Seòmar agus comataidhean

I thank the member for her speech and for mentioning the families in the way that she has. It is much appreciated.

Given what the member is saying, will she support our motion, in order to ensure that we get immediate disclosure of the information that we need?

Public trust in governance and decision making, whether at the local or national level, is crucial for our institutions and democracy. Transparency and accountability are equally as important. We in the Parliament would all agree that people who work in public service must strive to ensure that those values are upheld.

In 2015, the Queen Elizabeth university hospital campus opened its doors for the first time. It was celebrated as a super-hospital and welcomed as one of the most advanced healthcare facilities in the world, yet, 10 years later, this flagship hospital faces a serious scandal.

That is not only because the contamination of the hospital’s water and ventilation system caused serious infection in child cancer patients and four deaths, but because of the subsequent secrecy, covering up and silencing of staff who tried to expose the truth. The cabinet secretary is shying away from answering questions that relate to the here and now. Families were gaslit, dismissed and denied the truth. We do not want that to happen again.

There are many failings that we can discuss in this debate—in leadership, accountability and transparency.

First, the board failed to listen to the families, doctors and whistleblowers who raised concerns from the beginning about problems with the water and ventilation system. The public inquiry heard first-hand accounts of management attempts to silence, threaten and belittle staff, and it is clear that whistleblowing procedures were not followed. The growing culture of ignoring staff and refusing to act on their concerns raises serious questions about management structures in and the leadership of our NHS.

It also raises concern about this SNP Government’s oversight of our most valuable public asset. Problems with water systems were identified in 2015 and again in 2017, but the Scottish Government claims that it was first made aware of them in March 2018. However, as my colleague Anas Sarwar said, there are serious questions about whether that is true. We need some truth. Given that the Government says that it was unaware of the issues in its brand-new super-hospital, it is clear that it failed to provide the oversight and effective leadership that was required.

Secondly, proper procedure failed and the hospital was opened before it was ready. The failure to carry out proper checks resulted in the premature opening of a facility that was not fit for purpose. Evidence to the inquiry shows that the risk of waterborne infection was foreseeable and that it had been raised but was not acted upon. That was a serious error in judgment.

The pressure to open the hospital on time and within budget, whether that came from within the hospital or above, must be heavily scrutinised. It is our job in the Parliament to scrutinise those issues. All those who were involved in decision making, be that operational or political, must be held to account—that is why we are discussing the issue in this debate. The culture of secrecy and cover-up must come to an end.

Thirdly, NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde failed to accept that the water and ventilation systems could be the cause of infections. It failed to admit serious errors in judgment, and it failed to take accountability. In doing so, it prevented transparency and withheld the truth from patients and families. Staff were neglected, families were ignored, and the public were denied the truth.

We are debating this issue today because the Queen Elizabeth university hospital was allowed to open before it should have. We must question that. Families were denied the truth about the role of the hospital in causing the infections and deaths of patients. The Scottish Government is refusing to take any accountability for the errors that were made under its watch. Accountability is what we must discuss, and the Scottish Government was accountable for what happened in our NHS.

I cannot begin to imagine the pain and trauma that those who are affected by the scandal have faced; they are brave to have spoken out. To lose a child to an avoidable death or to have them suffer a severe infection is one thing, but to be denied the truth about the true cause of their death or infection is quite another. Patients and families are angry, and they should be. What they seek now is truth and justice, and that is what they deserve.

I urge the Government to authorise the immediate and full disclosure and preservation of communications that relate to the contaminated water and inadequate ventilation systems and the premature opening of the hospital, as well as any further communications that relate to the issues that we are discussing. By not publishing those documents, we would risk abandoning transparency, diminishing the public’s trust and repeating the same mistakes.

There were problems with the hospital from the very beginning. Long waiting times, staff vacancies and poor infrastructure. The SNP cannot deny its incompetence in overseeing the development and opening of a hospital that would go on to have so many problems.

If the Scottish Government has nothing to hide, it should prove it. Providing full transparency over this matter is the least that the Scottish Government can do for those whistleblowers and families, and it is the least that the patients, families and staff deserve.

As other members have done, I thank my colleague Sarah Boyack for her ambition in and commitment to introducing the bill. A great deal of work has gone into the bill, and I commend her for her on-going dedication to protecting the environment, tackling poverty and promoting collective wellbeing. Scottish Labour agrees with the general principles of the bill and will support it at stage 1.

The integration into legislation of definitions of “wellbeing” and “sustainable development” will not only improve policy coherence and guidance for public bodies but provide structure and accountability that will contribute to Scotland’s progress towards achieving the United Nations sustainable development goals. More must be done to further embed wellbeing and sustainable development principles into public bodies’ decision making. It is clear that, too often, short-term priorities drive decision making over long-term sustainability.

The committee’s evidence sessions supported the value of creating statutory definitions and assisting public bodies to meet their wellbeing and sustainable development obligations. Evidence to the committee overwhelmingly supported the aims and ambitions of the bill. Indeed, organisations such as Oxfam have long backed calls for the bill and see it as a way of enhancing the national outcomes with decision making and delivery. They remain sceptical about whether non-legislative approaches will be sufficient to achieve sustainable development and wellbeing goals.

