Seòmar agus comataidhean

To ask the Scottish Government what it is doing to protect the on-going viability of local and regional museums and galleries. (S6O-04544)

Across South Scotland, there are a number of important cultural artefacts that museums do not have the funding to maintain. If that relatively small amount of funding is not found, those pieces will have to go into storage away from the public, in order to protect them, which will further decrease visitor numbers. Is the Scottish Government sleepwalking into the terminal decline of Scottish culture anywhere other than in our major cities, or does the plan that the cabinet secretary mentioned support culture in our towns and villages?

Will the cabinet secretary take an intervention?

Today’s debate is of critical importance, and it is right that we use our time in the chamber to debate topics that match the Scottish people’s priorities.

The SNP Government might want to hide from its responsibilities and its record when it comes to the NHS, but Opposition members have a responsibility to hold the Government to account on behalf of patients and staff, who have been let down for far too long. I therefore thank Douglas Lumsden for bringing the debate to the chamber, and I share his concern for his constituents. As the motion states, more than 3,000 patients in NHS Grampian have waited more than two years for treatment. That is unacceptable.

The Government’s record is also appalling in my South Scotland region. The issue of waiting times for NHS treatment is perhaps the one that I hear most about from my constituents, and I also hear from overstretched staff members in the areas that I cover. Constituents say to me that waiting times are too high, that there is unclear information on what is happening and that the Scottish Government has no real plan to address the issue. Staff tell me that thousands of registered nursing staff are missing from health and care services, that the number of nurses leaving the register within their first 10 years is increasing and that the number of students applying to study for a nursing degree is falling. The SNP has no credible plan to rectify that, as NHS staff can see.

We are hearing in the chamber tonight that, whether someone lives in a rural area or an urban area, whether they are young or old or whether they have a long-term condition or are seeking new advice, worries about NHS waiting times are a constant.

So far, I have raised the concerns of constituents and staff who have reached out to me. In the few minutes that I have left, I want to raise the voices of women living in Scotland. Recent reporting suggests that women across Scotland are suffering “structural neglect” by the NHS, with hundreds being left to languish on waiting lists for years. Weekend papers highlighted the extreme waiting times that are being experienced specifically by women for female-only medical interventions.

Currently, almost 1,500 women in Scotland have been waiting for more than two years for vital gynaecological surgery. My research shows that women in three health board areas—NHS Grampian, NHS Tayside and NHS Lanarkshire—have been waiting for more than four years, often in agony, for laparoscopies. The response to a Scottish Labour freedom of information request shows how many women are being badly failed by the SNP when it comes to hysterectomies. We revealed a wait of almost six years in NHS Grampian, and in NHS Borders, in my South Scotland region, the longest wait in 2024-25 was 10 times longer than in 2019-20. That is absolutely scandalous. I could go on. Waits for a colposcopy—a test that can help to identify cervical cancer—are unacceptably high. In Ayrshire, the average wait time is continually increasing, with the longest wait at the time being a shocking 238 days.

Bringing down waiting lists must be an absolute priority. We must have a plan that actually delivers for patients and staff. Under the Scottish Government, our tremendous NHS staff have been pushed to the limit, services are at breaking point and patients suffer on endless lists. For patients and staff, this is a Government without a plan, and that must change.

I thank George Adam for bringing this celebration of the work of the University of the West of Scotland to the chamber.

We all know the power of education, and we all believe that it can transform lives. The right to education at all levels must be embedded in all that we do as politicians. It is important that we continue to work with universities to encourage programmes such as the foundation academy. The foundation academy has allowed pupils who wish to pursue higher education in a wide range of subject areas to gain access to it. It has provided a pathway without which that education might have been out of reach.

As we have heard, thousands of young people have benefited from the academy since it was launched in 2022 with the aim of bridging the gap between schools and the university, and the numbers continue to increase each year.

One of the biggest challenges that is faced by pupils who would like to go to university, especially those who lack support for and experience of university at home, is change. That can be a very difficult gap to bridge, and we all know that it has led to many people simply giving up. The programme directly addresses that issue, and we should all support it in doing so.

As others have said, the programme includes accredited modules and affords the students a taster of university education.

I was pleased to speak with delegates from the University of the West of Scotland about the foundation academy when they visited Parliament earlier this year. I am proud to say that in my South Scotland region, 245 pupils have participated. Through the programme, they have gained insight and learning experiences to improve their future university applications.

No child or young person should ever feel limited because of their background or circumstances. Everyone should have support to develop the skills and knowledge that they need to access their chosen path. The programme provides opportunity by creating more routes for students to gain access to university. It is vitally important that students from all backgrounds have access to university, should they wish it.

We know the impact of growing up in poverty, which causes unfair barriers to accessing further education. We should be doing everything that we can to provide all children with the tools to choose their own future, which must include access to university, if they choose that option.

As I have a rural constituency, it is very common for constituents to tell me how difficult it is for their young family members to travel to education and training. Recent work that I have participated in around traditional building trades highlighted the issue for me. If a young person living in Dalmellington wants to learn a trade such as roofing, they cannot, through no fault of their own, get public transport that allows them to reach college for the start time. How can we expect them to commit to options that they simply cannot get to?

We in the Parliament have a responsibility to fix those injustices. Part of our responsibility in relation to supporting programmes such as the foundation academy is to look at the wider issues for and needs of our communities.

