Seòmar agus comataidhean

I thank the other members of the Social Justice and Social Security Committee for preparing this important contribution to our national discussion. I am now a member of that committee, but I was not when the report was prepared. I thank the clerks and all those who contributed the important evidence.

I know that, in this place, we all share the goal of ending violence against women and girls in Scotland by tackling the underlying attitudes and systems that perpetuate it. We all understand that that has to be a priority for any Government and for the Parliament as a whole. Equally, however, we need to understand that that will not result from good sentiments and kind words alone. I therefore welcome the minister’s comments so far in the debate, and I look forward to hearing her closing contribution at the end of today’s discussion.

I have heard—I am sure that other members have, too—harrowing stories from constituents about financial exclusion causing a great number of problems when they are leaving domestic abuse situations. My party and I want to play a constructive and positive role in achieving change. We need to ensure that any legislative efforts are making the impact that women and girls need, and we need efforts that reflect the reality of life for domestic abuse victims in Scotland. The committee’s work goes some way to improving the landscape on that, and Scottish Labour welcomes its recommendations. I will touch on a few that I hope jump out as a priority.

Overall, the equally safe strategy is good, but it can be effective in helping victims only if more is done to raise awareness of its existence. We know that far too many people have no idea about the programmes and funds that are available to them. That information should be present in as many settings as possible, especially during people’s lives in education. We heard about the need to inform young women and girls of the help that is provided and the platforms where they can get support throughout their lives. That is important in ensuring that young girls and women grow up knowing what is available to them.

Women who are trapped in an abusive relationship are, in effect, unable to live any form of healthy life. A key component of that is the restriction in their access to finance. That is often deliberate, and it is cruel. Abusers begin the process very early in relationships, so the signs are often there, but, naturally, not everyone can see them, particularly in those early moments. We must use what we have learned from police, social services and health settings to inform policy and improve the offer that we have. That cross-portfolio working is key to ensuring that information and support are provided at the correct time and in the correct way.

If we are serious about supporting women to leave abusive relationships, we must give them the financial freedom to leave. Others have spoken about that. The fund to leave can go a long way to assisting not only women in that situation but their children or dependants. However, we need to consider further whether the current level is enough, how the fund can be accessed and whether it will be brought in across the board.

The evidence that was received during the inquiry highlighted numerous barriers that victims face in accessing the support that they need. A large part of that is about debt, as we have heard from other members. Survivors often face debt that has come through desperation or deliberate manipulation by partners. I know that the minister mentioned that in her speech, but the Government must consider that aspect and work with partners to help victims when they are in temporary accommodation, so that they are not drowning in financial obligations and can maintain their housing. We know that maintaining housing is a key way of ensuring that victims have a more positive outcome.

We, in Scottish Labour, are updating our policies in line with some of the recommendations, and we continue to review their effectiveness so that we can help as many people as possible. We have to improve Scotland with meaningful policy that will not simply disappear into news cycles. The committee’s report is an opportunity to take a step in that direction, and we welcome it.

In closing, I say again how significant the report is in contributing to the change that we all know needs to be made for women and girls who are fleeing domestic abuse.

Jackie Dunbar’s example is still ringing in my ears. It is difficult for women to leave such situations, and we all need to try to fix that and find solutions.

Scottish Labour fully supports the report and we want to work with the Government to ensure that we can deliver on its recommendations. Delivery is crucial.

I commend the committee for holding the inquiry during the first half of 2025. Timeframes are tight for some of the committees, so it is important that it managed to hold the inquiry. Today’s debate has demonstrated how important that work has been and must continue to be.

I again thank those who gave evidence. Sometimes, we forget how difficult it can be for people to give such evidence—for the victims, of course, but also for the staff who work in our policing, housing and social services. It is difficult for them to offer support again and again, because we are not always getting those solutions for people.

The discussions with women with lived experience, the visit to Financially Included, which Bob Doris mentioned, as well as the evidence sessions on the wide range of relevant policy areas, such as housing, social security, legal aid, public debt, immigration status and policing, have paid dividends. The Government should methodically look through and respond to the recommendations.

We have also heard from members across the chamber that the themes in the recommendations that we have all mentioned need to be co-ordinated. There needs to be a co-ordinated approach across the wide range of policy areas and at different levels of government. That is something that we say in the chamber a lot, but we need to improve the delivery of that approach, so I would be interested to hear from the minister what plans she has to try to take it across policy areas.

Many members have mentioned key recommendations that they hope that the minister will do further work on. We know that there are difficulties in accessing advice. Where is that advice? How easy is it for people to access it? What do we have in place to ensure that we get that trauma-informed training for members of staff? What would the introduction of a national roll-out of the fund to leave look like? It is important that we get some answers. Members have also raised important issues around legal aid and investment. This must be a priority for Government. Delivery is crucial. It is a priority for the Parliament and it is most certainly a priority for Scottish Labour. We really value the opportunity to debate the issue this afternoon.

That is very helpful. Thank you.

To explain a bit more, the bill allows the commissioner to

“take such steps as the Commissioner considers appropriate”

when seeking to resolve a matter without recourse to an investigation. What powers might help with investigation, and what other resolutions might be found?

