Maurice Golden
Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party · Scotland
“Large numbers of young people continue to be referred to child and adolescent mental health services, and the waiting times that they face illustrate the scale of demand that is put on the system. In NHS Tayside, there is only one facility: Dudhope young people’s unit, which admits an average of 20 young people per year.”
“Beat’s helplines, peer support groups and campaigns continue to provide essential help for people who are suffering from eating disorders, not least by giving people the opportunity to connect and share their experiences. Those services are only part of the picture.”
“I am pleased to speak in support of the motion recognising eating disorders awareness week 2026, as I have done in previous years, and I thank Elena Whitham for securing the debate.”
“Recent data from the 2024 Scottish health survey reveal that around 26 per cent of people aged 16 to 24 reported eating behaviours and feelings related to food that could be indicative of a possible eating disorder—the proportion was far higher than in older age groups.”
“We must ensure that no young person in Scotland feels alone in their struggle and that their communities in schools, workplaces and families are empowered to support them.”
“To ask the Scottish Government, in light of recent changes to Scottish Qualifications Authority policy permitting internet-enabled devices, such as Chromebooks, in exams, what action it is taking to ensure that pupils who rely on speech-to-text as their normal way of working are not, in practice, prevented from using this technology durin…”
The complete record
Every one of 229 lines we hold for Maurice Golden, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 5.
“We must ensure that no young person in Scotland feels alone in their struggle and that their communities in schools, workplaces and families are empowered to support them. I urge ministers to listen carefully to the debate and to outline how the Scottish Government will strengthen both specialist services and community support, so that we can turn the promise of this awareness week into lasting progress for everyone who is affected by eating disorders. 20:27”
“Large numbers of young people continue to be referred to child and adolescent mental health services, and the waiting times that they face illustrate the scale of demand that is put on the system. In NHS Tayside, there is only one facility: Dudhope young people’s unit, which admits an average of 20 young people per year. Also, no data are held for adult patients. Those aspects desperately need to be addressed. Community matters, because it is about not just clinical care, but creating supportive environments where people feel understood, where early signs do not go unnoticed or unspoken, and where friends and families know where and how to seek help. Awareness campaigns have an important place, but we must back them up with action: investment in treatment services, workforce development, research and evidence-led public education.”
“Beat’s helplines, peer support groups and campaigns continue to provide essential help for people who are suffering from eating disorders, not least by giving people the opportunity to connect and share their experiences. Those services are only part of the picture. The national review of eating disorder services set out comprehensive recommendations to improve access and quality of care, and the Scottish Government has rightly accepted those recommendations and has established a national network to co-ordinate delivery. However, we need investment in, and accountability for, delivering the recommendations to be sustained over the long term, because we know that this is not a problem that will disappear any time soon.”
“Recent data from the 2024 Scottish health survey reveal that around 26 per cent of people aged 16 to 24 reported eating behaviours and feelings related to food that could be indicative of a possible eating disorder—the proportion was far higher than in older age groups. That mirrors reporting that more than a quarter of young Scots may have symptoms suggesting an eating disorder, with significant impacts on work, education and social life. Those findings echo concerns about rising prevalence since the pandemic and underline the urgent need for awareness raising and early intervention. I put on record my thanks for the extraordinary work of the eating disorders charity Beat.”
“I am pleased to speak in support of the motion recognising eating disorders awareness week 2026, as I have done in previous years, and I thank Elena Whitham for securing the debate. I also associate myself with the powerful contributions from both Elena Whitham and Emma Harper, which are an important reminder of why these debates matter so much. This year’s theme of community is particularly important. Eating disorders can be profoundly isolating for those experiencing them and for their families and carers. Building supportive connections—with peers, professionals and community groups—can make a huge difference to recovery. The scale of the challenge that we face in Scotland is sobering.”
