Seòmar agus comataidhean

On a point of order, Deputy Presiding Officer. Apologies—I could not get logged in. My vote is no.

I thank Marie McNair for bringing the debate to the chamber.

People might ask why a member from Ayrshire who represents the South Scotland region would ask to speak in a debate about the Clydebank blitz. The truth is that my dad, Bill Mochan, is a Bankie. He has not lived in Clydebank for a long time, but he has always maintained his connection to the town and has spoken with pride, humour and love for Clydebank.

My nana and papa, Annie and Jimmy Mochan, and my Auntie Agnes all lived through the two nights of bombing. My nana and papa did not often speak about those evenings—there was nothing about the fear, the loss of life or the effect that the bombing must have had on them emotionally. Rather, they spoke occasionally about the loss of buildings or the loss felt by other families. On the other hand, Auntie Agnes did speak about the nights themselves—about the noise, the shelters and the devastation as they emerged from the bunkers.

I do not think that I fully understood the events until I was much older. I know now that the Clydebank blitz was one of the most destructive air raids in Scotland during the second world war and had lasting impacts on the town and its people. As others have said, the brutal attack occurred over two nights, on 13 and 14 March 1941. People were killed and infrastructure was damaged, and pretty much the whole population of Clydebank became homeless basically overnight. On reflection, I wonder why my elders did not describe it in that way to me. Perhaps, like so many working-class people throughout history, they accepted the things—often, brutal things—that happened to their communities.

I want to raise three points in my reflections on the Clydebank blitz. First, as my Uncle Jim reminded me last night, the Government covered up what was happening at the time. The media reports cited only a town in western Scotland, while official censorship suppressed casualty figures and imagery of the near-total destruction of the town’s housing. Photos were cropped and film crews were not permitted in. In this day and age, with immediate films, Instagram and all the social media that we now have, it seems unbelievable that such restrictions were able to be put in place.

My second point relates to the rebuilding of Clydebank after the war. The devastation happened in 1941, but I have a childhood memory of sitting in the back of a car—probably in about 1977, more than 30 years later—and asking about a little side building that had an old fireplace and wallpaper that seemed out of its time. My papa replied, “Yes, that came down in the blitz.” That was many years later, so I now think to myself that the Clydebank community, like so many working-class communities, was somewhat abandoned during the rebuilding in favour of perhaps more affluent and less industrial communities.

My final point is how similar that feeling is to the feeling in my community. I live in a working-class ex-mining area. It was not bombed in 1941, but it has definitely been abandoned at times by Governments. Just as the pit closures were an insult to the miners who contributed so much to Scotland’s culture and economy, deindustrialisation in the years after the war led to Clydebank experiencing generations of unemployment, a lack of investment by Governments and an accepted decline in services. Neither the miners nor the shipbuilders created those conditions; rather, their communities fell victim to the social and economic problems that we all know about and have observed. Governments had no contingency plans, provided no support and had no sympathy for communities as times changed and decisions were made that removed opportunities from people in those areas. Working-class communities continue to face those realities.

I pay tribute to the people of Clydebank. I pay tribute to those who lost their lives during the blitz and to the local people who immediately came to people’s aid in many different ways. I also pay tribute to the communities that went on, are resilient and continue to demand that Governments do better.

:Amendment 109 would require the Government to carry out a review of the bill’s impact on the NHS workforce. It arose from concerns about the impact that the bill could have on the NHS if workers are trained in a specific area and then pulled into the private sector. It is really a probing amendment to put on record Scottish Labour’s concern about the impact that the bill could have on the NHS workforce, given the amount of pressure that it is already under.

:We have discussed that. The Government needs to ensure that we get the right person in the right place at the right time in whatever profession they choose, and back that up with the knowledge that we have the right staffing for public services.

I thank members for their interventions, which are much appreciated.

:Yes—it is something that we in Scottish Labour have been thinking about, and I lodged amendment 109 to probe whether the Government takes that issue seriously. We know that there are already pressures on the NHS workforce, so I would like to hear from the minister what the Government can or will do to ensure that, if the bill is passed, it does not disrupt our NHS workforce.

Like others, Scottish Labour supports the Government in exploring how best to approach the regulation and licensing of non-surgical cosmetic procedures. In considering the bill, we have sought to balance the need for fair and appropriate regulation that prioritises public safety with not putting unnecessary requirements on the service, while ensuring that we get the right support for current practitioners.

The purpose behind my amendment 110 is to ensure that proper checks and balances are put in place. It would require the Scottish Government, within 12 months and then within two years of royal assent, to assess the support that has been provided to the industry. The amendment arose from concerns about ensuring that many skilled practitioners are not left behind. It would require the Government to assess the support that has been provided to independent and non-medical providers. That support includes training opportunities to upskill and the provision of guidance and qualification pathways. The amendment would also require the Government to report on whether any financial support has been offered to remote and rural businesses.

The Government has provided an assurance that proper support and guidance has been put in place, which is something that Labour supports, but my amendment would require the Government to report on that.

Can the cabinet secretary explain not only how the Government will fill the massive number of carer vacancies, as is required to end delayed discharge, but how it will better support existing staff who are working flat out to provide care to those who are stuck in hospitals?

I, too, thank Elena Whitham for bringing this important debate to the chamber, and I welcome the guests to the public gallery. I thank parents such as David for pushing us, as politicians, to do more.

Like other parties, Scottish Labour supports the aims and objectives of eating disorders awareness week 2026, which this year—as we heard from other members—has a particular focus on the theme of community. That is such an important point to make.

