we cannot do things a bit more flexibly. We should look at setting up short- life committees and sub-committees—or joint sub- committees of two or more committees, if that would be useful. That would give us the flexibility to react to circumstances. I absolutely agree that there should be no single-sex committees. Scottish Labour works hard to ensure that our group has gender balance, and we must never stop doing that. Douglas Ross: I have been interested in the discussion about that issue. If I understand correctly, all the committee members on the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee, which is considering the matter, are female, apart from the convener.”
“Jamie Hepburn: The member will surely recognise—I must be careful of what I say here— that not every minister might remain one for the entire duration of a session of Parliament. How would she deal with the notion that those members who have been disenfranchised might then find themselves on the back benches and on a committee? Rhoda Grant: That would apply, too, to those who were promoted into ministerial and cabinet secretary positions—they would already have cast a vote and would then be subject to scrutiny by that same committee. However, we would simply have to live with that, because I do not think that any of us are so arrogant that we cast a vote expecting to be in an elevated position and none of us are probably looking at our demotion so clearly as when we are looking to cast a vote— although the minister might disagree.”
“It is difficult to see how we can leave our party politics at the door in what sometimes can be a very partisan Parliament. A proposal is that we elect committee conveners. We believe that that would help. It would obviously have to be under the d’Hondt system, so that candidates could be only from one party. That approach would give scope for a different career path for MSPs, who could look to become a committee convener rather than a Government minister or cabinet secretary. It would also provide opportunities for those who might not be in favour with their party and might never hope to aspire to committee convenership otherwise. Excluding cabinet secretaries and ministers from casting a vote in the ballot would ensure that the Government could not unduly influence those elections.”
“However, it is important for all of us that legislation is of quality, is robust and that it delivers for the people of Scotland. It serves no one’s interest if members of the governing party go soft on Government ministers when, in fact, they need to be more robust in specific instances. Rhoda Grant: Indeed—I was about to make that very point. Legislation must be tested to ensure that it will do what it is meant to, that it will not have unintended consequences and that it will be really good legislation. That benefits the Government as well, because it means that its legislation is all the better because of it. At the same time, I do not think that anyone expects committee members to leave their personal beliefs at the door when they go into committee. Sometimes, that directs the approach that they take.”
“I thank the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee for the debate and for carrying out an inquiry into committee effectiveness. We must review and improve our procedures to ensure that the Parliament always operates to the highest standards. Our committees exist to hold Government to account and to test legislation. Members must leave their party allegiance at the door and hold Government to account. Some would argue that the role is different for members of the governing party when they are dealing with legislation, given that they stood on a manifesto that promoted that same legislation. I do not think that anyone would expect the committee— Kenneth Gibson: Will the member take an intervention on that point? Rhoda Grant: Yes. Kenneth Gibson: That is a really important area.”
“We all know, however, that HIAL was never so proactive as it was when Sandy Matheson chaired the board. Islanders are by nature seafarers and would make a much better job of running those services than people who have never set foot on an island. The Scottish Government has promised resilience funding, but we need to know the detail of that and how it will protect businesses going forward. As we have heard, ferries are not just a problem for the Clyde and Hebrides service; the Orkney and Shetland interisland fleet is even older, and it does not even provide reasonable disabled access. Those councils cannot afford to replace their fleet, and they need help from the Scottish Government to access capital to allow them to do so.”
“The cost to our island communities has been incalculable—there is a shortage of ferries, and the ones that we have are old and break down regularly. When I speak to businesses, I am struck by the fact that they are surviving only through sheer determination. Had they not had island DNA, they would have upped and left for places where they did not have to struggle with constant disruption. The same is true for those who need to access healthcare off island. Against the backdrop of failing ferries, the stress of being unwell, in addition to the stress of trying to access care, will be incalculable. Those issues are crucial to islanders, yet we do not have adequate representation of islanders on the boards of HIAL, CalMac and CMAL. The insinuation is clear: islanders cannot manage their own services.”
