Stuart McMillan
Scottish National Party · Scotland
“Can the cabinet secretary provide any details about when funding will be in place to replace the Port Glasgow health centre with a new health hub? Can she advise when there will be investment to improve the fabric of Inverclyde royal hospital?”
“Will the member give way? Mark Simpson: I would love to. Stuart McMillan: Reform’s policies are about taking money out of the public sector, but Mr Simpson is now asking for more money to be spent on throughcare support. Where is that money coming from? I am genuinely interested to know.”
“Millions of people globally are impacted by climate change today, and that will also be the case for future generations, as has already been touched upon by Sanne Dijkstra-Downie.”
“It is important that they are successful in delivering the heat that we all need, but the issue of their environmental impact is also vital. District heating systems play an important role in communities up and down the country, but they come in a range of scales. Are they operating effectively?”
“I touched on the CPA a minute ago, and the issue of AI data centres has been raised time and again at both international and regional conferences. We are not the only people who are talking about the issue. Helpfully, it is on the agenda for this year’s festival of politics.”
“I look forward to the contributions from MSPs in the open debate, which I am sure will help the committee’s discussions on Thursday, when we meet for the first time, and during the rest of the parliamentary session. I will touch briefly on three items, for wider consideration.”
The complete record
Every one of 590 lines we hold for Stuart McMillan, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 5 of 12.
“Amendment 44 would require the Scottish Government to produce regulations on how such situations should be managed. I will come to the Government’s concerns once I have put this on the record. Although uncommon, that is a scenario of major concern to healthcare professionals, and we cannot wish that away. The role of any clinical professional to intervene in such circumstances where complications arise needs to be made clear. That could be a co-ordinating registered medical practitioner, staff at the location where an assisted dying takes place or the Scottish Ambulance Service, if called to the scene, so the issue goes beyond just the registered medical practitioner. The duties of all such staff in those circumstances need to be clearer.”
“The Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee recommended that a statutory requirement to consult with the chief medical officer should be added to the bill, which is why I lodged amendment 223. It does precisely what is needed by requiring consultation with the chief medical officer. Bob Doris: As we all know, occasionally people do not die as expected from taking a lethal substance. I will not debate how often that happens; I am sure that it is very rare, but it does happen. Ingestion of medication is not a reliable route for some people, especially if they are already ill. People may vomit the medication or fail to absorb a lethal or rapidly lethal amount. The person may then not die, or the process of dying may be more protracted and distressing than expected.”
“Miles Briggs: I suppose that the cabinet secretary would probably say what he has been saying and note that the Scottish Government is of the view that this amendment, and many other amendments, may give rise to issues of legislative competence. However, amendment 102, in the name of Neil Gray, would remove the reference in section 15(8) to approved substances, which would mean—I think that this is the point that the member is trying to make—that my amendment would therefore require only consultation on regulations in relation to the training of authorised health professionals, which is an issue that ministers should know is fully devolved to this Parliament, so I do not see why that would be outside the competence of our Parliament.”
“I have been looking at issues around the section 30 order process and the section 104 order process separately, because I have been reassured about the section 30 order process but not about the section 104 order process. I just noticed that the Government note says that the matters in section 15 can be dealt with as a consequence of the section 30 order, but the matters that you are touching on, Mr Briggs, sound to me as though they would otherwise have been dealt with through the section 104 process, because they relate to training and so on. You may not have a perspective on the issue—I suppose that I am really just raising the issue as much as anything else—but, if you have a perspective, you can give it to me. The Deputy Presiding Officer: Always through the chair.”
“Amendment 223 would require ministers to consult the chief nursing officer, the chief medical officer and others they consider appropriate before laying regulations specifically around training, qualifications and experience that a registered nurse or registered medical practitioner must have in order to take on the role of authorised health professional. Jamie Hepburn: I should apologise to Miles Briggs, because, in making this intervention on his speech, I am using him as a proxy for the cabinet secretary, because the point that I want to make occurred to me only after I read something in the Government’s commentary note that confused me a little.”
“Fundamentally, section 30 and section 104 orders are legitimate Parliamentary processes. I will leave it at that. Miles Briggs: I note that amendment 103 pre- empts amendments 104 and 105 and my own amendment 223, which I have lodged on behalf of the RCN Scotland, which is neutral on the issue of assisted dying. RCN Scotland’s position is that amendment 103 is not necessary because section 15(8) relates to the training requirement for a devolved health service, not the regulation of professionals. The role of registered nurses as authorised health professionals means that, if the bill passes, nursing leadership will be vital for ensuring that appropriate protections and training are put in place.”