“To ask the Scottish Government, in light of recent changes to Scottish Qualifications Authority policy permitting internet-enabled devices, such as Chromebooks, in exams, what action it is taking to ensure that pupils who rely on speech-to-text as their normal way of working are not, in practice, prevented from using this technology during exams. (S6O-05500)”
“Therefore, I believe that, at stages 2 and 3, we need to ensure a proportionate, evidence-based regulatory framework that improves safety without excluding competent, properly trained and insured practitioners. 16:29”
“In addition, as has been mentioned previously, the sector is filled with female innovators, leaders and business owners, from start-ups to scale-ups. This is perhaps one of the best examples of a sector in Scotland that is fully leveraging the pool of talent that we have. Therefore, we need to be very cautious about the implications of the bill, which would say to up to 1,800 female entrepreneurs that they do not have a future in Scotland. Overall, there is a requirement for businesses to be managed and run by adequately trained individuals, who should be regulated and would include healthcare professionals and non- healthcare professionals. Ultimately, having a prescriber in the room would not necessarily improve patient outcomes.”
“Maurice Golden: From my personal experience and that of such individuals, I can say that an aesthetics practitioner who has been regularly assisting clients for a decade would be safer in triaging than, perhaps, a nurse with two days of training in aesthetics. There is a balance to be struck. Both can sit alongside each other, but the fact that an individual has a medical degree does not ensure that their aesthetics training will be commensurate with what a client may expect or want. Stuart McMillan: Will Maurice Golden take an intervention on that point? Maurice Golden: I think that I will need to make some progress. Ultimately, we have to recognise that the aesthetics sector is one of artists and creatives and that it takes years of training and practice to hone the techniques that are required to be top of the field.”
“Maurice Golden: My understanding is that, for example, on permitted premises, we should be focusing on the environment. A clean clinic in, or as part of, a dwelling would be a safer environment than a dirty room in a doctor’s surgery. The focus needs to be on the client experience and the overall regulated journey for the client. Carol Mochan: I was part of the evidence taking, and, with regard to this part of the bill, there was a strong emphasis on what protections there are, because there could be interactions or reactions, and on the importance of having a medical person there for that situation. There was also discussion about the premises, but, absolutely, there was stuff about how we protect the public if there are complications.”
“In fact—and I will come on to this—I see that as being not particularly helpful for safety or for client experience. The proposal shows a lack of understanding of the point at which complications might arise, which is often once a client has left the clinic. Therefore, unless the proposal is for the healthcare professional to follow that client throughout their week, the argument falls down completely. Clare Haughey: Will the member take an intervention? Maurice Golden: Do I have time? The Deputy Presiding Officer: I can certainly give you the time back, Mr Golden. Maurice Golden: Yes, I am happy to take the intervention. Clare Haughey: Perhaps the minister, in an intervention, would be able to clarify this more fully, but I think that Mr Golden is misinterpreting the bill and, consequently, the recommendations of the stage 1 report.”
“It is regulatory overreach, and it will exclude safe practitioners instead of stopping unsafe ones, which is what we are attempting to do. Clare Haughey: I think that Mr Golden might have misinterpreted the bill and the committee’s report. We are talking about higher-tariff non- surgical procedures in HIS-inspected premises being supervised by a healthcare professional; the proposal is not necessarily that those healthcare professionals would carry out the procedures. It is about ensuring safety by requiring that, if there is an adverse effect, some sort of medical assistance is easily accessible. The Deputy Presiding Officer: I can give you the time back, Mr Golden. Maurice Golden: I do not believe that there is a requirement to have a healthcare professional on site.”
“However, from reading the bill, it looks as though it identifies two different groups. The first group, legitimate practitioners, includes only healthcare professionals, even if they have little training in aesthetics; and the second group, the black market, encapsulates all non-healthcare professionals, among whom, bizarrely, are the best practitioners in the field. My view is that the bill, as drafted, will assist in lowering safety levels and standards and will ultimately reduce enforcement and accountability. Under the bill, only healthcare professionals will be able to register premises with Healthcare Improvement Scotland. That means that highly trained, insured and experienced non-healthcare professionals will be legally barred from operating, regardless of their competence or safety record.”