Thank you. That is very helpful.

I want to ask about people’s views on sections 6 to 11 and schedule 2, which effectively give the commissioner powers to carry out investigations. Do witnesses have any views on the powers that relate to investigations by the commissioner?

I, too, thank Marie McNair for securing this debate in the chamber. I also thank AMMF for all the work that it does to support research on cholangiocarcinoma, raise awareness and support those who have been diagnosed. Its campaign and Marie McNair’s call to ensure the funding for testing are so important, and I look forward to the minister’s response to them.

Although it has often been documented that cholangiocarcinoma is rare, I was really interested in Marie McNair’s point about the changing reality of that rarity—I had not picked up on that, so I was glad to hear about it in the debate. Bile duct cancer is aggressive and it is on the rise: it is considered to be the second most common primary liver cancer in the world. As we have heard from others, the incidence is higher in Scotland than in England; we must seek to understand why that is and what we can do about it.

The debate will help to highlight the causes of and risk factors for bile duct cancer, as well as to increase awareness. That is why it is so important that debates such as this are secured. Marie McNair is excellent at using her members’ business debates to do that.

We have already heard that timely diagnosis and treatment are crucial, and we also know that the diagnosis of bile duct cancer can often come late, resulting in poorer outcomes. I want to highlight—as I often do—the health inequalities that others have mentioned. People in more deprived areas have higher rates of preventable cancers and are more likely to be diagnosed at later stages. When we are speaking about bile duct cancer, which tends to be diagnosed at a late stage, it is important to have that in our minds. We must always seek ways to ensure that the cancer inequality gap is closed. I know that the minister has spoken about that in the chamber; she might mention it again in her closing speech.

As we read in the motion, bile duct cancer symptoms are difficult to spot, particularly at an early stage. The risk factors are largely unknown and it is believed that the cause of bile duct cancer is likely to be a combination of factors, including other illnesses that cause chronic damage to the liver and bile ducts. Although it is most common in people over the age of 60, incidence of the cancer is increasing across all age groups, including among younger people, which emphasises the need to increase public awareness of symptoms, risk factors and treatment options.

Although there is no guaranteed way to avoid bile duct cancer, people can take proactive steps to reduce their chances of developing the disease. When I was researching this, I looked at information from NHS Inform, which suggests that healthy lifestyle factors such as quitting smoking would also have positive impacts on people’s health in that way. Smoking is a leading and silent killer. When smoking rates reduce across Scotland, people’s health, lifestyles and outcomes improve. It is important that the Parliament commits to funding for smoking cessation and other health-improvement measures.

In relation to the link to liver damage, other measures that have come to light are reducing alcohol intake and minimising exposure to hepatitis B and hepatitis C viruses. Doing those will, we think, help with this cancer and others.

We know that there should be a greater focus on Scotland’s relationship with alcohol and its culture of binge drinking. Through targeted interventions to lower excessive drinking rates, we will reduce people’s chances not only of developing cancers such as cholangiocarcinoma, but of developing other diseases.

I repeat my appreciation to Marie McNair for bringing the issue to the chamber. Awareness of the condition is so important, and I know that the minister will give a good response to the debate.

Like others, I was not going to speak in the debate, but I want to make a short contribution.

The Parliament has been commended on the way in which it has handled the bill. The debate was very sensitive, and the bill has been steered through very well by Liam McArthur, as has been commented on many times.

In my view, it is important to allow the bill to go to the next stage. To do that, we have to support the financial resolution. As Mr McArthur said, we can further debate the issues at stage 2. Members have had a real opportunity to submit amendments, with 300 or so having been lodged. We will debate those amendments to try to strengthen the bill and will allow members to vote for or against it in a free vote. In that process, we will also be able to discuss the financial implications of the legislation.

I hope that members will ensure that the financial resolution gets through at this stage.

The Scottish Government has tightened its criteria for Covid vaccinations in the NHS, which means that boosters will no longer be offered to adults who are under 75. I understand that that decision follows advice from the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation. However, as winter approaches, many people are concerned.

What reassurance can the Scottish Government offer those who are no longer eligible for the Covid booster? Is it not concerned that removing the booster from under-75s might lead to an increase in Covid cases, which will put pressure on services as we head into winter?

For years, midwives have issued warnings about the sustainability of services, but it seems that the cabinet secretary has not fully listened. The cabinet secretary has been told many times by the profession that our hard-working, dedicated staff face mounting pressures and an increasing workload. Junior midwives are being forced to enter the profession with limited mentorship and support. The Government mentioned an increase in midwife numbers, but what about the numbers of whole-time equivalent staff, the unfilled shifts and the changing complexities of cases, all of which have been raised by the profession? Staff on the ground are burned out, and it is clear that urgent action is needed.

Today, the cabinet secretary announced a new Scottish maternity and neonatal task force, but, after months, many of the nursing and midwifery task force recommendations have not actually been implemented—some of the work has not even been started. How can the Parliament be confident that the new task force will ensure the delivery of better outcomes for staff and patients on the ground? Has the cabinet secretary ensured that tight timeframes are in place for reporting on that?