Brian Whittle
Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party · Scotland
“As Jamie Halcro Johnston said, roads, rail networks and ferries—we keep coming back to ferries—are key to keeping those communities where they are and stopping migration away from them. The chamber will welcome the fact that this— eventually—is my last speech in this parliamentary session.”
“Speaking as somebody who got his first mobile phone—a brick of a thing—at the age of 32, I find that quite astonishing. It is important that pupils have the opportunity to put their phones down in school, but also important is what happens outside school.”
“As always, I want to introduce a slightly different approach to the subject and so I will talk about how we should develop health policy. We must start from the position that services should be available to our communities no matter where they are, whether they are urban, rural or on islands.”
“It is interesting that the girls attitudes survey carried out by Girlguiding UK in 2025 found that girls are restricting their online activity in order to protect themselves, with more than a third of respondents reporting that they avoid using certain apps and platforms in order to protect themselves.”
“It is a pleasure to follow Beatrice Wishart, who, as we all know, has been a real champion for her communities in the time that she has spent here.”
“That was an interesting question from Mr Harvie, as the Scottish Greens have spent the majority of this session of Parliament demonising our farmers and food producers.”
The complete record
Every one of 750 lines we hold for Brian Whittle, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 15.
“For Balfour, Jeremy (Lothian) (Ind) Cole-Hamilton, Alex (Edinburgh Western) (LD) Greene, Jamie (West Scotland) (LD) Regan, Ash (Edinburgh Eastern) (Ind) Rennie, Willie (North East Fife) (LD) Wishart, Beatrice (Shetland Islands) (LD) Against Adam, George (Paisley) (SNP) Adam, Karen (Banffshire and Buchan Coast) (SNP) Adamson, Clare (Motherwell and Wishaw) (SNP) Allan, Alasdair (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (SNP) Arthur, Tom (Renfrewshire South) (SNP) Baillie, Jackie (Dumbarton) (Lab) Baker, Claire (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab) Beattie, Colin (Midlothian North and Musselburgh) (SNP) Boyack, Sarah (Lothian) (Lab) 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) Carson, Finlay (Galloway and West Dumfries) (Con) Chapman, Maggie (North East Scotland) (Green) Choudhury, Foysol (Lothian) (Ind) Clark, Katy (West Scotland) (Lab) Coffey, Willie (Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley) (SNP) Constance, Angela (Almond Valley) (SNP) Dey, Graeme (Angus South) (SNP) Doris, Bob (Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn) (SNP) Dornan, James (Glasgow Cathcart) (SNP) Dowey, Sharon (South Scotland) (Con) Dunbar, Jackie (Aberdeen Donside) (SNP) Duncan-Glancy, Pam (Glasgow) (Ind) Eagle, Tim (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Fairlie, Jim (Perthshire South and Kinross-shire) (SNP) Findlay, Russell (West Scotland) (Con) FitzPatrick, Joe (Dundee City West) (SNP) Fraser, Murdo (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Gallacher, Meghan (Central Scotland) (Con) Gibson, Kenneth (Cunninghame North) (SNP) Gilruth, Jenny (Mid Fife and Glenrothes) (SNP) Gosal, Pam (West Scotland) (Con) Gougeon, Mairi (Angus North and Mearns) (SNP) Grahame, Christine (Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale) (SNP) Grant, Rhoda (Highlands and Islands) (Lab) Gray, Neil (Airdrie and Shotts) (SNP) Greer, Ross (West Scotland) (Green) Griffin, Mark (Central Scotland) (Lab) Gulhane, Sandesh (Glasgow) (Con) Halcro Johnston, Jamie (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Harper, Emma (South Scotland) (SNP) Harvie, Patrick (Glasgow) (Green) Haughey, Clare (Rutherglen) (SNP) Hepburn, Jamie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (SNP) Hyslop, Fiona (Linlithgow) (SNP) Johnson, Daniel (Edinburgh Southern) (Lab) Kerr, Liam (North East Scotland) (Con) Kerr, Stephen (Central Scotland) (Con) Kidd, Bill (Glasgow Anniesland) (SNP) Leonard, Richard (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) Maguire, Ruth (Cunninghame South) (SNP) Marra, Michael (North East Scotland) (Lab) Martin, Gillian (Aberdeenshire East) (SNP) Mason, John (Glasgow Shettleston) (Ind) Matheson, Michael (Falkirk West) (SNP) McAllan, Màiri (Clydesdale) (SNP) McCall, Roz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) McKee, Ivan (Glasgow Provan) (SNP) McLennan, Paul (East Lothian) (SNP) McMillan, Stuart (Greenock and Inverclyde) (SNP) McNair, Marie (Clydebank and Milngavie) (SNP) McNeill, Pauline (Glasgow) (Lab) Minto, Jenni (Argyll and Bute) (SNP) Mochan, Carol (South Scotland) (Lab) Mundell, Oliver (Dumfriesshire) (Con) Nicoll, Audrey (Aberdeen South and North Kincardine) (SNP) O’Kane, Paul (West Scotland) (Lab) Robertson, Angus (Edinburgh Central) (SNP) Robison, Shona (Dundee City East) (SNP) Roddick, Emma (Highlands and Islands) (SNP) Ross, Douglas (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Ruskell, Mark (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Green) Russell, Davy (Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse) (Lab) Slater, Lorna (Lothian) (Green) Smith, Liz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) 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) 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) Webber, Sue (Lothian) (Con) Wells, Annie (Glasgow) (Con) White, Tess (North East Scotland) (Con) Whitfield, Martin (South Scotland) (Lab) Whitham, Elena (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley) (SNP) Whittle, Brian (South Scotland) (Con) Yousaf, Humza (Glasgow Pollok) (SNP) Abstentions Rowley, Alex (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab) The Deputy Presiding Officer: The result of the division is: For 6, Against 106, Abstentions 1.”
“Amendment 34 disagreed to. Amendment 7 moved—[Brian Whittle]—and agreed to. Amendment 35 moved—[Jenni Minto]—and agreed to. Amendment 36 moved—[Jeremy Balfour]. The Deputy Presiding Officer: The question is, that amendment 36 be agreed to. Are we agreed? Members: No. The Deputy Presiding Officer: There will be a division.”
“For Balfour, Jeremy (Lothian) (Ind) Cole-Hamilton, Alex (Edinburgh Western) (LD) Greene, Jamie (West Scotland) (LD) Regan, Ash (Edinburgh Eastern) (Ind) Rennie, Willie (North East Fife) (LD) Wishart, Beatrice (Shetland Islands) (LD) Against Adam, George (Paisley) (SNP) Adam, Karen (Banffshire and Buchan Coast) (SNP) Adamson, Clare (Motherwell and Wishaw) (SNP) Allan, Alasdair (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (SNP) Arthur, Tom (Renfrewshire South) (SNP) 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) Carson, Finlay (Galloway and West Dumfries) (Con) Chapman, Maggie (North East Scotland) (Green) Coffey, Willie (Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley) (SNP) Constance, Angela (Almond Valley) (SNP) Dey, Graeme (Angus South) (SNP) Doris, Bob (Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn) (SNP) Dornan, James (Glasgow Cathcart) (SNP) Dowey, Sharon (South Scotland) (Con) Dunbar, Jackie (Aberdeen Donside) (SNP) Eagle, Tim (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Fairlie, Jim (Perthshire South and Kinross-shire) (SNP) Findlay, Russell (West Scotland) (Con) FitzPatrick, Joe (Dundee City West) (SNP) Forbes, Kate (Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch) (SNP) Fraser, Murdo (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Gallacher, Meghan (Central Scotland) (Con) Gibson, Kenneth (Cunninghame North) (SNP) Gilruth, Jenny (Mid Fife and Glenrothes) (SNP) Gosal, Pam (West Scotland) (Con) Gougeon, Mairi (Angus North and Mearns) (SNP) Grahame, Christine (Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale) (SNP) Gray, Neil (Airdrie and Shotts) (SNP) Greer, Ross (West Scotland) (Green) Gulhane, Sandesh (Glasgow) (Con) Halcro Johnston, Jamie (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Harper, Emma (South Scotland) (SNP) Harvie, Patrick (Glasgow) (Green) Haughey, Clare (Rutherglen) (SNP) Hepburn, Jamie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (SNP) Hoy, Craig (South Scotland) (Con) Hyslop, Fiona (Linlithgow) (SNP) Kerr, Liam (North East Scotland) (Con) Kerr, Stephen (Central Scotland) (Con) Kidd, Bill (Glasgow Anniesland) (SNP) 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) Maguire, Ruth (Cunninghame South) (SNP) Martin, Gillian (Aberdeenshire East) (SNP) Mason, John (Glasgow Shettleston) (Ind) Matheson, Michael (Falkirk West) (SNP) McAllan, Màiri (Clydesdale) (SNP) McCall, Roz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) McKee, Ivan (Glasgow Provan) (SNP) McLennan, Paul (East Lothian) (SNP) McMillan, Stuart (Greenock and Inverclyde) (SNP) McNair, Marie (Clydebank and Milngavie) (SNP) McNeill, Pauline (Glasgow) (Lab) Minto, Jenni (Argyll and Bute) (SNP) Mountain, Edward (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Mundell, Oliver (Dumfriesshire) (Con) Nicoll, Audrey (Aberdeen South and North