George Adam
Scottish National Party · Scotland
“The spirit of hope, optimism and belief has always been part of Scotland’s heart and Scotland’s story, which is why the motion feels so out of place in our chamber. Where Scotland sees hope, Reform sees grievance. Where Scotland sees opportunity, Reform sees division.”
“The tartan army have travelled in numbers, as they always do, and they have shown the world exactly what Scotland is all about. Scotland is good humoured, looks for friendship and shows respect to others and their culture—and is a wee bit gallus.”
“By the end, it reads like the ramblings of a very angry man sitting on his own in the corner of the pub, complaining about immigrants, about net zero, about equality, about young people and about Scotland—and eventually falling out with absolutely everyone else in the pub.”
“It is Nigel Farage—the same Nigel Farage who promised prosperity and delivered labour shortages, higher costs, barriers to trade and years of economic uncertainty— Malcolm Offord: Will the member take an intervention? George Adam:—and now he is back, demanding that Scotland trusts him again.”
“What Scotland needs is confidence in ourselves—confidence to build our communities and confidence in our ability to build a fair economy that works for everyone. We need confidence that our future is not bound up in the bitterness and division offered by Reform UK.”
“George Adam: His lordship’s argument is that it is slightly better than it is for somebody else next door. That is complete and utter nonsense. Presiding Officer, I used to be in the motor industry—if someone sold you a second-hand car that immediately burst into flames, you would not turn up and ask for a second one, would you?”
The complete record
Every one of 411 lines we hold for George Adam, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 9.
“I thank Liam McArthur for all the work that he has done on the bill. In my notes, it says, “Try not to cry during this debate,” because it means quite a lot to me. I often use songs and music to describe how I am feeling and to tell people how I feel. It is often said that music is the soundtrack of our lives. I used that phrase in the stage 1 debate to express my love for Stacey—I kind of do that a lot. After 30 years of marriage, it is probably less romantic than it was back in the day. It was American broadcaster Dick Clark who first used the phrase “Music is the soundtrack of our lives.” When we hear certain songs, we are instantly taken back to when we first heard them— the school disco, the relationship that was fleeting but powerful or St Mirren winning the cup. That last one might just be me.”
“Overall and taken together, the amendments would ensure that regulation is based on recognised competence and qualifications, while appropriate safeguards for patients would be maintained. They would not weaken the regulations but would ensure that the framework recognises qualified practitioners and allows ministers to regulate the sector proportionately rather than excluding the sector entirely. I hear from across the chamber that there is recognition that many women-led small businesses are going to be put out of business by the bill. If we do not support amendments such as those from Jeremy Balfour and me, there will be no pathway and those women-led businesses will be put out of business. 15:15 The Deputy Presiding Officer: I will take a brief contribution from”
“A better way needs to be found, and there needs to be a pathway for non-medical but highly trained aesthetics providers to carry out perhaps not all but some treatments. My amendments in the group would ensure that future regulations on qualifications and training properly recognise competence across the sector. Amendment 17 would require regulations to ensure that pathways exist for practitioners who hold relevant qualifications but are not healthcare providers. That would ensure that the regulatory framework recognises the range of qualified practitioners who currently operate in the sector. Amendment 18 would require ministers, when specifying qualification or training requirements, to “have regard to recognised aesthetics qualifications.” Amendment 23 is a consequential amendment.”
“The bill would create the odd position in which highly trained aesthetics practitioners would need to be supervised by a medical practitioner with possibly only a few hours of aesthetics training. The bill also raises practical questions about capacity, as no clear data is available on how many prescribers actively work in the aesthetics sector or whether there would be sufficient numbers to support independent clinics across Scotland. As the minister has confirmed, the number of such clinics might be as high as 1,500. The bill would force qualified, responsible providers to recruit medics to supervise them, but the Government cannot tell us whether that would be possible, given that data on the number of prescribers is not available. Furthermore, can the NHS afford to lose hundreds of prescribers to the aesthetics sector?”
“Ultimately, people who undergo such procedures deserve to have confidence that the person treating them has the right expertise and that the appropriate oversight exists. I believe that amendment 5 would provide for that, and I encourage colleagues to support it. I move amendment 5. Ash Regan: I will support Jeremy Balfour’s amendment 5. Injectable aesthetics procedures are not typically taught as part of most undergraduate medical or nursing degrees. As a result, medical practitioners who enter the aesthetics sector often obtain their training in such procedures through separate aesthetics training courses. By contrast, non-medical practitioners, who often receive qualifications regulated up to level 7 in aesthetics practice, focus entirely on facial anatomy, complications management and safe aesthetics practice.”
“That would allow people to continue working, gain experience, develop skills and, ultimately, get the qualification. Amendment 5 aims to strike a fair and proportionate balance. It would recognise and support practitioners who had undertaken advanced qualifications, and it would ensure that robust safeguards were in place for the public. Ultimately, we need to provide public safety and protect small businesses. If we do not do that, people will go to other parts of the country, they will set up completely unregulated businesses and there will be greater health consequences as a result. Many small businesses will close, and people who have put in a significant amount of money will be put out of work.”
“Specifically, amendment 5 would allow practitioners to provide non-surgical procedures unsupervised if they were a regulated medical professional or a non-medical practitioner with a qualification relevant to the procedures that they were providing “at a level at least equivalent to level 11 of the Scottish credit and qualifications framework.” Such qualifications reflect a high level of knowledge and competence, as would be appropriate for independent practice. Importantly, amendment 5 is not about shutting people out of the sector. If a practitioner did not yet meet that threshold, they could still be allowed to practise, but they would do so within a framework of supervision by an appropriately qualified medical professional.”