“It is also disappointing that no progress has been made on 11 out of the 13 objectives in the national islands plan, but I have to say that I am at a loss to understand which of the two objectives has seen any progress at all. I come to the issue of ferries, on which, despite the fact that they are essential for island communities, we have seen growing disruption. The Government has failed our islands by having no ferry replacement plan, and it started a replacement programme only when the crisis loomed. The building of the Glen Sannox and the Glen Rosa has been a disaster; the cost to the public purse of building those ferries should have replaced the whole fleet, had the plan been efficiently managed.”
“Surely it is wrong that in a modern Scotland children are being forced to leave home to access education. The act is a huge disappointment to islanders. It could have been a game changer, but it makes little or no difference to their lives. Tim Eagle: I missed it if you said it, but I was wondering whether you would join me in welcoming residents of Mull who are in the gallery listening to the debate and who are probably very interested in what you are talking about. The Deputy Presiding Officer: Always speak through the chair. Rhoda Grant: Yes, I am happy to do that. I hope that the 2018 act will make a difference, because even at this stage, the Government could intervene to ensure that islanders’ views were heard.”
“Government agencies ignore their obligations under the 2018 act and do not carry out island communities impact assessments; for example, there have been decisions such as the closure of tourist information offices that were obviously detrimental to those communities, but no impact assessment was carried out on them. The communities of Mull have expressed concerns about the new school campus, but their concerns have been absolutely ignored. That is, of course, an issue for Argyll and Bute Council, which should be subject to the 2018 act and therefore should be island proofing that policy; however, it is also an issue for the Scottish Government, which will provide funding for the campus. It could step in to ensure that all islanders’ ambitions are met.”
“Our amendment points to examples such as highly protected marine areas, the ban on wood-burning stoves, the island bonds plan and many other policies that have been designed with no knowledge of islands or their needs. We need a rural first policy approach in which every policy is tested in rural or island communities to ensure that there are no unintended consequences and that those policies are designed for our island communities. We know that policies designed in rural and island areas work well in urban settings, but the opposite is not the case.”
“Our islands are wonderful places, and I am honoured to represent all but two of Scotland’s populated islands. Each island is different, with a different personality, but all islanders have things in common: they are resilient, self-sufficient and quick to help and support others in their community. That is the reality of island living. The Islands (Scotland) Act 2018 built a level of expectation that, I am sad to say, has not been met. The promise was that policy would be island proofed and that islanders would not be disadvantaged due to where they were born or where they had made their home, and the hope was that legislation would help build island economies and stop depopulation. Sadly, that has not happened.”
“To ask the Scottish Government whether it plans to allocate additional funding to Argyll and Bute Council, in light of reports of Argyll and Bute health and social care partnership’s funding deficit. (S6O-04687)”
“We must also clean up our waters and ensure that we properly monitor sewage discharge, with a view to ensuring that there are no discharges of untreated sewage into our environment, including our seas. That will be good for the environment and for nature, and it will make our seas much safer for us, too. It benefits us all to make a difference, and I urge the Government to act on those suggestions. 18:31”
“I was going to start listing some of the beautiful beaches in the Highlands and Islands to give Finlay Carson a run for his money, but I just did not think that that would be fair, because there are many, many more in the Highlands and Islands. However, it is desperately sad that they can be spoiled by litter, which impacts habitats but also our enjoyment of the seaside. The information that was gathered from the Marine Conservation Society surveys must be used to initiate policies that cut litter and change behaviour, because it has to be down to each and every one of us, individually, to make that change and to make it socially unacceptable for people to litter. We see it all too often—not just on our beaches but on our roadsides.”
“The charge changed behaviour and that change was almost immediate—in a very short space of time, there was an 80 per cent decrease in the number of discarded carrier bags that were found in beach cleans. That shows how many had been littering our seas and other public places until that point. Sadly, that bucks the trend, because plastic litter continues to increase. Because of public awareness and the beach cleans that add to that awareness, the pressure to ban plastic and wet wipes continues to grow as we see an increase in the number of those wipes littering beaches. Their disposal in our sewage system adds to the pressure on the ancient infrastructure, causing further pollution. We have heard that Scotland’s beaches regularly top the list of the best beaches in the world.”