“What I will say, however, is that, fundamentally, the section 104 order process is a legitimate process and, as I touched on yesterday when I spoke about the experience of the Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee, it has been utilised in Parliament before, in relation to the Moveable Transactions (Scotland) Act 2023 and the Trusts and Succession (Scotland) Act 2024. There were amendments at stage 2 and stage 3 of those bills but the concerns that we have heard over the past hour and 20 minutes were not raised at those times. The members of the Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee had unanimous positions on those bills, across parties. Therefore, I am saddened by what we have heard over the past hour and 20 minutes, irrespective of what people will do when it comes to the final vote next Tuesday.”
“Amendments 12 to 16, in my name, have been submitted following discussion with Liam McArthur after stage 2, when I proposed amendments on behalf of the Salvation Army. I thank Mr McArthur for his engagement and for working to deliver the amendments. Amendments 12 to 16 would provide technical improvements to the drafting of section 15 and tidy up aspects of it. I appreciate that Sue Webber’s amendment 100 would remove sections 15(7A) and 15(7B), but I ask colleagues to reject that amendment, as my amendments would enhance section 15(7A) and delete section 15(7B), which Sue Webber wants to see happen. I want to touch briefly on Liam McArthur’s amendments 43, 88, 101 and 104. I will not open up what we have been listening to for the past hour and 20 minutes.”
“We continue to fund the Scottish Ambulance Service’s mental health paramedic response units, and an evaluation of that support is expected in the coming months. Our investment in those units and in other improvements will continue to ensure that people who experience distress receive the right support at the right time and in the right place, while ensuring that officers are deployed only when necessary. Violence Against Women and Girls 7.”
“The cabinet secretary has touched on some of these points, but can she outline what further work is being done through improvements such as the distress brief intervention programme and the increased investment in mental health to get people the right care when they need it and reduce the need for police to attend mental health- related calls? Angela Constance: The investment in the distress brief intervention programme, which has now been rolled out across Scotland, has enabled it to achieve more than 100,000 referrals. The programme also supports the expansion of the NHS 24 mental health hub that I referred to earlier. That helps to support call-handling capacity and to establish the national model of digital and psychological treatments.”
“I suppose that my point is that we are where we are. We are in the reality of politics. We do not have that, and we are not going to get it unless the UK Government comes up with it in the next week, which I do not think it will.”
“Mr McMillan is correct in saying that the order could not have been made until Parliament had passed the bill, but there was nothing stopping the UK Government producing a draft or at least offering this Parliament some clarity, but it did not do that. Mr Balfour said that we lack a veto, but the commencement regulations are our veto, particularly if amendment 133 is passed. If Parliament passes the bill, no system of assisted dying could begin until we had agreed through the commencement regulations that, for example, conscientious objection, no detriment, training requirements and so on had all been covered. Do we not have that veto through the commencement regulations? 17:45 Jeremy Balfour: I absolutely agree with Mr Greer on his initial point that the UK Government could have given us something in draft.”
“If there had been the will, I think it would have been possible for both Governments to have drawn something up, not necessarily to tie everything up but to give us the general principles. I do not know whether the UK Government wants to give the opt-outs. We have had no indication of that in any correspondence and are being asked to take a massive leap in the dark. Ross Greer: Regarding the exchange between Mr McMillan and Mr Balfour about the section 104 order, I share their frustrations about the level of uncertainty that we face today. There was nothing to stop the UK Government producing a draft section 104 order.”
“Stuart McMillan: The section 104 process has regularly been discussed by the Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee, and I am sure that Mr Balfour would agree that we have consistently been told that the process would start only at the end, after stage 3 has been completed, and that it would not begin before stage 3 has been completed. However, the cabinet secretary’s letter of 5 March tells us that the section 104 process has already started. Does that not indicate either that the process has been changed or that it has been expedited for some other reason? Jeremy Balfour: I absolutely agree with Mr McMillan. Perhaps, when he speaks, the cabinet secretary can tell us why that has happened so quickly. Like Mr McMillan, I spent a number of years on the DPLR Committee and I know that it is unusual for that to happen.”
“Will the member accept an intervention? Jeremy Balfour: I will let Mr McMillan in in a moment. There are time pressures because this session of Parliament comes to an end in two and a half weeks’ time. The issue should have been sorted out by both Governments before now, so that we knew exactly what we were voting for. That could have been the way forward because, at that point, whether I agreed with the section 104 order or not, I would know exactly what protections other people were getting. I will not have that assurance, whether I am re-elected or not.”