“Although the procedures are often described as non-invasive, we know that, when things go wrong, there can be significant consequences, including infection, tissue damage and long-term complications. For that reason, it is essential that those who carry out the procedures independently have a sufficiently high level of training and competence. At the same time, I recognise that many practitioners in the sector who have spoken to me have invested significant time and effort in gaining meaningful qualifications and building professional standards. Amendment 5 is very much about recognising expertise. It would ensure that those with the appropriate level of qualification could practise independently with confidence, and it would give the public assurance that the standards would apply across the sector.”
“Amendment 16 disagreed to. Amendments 3 and 4 moved—[Jenni Minto]— and agreed to. The Deputy Presiding Officer: Group 4 is on qualifications and training. Amendment 5, in the name of Jeremy Balfour, is grouped with amendments 17, 18, and 23. Jeremy Balfour: I confess that when I saw this bill come before Parliament, I did not expect to engage directly with it. However, over the past few months, like Alex Cole-Hamilton, Ash Regan and others, I have been approached by numerous sole traders and businesses about the effect that the bill will have if it is passed, particularly on small businesses and on the young women who have sought to carry out these procedures as a trade. The intention behind amendment 5 is to ensure that non-surgical cosmetic procedures are carried out safely and by people who have the appropriate level of expertise.”
“On a point of order, Deputy Presiding Officer. I could not connect to the system. I would have voted no. The Deputy Presiding Officer: Thank you, Mr Adam. I will make sure that that is recorded. For Baillie, Jackie (Dumbarton) (Lab) Baker, Claire (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab) Boyack, Sarah (Lothian) (Lab) Briggs, Miles (Lothian) (Con) Burnett, Alexander (Aberdeenshire West) (Con) Carlaw, Jackson (Eastwood) (Con) Carson, Finlay (Galloway and West Dumfries) (Con) Choudhury, Foysol (Lothian) (Ind) Clark, Katy (West Scotland) (Lab) Dowey, Sharon (South Scotland) (Con) Duncan-Glancy, Pam (Glasgow) (Ind) Eagle, Tim (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Findlay, Russell (West Scotland) (Con) Fraser, Murdo (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Gibson, Kenneth (Cunninghame North) (SNP) Gosal, Pam (West Scotland) (Con) Grant, Rhoda (Highlands and Islands) (Lab) Griffin, Mark (Central Scotland) (Lab) Gulhane, Sandesh (Glasgow) (Con) Halcro Johnston, Jamie (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Hoy, Craig (South Scotland) (Con) Johnson, Daniel (Edinburgh Southern) (Lab) Kerr, Liam (North East Scotland) (Con) Kerr, Stephen (Central Scotland) (Con) Leonard, Richard (Central Scotland) (Lab) Lumsden, Douglas (North East Scotland) (Con) Marra, Michael (North East Scotland) (Lab) McCall, Roz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) McNeill, Pauline (Glasgow) (Lab) Mochan, Carol (South Scotland) (Lab) Mountain, Edward (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Mundell, Oliver (Dumfriesshire) (Con) O’Kane, Paul (West Scotland) (Lab) Ross, Douglas (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Rowley, Alex (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab) Russell, Davy (Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse) (Lab) Smith, Liz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Stewart, Alexander (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Sweeney, Paul (Glasgow) (Lab) Villalba, Mercedes (North East Scotland) (Lab) Webber, Sue (Lothian) (Con) Wells, Annie (Glasgow) (Con) White, Tess (North East Scotland) (Con) Whitfield, Martin (South Scotland) (Lab) Whittle, Brian (South Scotland) (Con) Against Adam, George (Paisley) (SNP) Adamson, Clare (Motherwell and Wishaw) (SNP) Allan, Alasdair (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (SNP) Arthur, Tom (Renfrewshire South) (SNP) Balfour, Jeremy (Lothian) (Ind) Beattie, Colin (Midlothian North and Musselburgh) (SNP) Brown, Keith (Clackmannanshire and Dunblane) (SNP) Brown, Siobhian (Ayr) (SNP) Burgess, Ariane (Highlands and Islands) (Green) Callaghan, Stephanie (Uddingston and Bellshill) (SNP) Chapman, Maggie (North East Scotland) (Green) Coffey, Willie (Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley) (SNP) Cole-Hamilton, Alex (Edinburgh Western) (LD) Constance, Angela (Almond Valley) (SNP) Dey, Graeme (Angus South) (SNP) Doris, Bob (Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn) (SNP) Dornan, James (Glasgow Cathcart) (SNP) Dunbar, Jackie (Aberdeen Donside) (SNP) Ewing, Annabelle (Cowdenbeath) (SNP) Fairlie, Jim (Perthshire South and Kinross-shire) (SNP) FitzPatrick, Joe (Dundee City West) (SNP) Forbes, Kate (Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch) (SNP) Gilruth, Jenny (Mid Fife and Glenrothes) (SNP) Gougeon, Mairi (Angus North and Mearns) (SNP) Grahame, Christine (Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale) (SNP) Greene, Jamie (West Scotland) (LD) Greer, Ross (West Scotland) (Green) Harper, Emma (South Scotland) (SNP) Harvie, Patrick (Glasgow) (Green) Haughey, Clare (Rutherglen) (SNP) Hepburn, Jamie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (SNP) Hyslop, Fiona (Linlithgow) (SNP) Kidd, Bill (Glasgow Anniesland) (SNP) Lochhead, Richard (Moray) (SNP) MacDonald, Gordon (Edinburgh Pentlands) (SNP) MacGregor, Fulton (Coatbridge and Chryston) (SNP) Mackay, Gillian (Central Scotland) (Green) Mackay, Rona (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (SNP) Macpherson, Ben (Edinburgh Northern and Leith) (SNP) Maguire, Ruth (Cunninghame South) (SNP) Martin, Gillian (Aberdeenshire East) (SNP) Mason, John (Glasgow Shettleston) (Ind) Matheson, Michael (Falkirk West) (SNP) McAllan, Màiri (Clydesdale) (SNP) McKee, Ivan (Glasgow Provan) (SNP) McMillan, Stuart (Greenock and Inverclyde) (SNP) McNair, Marie (Clydebank and Milngavie) (SNP) Minto, Jenni (Argyll and Bute) (SNP) Nicoll, Audrey (Aberdeen South and North Kincardine) (SNP) Regan, Ash (Edinburgh Eastern) (Ind) Rennie, Willie (North East Fife) (LD) Robertson, Angus (Edinburgh Central) (SNP) Robison, Shona (Dundee City East) (SNP) Roddick, Emma (Highlands and Islands) (SNP) Ruskell, Mark (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Green) Slater, Lorna (Lothian) (Green) Somerville, Shirley-Anne (Dunfermline) (SNP) Stevenson, Collette (East Kilbride) (SNP) Stewart, Kaukab (Glasgow Kelvin) (SNP) Stewart, Kevin (Aberdeen Central) (SNP) Sturgeon, Nicola (Glasgow Southside) (SNP) Thomson, Michelle (Falkirk East) (SNP) Todd, Maree (Caithness, Sutherland and Ross) (SNP) Torrance, David (Kirkcaldy) (SNP) Tweed, Evelyn (Stirling) (SNP) Whitham, Elena (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley) (SNP) Wishart, Beatrice (Shetland Islands) (LD) Yousaf, Humza (Glasgow Pollok) (SNP) The Deputy Presiding Officer: The result of the division is: For 45, Against 68, Abstentions 0.”
“Its effect would be simple: if any provision of the act conflicts with a matter that remains reserved to the United Kingdom Parliament, that provision would have no legal effect in Scotland. Amendment 249 is not an attempt to frustrate the bill—”
“Amendment 248 disagreed to. Amendment 52 moved—[Liam McArthur]—and agreed to. Section 22—Limitations on effect of Act The Presiding Officer: We move to group 17, which is on limitations on the effect of the act. Amendment 249, in the name of Stephen Kerr, is grouped with amendment 113. I call Stephen Kerr to move amendment 249 and to speak to both amendments in the group. Stephen Kerr: Group 17 takes us to the constitutional question that sits at the foundation of the bill, which is whether the provisions before us can operate within the powers that this Parliament possesses. Amendment 249 seeks to make that boundary clear. It would broaden section 22 so that it would apply to all reserved matters under the Scotland Act 1998, and not only to particular areas such as drugs, poisons or aspects of medical regulation.”
“For Allan, Alasdair (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (SNP) Baker, Claire (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab) Balfour, Jeremy (Lothian) (Ind) Bibby, Neil (West Scotland) (Lab) Boyack, Sarah (Lothian) (Lab) Carson, Finlay (Galloway and West Dumfries) (Con) Dowey, Sharon (South Scotland) (Con) Duncan-Glancy, Pam (Glasgow) (Ind) Ewing, Annabelle (Cowdenbeath) (SNP) Ewing, Fergus (Inverness and Nairn) (Ind) Forbes, Kate (Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch) (SNP) Fraser, Murdo (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Gallacher, Meghan (Central Scotland) (Con) Golden, Maurice (North East Scotland) (Con) Gosal, Pam (West Scotland) (Con) Griffin, Mark (Central Scotland) (Lab) Halcro Johnston, Jamie (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Hoy, Craig (South Scotland) (Con) Johnson, Daniel (Edinburgh Southern) (Lab) Kerr, Stephen (Central Scotland) (Con) Leonard, Richard (Central Scotland) (Lab) Maguire, Ruth (Cunninghame South) (SNP) Marra, Michael (North East Scotland) (Lab) Mason, John (Glasgow Shettleston) (Ind) McCall, Roz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) McMillan, Stuart (Greenock and Inverclyde) (SNP) McNeill, Pauline (Glasgow) (Lab) Mundell, Oliver (Dumfriesshire) (Con) Nicoll, Audrey (Aberdeen South and North Kincardine) (SNP) O’Kane, Paul (West Scotland) (Lab) Regan, Ash (Edinburgh Eastern) (Ind) Roddick, Emma (Highlands and Islands) (SNP) Ross, Douglas (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Russell, Davy (Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse) (Lab) Sarwar, Anas (Glasgow) (Lab) Smith, Liz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Webber, Sue (Lothian) (Con) Wells, Annie (Glasgow) (Con) White, Tess (North East Scotland) (Con) Against Adam, George (Paisley) (SNP) Adam, Karen (Banffshire and Buchan Coast) (SNP) Arthur, Tom (Renfrewshire South) (SNP) Baillie, Jackie (Dumbarton) (Lab) Beattie, Colin (Midlothian North and Musselburgh) (SNP) Briggs, Miles (Lothian) (Con) Brown, Keith (Clackmannanshire and