Kincardine) (SNP) Robertson, Angus (Edinburgh Central) (SNP) Robison, Shona (Dundee City East) (SNP) Roddick, Emma (Highlands and Islands) (SNP) Ross, Douglas (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Ruskell, Mark (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Green) Slater, Lorna (Lothian) (Green) Smith, Liz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) 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) Webber, Sue (Lothian) (Con) Wells, Annie (Glasgow) (Con) White, Tess (North East Scotland) (Con) Whitham, Elena (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley) (SNP) Whittle, Brian (South Scotland) (Con) Yousaf, Humza (Glasgow Pollok) (SNP) Abstentions Baillie, Jackie (Dumbarton) (Lab) Baker, Claire (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab) Boyack, Sarah (Lothian) (Lab) Choudhury, Foysol (Lothian) (Ind) Clark, Katy (West Scotland) (Lab) Duncan-Glancy, Pam (Glasgow) (Ind) Grant, Rhoda (Highlands and Islands) (Lab) Griffin, Mark (Central Scotland) (Lab) Leonard, Richard (Central Scotland) (Lab) Marra, Michael (North East Scotland) (Lab) Mochan, Carol (South Scotland) (Lab) O’Kane, Paul (West Scotland) (Lab) Rowley, Alex (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab) Russell, Davy (Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse) (Lab) Sweeney, Paul (Glasgow) (Lab) Villalba, Mercedes (North East Scotland) (Lab) Whitfield, Martin (South Scotland) (Lab) The Deputy Presiding Officer: The result of the division is: For 6, Against 91, Abstentions 17.”
“However, I still think that there is real concern among those who are operating such businesses at the moment. It is all very well to say that we are going to talk to them and introduce possible solutions, but they have to face decisions about whether to renew leases, whether it is worth putting money into new equipment and whether to train new staff. As it stands, they have no guarantee at all that they will be here in 12 months’ time. For that reason, I press amendment 34. The Deputy Presiding Officer: The question is, that amendment 34 be agreed to. Are we agreed? Members: No. The Deputy Presiding Officer: There will be a division.”
“I hope that that will not occur, but, if it does, transitional provision might be required if applications are pending. It is therefore right that the commencement provision in section 20 of the bill be adjusted to provide scope for that protection to be included in commencement regulations, and I thank Mr Whittle for working with me on the amendment. I ask Mr Balfour not to press amendments 34 and 36, but I urge members to support amendment 35 in my name and amendment 7 in Mr Whittle’s name. The Deputy Presiding Officer: I call Jeremy Balfour to wind up and to press or withdraw amendment 34. Jeremy Balfour: I welcome Brian Whittle’s amendment 7 and I hope that members will support it. I thank the minister for picking up the concerns that she mentioned in relation to amendment 35.”
“The Scottish Government intends to progress work on regulations during that time—for instance, in relation to training or supervision. Mr Balfour is looking to support businesses, but it is in businesses’ interests that work on other regulations can be progressed—for example, under section 5 of the bill—before the creation of offences comes into force, to ensure that businesses have advance notice of requirements. Amendment 7, in Brian Whittle’s name, raises the important point that transitional provision in connection with the implementation of the bill might be needed. If many businesses register with Healthcare Improvement Scotland at the same time, there could be delays, and it would not be reasonable for businesses that were otherwise compliant to be forced to cease trading or to be criminalised due to an administrative delay.”
“However, amendment 35, in my name, puts that beyond doubt by preventing the offence created in section 3—providing a non- surgical procedure outwith permitted premises— from coming into force before that date. I recognise that requiring any earlier date might be unduly difficult for businesses and that any later date would delay operation of the protections in the bill. I hope that that provides assurances to Mr Balfour and that members will support amendment 35. I urge Mr Balfour not to press his amendments 34 and 36, which would delay the commencement of offences in other parts of the bill for 24 months. That is too long a wait. I also cannot support any provision that would prevent the Government from using regulatory powers until then.”