“Yesterday’s announcement was a categorical show of support that Port Glasgow will still be building ships. I am delighted about that, and I am proud of what the SNP Government is doing. I also know that the workforce and their families are delighted. I am looking forward to taking that message to the constituency and to the voters in the election in May. The Deputy Presiding Officer: We move to closing speeches. 16:44”
“What many people, including some in the chamber, forget is that, no matter the well- documented issues regarding the MV Glen Sannox and MV Glen Rosa—some of which are true, I hasten to add—the yard has launched five vessels since the Scottish Government took it into public ownership. Many aspects of what has happened at the yard have been regrettable, to say the least. I have shared many frustrations with the shop stewards John McMunagle, who has since retired, Kenny Meechan, who has taken on John’s role, and Alex Logan. The strength and resolve of Alex Logan is absolutely immense. His belief in the yard and the workforce has now been rewarded, and I hope that the management will repay his and the entire workforce’s loyalty and commitment by delivering a yard that we can all be proud of.”
“Let there be no doubt that, but for the actions of the SNP Government in 2014 and again in 2019, when the yard was nationalised—I did not hear anyone support the nationalisation in their speeches—we would now have Newark apartments, instead of a shipyard, sitting beside Newark castle in Port Glasgow. The jobs and opportunities would have gone, and all that would be remembered of a once- proud tradition would be the Skelpies 100m away. I never want the SNP Scottish Government to apologise for saving hundreds of highly skilled, quality jobs in Port Glasgow, and I will never apologise for lobbying to save our yard and for lobbying to get work into our yard.”
“In minutes of a Cabinet meeting on 1 June 2005, the then Lib Dem MSP Ross Finnie, who was the environment minister and the one who signed off the contract for Remontowa to carry out the work, stated that “the yard had declined to a state that was close to irreversible.” When politicians fail to acknowledge the challenges faced by the yard long before 2014, they do the workforce and the yard an absolute disservice. Ferguson has lived more than nine lives, and I dare say that it will live many more, with many twists and turns still to come in its journey. If that is the case, it means that the yard will continue building ships and creating opportunities.”
“My support for the yard goes back long before I was elected. During the Westminster election campaign of 2005, I was the SNP candidate for Inverclyde, and I started a campaign to try to save the yard. During the campaign, the then Labour- Lib Dem Scottish Executive awarded the fisheries protection vessel order to the Remontowa shipyard in Poland. The situation at the Ferguson Marine yard was so severe that it laid off 100 workers.”
“Yesterday’s announcement by the Cabinet Secretary for Transport and the Deputy First Minister that Ferguson Marine is to build four new vessels, in addition to the Government’s intended purchase of Ardrossan harbour—which my colleague Kenny Gibson mentioned and has lobbied for consistently over many years—helps to shape today’s debate. Like my Ayrshire colleague, I have been persistent in my lobbying for Ferguson Marine, because it is not just a constituency issue; it is a personal one for me, too. I have said it before, but this is another opportunity to do so again in the chamber. When my father passed away, he was an employee of the yard, and the workforce was very supportive of our family. I have never forgotten that, and I never will. I know that my family were very grateful to those in the workforce for their support at that time.”
“First, I apologise to you, Presiding Officer, to Richard Leonard and to members in the chamber for my part in the sedentary discussion earlier. I, too, want to mention Fiona Hyslop, particularly as this is her final debate in the chamber, as Kenny Gibson mentioned. She is one of the class of 1999 and has certainly had a very distinguished period of service in the Scottish Parliament. I thank her for everything that she has undertaken in her time here. When she leaves Parliament, our Parliament—our country—will be in a better place for her contribution to the parliamentary process. [Applause.] I highlight the fact that my wife works part-time for CalMac Ferries, as I usually do when I speak about ferries.”
“Passenger revenue is up over the past decade by 40 per cent, but public subsidy is up by nearly 300 per cent. So what we have is a monopoly, and the question is: do we want it as a private monopoly or a public monopoly?”
“When I recently sought information on ferry delays and cancellations from the Cabinet Secretary for Transport, I was told in a written answer, which was released just two days ago, that “Western Ferries and Pentland Ferries… are both privately owned and operated companies”, so “The Scottish Government does not hold this information.”—[Written Answers, 2 March 2026; S6W- 43859] I might add that neither Western Ferries nor Pentland Ferries is within the current scope of freedom of information laws, which Katy Clark is giving this Parliament an opportunity to reform. There is a real lack of transparency and accountability over the delivery of public services paid for by public funds. That leads me to the northern isles ferry routes operated by Serco.”