Dunblane) (SNP) Brown, Siobhian (Ayr) (SNP) Burgess, Ariane (Highlands and Islands) (Green) Burnett, Alexander (Aberdeenshire West) (Con) Callaghan, Stephanie (Uddingston and Bellshill) (SNP) Carlaw, Jackson (Eastwood) (Con) Chapman, Maggie (North East Scotland) (Green) Clark, Katy (West Scotland) (Lab) Coffey, Willie (Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley) (SNP) Cole-Hamilton, Alex (Edinburgh Western) (LD) Constance, Angela (Almond Valley) (SNP) Dey, Graeme (Angus South) (SNP) Don-Innes, Natalie (Renfrewshire North and West) (SNP) Doris, Bob (Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn) (SNP) Dornan, James (Glasgow Cathcart) (SNP) Dunbar, Jackie (Aberdeen Donside) (SNP) Fairlie, Jim (Perthshire South and Kinross-shire) (SNP) FitzPatrick, Joe (Dundee City West) (SNP) Gibson, Kenneth (Cunninghame North) (SNP) Gilruth, Jenny (Mid Fife and Glenrothes) (SNP) Grahame, Christine (Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale) (SNP) Grant, Rhoda (Highlands and Islands) (Lab) Gray, Neil (Airdrie and Shotts) (SNP) Greene, Jamie (West Scotland) (LD) Greer, Ross (West Scotland) (Green) Harper, Emma (South Scotland) (SNP) Harvie, Patrick (Glasgow) (Green) Haughey, Clare (Rutherglen) (SNP) Hepburn, Jamie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (SNP) Hyslop, Fiona (Linlithgow) (SNP) Kerr, Liam (North East Scotland) (Con) Lennon, Monica (Central Scotland) (Lab) Lochhead, Richard (Moray) (SNP) Lumsden, Douglas (North East Scotland) (Con) MacDonald, Gordon (Edinburgh Pentlands) (SNP) MacGregor, Fulton (Coatbridge and Chryston) (SNP) Mackay, Gillian (Central Scotland) (Green) Mackay, Rona (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (SNP) Macpherson, Ben (Edinburgh Northern and Leith) (SNP) Martin, Gillian (Aberdeenshire East) (SNP) McAllan, Màiri (Clydesdale) (SNP) McArthur, Liam (Orkney Islands) (LD) McKee, Ivan (Glasgow Provan) (SNP) McLennan, Paul (East Lothian) (SNP) Minto, Jenni (Argyll and Bute) (SNP) Mochan, Carol (South Scotland) (Lab) Rennie, Willie (North East Fife) (LD) Robertson, Angus (Edinburgh Central) (SNP) Robison, Shona (Dundee City East) (SNP) Rowley, Alex (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab) Ruskell, Mark (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Green) Slater, Lorna (Lothian) (Green) Somerville, Shirley-Anne (Dunfermline) (SNP) Stevenson, Collette (East Kilbride) (SNP) Stewart, Alexander (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Stewart, Kaukab (Glasgow Kelvin) (SNP) Stewart, Kevin (Aberdeen Central) (SNP) Sturgeon, Nicola (Glasgow Southside) (SNP) Sweeney, Paul (Glasgow) (Lab) Swinney, John (Perthshire North) (SNP) Thomson, Michelle (Falkirk East) (SNP) Todd, Maree (Caithness, Sutherland and Ross) (SNP) Torrance, David (Kirkcaldy) (SNP) Tweed, Evelyn (Stirling) (SNP) Villalba, Mercedes (North East Scotland) (Lab) Whitfield, Martin (South Scotland) (Lab) Whitham, Elena (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley) (SNP) Wishart, Beatrice (Shetland Islands) (LD) Yousaf, Humza (Glasgow Pollok) (SNP) Abstentions Adamson, Clare (Motherwell and Wishaw) (SNP) Findlay, Russell (West Scotland) (Con) Matheson, Michael (Falkirk West) (SNP) Mountain, Edward (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Whittle, Brian (South Scotland) (Con) The Presiding Officer: The result of the division is: For 39, Against 75, Abstentions 5.”
“Amendment 247 disagreed to. Amendment 248 moved—[Stephen Kerr]. The Presiding Officer: The question is, that amendment 248 be agreed to. Are we agreed? Members: No. The Presiding Officer: There will be a division.”
“For Allan, Alasdair (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (SNP) Baker, Claire (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab) Balfour, Jeremy (Lothian) (Ind) Bibby, Neil (West Scotland) (Lab) Boyack, Sarah (Lothian) (Lab) Briggs, Miles (Lothian) (Con) Carson, Finlay (Galloway and West Dumfries) (Con) Dowey, Sharon (South Scotland) (Con) Duncan-Glancy, Pam (Glasgow) (Ind) Ewing, Annabelle (Cowdenbeath) (SNP) Ewing, Fergus (Inverness and Nairn) (Ind) Findlay, Russell (West Scotland) (Con) Forbes, Kate (Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch) (SNP) Fraser, Murdo (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Gallacher, Meghan (Central Scotland) (Con) Golden, Maurice (North East Scotland) (Con) Gosal, Pam (West Scotland) (Con) Griffin, Mark (Central Scotland) (Lab) Halcro Johnston, Jamie (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Hepburn, Jamie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (SNP) Hoy, Craig (South Scotland) (Con) Johnson, Daniel (Edinburgh Southern) (Lab) Kerr, Liam (North East Scotland) (Con) Kerr, Stephen (Central Scotland) (Con) Leonard, Richard (Central Scotland) (Lab) Marra, Michael (North East Scotland) (Lab) Mason, John (Glasgow Shettleston) (Ind) McCall, Roz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Mundell, Oliver (Dumfriesshire) (Con) Nicoll, Audrey (Aberdeen South and North Kincardine) (SNP) O’Kane, Paul (West Scotland) (Lab) Regan, Ash (Edinburgh Eastern) (Ind) Roddick, Emma (Highlands and