Seòmar agus comataidhean

I, too, thank all the volunteers in the Borders who participated in the great Borders river clean this year and in previous years. I also congratulate Rachael Hamilton on securing a members’ business debate on the issue. It is important that actions from local communities are spoken about and acknowledged in the Scottish Parliament.

More than 400 people from a number of villages across the Scottish Borders have worked together, demonstrating not only the strength of spirit of towns and villages pulling together on a common cause, but also where we need to act to look after the natural environment that we rely on and must take responsibility for.

As members have said, communities in many parts of the south of Scotland are rightly concerned about the environment, littering and fly tipping. Many communities are taking excellent direct action through events such as the river clean, litter picks and the beach clear-ups that Martin Whitfield mentioned. Cleaning our green spaces, rivers and fields undoubtedly has many advantages, from the aesthetic—tourists are attracted to the beautiful towns and villages across the Borders and beyond—to the environmental and educational benefits. It is important to teach people from an early age to respect their environment and understand the damage that is caused by plastics and the overconsumption of goods, which previous generations have undoubtedly succumbed to.

As it aimed to do, the great Borders river clean has brought into sharp focus the scale of the problem that we face. In one weekend, 3,000kg of rubbish was pulled from a Borders river. What a throwaway society we live in. The organisers hope that that shocking figure will raise awareness of the effects of the problem and help to change behaviours and reduce the amount of litter that enters the natural environment. That is very much needed.

Young people across the planet are telling us to act now and are instructing us to take the issue seriously. As a Parliament, we must accept our responsibilities. We must do more and take on responsibility for ensuring that there is legislation and funding to prevent the causes of such environmental problems. We must be serious about having a zero-waste Scotland. We need to use the evidence that we have to move on education, with local authorities responding to the reasons that have been identified, be they socioeconomic problems, barriers to people accessing services or a lack of education to change behaviour.

I end by noting just how important the subject is. I hope that we will return to it in the chamber many times in order to demonstrate that we take it very seriously, as that will be the best thank you that we can offer the volunteers. I once again commend the great Borders river clean and thank all the volunteers.

It is good to be back at Holyrood, making a start on the job that all members were elected to do: to push Scotland forward in building a better future for us all. To my mind, at least, that is long overdue. The Parliament needs to use its time and powers much more decisively and effectively. To do so is our duty not only to those who have elected us, but to the generations who fought to bring power here in the first place.

During the summer, I have been out regularly to speak to constituents. The most common question that I am asked—after “Why are you at the door?”—is a simple one: “What does the Scottish Parliament actually do?” I will be honest: in the first months of my time as an MSP, I have found myself asking the same question. The answer is, in short, “Not enough.”

It is a great disappointment that the Government’s plan and delivery for the first 100 days of government is, as usual, more than underwhelming. Although positive advances that are to be welcomed include an inquiry into the Covid crisis and £1 billion for the NHS, it is far from the radical template for a new country that the manifestos of the two governing parties suggested back in May. In reality, most of the plan is just recycled announcements that were already known.

The long-awaited NHS recovery plan unfortunately contains nothing of note for social care, which is at a catastrophic tipping point. It lacks a meaningful youth job guarantee, and we are still left with little to no detail at all on what is to be done to help people in rented accommodation in Scotland. I understand that that is part of a great many things that we will hear about later in the year—a promise that the public has gotten used to under this Government.

Reform of the rented sector is one of the key public concerns of our age. We often hear positive rhetoric about Scotland’s supposedly progressive approach to housing, but that does not stand up to even the most cursory bit of scrutiny. Although I am sure that many will welcome input from the Greens, it will need to be more than just another voice in the room. We are years behind on these reforms, and if we do not act now, with the added economic costs of Covid, it may be too late to get many renters’ lives back on track.

