Seòmar agus comataidhean

It is. That work is very exciting and there is plenty to work towards. However, I think that Claire Sweeney was saying that, to get the full power behind it, the Government needs to be stronger in pushing public leaders. It would be good to have some kind of commitment from the minister on that. I think that we all agree that we need to push the people at the top to really see this as a priority so that all those things are brought to the fore.

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I am not sure whether my vote registered. The app says that there was an error. I would have voted yes.

Women across Scotland face the significant challenges of health inequalities on a daily basis. For many women, those inequalities can define their lives—in some cases, simply because they are women, and in others, because they are women who live in areas where there are higher levels of deprivation. It is clear that women need many of the short-term and medium-term actions in “Women’s Health Plan”.

I thank the First Minister for confirming that the appointment will be made. If the First Minister truly recognises the urgency of the matter, will she give women across Scotland the answer that they not only want but need, and ensure that the appointment will be meaningful and will take forward the important short-term actions in “Women’s Health Plan” that have not been forthcoming so far?

To ask the First Minister when the Scottish Government plans to appoint a women’s health champion, in light of the appointment of a women’s health ambassador for England. (S6F-01264)

I thank Douglas Lumsden for bringing another important sports debate to the chamber. I echo the comments of colleagues and, on behalf of Scottish Labour, I pay tribute to all of those involved in Scottish Rugby for their efforts and successes during the past year, particularly given the adverse impact that the pandemic had on team sport in Scotland. It is great to see that rugby in Scotland is looking as strong as ever.

I will begin my speech by focusing on the successes of the Scottish women’s rugby team, which qualified for the women’s rugby world cup that will take place in New Zealand later this year. That is a significant success for a multitude of reasons. First and foremost, it is the first time that the team has qualified for 12 years, which is a magnificent feat, and I know from this debate that the whole Parliament wishes the team well in its group stage fixtures against host nation New Zealand, Australia and Wales.

Qualification also has significance for the future of women’s rugby and women’s sport more generally. Like other sports, rugby has been a male-dominated scene for years, but by playing in the most prestigious of competitions and representing our nation, its elite female athletes will be role models to many young women and girls who might have an interest in sport. It is crucial that we show support through increasing public awareness and other means when the tournament arrives later in the year. Brian Whittle’s points about it being seen and visible in order to encourage people to take part were well made.

Given that we are marking success, I will mention another south of Scotland team, Ayrshire Bulls men’s rugby side, which had national success in the Scottish premiership in 2021 and before the pandemic. It is important to have strong voices for rugby in our own areas, and I am proud that we have that in Ayrshire. I am sure that it encourages local young people who aspire to be rugby players to take that on and be successful.

That said, as with other sports, we know that not everyone plays rugby in order to become a professional and play at the highest of levels; it can also be about enjoying outdoor activity with friends, learning new skills and keeping fit. It is therefore absolutely right that the motion highlights the value of the players, supporters, coaches and volunteers who, more widely, make community rugby and sport what it is. Without those coaches and volunteers, many weekly training sessions and matches across the country would not go ahead. It is therefore really important that we recognise them. I have a football referee in the team that I work with, and he said that I should also mention how tough the referee’s job is and say that we support referees as well.

Many contributing factors make community sport work to the benefit of our physical and mental health, and it is right that we pay tribute to everybody who gives their own time. That said, we must not lose sight of the fact that sport is inaccessible for many and that rugby, football and tennis clubs might be unaffordable for many. I hope that the minister will take that point on board. Jackie Dunbar’s point was also well made—it is important that sport is accessible and affordable for all.

It is right that we have today’s debate to recognise the progress and success of Scottish rugby at the highest level, but also to recognise the importance and influence of rugby at the grass-roots level. As the motion states, admirable organisations such as the School of Hard Knocks use sport to overcome some of the challenges that are faced by the most vulnerable in our communities. However, we need more from the Government and more intervention to focus our efforts on making sport affordable and accessible. I take the opportunity, once again, to pay tribute to the Scottish rugby teams and wish them well for 2022-23.

They back the Government implementing what is in the Feeley report, and so we must move to make sure that those things are implemented for people at pace.

It is a question that I ask in this chamber almost weekly: when will the Government implement the commitments that it has made?

That is why Scottish Labour is calling for the end of all non-residential social care charges across the current financial year, and we are calling for it to happen right now. We simply cannot expect people to bear the brunt of the Scottish Government’s constant hand wringing for much longer. We are in the midst of the worst cost of living crisis in living memory, and people need support from this Government now. That is not too much to ask—it was, after all, in the SNP’s manifesto last year. I remember the days when breaking a manifesto promise was considered to be unacceptable, both from the Opposition benches and the Government back benches.

As my colleagues have already mentioned, this is not simply a request from Scottish Labour that we are not willing to do ourselves. Only this week, as we have heard, Scottish Labour-run West Dunbartonshire Council unveiled an ambitious cost of living plan, which includes ending non-residential social care charges. Imagine if that replicated on a national scale.

Here we see forward-thinking work going on at a local level, and yet the SNP’s proposed vision for a national care service strips councils of most of their powers in this regard. I have heard it said that, before long, under this Government, local government will hardly be able to cut ribbons, never mind anything else. The commitment that this Government gives to local government is a disgrace.

It is clear that we should be doing more. Today, we should be backing Labour’s motion to end non-residential care charges.

The law states that a person is involved in antisocial behaviour if they act

“in a manner that causes or is likely to cause alarm or distress”

to anyone, or if they behave in a way that is

“likely to cause alarm or distress to at least one person who is not of the same household”.

In what sense is deliberately seeking to scare or intimidate a woman who is simply pursuing the healthcare to which she is entitled not antisocial? Why cannot the antisocial behaviour laws be used? Will the minister ensure that those laws are used now to protect people who are seeking healthcare?

This is an important and timely debate with an immediate purpose. It is the kind of debate that we should be having more of in the Parliament, but that, sadly, we rarely do. The Government does not often want to debate issues such as this—issues that it has made commitments on but that it is not prioritising, and issues that it could easily achieve.

Everyone in Scotland knows that social care is really being held together by the hard work of overworked and underpaid carers across the sector, and that they hold it together every day with little support from central Government. If you talk to workers on the front line, you feel that there is very limited support from this Government.

On top of that, those who require care are often some of the worst-hit by inflation and the general increase in the cost of living. Unfortunately for them and so many others, we are now well into the depths of the cost of living crisis, which is already biting hard for families all across the country. Those same people are asking for help.

This Government’s record of supporting local government is very poor. I think that we should have some honest debate and discussion around that. This Government has presided over the slashing of care packages and the withdrawal of respite care. It has failed to immediately implement a number of key Feeley review recommendations, including that of universal non-residential care. All of those things would have made such a crisis much more bearable for those with care needs and their families. Let us not forget that it was this Government that set up the Feeley review, so why are we still awaiting its implementation? Far too long a time has passed.

To ask the Scottish Government what discussions justice ministers have had with ministerial colleagues regarding using antisocial behaviour laws to prevent people from carrying out intimidating protests outside abortion clinics. (S6O-01252)

It is welcome that the Scottish Government has accepted the recommendations that were made in the review, although it remains unfortunate that the Scottish Greens have had to be forced, yet again, into backing a policy that they committed to supporting in their manifesto just last year. The announcement will be welcomed by campaigners who I have campaigned with many times at the Killoch site in Ochiltree, East Ayrshire. Given the report, surely the minister can categorically confirm that the notification direction on planning permission will mean that the proposed incinerator development at that site will not go ahead.