The Scottish Government has dismissed the bill, because it believes that its aims can already be achieved in the current policy landscape and that additional legislation would be unnecessary. However, despite what the minister said in his speech today, the Scottish Government has been promising a reformed and strengthened national performance framework for years. I believe that those promises were first made back in 2021, but we have yet to see them come to fruition. Instead, we are left with an outdated structure and legislation that is not delivering.

The current approach is clearly not working—that is our position—and the committee’s report found that the proposed legislation is not incompatible with any of the planned reforms to the national performance framework, yet the Government still will not support the bill.

Scottish Labour welcomes the ambition of the bill and the clear structure, guidance and accountability mechanisms that it would give to public bodies and other organisations. The fact that it complements the national performance framework should be welcomed, and the Government should view the bill as something that strengthens existing ambitions instead of something that is unnecessary.

The world has entered precarious times, with some world leaders denouncing the UN’s sustainable development goals. Setting out a clear framework that embeds the principles of sustainability and wellbeing into the heart of public bodies’ decision making can only help to ensure that poverty and inequality, the climate and the wellbeing of future generations are consistently at the forefront of decision making instead of being an afterthought. That can only be a good thing, which is why Scottish Labour will support the bill at decision time.

14:53

In closing for Labour, I thank members for an important and interesting debate. There is real enthusiasm across the chamber for the work that Sarah Boyack has undertaken, which I thank her for. That enthusiasm is why I am confused as to why we cannot get the bill over the line at stage 1, as Patrick Harvie has mentioned.

Every member agrees that Sarah Boyack has been consistent in her approach, from the very early days following her election to the Parliament. Like others, I thank my Social Justice and Social Security Committee colleagues, who I am sure will allow me to say that we appreciated Sarah Boyack’s work and her passion for the bill. I thank the clerks and the witnesses who put in the hours and allowed us to understand and scrutinise the bill when it was presented to the committee.

As I set out in my opening remarks, Scottish Labour agrees with the general principles of the bill and will be supporting it at decision time. During the debate, we wanted to hear whether we could achieve some agreement to allow the bill to be passed at stage 1. I think that everyone agrees that setting out the definitions of wellbeing and sustainable development in legislation would not only improve policy coherence and public body guidance, but provide the structure and accountability that would help Scotland to contribute to the achieving of the UN sustainable development goals.

The critical point is that Sarah Boyack’s bill could give us the opportunity to action something—there has been very little action to date. We are talking about the fact that the policy landscape is incoherent. Sarah Boyack’s bill brought focus to the committee’s discussion on the issue. If she worked with the Government, we could reach a focused outcome.

The member is willing to work with the Government. She was disappointed about the lack of support for her bill but, when the Government said that it would lodge a similar bill, she could see that some joint work could be done. We can understand why she is so disappointed by the committee not agreeing to support her bill at stage 1 and by the fact that the Government will not be supporting the bill or even working with her to support it at decision time today.

I am aware of the time, so, in my remaining minutes, I will turn to the member in charge of the bill, Sarah Boyack, to say thank you from Scottish Labour. Members will know that she will be standing down at the next election. I thank her not just for her work on the bill but for her contribution to the Parliament over the many years that she has been here. From what we have heard today, colleagues agree with that sentiment, and there have been many kind words for Sarah Boyack in their contributions.

Sarah Boyack was elected to the new Scottish Parliament in 1999. She was Minister for Transport and the Environment in the Scottish Executive and went on to be Minister for Transport and Planning. She should be very proud that, during that time, she introduced one of Scottish Labour’s flagship policies, which was the free bus pass for people over 60 and disabled people. It is safe to say that Scottish Labour is proud to have had Sarah Boyack on our benches, whether in government or in opposition. I hope that, across the chamber, we can agree that the Parliament has benefited greatly from her ability to work cross-party with determination and a can-do attitude. [Applause.]

This is an important bill. Sarah Boyack has made important contributions on it in the chamber, and it will be unfortunate if it falls tonight. The important message is that this work must go on.

15:26

If we truly hope to co-ordinate housing support services with wider public services, including health services, we must recognise the vital role that occupational therapists play in assessing housing needs. However, that workforce faces growing demand, a lack of financial stability and very high vacancy rates. What is the Government doing to improve OT numbers across Scotland? Does it recognise that additional recruitment will improve not only health outcomes but the links with housing support for constituents?

If we truly hope to co-ordinate housing support services with wider public services, including health services, we must recognise the vital role that occupational therapists play in assessing housing needs. However, that workforce faces growing demand, a lack of financial stability and very high vacancy rates. What is the Government doing to improve OT numbers across Scotland? Does it recognise that additional recruitment will improve not only health outcomes but the links with housing support for constituents?