The saddest fact is that we all know that a great deal of the public do not pay much attention to what goes on in this building precisely because so much is consigned to reports, future plans or one-off payments, with no or little long-term purpose behind them. Perhaps this session will be different and my words of warning will sound hollow. I truly hope that that will be the case. However, if we have another five years of governance in Scotland in which decisions such as doubling the Scottish child payment or saying no to the Cambo oil field are not made, we will be back here again in 2026.

I warn that a greener Scotland should mean not simply having Greens in Government, but actively pursuing radical and transformative change. As noted by the world-renowned climate activist Greta Thunberg today, Scotland under this Government has done little to suggest that it is a world leader on climate change. With COP26 approaching, we could well become caught out in front of the world’s gaze.

Scottish Labour has said that we need to use the opportunity of COP26 to show leadership in tackling the climate emergency and deliver a just transition, with thousands of new green jobs across Scotland. Under this Government, the number of jobs directly in the low-carbon economy is at the lowest level since 2014, and the SNP’s new green jobs workforce academy amounts to little more than a new jobs portal. That is not good enough. Before they publish another plan to keep the press happy, my message to the SNP and the Greens during this important week is simple: you cannot stand up for Scotland by lying down.

This incident is obviously a serious failure that must not be allowed to happen again. I ask my question on behalf of women who had subtotal hysterectomies before 1997. To reassure those women, I would like to press for a date on which the audit of those cases will be completed. How long will it take for individuals affected to be contacted? In cases involving individuals who have passed on due to complications relating to cervical cancer, will their families be contacted?

The Scottish Government rightly recognises that low pay is at the heart of child poverty and that it is an issue that should preoccupy everyone across the country. Why, then, will the Government not commit to paying carers—a workforce that is largely made up of seriously underpaid women with childcare responsibilities—£15 an hour?

The figures that were reported were stark and unacceptable. As well as delayed discharges, there are serious issues of people being offered only out-of-area placements for care. Will the First Minister commit to introducing, through the legislation for a national care service, a statutory duty on integration joint boards to provide care in the community for people who leave psychiatric hospitals, rather than leave people in limbo for years, as has been reported this week?

It is very welcome that women’s health is receiving some of the spotlight that it deserves in the chamber today. I am delighted to be opening for Scottish Labour.

I want to focus on the way in which women continue to be treated as second-class citizens in Scotland, whether by neglect or design. There is only so long that the Government can keep coming up with motions celebrating plans as yet unannounced. People want action—that is what Scottish Labour continues to focus on, and that is what I will focus on in the debate.

Scottish Labour pushed for action on women and women’s health throughout the previous parliamentary session. An example was the action of my colleague Monica Lennon, who did so much to improve the provision of free period products with world-leading legislation. That was action, but I am sure that Monica would agree that there is still a great deal more to do. We can do that only by working together and using the powers of the Parliament.

I worked for many years in the NHS and saw at first hand the ways in which women’s medical concerns are so often dismissed as minor considerations or cast off as by-products of personal responsibility. It is vital that people in our position speak up for those who are unable to do so.

I know from my constituents that the stigma surrounding menopause, access to specialist mental health support and waiting times for breast cancer screening appointments are just a few of the ways in which women in Scotland feel that their needs are not taken into consideration. Menopause symptoms in particular remain heavily stigmatised, and many women are reluctant to ask for help or share their experiences. Specialist services must have greater equality in access to allow women to be confident in coming forward to access treatment.

There is perhaps no greater example in contemporary Scotland of such neglect than the treatment of the survivors of the transvaginal mesh scandal. During the previous parliamentary session, my Labour colleague Neil Findlay, along with MSPs from other parties, did much to raise awareness of the issue. They had some success, although there are still questions left unanswered.

The work of the Scottish Mesh Survivors campaign has repeatedly revealed the extent to which those women trusted the NHS to treat them. They were led to believe that the mesh was safe, only to be left with life-changing injuries. Many of those women were left unable to work or live a normal life and they suffered all the dreadful social and financial impacts that followed.