“That knowledge also shows trends of pollution and the impact of Government policy. What I found particularly striking was the number of carrier bags that were collected, which increased over the decades and then fell dramatically when a charge was placed on them. We know that it was not the cost of the carrier bag that led to the change of behaviour, rather it was the constant reminder that we were not doing the right thing if we took a carrier bag. Before the charge was implemented, we all set off shopping with great intentions about taking reusable bags, but we often forgot. That led to huge numbers of plastic bags blowing away and being discarded deliberately.”
“I congratulate Kenneth Gibson on securing the debate. I also pay tribute to the work of the Marine Conservation Society to highlight the impact of litter on our seas and beaches. I thank it for organising the beach cleans throughout the UK that have enabled more than 15,000 volunteers to take part this year. The beach cleans are not simply a tidy-up exercise, although they are part of that. The feedback that the MCS gets and the information it gathers in its surveys—it did 1,200 surveys last year—tell us what is littering our beaches and what it is finding there. That information is useful. It gives us an insight into the main cause of pollution, but it also gives us an insight into the most likely culprits, which is valuable information for tackling the issue at source.”
“We must make sure that our loved ones know our wishes and that we update them when circumstances change. As a society, we do not really speak about dying. We have to change that. We need to have those discussions. We need to make sure that everyone can access high-quality palliative care, to enable them to live their last precious days to the full with their loved ones. That has to happen before we ever consider assisted dying. 16:13”
“In those circumstances, if assisted dying were an option, it is easy to see why somebody would ask for it for themselves, to save their families from that grief and worry. We know that, in the Covid pandemic, not every life had the same value. Older people and disabled people were encouraged to sign “Do not resuscitate” forms. Some refused to do that but then found that those instructions were placed on their files regardless. That must never happen again. Of course, we need to make end-of-life decisions; DNRs are a part of that, but they should always be an individual choice. Medical intervention and treatment is also a choice: we all know of people who refuse treatment because it makes them feel so bad or because it interferes with their last days with family and friends. Those are issues that we need to speak about.”
“We demand high-quality care at the start of life; we must demand it for the end of life, too. Sadly, too often, that is not happening. Too many people cannot access the care that they need at the end of life. There is a significant variation in the services across NHS boards. We all see it in our postbags: people are stuck in hospital, spending their last days and hours on busy wards with no privacy, where staff are too stretched and do not have the time to support the bereaved or care for the dying. There is a reluctance to acknowledge that someone is at the end of their life, because the resources are not there to support them. That leaves families struggling and asking for help but not getting it, because it is not recognised that the person is at the end of their life.”
“When there is no tomorrow, it is only today and this moment that count. When spending time with loved ones when there are no future plans to speak about, we talk differently. We reminisce and talk more about happy memories and the things that are important. We talk about what is happening in the moment. It is a time for people to make their wishes known. Some people use the time to give away prized possessions to the care of others. They take time to tell their loved ones what they mean to them. It is a time to help loved ones to cope with bereavement. For that to be done, there needs to be high-quality end-of-life care. The committee’s stage 1 report on the bill shows that 90 per cent of people need some form of palliative care at the end of life.”
“This debate pushes us all to examine our sense of right and wrong, not just for ourselves but for others. We all have our opinions, which are sincerely held and are based on our knowledge and experience and the evidence that we have read and heard. This vote falls to us as individuals, and we must do what we believe is right. As elected members, we must also represent the wishes of our constituents as fairly and fully as possible. I understand that many of my constituents will be disappointed in my vote tonight. I have a huge amount of respect for Liam McArthur and, especially, for the way in which he has pursued the bill. However, I cannot support the bill, because, for me, every day, minute and second of life is precious. When time is running out, it is even more precious.”
“However, in the programme for government—without apology for the delays—the Scottish Government boasts that it will publish a rural development programme. Although it must introduce a rural development programme, real change is impossible to achieve without the tools to do so. As members can imagine, I continued to read the document with increasing trepidation. Then my eyes fell on the words: “Building on having met all milestones set out in the delivery plan to dual the A9”. The key delivery milestone was to complete the dualling of the A9 by this year. However, the Government sells that as an achievement, albeit 10 years late. If the situation were not so serious, it would make for a comedy sketch. I say to George Adam that these are the same old attack lines because they are the same old failures. 16:08”