“I will start on a point of consensus. From what I have heard, there will be unanimous support for the bill at stage 1. I thank the minister for her engagement thus far. Furthermore, everyone in the chamber recognises that the status quo is unacceptable and that there is a requirement for regulation. If that regulation is enforced and adequately resourced, as well as promoted to the public, it will help to limit the black market and thereby improve safety standards across the sector. Safety standards are high among professional and experienced practitioners. In my view, there are two groups operating in Scotland: legitimate practitioners, a group that includes healthcare professionals and non-healthcare professionals, and the black market bad actors, about whom we have heard.”
“Other UK nations already operate robust and reliable death certification systems. Recognising those processes avoids duplication, reduces delays for families and maintains appropriate safeguards. I again thank the committee for its work on its report, and I thank everyone who gave evidence at stage 1. I look forward to hearing members’ views and encourage them to support the progress of the bill. I move, That the Parliament agrees to the general principles of the Non-surgical Procedures and Functions of Medical Reviewers (Scotland) Bill. 15:52”
“I am also pleased to speak to part 2 of the bill, which includes amendments to the Certification of Death (Scotland) Act 2011. Those amendments extend the right to request an interested person review and update the provisions on authorising cremations in Scotland when a death has occurred elsewhere in the United Kingdom. I thank the committee for supporting those changes and note its recognition of the benefits that the measures will bring. Extending access to interested person reviews is an important step in strengthening public confidence and ensures that all relatives have the same opportunity to request a review when that would provide clarity or reassurance. We are also removing the requirement for medical reviewers to authorise cremations when the death took place in another part of the UK.”
“Does the minister accept that the bill will make 1,800 female-led businesses go to the wall? Jenni Minto: I do not recognise those numbers. I have been clear that I will work with businesses and with Mr Golden to look at what is possible. However, I know that there are many who think that our approach is lacking in a different respect and who have said that the bill should be far more restrictive. That indicates the balance that I have sought to strike throughout the process: addressing the grave concerns that many people have about managing and minimising the risks of non-surgical procedures but, at the same time, minimising the effects on businesses. I commend the bill as the right way forward on an issue that clearly requires action.”
“There will be a short pause before we move to the next item of business. Non-surgical Procedures and Functions of Medical Reviewers (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1”
“If we kick the issue down the road, we will do a great disservice not only to our current constituents but to future generations. That is why it is not just environmentalists backing the bill—it is health charities such as Asthma and Lung UK and bodies such as the Children and Young People’s Commissioner Scotland, because they know that our young people need a safer, healthier Scotland. I thank the Scottish Government and all members who are backing the bill. To those who are not yet convinced because they are worried about the amount of time left, I ask them to give the bill a chance. I assure all members that I will work night and day to ensure that we will have a robust bill at the end of the process. The Deputy Presiding Officer: That concludes the debate on the Ecocide (Scotland) Bill at stage 1.”
“What if people do not want to come to Scotland because we have an ecocide law?”. Well, I want people to know that we will have an ecocide law. We welcome investment and we want development, but we need it to be in the right place and done in the right way, and I have great trust in our planning authorities to do that. Maurice Golden is giving me a look; I note that my husband is a planner, so I have to say that I trust our planners. Planning is where I learned about protecting our environment, and we must recognise that planners already look at environmental impacts. Amendments have already been set out in writing that we agree on, and we can work on them at pace. I am listening to all committee members, but it is up to the committee to agree the time to do the work. I will be working, and my door will be open to everybody.”
“Colleagues have raised concerns about whether we have the right resources in place for our regulators, including SEPA. I hope that the bill has allowed that debate to open up. I thank Bill Kidd for mentioning Polly Higgins, and I want to mention those colleagues, including Richard Leonard, who brought tears to my eyes. I cannot take people being nice to me—I am not used to it. However, I reassure members that this is not about being sentimental or about Scotland trying to get headlines. We are now one of the most nature-depleted countries in the world. We all love Scotland and we all care about its future, but we cannot be complacent any longer. In committee, when the cabinet secretary was giving evidence, colleagues asked, “What if the bill puts off investment?”