Islands) (SNP) Ross, Douglas (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Russell, Davy (Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse) (Lab) Sarwar, Anas (Glasgow) (Lab) Smith, Liz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Webber, Sue (Lothian) (Con) Wells, Annie (Glasgow) (Con) White, Tess (North East Scotland) (Con) Against Adam, George (Paisley) (SNP) Adam, Karen (Banffshire and Buchan Coast) (SNP) Arthur, Tom (Renfrewshire South) (SNP) Baillie, Jackie (Dumbarton) (Lab) Beattie, Colin (Midlothian North and Musselburgh) (SNP) Brown, Keith (Clackmannanshire and Dunblane) (SNP) Brown, Siobhian (Ayr) (SNP) Burgess, Ariane (Highlands and Islands) (Green) Burnett, Alexander (Aberdeenshire West) (Con) Callaghan, Stephanie (Uddingston and Bellshill) (SNP) Carlaw, Jackson (Eastwood) (Con) Chapman, Maggie (North East Scotland) (Green) Clark, Katy (West Scotland) (Lab) Coffey, Willie (Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley) (SNP) Cole-Hamilton, Alex (Edinburgh Western) (LD) Constance, Angela (Almond Valley) (SNP) Dey, Graeme (Angus South) (SNP) Don-Innes, Natalie (Renfrewshire North and West) (SNP) Doris, Bob (Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn) (SNP) Dornan, James (Glasgow Cathcart) (SNP) Dunbar, Jackie (Aberdeen Donside) (SNP) Fairlie, Jim (Perthshire South and Kinross-shire) (SNP) FitzPatrick, Joe (Dundee City West) (SNP) Gibson, Kenneth (Cunninghame North) (SNP) Gilruth, Jenny (Mid Fife and Glenrothes) (SNP) Grahame, Christine (Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale) (SNP) Grant, Rhoda (Highlands and Islands) (Lab) Gray, Neil (Airdrie and Shotts) (SNP) Greene, Jamie (West Scotland) (LD) Greer, Ross (West Scotland) (Green) Gulhane, Sandesh (Glasgow) (Con) Harper, Emma (South Scotland) (SNP) Harvie, Patrick (Glasgow) (Green) Haughey, Clare (Rutherglen) (SNP) Hyslop, Fiona (Linlithgow) (SNP) Lennon, Monica (Central Scotland) (Lab) Lochhead, Richard (Moray) (SNP) Lumsden, Douglas (North East Scotland) (Con) MacDonald, Gordon (Edinburgh Pentlands) (SNP) MacGregor, Fulton (Coatbridge and Chryston) (SNP) Mackay, Gillian (Central Scotland) (Green) Mackay, Rona (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (SNP) Macpherson, Ben (Edinburgh Northern and Leith) (SNP) Martin, Gillian (Aberdeenshire East) (SNP) McAllan, Màiri (Clydesdale) (SNP) McArthur, Liam (Orkney Islands) (LD) McKee, Ivan (Glasgow Provan) (SNP) McLennan, Paul (East Lothian) (SNP) McMillan, Stuart (Greenock and Inverclyde) (SNP) McNeill, Pauline (Glasgow) (Lab) Minto, Jenni (Argyll and Bute) (SNP) Mochan, Carol (South Scotland) (Lab) Rennie, Willie (North East Fife) (LD) Robertson, Angus (Edinburgh Central) (SNP) Robison, Shona (Dundee City East) (SNP) Rowley, Alex (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab) Ruskell, Mark (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Green) Slater, Lorna (Lothian) (Green) Somerville, Shirley-Anne (Dunfermline) (SNP) Stevenson, Collette (East Kilbride) (SNP) Stewart, Alexander (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Stewart, Kaukab (Glasgow Kelvin) (SNP) Stewart, Kevin (Aberdeen Central) (SNP) Sturgeon, Nicola (Glasgow Southside) (SNP) Sweeney, Paul (Glasgow) (Lab) Swinney, John (Perthshire North) (SNP) Thomson, Michelle (Falkirk East) (SNP) Todd, Maree (Caithness, Sutherland and Ross) (SNP) Torrance, David (Kirkcaldy) (SNP) Tweed, Evelyn (Stirling) (SNP) Whitfield, Martin (South Scotland) (Lab) Whitham, Elena (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley) (SNP) Wishart, Beatrice (Shetland Islands) (LD) Yousaf, Humza (Glasgow Pollok) (SNP) Abstentions Adamson, Clare (Motherwell and Wishaw) (SNP) Matheson, Michael (Falkirk West) (SNP) Mountain, Edward (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Whittle, Brian (South Scotland) (Con) The Presiding Officer: The result of the division is: For 40, Against 74, Abstentions 4.”
“Are we agreed? Members: No. The Presiding Officer: There will be a division. As this is the first division of today’s stage 3 proceedings, I suspend the meeting for around five minutes to allow members to access the digital voting system. 10:01 Meeting suspended. 10:06 On resuming— The Presiding Officer: We come to the division on amendment 247. Members should cast their votes now.”
“This is an extremely sensitive subject for everyone. For Mr Fraser to use some of the language that he has used and to conflate two very different things is not befitting of the debate that we have had throughout our stage 3 consideration. It could be upsetting to people in the chamber and outside of it. Mr Fraser should know better; he should take a look at what he has said and maybe retract some of it and tone down the language a bit. Murdo Fraser: I say very gently to Mr Adam that that intervention is not worthy of him. We are dealing with a legal reality and a groundbreaking change in the law that will have a huge impact. All that I am seeking to do is to ensure that we put suicide prevention at the heart of the bill. For that reason, I press amendment 247. The Presiding Officer: The question is, that amendment 247 be agreed to.”