“Yesterday in Parliament, I asked the Deputy First Minister when that forensic audit will be published, but I did not get an answer. So I ask the Government the same question again today: when will this forensic audit be published? There is another, wider point that I want to make about private ownership, which is this.”
“It was private ownership. Richard Leonard: In fact, because of persistent pressure from this Parliament’s Public Audit Committee, the Government has been required to bring in the accountants—[Interruption.] The Deputy Presiding Officer: Mr Leonard, please resume your seat for a second. I am looking at two members who are having a conversation across the chamber from sedentary positions, which is disrespectful to the member who has the floor. Mr Leonard, please continue. Richard Leonard: Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. Let me return to this point: because of persistent pressure from this Parliament’s Public Audit Committee, the Government has been required to bring in the accountants Grant Thornton to conduct a forensic audit to track down exactly where £124 million of public money went when the yard was in private ownership.”
“To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on any discussions it has had with NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde regarding the implementation of the Royal Mail national health service-specific barcode system to ensure that appointment letters, test results and urgent patient correspondence are delivered on time, particularly during service disruptions. (S6O- 05591)”
“He talked about apprenticeships. It is critical that apprentices have confidence that there is a future for the yard. I hope that delivering the pipeline of work of those four additional vessels will give apprentices in particular the confidence that they will have work for many years to come. Currently, Ferguson Marine employs 38 apprentices. Since nationalisation, the yard has created 91 apprenticeships. The proposed programme of four vessels will enable the current apprentices to complete their apprenticeships. As we all know, given the scale of shipbuilding in Scotland right now, there is huge competition over those extremely talented and skilled apprentices. My hope through the announcement is that they will continue to support the workforce at”
“Can the Deputy First Minister provide assurances that the announcement gives the current apprentices the security that they need to plan their futures, allows more apprentices to be taken on and have a future at Ferguson Marine, and gives the management the opportunity to push ahead, deliver those vessels, win more orders and turn around the negativity about the yard that has, sadly, been apparent for many years? Kate Forbes: Stuart McMillan has been a tireless advocate for the future of Ferguson Marine and has often made the point to me that Ferguson Marine is more than just an employer. It is an absolutely critical part of the Inverclyde economy and is loved by the wider community, who recognise the role that it has played over many generations. I am grateful to Stuart McMillan for his representation of his constituents.”
“I thank the Deputy First Minister for what is an outstanding announcement and show of support for our yard and my community. It will be welcomed by the workforce, their families and all of Inverclyde. I pay particular tribute to Alex Logan, the GMB shop steward, who has been tireless in his efforts for many years to safeguard the yard. My father worked at the yard before he passed, so today’s announcement means so much more to me. It is about the future of shipbuilding in Port Glasgow and Inverclyde.”
“The member makes an important point about seeking security in future funding for vessels and harbours. That is why the comprehensive spending review is important, as is the infrastructure and investment pipeline that has been developed, as well as the infrastructure strategy that is currently out for consultation. Along with the islands connectivity plan, all that sets out plans for investment in vessels in a continuous, orderly and organised way that will take us right up to 2045.”
“I thank the cabinet secretary for the excellent announcement of the direct award of two vessels to Ferguson Marine. Given the position in which the United Kingdom Government budget has left Scotland, I am proud that the SNP Government remains committed to continued investment in new vessels and improving the infrastructure at our ports. In the face of continued demands on the capital budget, what assurances can the cabinet secretary provide that the issue will continue to be a priority for the Scottish Government? Fiona Hyslop: I thank the member for his support. He has continuously supported his constituency of Inverclyde and the position of Ferguson Marine, which will be further elaborated on by the Deputy First Minister in the statement that is to follow.”
“Does the Deputy First Minister agree that it is vital that, in supporting the shipbuilding industry in Scotland, the Scottish Government works to deliver economic and social best value, given the history and the heritage of the industry and the industrial capability and capacity that it represents? Kate Forbes: We absolutely recognise the economic and the social impact of the industry. Stuart McMillan, too, has recognised its social impact through the strength with which he has represented Inverclyde and the Ferguson Marine shipyard. I was delighted to meet the GMB representative Alex Logan, along with the First Minister, in the past few days, off the back of an invitation from Stuart McMillan, to understand just how critical it is that we retain those skills. Food and Drink Sector (Exports) 3.”