“Monica Lennon: As a socialist, I always have a glass that is half full, and I believe that we can get this done—I will move mountains to get this done. Edward Mountain: You might have to. Monica Lennon: I have great faith in Edward Mountain, even though he might be talking himself down today. As convener, he expertly chairs the committee every Tuesday morning. As I look around at the colleagues who are in the chamber, I know that we can do this. As Douglas Lumsden said—I think that he is flirting with the idea of supporting the bill—it matters to the people of the north-east of Scotland; it matters to my constituents; and it matters to us all. There are technical points for us to deal with. I understand members’ frustration and curiosity about section 40 of the 2014 act and why there have been no prosecutions.”
“I assure Bill Kidd that Baroness Rosie Boycott is a real person, who—like Russell Findlay, who is not here today— spent time as a journalist, investigating powerful, wealthy people and holding them to account. She worked with colleagues from across the benches in the House of Lords and also with people of no political persuasion. Maurice Golden: Does Monica Lennon agree that precedent was set in the previous parliamentary session with the Tied Pubs (Scotland) Bill, which had—I think, from memory— around 247 amendments to be taken at stage 2 in March 2021, yet the committee worked hard to ensure that all those amendments were disposed of so that the bill could move to stage 3? The timescale that Monica Lennon is facing has been experienced and dealt with before by this Parliament.”
“I am genuinely looking at all the committee’s recommendations to see where amendments are appropriate. I will work at pace—not in a rush, and not like a headless chicken, but in a serious, committed way—to get this done. I give the Parliament my word on that. I agree with Maurice Golden and other colleagues that the issue is too important to kick down the road. The cabinet secretary is right; it is not about Scotland trying to show off that we are the front runners—we are not; we are lagging behind our neighbours in the European Union. This week, the issue was raised in the House of Commons, where ministers are looking at the issue across portfolios, including in the Ministry of Justice and the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, because, as Bill Kidd said, there was a bill in the House of Lords.”
“The Government remains supportive of the general principles of the bill at stage 1. 15:37 Monica Lennon: I thank all colleagues for their contributions to the debate. It is clear that members have put a lot of thought into the points that they wanted to make. I will repeat what I said at the beginning of the debate: I take the committee’s report seriously, I am grateful for its work, and I understand the time constraints on everyone’s work in the Parliament in February, as we find ourselves just ahead of an election. However, we have to make every minute in the Parliament count. I again assure Edward Mountain, who is the committee’s convener, and all colleagues that work is well under way to identify the areas for amendment on which the Government and I agree.”
“I have indicated that I am considering other amendments—ones that would be appropriate in response to the concerns that local authorities have raised—and the possible linking of the new offence to the existing offence under section 40 of the Regulatory Reform (Scotland) Act 2014. I am also taking into consideration members’ comments about the very high bar for proving ecocide and the reticence that complainants might therefore have about going too high up the chain for fear of an allegation not reaching that high bar and a section 40 offence then not being made out. I have talked about that during stage 1. I will leave the Parliament to decide how it wants to proceed. However— Sarah Boyack: Will the cabinet secretary take an intervention? Gillian Martin: I am just about to sit down.”
“I have also said repeatedly that we have been working on amendments to the bill. Forgive me, but I will not put anything more on those on the record and so constrain my time. However, I emphasise that I appreciate the constraints that the committee is under. I was in that situation as a convener at the end of the previous parliamentary session, when we were exiting the EU and all the statutory instruments were coming through in addition to the climate change plan. I completely understand such constraints. Many members have expressed the hope that if the bill comes to its conclusion and is passed by the Parliament it will be a law that never has to be used in court. Given the severity of what we are talking about, such a situation must be avoided.”