“It is clear that a minority of people who attend football matches believe that they can behave in any way that they want, without any thought for the safety or security of the vast majority of fans who go to matches to support and enjoy watching their football team. With regard to the minority of fans who behave illegally and irresponsibly, action will be taken by Police Scotland, and action should be taken by the clubs.”
“The behaviour of some fans after Sunday’s match between Celtic and Rangers was completely unacceptable. Does the minister agree that all fans must exercise personal responsibility—as the vast majority already do—to ensure that those around them can enjoy the game safely, and that football clubs also need to take some responsibility for the behaviour of their fans? Siobhian Brown: Yes, of course—just as everyone has a responsibility to behave appropriately and in line with the law, no matter where they are. Just because they are at a football match does not mean that the rules of society and the rule of law are not in place. No one should feel that being in a stadium on a match day somehow gives them permission to act in ways that they would not do in other parts of society.”
“To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on the progress of the changing places toilets Scotland fund. (S6O-05590)”
“Let us recognise that affordable football is not a luxury but is essential for the health of our communities and the future of national game and let us champion the fan ownership model as a pathway to sustainable, community-centred football that serves everyone. The Deputy Presiding Officer: Thank you Mr Adam. I did not have to use the button, which is always good. I call the minister, Maree Todd, to respond to the debate. 19:19”
“However, that should not be used as an excuse; instead, it should serve as a call for creative thinking about how to balance financial sustainability with accessibility. How can we ensure that our clubs thrive while keeping the game affordable for ordinary families? The German model shows us the way forward. By combining fan ownership with affordable pricing, they have built sustainable clubs with passionate and loyal supporter bases. Those clubs are financially stable precisely because they prioritise accessibility, community engagement and affordability. Football clubs such as St Mirren do remarkable work in their communities, from food bank connections to mental health initiatives, but we should always put the football fan first.”
“We must acknowledge that football is facing an affordability crisis. Working-class fans and families are being priced out of the game that they love. When someone on a modest income has to choose between paying bills and taking their child to see their local football team, something fundamental has gone wrong. I support the calls for a £25 price cap on away tickets in Scotland. I recognise that ticket sales form a more significant proportion of revenue for Scottish clubs than for those in many other European leagues. Unlike England’s Premier League or Germany’s Bundesliga, where there is a substantial income from broadcasting deals, our Scottish clubs rely heavily on gate receipts. According to recent analysis, ticket sales account for 20 to 30 per cent of revenue for most Scottish Professional Football League clubs.”
“That model is even more established in Germany, where all but three Bundesliga clubs operate under the 50-plus-1 rule and 15 of the 18 clubs have majority fan ownership. That has created one of the most affordable and fan-friendly cultures in Europe, with average ticket prices significantly lower than in Scotland and England. I have witnessed first-hand in my constituency the transformative work that is being done by St Mirren. The club is a beacon of inclusivity and has achieved recognition as a disability-friendly club through its partnership with the charity I Am Me Scotland. That groundbreaking work ensures that everyone, regardless of ability, can enjoy the beautiful game in a safe and welcoming environment. That is what football should be all about: opening doors, not closing them.”
“We have built a fan ownership model in Paisley and SMISA now holds a majority stake in St Mirren FC, ensuring that supporters have a genuine voice in how their club is run. Our partnership with our corporate stakeholder Kibble mirrors the successful German model of fan ownership, in which clubs must follow the 50-plus-1 rule, ensuring that members retain majority voting rights. We have created a similar structure at St Mirren, where community ownership works alongside responsible corporate partnership. Kibble’s involvement has been transformative but, crucially, fans remain at the heart of all decision making. Fan ownership has grown across Scotland and there are currently supporter-owned or part-owned clubs in Scottish football, including Hearts, Motherwell, Dunfermline Athletic and Stirling Albion.”
“I, too, have been involved in many of these debates, but I will ensure that I give an entirely new speech and that you do not have your finger anywhere near that button, Presiding Officer. I am delighted to contribute to the debate, which was brought to the chamber by my friend and colleague Gillian Mackay, and to recognise the vital contribution that our football clubs make to their fans and to our society. I have said before that football is not just a game in Scotland but is woven into the fabric of our communities. In Paisley, St Mirren Football Club has been a cornerstone of our community for generations, bringing together people from all backgrounds and ages. I am particularly proud of the work that I established and led in the St Mirren Independent Supporters Association.”
“She was a force of nature who never forgot where she came from, who fought tirelessly for what she believed in, and who made everyone around her better just by being there. Even in her final hours, Jeane was thinking of others, making sure that Susan knew that she loved her, and making sure that her big, daft pal fae Paisley was happy. That was Jeane Freeman. That will always be Jeane Freeman. Although our hearts are broken, we are all better people for having known her. Susan, we cannot begin to understand your loss, but I promise you this: Jeane’s legacy, her spirit, and her fierce love and loyalty will live in every single one of us. She was, and always will be, simply incredible. [Applause.] 14:31”
“She told me that Jeane had come round just as the final whistle had blown and said, “George will be pleased that St Mirren won.” Jeane then demanded that Susan send a picture of her in her hospital bed, clapping because St Mirren had got through to the next round of the cup. That is a classy lady. That woman, even when she was dying, was thinking about someone else: she was thinking about her big, daft pal fae Paisley. But Jeane Freeman was an extraordinary woman who touched the lives of everyone fortunate enough to know her. She was fierce, loyal, compassionate and utterly devoted to those she loved. From her powerful advocacy during the independence referendum to her leadership through the darkest days of Covid, Jeane showed Scotland what true public service looks like.”