“Jenni Minto: Although commencement of the bill will rightly be a matter for ministers in the next session of Parliament, my intention is for its key provisions to be commenced on 6 September 2027, which is the date from which the licensing scheme for lower-risk, non-surgical procedures will also take effect. Businesses will have until that date to adjust to the bill’s requirements and, in that time, preparations will be made for its enforcement and implementation. I took on board Mr Balfour’s point that some businesses might be concerned that a future minister might bring forward the date for provisions on offences coming into force. I explained why that was unlikely.”
“The minister agreed that I had raised a valid concern and further noted in correspondence that she would not want to penalise any business that had done everything required of it to adhere to the new legislation. The approach that we have settled on for amendment 7 would allow transitional provisions to be made in regulations, alongside and in advance of commencement of the bill. I hope that the minister can answer in the affirmative that this provision will be put in place if needed to ensure that businesses are able to trade without being criminalised if they have applied for a licence.”
“We have the view that, as the system expands, we are likely to require more money to meet the requirements.”—[Official Report, Health, Social Care and Sport Committee, 9 December 2025; c 41.] Amendment 7 would allow the commencement regulations made under section 20(2) to include transitional, transitory or saving provisions. I approached the minister to see what could be done, as we have seen such issues arise before— for example, when the new regulations for protecting vulnerable groups came into force and the demand from people in roles facing kids at summer camps and from pre-hiring processes in schools outpaced the time limit in Disclosure Scotland’s service level agreement, which states that 90 per cent of applications should be processed within 14 days. I am glad that we have found common ground here.”
“A number of businesses currently operate without a Healthcare Improvement Scotland licence. The bill will require such a licence for certain procedures, in relation to which one was not previously required. The concern is that there will be an increase in the number of applications, which could create a decision delay that will force businesses to close for unknown and possibly extended periods of time while they await a decision, or perhaps even to cease trading altogether. Healthcare Improvement Scotland said that it will need more resources in order to enforce the bill’s provisions. In evidence, Eddie Docherty of HIS said: “To be honest, it is currently quite a long way away from being a self-financing process. The discussions with the Scottish Government about baseline funding will need to continue.”
“My officials are looking at enhanced paediatric services in primary care aligning to public commitments around shifting the balance of care to primary and community settings.”
“Despite targets in the NHS Scotland recovery plan following Covid, tooth decay remains the primary reason for child hospital admissions, with more than 6,500 extractions under general aesthetic annually costing the NHS £8.4 million. That is an entirely preventable condition. Every procedure that is performed represents a drain on theatre space, staff time and resources that are needed elsewhere. Does the cabinet secretary share the public’s concern? As a result of those statistics, is the Scottish Government taking any new action to improve children’s oral health? Jenni Minto: As I indicated to Carol Mochan, I am meeting BDA Scotland on 24 March to discuss paediatric extractions under general anaesthetic.”
“Will the member take an intervention? Ross Greer: Yes. Brian Whittle: I am grateful to Ross Greer for taking my intervention, and I will support the amendment. The only thing that concerns me about amendment 200 is that, for a person to request an advocate, they must know and understand that the advocacy service is available to them. How would he tackle that problem? Ross Greer: As I said, I will come on to talk about amendment 200 in more detail in a moment, but there is provision for the information service to make patients aware of the option of advocacy. The key point about requesting it is what I am about to come to. To briefly summarise this section—”
“To ask the First Minister what assessment the Scottish Government has made of any impact on the national health service arising from reports that the number of consultants working in the private healthcare system is the highest on record. (S6F- 04747)”
“Power is given to ministers to expand the scope beyond what is listed, if required, in consultation with health professionals. I recognise that the Law Society of Scotland feels that reform of advance care directives should occur more comprehensively. However, as the functions under the bill will be reviewed, this is an opportunity to test-pilot changes around advance care directives. I move amendment 149.”
“It is standard elsewhere, and using the bill as a way to introduce the practice would give us a clear way to evaluate how it can work. The advance care directive makes clear the patient’s wishes around specific items of care that may prolong their life if they become incapacitated and cannot continue with the assisted dying process, become incapacitated due to the effects of the substance, choose to cancel their declaration, or decide not to use the substance. Again, the advance care directive cannot be used to choose assisted dying in the event of incapacity. The template requirement is to allow a standard format for the advance directive that fits the needs of healthcare professionals and makes information easy to locate when needed.”