“Many countries—many members have mentioned which ones—have already taken this stance. Edward Mountain: The committee has only seven meetings left, and we have already asked for another one. There will be three meetings on the climate change plan, and time for two of those is already allocated. If the bill is to go further, the cabinet secretary will have to lay out amendments in the next week or so to allow the committee to schedule the evidence. Is she in a position to do that? Gillian Martin: I have already set out the nature of the amendments that we want to lodge: we want to replace the legal or persuasive burden in the defence of necessity with an expressly evidential burden; we want to remove the reporting requirement; and we want to add a defence of acting under a permit or under other authorisation.”
“This has been a fascinating debate and it has been interesting to hear members’ passion about the issue and their takes on Ms Lennon’s proposals. We have seen the Parliament working at its best and, although we might not all agree on the issues, there has been consensus that environmental crime should be punished in a way that deters environmental damage of whatever type. I pay tribute to Monica Lennon for raising awareness of the importance of preventing serious damage—it is great that we are having this debate, and I do not want to kick the can down the road. Edward Mountain: Will the cabinet secretary take an intervention? Gillian Martin: I will, in a second. Monica Lennon has brought a global campaign to the Parliament. We will not be the front runners on this issue.”
“Parliament cannot credibly claim leadership on climate action if it repeatedly delays taking action but, with less than two months of this session remaining, we must also accept that rushed legislation is rarely good legislation. The Deputy Presiding Officer: I call the cabinet secretary, Gillian Martin, to close the debate on behalf of the Scottish Government. 15:33 Gillian Martin: I will try to keep my comments brief, because I know that the member in charge will want to respond to the debate in full. I have listened carefully to members’ contributions and I assure them that my officials and I will consider in detail the issues that have been raised in the committee’s report and in the contributions made today.”
“The majority view of the committee is that the bill should not progress, largely due to concerns that there is insufficient time to resolve the issues with the definitions. I have some sympathy with the members who dissented. Stage 2 would ordinarily be the appropriate point at which to test whether such concerns could be resolved, but instead, the committee recommends that new legislation be introduced in the next parliamentary session. I admit that that concerns me because it feels like kicking the can down the road: we should remember the much-hyped and much-delayed Circular Economy (Scotland) Bill, which ended up putting off meaningful action. We have a dilemma before us.”
“It would also demonstrate that the Scottish Government expects businesses and the public alike to take their environmental responsibilities seriously. There is growing international precedent for such an approach. Belgium and France have introduced ecocide laws, the Netherlands is considering similar action and the EU’s environmental crime directive requires member states to criminalise the destruction or damage of large or highly valued ecosystems and their habitats. As with any bill at an early stage, there are important issues to consider, including compatibility with the ECHR, the scope of liability and the need for clear definitions to ensure legal certainty and effective enforcement. That last point is a decisive one.”
“As part of the United Kingdom, Scotland is bound by the United Nations Aarhus convention, which requires that people must be able to challenge situations in which their environmental rights are denied or in which environmental laws are broken. That is where we see the failure of the current environmental protections and associated legislation here in Scotland. I therefore agree with Monica Lennon that the most serious cases should be treated as more than regulatory breaches. Creating a stand-alone offence would place such acts firmly in the realm of the criminal law. That matters because it would send a clear signal that environmental destruction is not a technical failure but a serious crime.”
“I begin by congratulating Monica Lennon on introducing the bill, because I know from personal experience how much work and determination are required to get a bill to stage 1. I also recognise the member’s long-standing commitment to environmental protection, which I share. The bill represents an opportunity to take decisive action to prevent and, where necessary, punish acts of serious environmental harm. There is, of course, already provision in law to address environmental damage, but, as early as 15 years ago, the Scottish National Party manifesto for the 2011 election recognised that there was work to be done in this area and included a commitment to publish an options paper on an environmental court. Monica Lennon’s bill largely attempts to achieve something similar. Rights without any means of enforcement are truly useless.”
