Seòmar agus comataidhean

I have been working with the Campaign for North East Rail on the issue of rail to Peterhead. Will the member join me in that campaign to ensure that we do get rail back there?

I have probably mentioned a few times in the chamber that my constituency contains many fishing communities. Integrity is embedded in those communities, which have a real pride in their fishing culture and heritage. The set of principles that the Scottish Government brings to the table in the negotiations is aligned with that long-established good faith and integrity, and Scotland is regarded as a good global citizen.

This debate on fishing negotiations comes at a time when leaders and citizens from around the globe have just gathered in Egypt to take stock of efforts to preserve our planet for future generations. Sustainability is on all of us, and it is our responsibility to take the stewardship of the seas seriously. Creating sustainability and preserving biodiversity are huge tasks, and they flow through our negotiations and discussions. In Banffshire and Buchan Coast, the oceans and seas are an important part of our daily lives, but we are coming ever closer to the real and obvious challenges of climate change.

At the forefront of our negotiations is our understanding that fishers and processors in my constituency and others are fearful about the future of an industry that is reeling from the Westminster perfect storm of Brexit, the cost of living crisis, economic chaos and spiralling energy costs, as well as an immigration policy that is failing the industry, particularly in the labour constraints that it upholds. The chief executive of the Scottish Fishermen’s Federation, Elspeth Macdonald, spoke for many when she said:

“the Brexit deal on fisheries fell far short of what the industry had sought and what the UK Government had promised.”

The Scottish White Fish Producers Association’s chief executive officer, Mike Park, said:

“It is clear, for the offshore catching sector, Brexit failed to deliver any benefits of being a coastal state.”

Meanwhile, the Scottish Seafood Association CEO, Jimmy Buchan, said that fishers had been “badly let down”. The Tory rhetoric of a “sea of opportunity” has indeed been exposed as entirely false.

I have spoken about the culture and heritage of the industry in Scotland, but we must also recognise the significant contribution that the industry makes to the economy. In 2021, fish and seafood exports were valued at £1 billion, which is almost 60 per cent of total Scottish food exports, and the industry itself employs some 15,000 people across Scotland.

Marine Scotland has acknowledged that valued contribution and reinvests in supporting it. For example, in 2021-22, around £14 million was awarded to a range of projects, including support for young fishers to enter the industry; the enhancement of sustainable aquaculture; protection of the marine environment; and support for Scotland’s coastal communities through improved infrastructure and facilities.

The strategy for the seafood sector, which was announced in October, highlighted on-going work to monitor and manage the marine space, so that consumers can have confidence in the sustainability of Scottish seafood. It detailed how the fishing and aquaculture sectors are being supported to remain internationally competitive and to attract skills and talent to some of Scotland’s most rural and coastal areas, despite the challenges of the post-Brexit trading environment.

I welcome the update from the Scottish Government on what it is doing to improve positive destinations for disabled people leaving school. How many people are accessing modern apprenticeships and how does the number compare with pre-pandemic numbers?

We have spoken a bit about loopholes. We know that the purpose of the bill is to close some loopholes that have been apparent. A few stakeholders, on all sides of the debate and argument, have been vocal in expressing the view that any exemptions for rough shooting would create potential loopholes. What considerations have been given to that? We have already discussed that issue, but is there anything specific that you have considered putting into the bill?

As somebody who is sitting here, scrutinising the bill, I am aware that its priority is animal welfare. Above and beyond everything else, including human activities, it is about animal welfare.

In this discussion, we are drilling down into the details and narrative of particular situations that may or may not happen. The convener talked about his experience on rough shoots and said that, if he had a dog that was out of control, he would not be asked back because, mostly, rough shoots are co-ordinated and organised in the most legal ways possible. In that regard, I do not think that we will have many issues, so would you agree that it will really come down to the enforcement?