“When I heard about Jeane’s illness, I was devastated, but, Jeane being Jeane, she managed to tell me in a very Jeane Freeman way—so much so that she nearly convinced me that she was not as ill as everybody else had told me and that there was a way that she could work things out. That was Jeane being Jeane and thinking about how I felt. The night before Jeane died, I was in the house, shouting at the television. St Mirren were playing Airdrie, and, although we won, it was a terrible game. At that moment, when the most important thing in my life was that football game, I got a message from Susan saying that Jeane had worsened and that she was permanently at Jeane’s side.”
“Susan and I firmly agree with the Bill Shankly quote: “People say that football is a matter of life and death. I say to them that it is a lot more important than that.” However, during her time away from politics, Jeane started following the great game, mainly with Susan, for Susan. Jeane and Susan attended Euro 2024 in Germany, along with half the country. They followed St Mirren’s recent success in the league cup this season—they both attended the final and semi-final games. Jeane did that for Susan, because that is what Jeane was all about: looking out for other people and making everyone else feel good.”
“When Jeane was the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Sport, during Covid, the rest of the world saw the woman we knew. Constituents told me how much Jeane and Nicola meant to them during that very scary time in their lives. That period now seems like a bad dream, much of which we are still dealing with, but people saw what Jeane Freeman was all about. As many members will be aware, Susan Stewart, Jeane’s partner, is football daft. Perfect for me, she is a St Mirren fan and a member of the tartan army, so we have a lot in common. Jeane— no so much. Even during her tenure as the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Sport, Jeane never really got our beautiful game and national pastime. She never understood what all the excitement was about.”
“Jeane would call me out if she thought that I was wrong, and she would tell me exactly what I had done wrong. Even as recently as last year, she texted me to tell me how stupid I was to do a certain thing. I am not telling anyone today what that certain thing was—people will need to work that out for themselves—but she used her time, even in her retirement, to tell me that. I also remember a recent conversation in which she questioned the logic of our First Minister in no longer having me in the Scottish Government, but, as I said, Jeane was a very good mate. Sometimes, at the most inappropriate times, I would try to make Jeane laugh, because, when she laughed, her whole face would light up, her eyes would sparkle and we would hear her very throaty laugh.”
“If, for whatever reason, you found yourself on the wrong side of Jeane, the best thing to do was run—run for your life. I was lucky. I loved Jeane and she loved me. We did not hug one another and tell one another that all the time—it was a very west coast of Scotland working-class love, but we had our moments. It was usually me who had the emotional outburst, but that will come as no surprise to anyone in the chamber. Jeane had a brick in her office. I often wondered why someone would have a brick in their office. It was a brick from her school—from where she came from—because she had a sense of who she was and where she came from, and that brick represented that. That meant everything to me, because, as some members know, I feel great pride in my home town of Paisley, so I could understand Jeane right away.”
“I will open by taking the opportunity to talk about Susan Stewart. I thank Susan for asking you, Presiding Officer, to ask me to speak today—as a former Minister for Parliamentary Business, I know that that is the protocol. It means a lot to me, because Jeane meant a lot to me. One of the things that I keep trying to remember—we must all remember this—is that, no matter how we all feel, Susan will be feeling this loss more than any of us. My heart goes out to her, because I know the loss that she will be feeling. Jeane Freeman was a force of nature, an impassioned campaigner and a feisty woman who did not suffer fools, so, of course, I was drawn to her—have you met the women in my life? When Jeane liked you, she liked you. She was hugely loyal.”
“Today, I say this to the UK Government and to those in Opposition parties in this Parliament. Stop making excuses, stop hiding behind selective arguments and stop using recycled arguments. Do the right thing, accept that an injustice has been identified, provide fair compensation and restore a measure of dignity to women who have already been asked to pay far too high a price for the UK Government’s failure. The UK Labour Government and Labour MPs, many of whom were elected on the back of supporting WASPI women, need to take responsibility and do the right thing. 17:17”
“However, in January this year, the Labour UK Government refused again. It came out with the same flawed arguments, the same cold comfort and the same old messages that had been given to thousands of women before. It said, “We know the system failed, but you are on your own”. What we have here is a U-turn on a U-turn, back to the original position. The WASPI women were told to wait for the review and that the case would be considered afresh, but instead we got a rerun. For the women affected, that is not just disappointing—it is crushing. Every delay is not a line in a ministerial statement; it is another month of anxiety, another month of lost income and another month of feeling invisible. My position on the matter is clear: I stand with the WASPI women, because justice delayed is justice denied.”
“I have said this before: these are our mums—well, not in my case, because some of them are only 10 years older than me—our grandmothers and other members of our family. These are real lives. These are real people who live in our communities. This is about a worker who did everything right, who paid in, who believed that the system would keep faith with them and who then had to choose between heating and eating while waiting for a pension that would end up never coming. In December 2024, the DWP apologised and accepted the maladministration, but refused to set up the compensation scheme. Then, when the WASPI women took legal action, the Labour UK Government settled, committed to reconsider the decision properly and even paid more than half of the WASPI women’s legal costs.”
“The WASPI women are not asking for special treatment. They are not even arguing that the law should never have changed. They are asking for something far more basic. They are asking for fairness and redress, because the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman found maladministration in the failure of the Department for Work and Pensions to properly communicate the changes to the women’s state pension age. The ombudsman looked at the evidence and concluded that many of the women born in the 1950s were left with little time to plan for the future. This is not some abstract policy debate; this is about a woman in Paisley who worked for decades in her community and who made plans around her retirement age, only to be told far too late that the goalposts had moved.”
