Seòmar agus comataidhean

I have been advised that reduced access to community health facilities and the increased pressure on and workload for community midwifery teams have led, in relation to in-person appointments in Ayrshire and Arran, to a situation in which

“many women do not ‘meet’ their named midwife until 22 weeks of pregnancy”.

That wait is far too long and is of significant concern.

Will the cabinet secretary outline how the Government is working with health boards to eliminate long waits for pregnant women who are looking to meet their named midwife in person? Has the Government explored asking health boards to formally record the length of those waits per case?

Is it helpful to think and talk about minimum unit pricing as part of a package of public health measures that aim to change the direction in this country away from alcohol harm?

Thank you very much.

I am interested in the right of the child to a family life, because we can all imagine this subordinate legislation having an effect on that. How can we ensure that young people who are in that situation have that right? Does the legislation comply with the provisions in the European Convention on Human Rights and the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child regarding the right to a family life and support for legal agency?

Thank you very much for the evidence. I am interested in the various income groups. Early on, there were concerns about MUP disproportionately affecting low-income groups and, on the other side, whether it would have an impact on people in more affluent areas.

I am interested to get clarity on the current pricing. For MUP to work, do we need to increase the price? Will it continue to have the same broad effects on those groups or do we have any concerns about it disproportionately affecting lower-income groups because of the other crises in income that people face?

Given the complexities of the young people and the amount of support that would be required to maintain family contact, does it seem realistic that that could be maintained?

Why is there little detail in the minister’s statement on how we can retain existing staff? Staff turnover is as great a problem as lack of recruitment. Last week, the Royal College of Psychiatrists produced a report that states that 42 per cent of existing consultants are over 50 and that half of them are considering early retirement. Can the minister give details on what strategy is in place to retain those hard-working staff?

This is a members’ business debate, and I am entitled to put forward my view on the idea that we should have a nuclear weapons-free world.

During a time when horrendous war and inhumanity are on our screens day after day, it has really felt appropriate that we strive to work on the issue that we are discussing today. I thank Bill Kidd for his continuing work on this vital issue, and I am clear in my support for the aims that are addressed and recognised in the motion. We need more activity in the Parliament that is dedicated to peace and more parliamentarians speaking boldly in favour of that.

The motion notes that 60 per cent of the world’s countries are now nuclear weapons-free zones, which is promising. Although the pace is gradual, we are slowly decreasing the threat of nuclear weapons globally. However, it remains the case that a small concentration of countries continue to put the entire globe at risk, and I am ashamed to say that our own is included in that number.

Striving to make Europe a nuclear weapons-free zone is a noble and worthwhile pursuit that this Parliament can contribute to constructively with partners across the continent, many of whom will have a clear interest in Scotland, due to its significance as one of the few areas in Europe to house nuclear weapons. Adding our voice to that orchestra has a definite impact, and it is wise of us to do so. People want to hear from Scotland on this issue, so let us speak to the world about it. Speaking to the world on this issue is something that we perhaps do not do often enough.

Although there are differences of opinion on this issue across the chamber, and even within parties, Scotland and the UK more widely have played an important role in the anti-nuclear weapons movement for decades by being proactive and constructive and having our communities speak out about the issue. There is no reason for us to slow that down.

I understand that there is no quick fix to the mistakes of the past that brought these horrible weapons into reality, but I am confident that, in time, the idea that we once had nuclear warheads capable of mass death and destruction on our doorstep will seem completely ridiculous. That might not be in my lifetime, but I hope that it is in my children’s lifetime. Here today, in this building, we can come together and make a difference. We can have a nuclear weapons-free Europe. I do not want generations to suffer because of the mistakes that we made and because we did not speak out. That is a key responsibility for all elected representatives. Let us work together in the knowledge that we can make Europe a beacon to the rest of the world and have a nuclear weapons-free Europe.

The dream of a nuclear-free world is one that sustains those who have been committed to peace and justice for decades, yet we still seem very far away from that ideal. To Mr Kerr, I say that reality will change only if we change it, and we must play our part in doing so. Our job is to build peace, not war. I am happy to make any small contribution that I can as part of that effort, and I am sure that many in the chamber are, too.

I do not believe that the world is a safer place with nuclear weapons, so we disagree on that point.