“I also welcome the additional investment for changing places toilets, which will help people who have children with additional support needs and disabilities to get out and about in their communities, rather than being stuck in the house. I warmly welcome those investments, in addition to the other ones that I have touched on—and there are others in the budget. I commend the budget to the Parliament. 16:18”
“That will help many of my constituents. That is part of the “bloated benefits bill” that Mr Hoy spoke about earlier. The payment helps people in my community and the communities that he represents. I also welcome the extra funding to help keep more children out of poverty from funds that were initially set aside to mitigate the UK Government’s two-child cap. I am conscious of the time, but I want to touch on one other point: the additional resource for neurodevelopmental assessments of the care needs of children and young people. I was a substitute on the Education, Children and Young People Committee when it undertook work on that last year. I have had a lot of engagement with constituents in Inverclyde about children with additional support needs. That additional resource will help families in my community, and I warmly welcome it.”
“I welcome the commitment to replace the ageing Port Glasgow health centre, and I thank the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care for accepting the invitation to visit the existing facility last summer. Only in the minds of Labour members can a positive announcement be turned into a negative. I greatly welcome today’s announcement of additional resources for hospices. I am in regular dialogue with the chief executive officer of Ardgowan Hospice, and I know that he will be pleased with that. However, I believe that there is still a discussion to be had about a more sustainable funding method for hospices across the country. Unlike Craig Hoy and the Tories, I welcome the increase in the Scottish child payment to £28.20 per week and the introduction of the premium payment of £40 per week for eligible children under 12 months.”
“With the limited powers of devolution, the budget delivers on a range of things that will and do matter to my constituents. It delivers vital support for families facing cost of living pressures and strengthens the public services that we will be relying on. The new cost of living measures to support families across Scotland, including the delivery of the new universal breakfast club offer for primary school-age children and additional funding to extend wraparound activity clubs in the afternoon and early evening, are to be welcomed. The health service will have the resources that it needs to continue reducing waiting times. With waits for hip and knee operations at record low levels, the longest waiting lists have fallen for seven months in a row.”
“The Tories made a complete mess of running the Government, and Labour, with its massive majority in the House of Commons, is now doing likewise. The national insurance contributions increase last year is a prime example of that, and £400 million has come out of the Scottish budget to deal with it. The Scottish Government put £2.2 million to Inverclyde Council last year to try and offset the problem. Michael Marra rose— Stuart McMillan: I am sorry, Mr Marra. The 8.5 per cent council tax increase would have been a lot less if there had not had to be that £400 million for the national insurance contributions increase. Thanks to Labour, Inverclyde council tax payers are paying a lot more money, and that will no doubt remain the case going forward. [Interruption.] I am sorry, Mr Marra, but I have already taken one intervention.”
“I say to Mr Marra that Labour members cannot have it both ways: they cannot claim that austerity came from the Tories at Westminster and also claim that it did not have an effect on the allocation of budget to the Scottish Parliament. That economic illiteracy is an example of why Anas Sarwar was right about the Prime Minister not being up to the job. However, it also tells me that the Prime Minister, Anas Sarwar and now Michael Marra are making the case for Scotland to be an independent nation. Daniel Johnson: In both this financial year and the next financial year, the block grant has a £5 billion increase. Is that the member’s definition of austerity? Stuart McMillan: A decade and a half of austerity: that is the point that I made.”
“I thank the Scottish Government for the announcements that it made today regarding additional resource for different policy areas. Every budget is about challenges and choices— the challenges that the Government of the day faces and the choices that it proposes in order to deal with those challenges. A decade and a half of Westminster-imposed austerity, coupled with high inflation, has significantly eroded the value of the Scottish Government’s block grant funding. That, in addition to an ageing population and strong global economic headwinds, has left our public services having to meet growing demand within increasingly challenging settlements. Those issues are not new to any of us in the chamber. During the 2024 UK election, Labour campaigned to get rid of the Tories in order to stop austerity.”
“The strike by resident doctors in England is a damning indictment on the Labour United Kingdom Government. Some 95,000 walked out in December 2025 alone. Noting the announcement this week on the situation in Scotland, will the First Minister join me in welcoming the pay deal for our doctors, and will he call on Anas Sarwar, and whichever of his colleagues still support him, to welcome that strong record of delivery for our dedicated national health service staff in Scotland? The Presiding Officer: On devolved responsibilities, please, First Minister.”