“By building on Dundee’s historic achievements and leveraging world-class talent and infrastructure, the action plan can help to cement the city’s position as a global leader. I fully support the motion and encourage the Scottish Government to use all the levers at its disposal to support the action plan, and I call on it to set out in full how it will engage with the plan’s recommendations. 19:15”
“The role of Dundee-based companies in the development of iconic games such as Grand Theft Auto and Minecraft cannot be overstated. Central to Dundee’s global reputation is Abertay University, which was one of the first universities in the world to offer dedicated courses in video game development. Abertay has supplied generations of highly skilled graduates who have shaped the industry locally and globally. Through the delivery of the action plan, there is an opportunity to recognise Dundee’s unique role and to deliver targeted support to strengthen its cluster. That includes backing local studios through funding and investment, supporting Abertay and other educational institutions to extend and expand their skills pipelines, and promoting Dundee as a centre of excellence in Scotland’s wider games sector.”
“The action plan calls on the Scottish Government to recognise games as a national priority; provide strong leadership and co- ordination; invest in studios and talent; support skills development; back regional hubs such as Dundee; and promote Scottish games on the global stage. Those measures are designed to ensure that the sector can grow sustainably and deliver real economic and creative impact across Scotland. Dundee exemplifies why that support is important. The city is the birthplace and beating heart of Scotland’s video games industry. Its success began with pioneering studios such as DMA Design, which was the forerunner of Rockstar North, and it continues today through a thriving cluster of independent studios.”
“This is not about rescuing a struggling industry or backing a speculative venture but about supercharging a sector that is already thriving and delivering real economic and creative impact. Scotland’s video games industry delivers exceptionally high productivity; it generates more than £150,000 in GVA per employee, which is more than double the Scottish national average. The Scottish Government should seize every opportunity to grow the sector further and create even more well-paid, highly skilled, export-driven jobs while attracting investment, strengthening regional economies and retaining skilled talent.”
“I congratulate Michael Marra on lodging the motion and bringing the debate to Parliament this evening. I welcome the publication of the national games action plan by the Scottish Games Network. Scotland’s games sector is a shining example of what is possible when entrepreneurial talent, creativity, innovation and technical expertise come together. The sector is one of Scotland’s greatest modern- day success stories and international exports. As the Scottish Government considers the recommendations of the action plan and the financial commitments involved, it is important to remember that the games sector already has a proven track record of success. The action plan is not making a funding request but asking for an investment in growth.”
“Acknowledging that such a review would be complex and require engagement with industry and others, amendment 21 proposes a two-year timescale, which would start from when the relevant section of the act was commenced. My amendment also provides the Scottish Government with relevant powers to propose and enact changes arising from the review. I ask members to support amendment 21.”
“I thank Sarah Boyack for her support of my amendment 21, as well as Mairi Gougeon and Gillian Martin for their constructive engagement, not just on this amendment but on the bill more generally. Scottish fisheries are vital to our local communities and our economy. Ensuring that they are appropriately regulated and that, in turn, regulations are complied with, underpins sustainable harvesting of stocks and helps to secure the health of the marine environment for generations to come. Fisheries penalties are a key part of the overarching fisheries management and enforcement approach, and they must be effective in order to properly drive compliance. Undertaking a review of fisheries penalties would be sensible and timely, and it would help to ensure that we have the best approach in place.”
“Scotland already has around 90 AD plants, which process 5.6 million tonnes of organic waste each year, produce 60MW of renewable electricity and account for around a quarter of the United Kingdom’s biomethane injection capacity. With the right policies, the sector could go much further. However, that opportunity will not realise itself. I therefore urge the Scottish Government to listen to the experts and turn that potential into reality. 18:23”
“Such technologies can play an important part in the decarbonisation of heat, and policy certainty would send a strong and positive signal to investors. The Government could go further still by creating sustainable market incentives—for example, around the use of bio- CO2. Alongside that, we must reduce unnecessary red tape. I agree with ADBA that planning guidance should presume consent for AD plants that meet best-practice standards under the anaerobic digestion certification scheme. At a strategic level, there is also a need to address the fragmentation of responsibility for biogas and biomethane across Government. Let us be clear about what is at stake.”