“Amendment 159 would create an obligation for medical practitioners to discuss the advance care directive with the terminally ill adult. In response to stage 2 feedback, I have removed the legal requirement for an advance care directive to be completed. A terminally ill adult would have the option of using the template that the Government produced, filling in as little or as much of it as they wanted. A discussion about advance care directives would still be mandatory, so that patients would be aware of all their options. Overall, this set of amendments would help to avoid doubt about patient intention and would provide clarity to patients, healthcare professionals and loved ones. I have looked at research across the UK and at international examples of what should be included.”
“Here we go again. The concern that I am trying to address with my amendments in this group is about the protection of patients and their wishes and the protection of healthcare professionals. My amendment 149 seeks to provide clarity on a patient’s decision to family members and friends, because the patient’s wishes are paramount in such situations. Amendments 149 and 303 seek to make provision for the Scottish Government to bring forward a template advance care directive that expresses the patient’s wishes for end-of-life treatment when they are accessing assisted dying. I stress that it would be optional to use the full template or some of the template or to decline to use it at all. The advance care directive could not be used to choose assisted dying in the event of incapacity.”
“I have listened with great interest to what Daniel Johnson has had to say. I wonder whether he agrees that, whatever timescale we agree to—if we agree to one—it cannot be open ended. If we agree to six months, it will not necessarily mean that someone who tries to access assisted dying will do so within that time, but we cannot have an open-ended timescale in legislation. Daniel Johnson: I quite agree. I am happy to give way to Alasdair Allan if he wishes to intervene.”
“To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to reports that the gap between secondary school leavers from the most deprived and least deprived areas going to a positive destination widened to 4.7 percentage points, which is the largest since 2020-21. (S6O-05602)”
“Colleges report that they have had to turn away qualified applicants from social care courses due to a lack of Scottish Government funding. At Ayrshire College’s Kilmarnock campus alone, 71 applicants have been turned away. Given the shortfall in social care worker numbers, would it not be prudent to ensure that applicants for those courses are fully funded? Tom Arthur: It is important that we have a coherent and joined-up approach. I hope that the member recognises that the budget that the Parliament has agreed to—without the Conservative Party’s support, I note—provides a significant funding uplift for not only health and social care but colleges. I hope that that demonstrates to Brian Whittle the Scottish Government’s commitment to addressing those issues.”
“I thank Jackie Baillie for bringing this incredibly important debate to the chamber. 17:43”
“The problem is that we have no step- up or step-down care, so we have bed blocking. The lack of co-ordinated workforce planning and social care leads to exactly the problems that were highlighted earlier—ambulance queues outside A and E and corridor care becoming more of a norm than it ever should be. The system needs to change. We need to either reduce the numbers of people coming to the front door or increase the staff head count. I would say that we need to do both—we need a complete overhaul of the system. I have talked a lot about A and E and the need for prevention, technology and workforce planning. How often have we talked about workforce planning in the chamber in the 10 years that I have been in Parliament? The Scottish Government is letting patients and staff down, and it is time for change.”
“I have received a number of emails from people in my South Scotland region about minor injuries clinics being closed, being relocated to a central area or having their opening times reduced. That means that more people are being funnelled through A and E. The current Scottish Government promised that, by summer 2025, every type 1 emergency department would have direct access to specialist frailty team staffing, but that pledge has yet to be delivered. That means that, as Scotland’s population ages, A and E staff also have to deal with frailty issues that could have been addressed through a frailty clinic. What are the outcomes of that? A Herald investigation revealed that the three A and E departments in Lanarkshire had exceeded capacity in at least 10 of the past 12 months, with Wishaw operating at 225 per cent of capacity last December.”
“The pandemic undoubtedly exacerbated the issues—not just in Scotland but across the UK— not only around the pressure and the demand that is being placed on our accident and emergency departments and social care systems, but around the complexity of the care that is required to be delivered to those patients. Does the member accept that that is also driving the increased demand and the pressures that we are seeing in A and E and in social care? Brian Whittle: I say to the cabinet secretary that this is 2026: where is the Covid recovery plan that we were promised way back by the health secretary, two predecessors ago? The trouble is that if patients cannot get to see a GP or get through to NHS 24, where do they go? They end up at the front door of A and E, probably with a problem that has deteriorated.”
“In 2024 alone, we estimate 818 excess deaths in Scotland were due to delays to admission of over 12 hours.” The RCEM has also stated: “It is important to note that whilst” there has been “a stark rise” in 12-hour waits from 2020, “waits were already starting to increase before the pandemic” and “Covid-19 cannot be solely blamed for increases.” The A and E department is the canary in the mine, because it is an indication of a system that is creaking and failing. Neil Gray: I appreciate the point that Brian Whittle is making, and I thank him for giving way.”