“To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on the procurement of marine protection vessels for Marine Scotland. (S6O-05486)”
“The FSB Scotland briefing is helpful in that regard. I believe that enforcement and penalties should be strengthened. Clear guidance helps to reduce the potential for people to claim that they made an inadvertent mistake. Patients are trusting their bodies to practitioners, so they need to have a safeguard regarding enforcement. I hope that colleagues will vote to pass the bill at stage 1. The industry is here to stay, and regulation to make the sector safer for patients is long overdue, as I indicated in my members’ business debate on the issue in October 2024. If we can make the industry safer, we are doing the right thing for our communities and our constituents. 16:22”
“Therefore, ultimately, whatever amendments at stages 2 and 3 are successful, the aspect of training and pathways to upskilling will be vital when it comes to secondary legislation, prior to the implementation of the legislation in September 2027. I want to highlight a further point, which concerns the issue of clinical supervision. This does not concern my constituency, but it could affect rural and island communities. The stage 1 evidence highlights a range of views. However, although I whole-heartedly agree with the view that is outlined in paragraphs 101 and 102 of the stage 1 report—that clinical supervision should be on site due to the risk of potential adverse reactions, which Dr Gulhane spoke about—I am conscious that compliance could be a challenge in remote and island areas if not many people are trained in such supervision.”
“That engagement is vital to finding the most suitable and workable solution to safeguarding patients as well as businesses and providers who have level 7 training. In that regard, paragraph 124 of the report and the minister’s response regarding the Healthcare Improvement Scotland (Requirements as to Independent Health Care Services) Regulations 2011 are helpful and complement each other. The need to consider those issues can be best explained by highlighting the viewpoint of a nurse who spoke at Davy Russell’s round-table session last week. She was a client of a level 7 practitioner, and said that she would prefer to be treated by a practitioner of that level who undertakes procedures daily than be treated by a registered nurse, who might do only a couple of procedures a week to supplement their income.”
“Therefore, I note the minister’s reply to paragraphs 162 and 163 of the stage 1 report, but I ask her not to rule out additional funding for HIS if it is required to get the regulatory function in place before regulation of the sector becomes self- financing. Paragraphs 108 to 125 of the stage 1 report relate to training and qualifications in the sector. Although I know that the bill does not focus on that, it is a key consideration when thinking about what the industry will look like going forward. I welcome the fact that dialogue on the issue has begun, including with the UK Government on the United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020, as set out in the minister’s response to the report. The minister will recall that my committee quizzed her on that area.”
“There are several aspects of the bill that we can all agree on, including that safety is absolutely paramount for patients, that the minimum age for procedures should increase to 18, and that we should ensure that the legislation can be amended through secondary legislation as new procedures are developed. That deals with the point that Alex Cole-Hamilton raised a moment ago. The more contentious aspects of the bill primarily relate to the regulatory function. I agree that Healthcare Improvement Scotland should act as the regulator. Clearly, due to the lack of available data on the sector, it is difficult to get a clear picture of how many people and businesses are involved. That is why regulation is so important.”
“I thank the minister for introducing the bill and for listening to the concerns of people in the non-surgical cosmetic industry. I am sure that the arguments that were heard at the round-table session that was hosted by Miles Briggs MSP a few months ago would have been very persuasive. I also thank colleagues in the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee for their investigation of the bill. The committee’s stage 1 report was excellent. Equally, I thank my colleagues in the Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee for our scrutiny, which helped to shape the lead committee’s further consideration. Finally, and most importantly, I thank my constituent Jill Best, who first brought the issue to my attention in 2018. I note that she is in the public gallery. Jill’s unstinting efforts to make the sector safer struck a chord with me.”
“The Scottish Government recognises the challenges that this poses for MSPs, particularly given the importance of the areas that are being discussed for removal: namely provisions related to training, qualifications and experience of health professionals; and employment duties, rights and protections. However, the Parliament has a duty to ensure that any bill that it passes is within competence, which is what we have set out to do. The Presiding Officer: The question on the motion will be put at decision time. 18:13”
“Of course, the situation might arise at stage 3—although I hope it will not—in which other amendments would be lodged that would raise issues that would have to be covered by the section 104 order. If we proceed by way of a section 104 order, that will require the bill to be amended to remove provisions that would then be dealt with through the order after royal assent, should the bill pass. The removal of provisions would be necessary in order to bring the bill within competence before the stage 3 vote as, if the bill is passed outside of competence, there is a strong likelihood of it being referred to the Supreme Court. With that in mind, as I said earlier, members may want to be mindful of the risks of new provisions being included through amendments at stage 3 that would take the bill further outside legislative competence.”