“There is a risk that non-waste anaerobic digestion could be regulated using the European Union’s best-available- technology standards that are designed for waste water treatment. At the same time, co-products such as pot ale could be reclassified as waste when sent to AD plants. That would mean that materials that are currently used productively—for example, as animal feed—would instead require waste transfer notes and waste handling certification. In short, those proposals would significantly increase costs and could affect as many as 20 major AD plants across Scotland. I urge the Scottish Government to bring together SEPA and ADBA to find a more proportionate and pragmatic approach. That links to the broader point that the sector needs a clear public commitment from the Scottish Government to the future role of biogas and biomethane.”
“I have met ADBA regularly during my time in Parliament, and I have spoken at one of its conferences, so I have first-hand knowledge of the depth of expertise that it brings and the commitment that it shows to ensuring that Scotland gains the maximum environmental and economic benefit from anaerobic digestion, especially in rural areas. When an organisation with that level of experience raises concerns, we should listen. ADBA has set out a number of policy asks to support the sector. I do not have time to cover them all today, but I will highlight a few points that I hope will encourage the Scottish Government to engage more closely. I will start with the specific but high-impact concern about the Scottish Environment Protection Agency’s proposals to change the regulatory status of feedstocks.”
“I thank Emma Harper for securing the debate on anaerobic digestion. I confirm Conservative support for the motion, and my personal support should be published shortly. The debate is a timely and welcome opportunity for us to discuss a technology that can make a real contribution to tackling climate change while delivering economic value for Scotland. I am pleased that the motion recognises that potential and, in particular, the role that anaerobic digestion can play in building a circular economy. That concept is fundamental, because a strong circular economy underpins our efforts to cut emissions, deliver a just transition for workers and create genuine, sustainable prosperity in communities across the country. I echo the motion’s recognition of the work of the Anaerobic Digestion and Bioresources Association.”
“They must also be about making difficult decisions so that communities have the right facilities to support their needs. That will require innovation, collaboration and a shared commitment across all levels of government and also the Parliament as it engages with the budget process. Swimming pools are more than just places to swim. They are community assets that support health, wellbeing and social inclusion. Let us commit to working collectively to safeguard these facilities for future generations. The Deputy Presiding Officer: I call David Torrance to wind up the debate on behalf of the Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee. 17:37”
“Sportscotland regularly engages with local authorities and leisure trusts on the sporting facilities estate and it will continue to work with Scottish Swimming to explore the options that are available to strengthen the role that it and other organisations can play in the planning for places for sport. Within that, consideration will be given to how best to support and protect swimming pools. Liz Smith: Will the cabinet secretary take an intervention? Neil Gray: I am really sorry, but I am nearly out of time. I am happy to give that further consideration, and either I or Ms Todd will respond to the committee and Ms Smith in due course. The solutions that we are looking for are not just about building for the future and maintaining what we have.”
“Jackson Carlaw: I ask the cabinet secretary to address that point, because a number of colleagues from across the chamber have supported the calls from many organisations that are involved for the Government to show leadership by establishing a task force, which could perhaps assist in the development of this narrative. Neil Gray: I was just about to turn to the question that was posed to me directly by Mr Carlaw, Ms Smith, Mr Rowley and others. A significant amount of work has already taken place and is already under way to better understand the swimming pool estate, and I have referenced some of that.”
“Energy efficiency improvements are not only vital for meeting our climate goals but essential for the economic sustainability of the facilities that we are discussing. Some of this thinking has already started, and the report “A Sustainable Future: Enhancing Energy Efficiency in Scotland’s Swimming Pools” sets out strategies, technologies and recommendations to create a greener, more economically viable and sustainable future for Scotland’s swimming facilities. I mentioned earlier the facilities estate review that sportscotland has undertaken, which will be published shortly. It will help us to have a better understanding of the current condition of the wider estate. Jckson Carlaw: Will the cabinet secretary give way? Neil Gray: If Mr Carlaw’s intervention is about the task force point, I am happy to give way to him.”