“I am grateful to my friend and colleague, Bill Kidd, for bringing this debate to the chamber, and to the WASPI women who continue to campaign. Behind all the acronyms and parliamentary process sits the simple truth that these are real people—real women in our communities—who were let down by the UK Government. I spoke during Kenny Gibson’s previous members’ business debate on this subject, so I was going to apologise if I repeated myself, but, after listening to some of the Opposition contributions today, I think that I will have to repeat myself. Tim Eagle said that the Scottish Government should provide the compensation, but the UK Government needs to take some responsibility for what it has done to the WASPI women. It is absolute nonsense for members to come here and make that academic argument at this stage.”
“While Keir Starmer’s distracted Labour Party looks the other way on the cost of living crisis, our Scottish Government is freezing rail fares. Will the First Minister explain how such decisions are putting money back into the pockets of my hard-working Paisley constituents?”
“What does not help is that we live in a political environment where we have the likes of Douglas Lumsden using artificial intelligence to generate around 1,300 FOI requests over four months. There were 987 in January 2025 alone, and that cost £185,000. That is the kind of thing that we have to be very careful about. Nobody in the chamber should be satisfied with the status quo in areas where improvement is needed. However, the question is not whether we should reform but how we reform. We must do that with the evidence in front of us and with the costs properly understood, and we must do it in a way that strengthens openness and practice, and not just on paper. That is the responsible and workable approach, and that is why I will not support the bill at stage 1. 15:05”
“We often talk about culture change in organisations such as the Scottish Government, local authorities or other FOI-able organisations, but in order to have that culture change we must get beyond the idea that that is an addition to the job. FOI is not an addition to the job: it is part of the job, it is something that you have to do and it is a legal requirement. At the same time, however, we have to strike the right balance, so that we do not take people away from their core duties and core jobs. I know the challenge that the Scottish Government faced during my time in post in trying to ensure that we issued the required 95 per cent of FOI responses in time.”
“It also includes compliance monitoring and the appointment of FOI officers. Whatever the actual intention behind those proposals is, there would be real consequences for staffing, training, governance and digital infrastructure, and we cannot pretend that those consequences would just disappear into existing budgets. In the material it provided to the committee, the Scottish Government set out its case that the 2002 act’s section 60 code of practice provides good guidance but that the bill would introduce new statutory duties that would go beyond current practice, including creating a new legal duty of proactive publication under the enforceable publication code and the designation of FOI officers with defined responsibilities. My argument is that we are at a stage where public organisations already have people who do that.”
“I say clearly at the outset that I am not against the idea of openness or the reform of FOI—some media outlets would probably have said otherwise when I was the minister, but that was a them problem and not a me problem. The question before us today, as many others have already said, is whether the bill, in its current form, is the right vehicle to deliver change and whether Parliament has enough certainty about what that would mean in practice across the public sector. The evidence heard by the committee repeatedly returned to the central issues of cost, burden and uncertainty. The bill goes well beyond making small technical adjustments to introduce new statutory obligations across the public sector, including requirements for proactive publication— which, incidentally, I always believed that the Government should have done anyway.”
“I thank Katy Clark for the way that she has gone about the business of progressing her member’s bill. Trying to sum up my thoughts on FOI in four minutes will be difficult, but I will be brutally honest. I should mention at this stage that I was the minister in post when Katy Clark originally published her bill and was at an FOI conference where I proposed my ideas about how we could move forward and she proposed hers. My opinion, which I have shared before, is that the current FOI regime, which has been in place for 20 years, remains fundamentally sound. It provides a strong and enforceable right to know how the Government and other public services operate, while at the same time including safeguards to protect genuinely sensitive information. I have said those things numerous times before.”
“To ask the Scottish Government what interaction it has had with Strathclyde Partnership for Transport regarding the Strathclyde regional bus strategy. (S6O-05475)”
“I hope that, as a result of agreeing today that the bill should proceed and as a result of the work that we will do to progress the bill to stages 2 and 3 and put it on the statute book, when we return to Parliament in the next session, we can look back and reflect on the work that will be carried out in our local authorities, in the hope that we will have reduced the burden that parents have felt. We hope that there will be fewer parents who describe their school experiences as stressful or a battle or who feel alone or cut off. 15:38”
“That is probably what has been reflected most in this afternoon’s debate. We are trying to set things right for children and young people who have experienced the inappropriate use of seclusion and restraint, but we are also trying to support parents and carers who face daily challenges and often find it hard to get to the truth of what is happening to their children and young people and to move beyond that to build a strong relationship with those who, as Daniel Johnson said, are in loco parentis.”
“In my time there, we produced a number of important pieces of work and reports on seclusion and restraint in schools and the abuses that have happened, which we have heard reference to this afternoon. However, Enable tried to look more widely at the school experience of children and young people who have a learning disability, autism and neurodivergence. We tried to reflect on their experience and, crucially, how we could make it better for them and for their parents. I remember a statistic that came from the report “#IncludED in the Main?!” At that point, the hundreds of parents and carers of young people with a disability whom we surveyed said that they found their experience of the school system stressful and a battle—those were the words that were used—and that they felt alone and cut off from decision making.”
“I know that Daniel Johnson will turn to those points in his closing speech, but we also have an opportunity, as the bill progresses, to address some of those points more fully. In reflecting on some of the process that sits around the bill, what Daniel Johnson said about the non-Government bills unit was correct. That unit is the unsung hero of Parliament in ensuring that bills are well drafted and well considered and that they can be brought to Parliament for scrutiny and for us to discuss the issues, decide on the general principles—as we will this afternoon—and then move forward into the subsequent stages. In opening, I reflected that I worked for Enable Scotland for seven years.”