As other members have done, I thank my colleague Sarah Boyack for her ambition in and commitment to introducing the bill. A great deal of work has gone into the bill, and I commend her for her on-going dedication to protecting the environment, tackling poverty and promoting collective wellbeing. Scottish Labour agrees with the general principles of the bill and will support it at stage 1.

The integration into legislation of definitions of “wellbeing” and “sustainable development” will not only improve policy coherence and guidance for public bodies but provide structure and accountability that will contribute to Scotland’s progress towards achieving the United Nations sustainable development goals. More must be done to further embed wellbeing and sustainable development principles into public bodies’ decision making. It is clear that, too often, short-term priorities drive decision making over long-term sustainability.

The committee’s evidence sessions supported the value of creating statutory definitions and assisting public bodies to meet their wellbeing and sustainable development obligations. Evidence to the committee overwhelmingly supported the aims and ambitions of the bill. Indeed, organisations such as Oxfam have long backed calls for the bill and see it as a way of enhancing the national outcomes with decision making and delivery. They remain sceptical about whether non-legislative approaches will be sufficient to achieve sustainable development and wellbeing goals.

The Scottish Government has dismissed the bill, because it believes that its aims can already be achieved in the current policy landscape and that additional legislation would be unnecessary. However, despite what the minister said in his speech today, the Scottish Government has been promising a reformed and strengthened national performance framework for years. I believe that those promises were first made back in 2021, but we have yet to see them come to fruition. Instead, we are left with an outdated structure and legislation that is not delivering.

The current approach is clearly not working—that is our position—and the committee’s report found that the proposed legislation is not incompatible with any of the planned reforms to the national performance framework, yet the Government still will not support the bill.

Scottish Labour welcomes the ambition of the bill and the clear structure, guidance and accountability mechanisms that it would give to public bodies and other organisations. The fact that it complements the national performance framework should be welcomed, and the Government should view the bill as something that strengthens existing ambitions instead of something that is unnecessary.

The world has entered precarious times, with some world leaders denouncing the UN’s sustainable development goals. Setting out a clear framework that embeds the principles of sustainability and wellbeing into the heart of public bodies’ decision making can only help to ensure that poverty and inequality, the climate and the wellbeing of future generations are consistently at the forefront of decision making instead of being an afterthought. That can only be a good thing, which is why Scottish Labour will support the bill at decision time.

14:53

In closing for Labour, I thank members for an important and interesting debate. There is real enthusiasm across the chamber for the work that Sarah Boyack has undertaken, which I thank her for. That enthusiasm is why I am confused as to why we cannot get the bill over the line at stage 1, as Patrick Harvie has mentioned.

Every member agrees that Sarah Boyack has been consistent in her approach, from the very early days following her election to the Parliament. Like others, I thank my Social Justice and Social Security Committee colleagues, who I am sure will allow me to say that we appreciated Sarah Boyack’s work and her passion for the bill. I thank the clerks and the witnesses who put in the hours and allowed us to understand and scrutinise the bill when it was presented to the committee.

As I set out in my opening remarks, Scottish Labour agrees with the general principles of the bill and will be supporting it at decision time. During the debate, we wanted to hear whether we could achieve some agreement to allow the bill to be passed at stage 1. I think that everyone agrees that setting out the definitions of wellbeing and sustainable development in legislation would not only improve policy coherence and public body guidance, but provide the structure and accountability that would help Scotland to contribute to the achieving of the UN sustainable development goals.

The critical point is that Sarah Boyack’s bill could give us the opportunity to action something—there has been very little action to date. We are talking about the fact that the policy landscape is incoherent. Sarah Boyack’s bill brought focus to the committee’s discussion on the issue. If she worked with the Government, we could reach a focused outcome.

The member is willing to work with the Government. She was disappointed about the lack of support for her bill but, when the Government said that it would lodge a similar bill, she could see that some joint work could be done. We can understand why she is so disappointed by the committee not agreeing to support her bill at stage 1 and by the fact that the Government will not be supporting the bill or even working with her to support it at decision time today.

I am aware of the time, so, in my remaining minutes, I will turn to the member in charge of the bill, Sarah Boyack, to say thank you from Scottish Labour. Members will know that she will be standing down at the next election. I thank her not just for her work on the bill but for her contribution to the Parliament over the many years that she has been here. From what we have heard today, colleagues agree with that sentiment, and there have been many kind words for Sarah Boyack in their contributions.

Sarah Boyack was elected to the new Scottish Parliament in 1999. She was Minister for Transport and the Environment in the Scottish Executive and went on to be Minister for Transport and Planning. She should be very proud that, during that time, she introduced one of Scottish Labour’s flagship policies, which was the free bus pass for people over 60 and disabled people. It is safe to say that Scottish Labour is proud to have had Sarah Boyack on our benches, whether in government or in opposition. I hope that, across the chamber, we can agree that the Parliament has benefited greatly from her ability to work cross-party with determination and a can-do attitude. [Applause.]

This is an important bill. Sarah Boyack has made important contributions on it in the chamber, and it will be unfortunate if it falls tonight. The important message is that this work must go on.

15:26