“I thank Jackie Baillie for bringing this incredibly important debate to the chamber. For the benefit of the cabinet secretary, I say from the outset that the staff in A and E are exceptional. We are not talking them down—we are talking about this issue because they have asked us to do so. It was the Royal College of Emergency Medicine, at an event that Jackie Baillie and I attended, that asked for the issue to be raised in Parliament. According to the RCEM, “Compared to 2021 … six times more patients now wait over 12 hours to be either admitted, transferred or discharged from hospital.”
“We must be careful when we talk about ticket prices. The last time we debated the issue, I was approached by somebody from St Johnstone who said, “Did you know that we offer a free ticket to a child who goes along with an adult?” Those are the kind of initiatives that we need to be aware of. I am running out of time. The Deputy Presiding Officer: Yes, Mr Whittle, you are indeed. Brian Whittle: I thank Gillian Mackay for once again allowing me the opportunity to talk all things sport. 19:07”
“When Tommy was looking for somewhere to house his squad, Motherwell Football Club allowed him to use its indoor facility for free. Clubs are the centre of our communities. I have previously talked about things such as the changing room initiative at Hearts and Hibs and the ability of football clubs to reach into communities and go where statutory services cannot. That is incredibly powerful. I will not go into St Mirren in great detail, because I am pretty sure that it will be mentioned later. However, we have talked about the way in which community clubs bring people together—they coalesce around that passion. Frankly, we undervalue that. We undervalue the soft power of sport and the impact that it can have. We are trying to stop conflict and create a community ethos and spirit. We undervalue the power of sport, and we also underfund it.”
“It was on Sunday, when my grandson was playing for Ayr United—these are only 12- year-olds, I should say—against St Johnstone. There is a community around that football club, which is drawn from all over the place. We in that community all gathered there to watch those kids joyfully knock lumps out of each other, as it turned out. With my eldest grandson, it is rugby, which involves a different community of people who come together around a passion for that particular sport. Gillian Mackay rightly talked about the influence of football in communities, and there are many instances that I could talk about in that regard. I am at Motherwell Football Club every Monday night, when I join my good friend Tommy McKean, who coaches there, and we get our squads together.”
“I thank Gillian Mackay for lodging her motion and bringing the debate to the chamber, allowing some of us, once again, to talk about football. Two or three weeks ago, I chaired an event at the festival of politics on the soft power of sport, which members who are in the chamber for this debate would have enjoyed. I opened that event by saying that sport does not care about colour, creed, religion or sexuality—sport cares only about performance, and it has an inextricable ability to draw communities together around a passion. I have talked about that in the chamber many times before: how sport can break down barriers and have an influence and an impact on people’s lives. We are talking about football today, and I will mention—as I always do—the last football match that I saw.”
“The Deputy Presiding Officer: That concludes portfolio questions on finance and local government. Protecting Children from Harm”
“Although I echo Neil Bibby’s welcoming of the initiative to ensure that all children get access to swimming, that access is not equitable at the moment, with many pools closing. In the cabinet secretary’s deliberations about how to deliver equitable access to swimming, was any work done to show whether we should use the money in school curriculum time, so as to fish where the fish are, to use an old phrase? Shona Robison: It is hard to tell whether that was a welcome, but the implementation plan supports the roll-out of the national primary school swimming framework. That partnership involving local government and Scottish Swimming aims to ensure that every primary school child has the opportunity to learn to swim. We should all welcome that, without finding reasons to moan about it.”
“The Deputy Presiding Officer: There will be a division. The vote is closed.”
“On the standards review, the minister’s comments made me ponder whether the Government may be reconsidering its support for the bill. Maybe we will get into that a bit more at some point in the afternoon. I say to Mr Dey that I accept that there is no definition of “community sentence” in the Scottish legislation, but the other members and parties in the chamber seem to be rather soft-touch on justice, and to want to allow MSPs who have been found guilty and sentenced to either a custodial sentence or a community sentence to remain representing the public. I do not believe that the public would accept that, so, on that premise, I will press amendment 1, and I intend to move my other amendments in the group. The Deputy Presiding Officer: The question is, that amendment 1 be agreed to. Are we agreed? Members: No.”