Scottish Labour is pursuing that and many other issues, because we see the advancement of women’s health as a core concern of a modern country that is focused on justice. We believe that by supporting women to live healthy lives, we build the blocks of a national health service.

For all the posturing, I am not sure that the same can be said of the Scottish National Party. Its recent record is not even close to acceptable. In 2020, more than 43,000 breast cancer screening appointments were cancelled, and at least 180,000 cervical screening tests were delayed. Less than three fifths of women from the most deprived areas of Scotland attend breast cancer screening appointments, compared with nearly four fifths of women in the most affluent communities. Scotland has only two mother-and-baby mental health units, and the Royal College of Psychiatrists in Scotland has said that mental health treatment for new mothers is akin to a postcode lottery. I urge members to remember that, on average, women with endometriosis wait eight years to receive a test.

Scottish Labour wants to start turning back the tide. As members can see from our amendment today, a first— and absolutely necessary—step is to recognise that we have an opportunity to right the wrong suffered by Scotland’s mesh survivors, and give a guarantee that they will be able to access the compensation that they deserve. If we can help that group of women, we can give hope to those who believe that their own concerns have been forgotten that things can change for the better.

For once, let us use the Parliament’s powers to redress the balance for a group of people who have no institutional power, only their own solidarity, compassion and desire for justice. I know that the SNP claims to support that idea in principle but, so far, it has come up with more excuses than solutions. It is long past time that we got it done and delivered the vital funding to those women, so that they can get back to some sense of normality and do not feel left behind by an establishment that seems so distant from their lives.

For years, the mesh survivors have campaigned relentlessly for justice. There is probably not an MSP in the building who has not been contacted by them or listened to their story. Ensuring that they do not have to pay for essential surgery from their own pockets is the least that can be done to correct the historical injustice that they have experienced, and we in the Parliament can help.

I implore the Scottish Government to join Scottish Labour today and start a new chapter in our country’s history by championing the right of women to receive fair and effective healthcare. It should not be too much to ask. I ask all members to support Labour’s amendment.

I move amendment S6M-00369.4, to insert at end:

“; acknowledges that, historically, the health concerns of women have been too easily ignored or dismissed; deeply regrets the life-changing damage to women as the result of transvaginal mesh surgery; commends the Scottish Mesh Survivors group, which has determinedly fought to raise awareness of the dangers of mesh and prevent further women being injured by its use, and supports the asks of its Charter for Mesh Care, which is calling for funding to be immediately made available to cover the costs of mesh removal for women having to undergo private surgery.”

I commend the motion from Mr Ross, who has highlighted a concerning trend in which the importance to women of giving birth in their local area with friends and family nearby is not being recognised as it should be. The motion is one of many that have been put before the Scottish Parliament by local representatives from across the country who have been forced to confront the closure or downgrading of important wards that serve communities and that are already concerningly understaffed. Importantly, in this case, the local health board assured the community that the downgrading of the unit at Dr Gray’s would be temporary, yet it is still waiting for the return of the consultant-led service. At this time, we recognise the importance of experienced local medical staff—the Covid outbreak has brought to our attention how important local services are.

It is clear that expectant mothers now have more choices than ever. In my area of Ayrshire and Arran, an increasing number of women are choosing to give birth at home. I am sure that the decision to choose that option has been influenced by the pandemic. Of course, the ability to make that choice has been made possible only through the expertise, hard work and dedication of a passionate group of staff—midwives, consultants and other team members—who have worked to improve care provision for women and families across the region. I talked to a first-time mum who could not praise highly enough the service that she has received. She stressed to me that the fact that it was a local service was really important to her. She said that if she had had to go far away from family and friends, she would have found that much more difficult.