As we have heard from other members, at least 100,000 people in Scotland are living with an eating disorder, and hundreds of thousands more are impacted as relatives, friends and colleagues. However, despite the number of people who are affected, we know that many people—both those who are personally living with an eating disorder and family members and friends who are trying to support a loved one with an eating disorder—will feel like they are facing the illness alone.

As has been said, eating disorders can be deeply isolating, and it can be frightening and difficult to reach out for support. We hear that repeatedly from those who are recovering and from their families. Some of the hardest times come before one realises that there are other people who have had similar experiences and other people to reach out to who care and have the skills to help. It often feels lonely, so we need that community approach at many different points on the journey.

In researching for the debate, I was pleased to see that Beat’s online page talks about

“celebrating the power of community”

and the real, important role that

“family, friends, and other support networks play in helping someone feel supported, understood, and never alone on their journey from seeking help, undergoing treatment and beyond.”

A community in that sense can and will extend throughout the journey.

Before coming to this place, I worked for some time in this particular field, and I feel that the importance of wider family, friends and community in supporting people cannot be overplayed. Recovery is always best when we have others around us, and often the ability to be part of a team together is not valued enough. When I talk about a team, I mean being together wherever that is, whether it is with our close family or close friends, with an official care team or with people who may not know much but reach out to us, such as those who are part of a local charity or community group. Sometimes, even the kindness of strangers can make a difference.

Therefore, I find the focus this year on community to be very important, and I want to amplify what Elena Whitham, the member who brought this debate to the chamber, said. We, as politicians, should be part of that community, too, and we must do our bit as legislators and policy makers to provide support. In fact, when I was looking through some information on this matter, I noted that Beat has talked about having the widest community possible and mentions the role that online communities can play. We need to highlight the importance to people of having that sense of community.

Like others, I acknowledge the comprehensive recommendations set out in the 2021 national review of eating disorder services, and I accept that a lot of work on this issue has been undertaken by Government and by organisations such as Beat. However, I agree that we must continue to advance, and at some pace. In that respect, I would like to raise the issue of community and local services that people can access. When I met representatives of Beat in my office, they explained to me how its report “There’s no place like home: The case for intensive community and day treatments for eating disorders” shows an urgent need to expand access to intensive community and day treatments and to ensure that such services are available to people of all ages across the UK, so that they can be seen frequently. That is perhaps a different approach from the models that we have at the moment, whereby people might be seen only weekly. Beat also commented on the importance of recovery within the community and noted that things such as eating out are done better through those kinds of networks and services.

Given the pressure of time, I will stop there. I look forward to hearing the minister’s response to this evening’s debate, which I have really enjoyed.

20:32

I, too, thank Elena Whitham for bringing this important debate to the chamber, and I welcome the guests to the public gallery. I thank parents such as David for pushing us, as politicians, to do more.

Like other parties, Scottish Labour supports the aims and objectives of eating disorders awareness week 2026, which this year—as we heard from other members—has a particular focus on the theme of community. That is such an important point to make.

As we have heard from other members, at least 100,000 people in Scotland are living with an eating disorder, and hundreds of thousands more are impacted as relatives, friends and colleagues. However, despite the number of people who are affected, we know that many people—both those who are personally living with an eating disorder and family members and friends who are trying to support a loved one with an eating disorder—will feel like they are facing the illness alone.

As has been said, eating disorders can be deeply isolating, and it can be frightening and difficult to reach out for support. We hear that repeatedly from those who are recovering and from their families. Some of the hardest times come before one realises that there are other people who have had similar experiences and other people to reach out to who care and have the skills to help. It often feels lonely, so we need that community approach at many different points on the journey.

In researching for the debate, I was pleased to see that Beat’s online page talks about

“celebrating the power of community”

and the real, important role that

“family, friends, and other support networks play in helping someone feel supported, understood, and never alone on their journey from seeking help, undergoing treatment and beyond.”

A community in that sense can and will extend throughout the journey.

Before coming to this place, I worked for some time in this particular field, and I feel that the importance of wider family, friends and community in supporting people cannot be overplayed. Recovery is always best when we have others around us, and often the ability to be part of a team together is not valued enough. When I talk about a team, I mean being together wherever that is, whether it is with our close family or close friends, with an official care team or with people who may not know much but reach out to us, such as those who are part of a local charity or community group. Sometimes, even the kindness of strangers can make a difference.

Therefore, I find the focus this year on community to be very important, and I want to amplify what Elena Whitham, the member who brought this debate to the chamber, said. We, as politicians, should be part of that community, too, and we must do our bit as legislators and policy makers to provide support. In fact, when I was looking through some information on this matter, I noted that Beat has talked about having the widest community possible and mentions the role that online communities can play. We need to highlight the importance to people of having that sense of community.

Like others, I acknowledge the comprehensive recommendations set out in the 2021 national review of eating disorder services, and I accept that a lot of work on this issue has been undertaken by Government and by organisations such as Beat. However, I agree that we must continue to advance, and at some pace. In that respect, I would like to raise the issue of community and local services that people can access. When I met representatives of Beat in my office, they explained to me how its report “There’s no place like home: The case for intensive community and day treatments for eating disorders” shows an urgent need to expand access to intensive community and day treatments and to ensure that such services are available to people of all ages across the UK, so that they can be seen frequently. That is perhaps a different approach from the models that we have at the moment, whereby people might be seen only weekly. Beat also commented on the importance of recovery within the community and noted that things such as eating out are done better through those kinds of networks and services.

Given the pressure of time, I will stop there. I look forward to hearing the minister’s response to this evening’s debate, which I have really enjoyed.

20:32

Can the cabinet secretary explain not only how the Government will fill the massive number of carer vacancies, as is required to end delayed discharge, but how it will better support existing staff who are working flat out to provide care to those who are stuck in hospitals?