I will be voting against Michael Marra’s amendments 45 and 48. They are really problematic, in that they are very middle-class focused. We have to look at the variety of people who will come forward for a GRC. The amendments are not inclusive of people from various different backgrounds. Sometimes we have to be careful when we say the word “safeguarding” when, in fact, we are talking about gatekeeping. That is what I feel is involved in the amendments. It is certainly gatekeeping, and what is proposed is against all the principles of the bill. The purpose of gender recognition reform is to make the process more progressive and easier for trans people to obtain a gender recognition certificate. I do not believe that the amendments would do that, so I will vote against them.

You said that you have received support from Jackson Carlaw for your amendments. What kind of support have you had for them in conversations with other colleagues?

No. I ask that the amendment goes to a vote, because I would like to see the committee’s conclusion at this stage.

I thank my colleague Emma Roddick for bringing the motion to Parliament for debate and for clearly setting out many of the issues surrounding mental health support in the workplace. It is quite apparent that I have a mental health condition; I have panic disorder due to post-traumatic stress disorder, as was apparent when I gave my first speech in Parliament and my legs did not work. I am therefore glad that we are talking about this issue today.

Stigma and discrimination can have a devastating impact on the lives of people with mental health problems. They can stop people reaching out for the right help and support and can leave people feeling isolated or living in fear of judgment and dismissal. The worry is always there that they might be thought of as being incapable of doing their job. I am certainly in that bracket but, like my colleague Emma Roddick, I am very capable. However, someone who discloses their personal mental health struggle will always have that underlying worry. That is the reality for many people.

The workplace is a huge part of our lives. Just as our home life and social interactions need to provide us with safety and security, our workplace should do the same, and we should take steps to improve working conditions.

Over the decades, there have been improvements in the workplace in relation to health and safety. That has mostly involved physical health and safety, but I think that we should also improve the situation with regard to mental health and safety. Providing much-needed support around prevention and intervention for employees that is easy to access is crucial. Reducing stigma and raising awareness in the workplace can be transformational, and education is key to addressing that. I feel empowered by giving this speech today, and I am grateful for the opportunity to do so. If we create a culture from the ground up, we ensure that employees are educated, and that helps to get everybody on board, which is, surely, vital. We cannot tackle mental health issues in the workplace without addressing bullying and ignorance. How we act in relation to one another is vital.

I have been encouraged by the outstanding work of See Me Scotland, and I warmly welcome its partnership involvement with vulnerable groups that, according to statistics, experience mental ill health the most. For example, its work to tackle mental health stigma and discrimination in the LGBT community is pioneering. It is important to note the holistic approach that is needed to tackle mental health stigma. Often, there are complex layers to the issue, so casting a wider eye over it is vital.

For example, I represent a coastal and rural constituency with unique mental health challenges being faced by farmers and fishers, and by people in those wider industries. I commend the work of NFU Scotland and the SeaFit programme, which work to protect the mental wellbeing of everyone who works in those industries and offer much-needed support and vital services. Work to reduce stigma must come from within those industries, as those organisations know their members best.

I want to take a moment to recognise the individuals who work incredibly hard to raise awareness and provide support. There are too many for me to mention all of them, but they work hard to amplify the message that we are sending today. Many of them have been impacted by mental health issues, either personally or in relation to someone they love.

I would like to mention one of my constituents, Danny Thain, from Fraserburgh, who will take to the streets of Aberdeen to sleep rough for a month, relying on the kindness of strangers for food and drink, to raise awareness of mental health issues and to raise funds for a mental health retreat, after his devastating experience of losing three close friends to suicide.

In conclusion, we must encourage and work with employers and other stakeholders to ensure that a workplace culture allows employees to prioritise their mental health and wellbeing without fear of stigma. I am proud that, in Scotland, we are moving towards a fundamental and progressive shift towards a human rights-based policy approach. Being much closer to complying with international human rights standards will address many of the issues that are raised in the motion. Of course, that alone will not help. We need that foundational cultural change as a priority, and it begins with all of us.