“Sue Webber: I think that I would get some points. I would not get a community sentence or a prison sentence— Kevin Stewart: You might. [Interruption.] The Deputy Presiding Officer: Members. Sue Webber: —unless I was driving at 100mph along the Cowgate at 7 am. We know that none of us should be doing that. [Interruption.] The Deputy Presiding Officer: Members! Alex Cole-Hamilton: Will the member give way? Sue Webber: I am not going to give way to Mr Cole-Hamilton. As we have heard several times, a 10-day sanction can be given by Parliament and there is no appeal process for that. We are looking for parity in appeals, which we hear about time and time again. What opportunity has there been to make the bill what it was originally intended to be and what it is for?”
“I say to Mr Cole-Hamilton that it is not just about someone being found guilty. However, Mr Cole-Hamilton was correct to state that the law is often an ass. It certainly is if we consider some of the legislation that we have passed in this place. I do not think that the public believe that it is okay for an MSP who has been found guilty to be in this place representing them. Graeme Dey: Will the member give way? Alex Cole-Hamilton: Will the member give way? Sue Webber: I will give way to the minister. I saw his name come up on the screen first. Graeme Dey: I do not want to reduce this debate to a ridiculous level, but I have a simple question for Sue Webber. If she was nicked for speeding on her way home from Parliament tonight, should she be removed from this place? Based on what she is telling us today, the answer is yes.”
“I try my best to stop interruptions from a sedentary position, but I rely on members to comply with standing orders and show courtesy and respect to all members at all times. Please continue, Mr Simpson. Graham Simpson: Indeed. The bill essentially mirrors the Recall of MPs Act 2015, which allows for a parliamentary sanction. Stephen Kerr: Will the member give way? Graham Simpson: No. I say to Mr Kerr that I am almost done. Having said all of that, I am against all the amendments in the group. The Deputy Presiding Officer: I call Sue Webber to wind up and to press or withdraw amendment 1. Sue Webber: I am content that the minister drew attention to the fact that there would have to be a custodial sentence or a community sentence that was given following a guilty verdict.”
“Where would that leave the legitimacy of the replacement member? What would be the repercussions for this Parliament if, after somebody was rejected, a court of appeal found them not guilty? Graham Simpson: That is clearly why we need an appeal process. Amendment 34— Brian Whittle: Will the member give way? Graham Simpson: I will give way now. Brian Whittle: That was a very genuine question from Kevin Stewart about the right of appeal. However, is there a right of appeal if this Parliament decides that a member must take a 10- day sabbatical from here? Graham Simpson: I say to Brian Whittle that there are two different processes here— Brian Whittle: An appeal— Graham Simpson: I wish that he would stop interrupting from a sedentary position. He is normally far more polite. The Deputy Presiding Officer: Mr Simpson, please resume your seat.”
“In addition, if a person was found guilty of a sufficiently serious offence, it is likely that they would receive a lengthy prison sentence that would certainly be over 12 months. That means that they would automatically be removed from office at the point of sentencing without waiting for any appeals period to expire. That automatic removal would eliminate the need for a recall process to be run at all. I stand by my position as reflected in the bill. Kevin Stewart: Will the member give way? Graham Simpson: I will. Kevin Stewart: I thank the member in charge of the bill for giving way. Does he agree that it would be absolutely unbelievably stupid to see somebody removed from this place and replaced by someone else only for them to go through an appeal process that found them not guilty?”
“However, a short community sentence might be issued for a very minor offence, and that might not reasonably be considered sufficiently serious to justify going back to the electorate, or the associated expense to the taxpayer of that recall process. In relation to prison sentences, appeals processes need to be considered. In that regard, I have again sought to mirror the appeal provisions in the 2015 UK act, which allow for all appeal processes to be exhausted before the recall process can commence. As the minister said in his letter to Sue Webber, amendment 34 contains no provision for appeal and it may not be ECHR compliant. That is a serious matter. Sue Webber should not move that amendment. Brian Whittle: Will the member give way? Graham Simpson: I will not, if Mr Whittle does not mind. I am almost done.”
“In relation to community sentences, I took the view that such a sentence would not necessarily remove greatly from the MSP’s ability to undertake their role in working for the electorate. Alex Cole-Hamilton: Does Graham Simpson agree that recall, rather than straight removal, matters? This Parliament has passed legislation that creates a range of criminal offences and, in relation to all of those crimes, has sanctioned the level of punishment and remedy. Simply removing a member, without the recall process, would therefore add an additional tariff to legislation that already exists. Graham Simpson: Yes. It would be absolutely absurd not to involve the electorate. Alex Cole- Hamilton is right. If a serving MSP receives a custodial sentence, they are, quite obviously, not able to undertake the role of parliamentarian.”