The programme addresses the challenges that pupils might have. First, it fully funds visits to the university and, secondly, pupils get experience of modules being delivered by lecturers in their own school for a period each week. That provides them with a comprehensive understanding of how university teaching is structured, and gives them accredited skills, knowledge and confidence—and the qualification that other members have mentioned—to take with them in the next steps in their education.

I appreciate all the work that staff and students have done, and I wish them great success for the future. I welcome all the contributions from members today.

The Government has repeatedly failed to say how it is ensuring that all health and safety workplace regulations are being complied with in relation to single-sex toilets. I have asked this question before, but can the Government provide any assurance that it will take some responsibility and look to assess the current situation in our NHS and other organisations—particularly those to which the Government provides public funds—and gather the necessary data? It should not be difficult, and I think that it is essential.

I thank Daniel Johnson for bringing this important debate to the chamber. In working with other members across the parties, he has been a real champion in the Parliament for people with learning disabilities, autism and neurodivergence.

The Scottish Government committed to the learning disabilities, autism and neurodivergence bill in its programme for government for 2021-22. That was at the very start of my journey as an MSP. At that time, I was approached by constituents and by professional organisations that asked me to support the bill. I must say that people were extremely positive and excited to see that piece of legislation advance.

In summer 2022, I had the great pleasure of attending the Borders Additional Needs Group’s branching out transitional youth camp. It was at that point that I realised that the bill was not progressing as many had hoped, following the indication that another consultation period would be added. That consultation did not commence until December 2023. In the short time that I have in which to speak tonight, I want to raise the voices of my constituents. I do not think that the frustration of those people and their families can be overstated.

During the four years that I have been in Parliament, this subject has featured as one of the most frequent requests in my casework. Often, it starts with a simple request: people just ask, “Can you help me to understand?” I believe that my colleagues in the chamber will have had the same type of request time and again. As MSPs, we all know that that simple request becomes bigger and bigger as families have to fight every step of the way for assessment, treatment and support.

The lack of leadership and the lack of urgency from the Government to legislate in this area is absolutely and utterly unacceptable. It seems that there is little doubt among experts and families that the bill should be in the Government’s programme for government, and it is not good enough to delay it any further if we truly want to change outcomes for people.

I have some very dear friends who have experience of the service provision for both adults and children with autism and ADHD in Ayrshire. They and many other families across my South Scotland region have had considerable difficulty in finding adequately trained GPs. When families, out of sheer desperation, seek private consultations, there is a lack of shared care and of clarity and follow-up with treatment plans. That all causes undue stress as well as considerable debt for families who can little afford it.

Other families have approached me about the complex systems that are in place to divert referrals from CAMHS. That issue is raised with me regularly—families do not feel supported, and they are provided with few options for support with diagnosis and/or treatment and/or integration with other services such as education and employment. The systems lack any opportunity for appeal on rejected referral routes, and families are already struggling and exhausted by the system itself. It is absolutely unacceptable.

In addition, families have raised with me the lack of training for education professionals, which means that opportunities to break down barriers and to enable people to fulfil their potential are missed. Education services are asking for training and resources, but the Government seems to be unable to respond to the need.

There is little doubt that the legislation should be progressed, to address many of the issues that have been raised by my constituents and by other members in this debate. I hope that the minister provides some answers to my constituents in summing up.

The member makes a very good point. Does he agree that it might be possible for us to help local authorities to engage in shared activities to enable some of our constituents to access such provision?

Absolutely. When somebody asked my primary school-aged son how school was, he said that there was a lot of sitting inside and sitting down. That came from the fact that, in his early years, he spent so much time outside—with his father, in particular.

Residential outdoor education represents a key milestone in a child’s educational development, and schools should aim to include it as a core part of learning—which is what Brian Whittle was trying to say, I think. I do not think that that is disputed across the parties.

I support the general principles of the bill. There are concerns, but I think that the member in charge of the bill recognises those, and we can fine tune it at stage 2 if there is a willingness to do so. We need to think about costs, provision for pupils with additional support needs and the impacts on teachers. However, as we have discussed, there is a way of addressing those issues.

There must be a financial resolution for the bill, and I hope that we can work across the parties on that. I will certainly do so with my colleagues in Scottish Labour. I repeat Willie Rennie’s point about the Government needing to make sure to seek out how we can get the bill through.

The bill seeks to address the fact that many schools do not currently provide residential outdoor education. On that, I pick up a point that I often raise in the chamber, which is about inequalities—particularly health inequalities. Those exist, and we know that they exist. The bill has definitely got to be part of the solution.

Costs and financial pressures represent a key barrier to families, and to children having the opportunity to go along to residential outdoor education. We know that disparities exist between pupils who live in the most and least deprived communities. The bill is an opportunity for the outdoors to be a part of everybody’s life and for those who live in poverty not to be disadvantaged. The bill must address the wider socioeconomic issues that impact on a child’s ability to access and attend residential trips.

I agree that we need to look at the role of teaching staff and make sure that residential outdoor education is done in a way that supports teachers and is a core part of the curriculum, as has been mentioned.

The intention and aims behind the bill are welcome, and its principles are well intended—all of us have said that during the debate. Outdoor learning enhances education, improves mental and physical health and has many benefits for a child’s development. It can break down barriers, particularly when it comes to inequality, and offer opportunities to the most disadvantaged children. We speak about that in the chamber every day. We need to have the will to ensure that it can happen, and I believe that that will is there, across the parties. Every pupil, no matter their background or individual need, should have the opportunity to attend a residential outdoor trip. I will play my part in making sure that we get the bill through.

Will John Mason give way?