As we know, the provision of support throughout pregnancy and during the process of giving birth is absolutely vital, and it is important that women are given the option to have the best care as close to home as is reasonable. I am sure that, like so many other maternity wards, the hospital in Elgin needs a consultant-led service to be restored, as Emma Harper highlighted. We need to ensure that maternity departments have dedicated facilities for women who, for example, are experiencing unexpected pregnancy complications, and to turn a new page in pre and postnatal care that will make Scotland—including all its rural parts—the envy of the world.

The subject of maternity services is extremely important, and I hope that, in time, we will return to the chamber to discuss the vital services and care for women and families that are provided in maternity units.

The damning audit of CAMHS in 2018 called for an end to rejected referrals. Three years on, at least 20 per cent of referrals to CAMHS are consistently rejected. Why has the Government waited three years and failed to end this damaging practice? When will it reform the referral system, as campaigners have been asking it to do over the past three years?

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I am having some technical problems. I could not vote, but I would have voted yes.

Before I begin my first speech, might I say what a privilege it is to be here, speaking on behalf of my home region of South Scotland? I fully intend to use my time in Parliament to stand up for the ordinary people of this country and the communities that are often ignored by a political class who are distant from the lives of their constituents.

I came here to get things done—that is what the people of South Scotland elected me to do—and it is important that we understand why so little has been done over the past decade before we move on to the next round of promises. There is no doubt that the campaign that we have all just fought did not pay as much attention to the desperate state of care, the NHS and mental health services as I would have liked, so I welcome the fact that a plan will eventually be brought to the chamber to deal with those matters.

I will focus particularly on the national care service and on the concerning way in which carers are treated in this country. In care, the root of the problem is pay. There is no doubt that the Government is very accomplished at media management, presenting a progressive face to the public and promoting its own narrative, but if that story is not reflected in the pockets of care workers—some of the most overworked people in the country—then it is meaningless.

We must also consider that the injustice disproportionately affects women—more often than not, women who have never been blessed with the advantages of family wealth or an additional income. Taking those factors into account, I have to ask why it has taken so long for the issue to become a priority for the Government. The pandemic may have highlighted the issue, but it should not have required such a life-defining event to turn our attention to these people, who have been undervalued for so long.

The recent Feeley report sets out some important steps forward in tackling the issue, yet it has failed to adequately address the chronic levels of low pay and the poor terms and conditions experienced by most people who work in care. I regularly speak to people of all ages and backgrounds—paid and unpaid, working every hour that they can to care for others—and the message is the same: we are struggling to keep our heads above water.

It is time that we started taking carers and a national care service seriously, but a national care service has to be worthy of the name and involve patients, carers, trade unions and local government from the outset. We cannot keep building institutions from the top down and expecting them to meet the needs of the people at the bottom. Rather than talking about the “esteem” in which a national care service will be held, let us be clear about the financial commitment to it, because if we want world class public services, we will have to pay for them.

When Labour created the NHS, Britain led the world in socialised health. It was a complete shift in the lives of the whole country, and I see no reason why we cannot aim for that sort of momentous change again. I hope that today is used by the Government as an opportunity to listen and to take on board the fact that there is genuine scepticism about any plans that it has put forward for the reform of health. Why? Because the Government has been in power for 14 years and, during that time, we have seen the NHS become worryingly underfunded and understaffed. Also, as colleagues have remarked, waiting times are now at concerningly high levels. This morning, I spoke to the Scottish Association for Mental Health about the concerning waits for children and young people to access CAMHS services—an on-going issue that must receive urgent attention.

In my final few seconds, I return to the issue of carers and ask the Government to be honest with them. The latest Barnett consequentials provide Scotland with around £700 million for the health and social care budget. It seems sensible that the lion’s share of that money should be spent on giving care staff a serious pay rise. I urge the Government to support the call from Scottish Labour and the trade union movement for carers to receive £15 an hour. In my own region, that would make a vast difference to the lives of many people. Let us achieve something meaningful straight out of the gate—right away—and let us send a message from this new Parliament. Let us pay back those people to whom we owe so much.