“Key considerations were whether the electorate will be left without a representative for an unreasonable period of time, whether the taxpayer will continue to pay for someone who is not undertaking their role as an MSP—for example, if they are imprisoned—and what conduct is required by the Scottish people of MSPs in order for them to be worthy of the position of MSP. I have sought to mirror, in general terms, the policy intentions and processes of the Recall of MPs Act 2015 in relation to the grounds for recall. In addition, for the criminal offence ground, I also considered grounds that were not included in the 2015 act in order to see whether the criminal offence ground could usefully be built upon.”
“That is what a committee of the new Parliament ought to do. As I have said throughout discussion of the bill, the processes that are being decided on are for Parliament and its members. Graham Simpson: Sue Webber’s amendments all broadly relate to where the line should be drawn in terms of when a member commits something sufficiently serious that it warrants automatic removal from Parliament altogether. I gave careful consideration in developing the bill to what the appropriate grounds for the initiation of a recall process should be, and what the appropriate grounds for automatic removal should be.”
“Although the Agnew report has been published and sent to the standards committee, when, in the four weeks that are left in this parliamentary session, would parliamentarians have a chance to discuss and debate it, never mind to set out and agree on what they want the sanctions process in this Parliament to look like and how associated changes—such as changes to standing orders and the code of conduct—should take place? As someone who is leaving Parliament, I would not want to leave legislation that is not underpinned by an independent, agreed sanctions process, with associated guidance and relevant changes to our standing orders. Our new Parliament needs to discuss and agree that process so that it can have confidence in it— [Interruption.] I will not give way now; I have given way quite a lot. I apologise.”
“Therefore, a significant change of direction that was not raised at stage 1, and that was not agreed at stage 2, has now been reintroduced in a revised, yet incomplete, form through a new amendment at stage 3. I will also mention here the sanctions process that the recall would be based on, which is a process that would depend on a regime that is currently under review and, therefore, yet to be agreed by the Parliament. 15:15 Kevin Stewart: That review, which has not yet finished, puts us in a bit of a dilemma in relation to this entire bill today. One would have thought that it should have been completed and in place before we were legislating on this particular issue. Does the minister agree? Graeme Dey: I agree with Kevin Stewart.”
“Are we seriously suggesting that those should be captured by the process? The bill as amended at stage 2 makes a clear distinction in relation to convictions arising from a criminal offence. Any sentence of imprisonment that did not result in disqualification under the law that is currently in place—therefore, a sentence of more than 12 months that resulted in imprisonment—would result in recall, whereby the electorate would decide whether its MSP should remain a member of Parliament. There would be no gaps in relation to sentences of imprisonment, and community sentences would form part of neither the recall process nor the removal process. The issue of community sentences was not raised during the stage 1 debate.”
“I have genuine concerns, in that if you got a prison sentence of up to one year that would mean that you were missing from Parliament for up to one year, but getting a sanction of 10 days from the parliamentary committee would also trigger a recall. Do you not think that there is an issue there? You might be able to appeal against a prison sentence, but you cannot appeal against the Parliament. There seems to be a conflict there. The Deputy Presiding Officer: Always speak through the chair. Graeme Dey: We will come to the sanctions process in due course. I will give the Parliament a flavour of what might be captured by community sentences. For example, Scottish Government statistics on community sentences cover community payback orders, restriction of liberty orders and drug treatment and testing orders.”
“I move amendment S6M-20819.1, to leave out from “strongly” to end and insert: “reaffirms its clear support for NATO as the cornerstone of collective defence and the foundation of transatlantic security; recognises that NATO has preserved peace among its members for more than 75 years and that the Alliance’s nuclear deterrent, including the strategic capability of the United States, has underpinned strategic stability among NATO members and deterred direct conflict between major nuclear powers in Europe for eight decades; recognises the United States as a central and enduring partner in safeguarding European security and acknowledges its leadership in providing the air mobility, logistics, intelligence and deterrence capabilities on which the Alliance relies; notes that military aircraft from NATO allies, including those of the United States, routinely and lawfully use Scottish airports such as Glasgow Prestwick Airport for refuelling and transit; further notes that such activity supports jobs, brings revenue and contributes to the financial sustainability of publicly owned airport infrastructure; rejects calls to withdraw cooperation from the country’s closest allies; calls on the Scottish Government to continue facilitating appropriate access for NATO partners to Scottish airport facilities in support of collective defence, national security and the long-term resilience of Scotland’s aviation assets, and regrets that the Scottish Green Party has chosen to use parliamentary time to debate these matters instead of raising the many devolved issues that require immediate attention.” 15:13”