Seòmar agus comataidhean

Warning duly noted, Deputy Presiding Officer.

I congratulate the member on securing the debate. This is not the first time that I have leapt to the defence of our public libraries, and I welcome those in the public gallery and beyond who are listening.

Before I go on to speak about the libraries in my constituency, I note that one of the reasons that I am the beneficiary of two degrees can be attributed to my then local library at Blackhall, in Edinburgh.

Stuck for somewhere to study at home—we were five children, stretching from ages one to 16; the 16-year-old was me—in a cramped council house, I sought sanctuary in that library and stumbled across critiques of Shakespeare plays that I had been studying for my highers. I never knew that such books had been written and I could not put them down. That A pass in higher English passported me to university. That in itself led to my career as a secondary teacher, and then as a solicitor and a politician—thanks all to Blackhall library, although I do not know if the library will thank me for being a politician.

Indeed, as a novice teacher, my own education improved in leaps and bounds thanks to the wonderful, eccentric Dorothy Devlin, who was then the librarian at Woodmill high school in Dunfermline, which was my very first posting. I think that, as a team, we made English as a subject worthwhile, and even fun. She also stood her ground against an attempt to censor her stock of books. There was something wild and radical about her, so even though she had a bun, and spectacles on the end of her nose, she put paid to the assumption that librarians are boring—they are radical. Today, there is the internet, which is useful, of course, but it cannot replace the feel and look of a book, which has no annoying pop-ups.

To fast-forward decades, as an MSP, I hold two of my surgeries in local libraries at Newtongrange and Gorebridge; indeed, my next surgery is due this Friday. Like many libraries, they go beyond books—-there are CDs and newspapers, and the library provides not only a spot for a politician, but internet access and training. There are reading groups for under-fives, bookbug sessions and mums-and-toddlers sessions. Indeed, I frequently encounter a crawling toddler as I listen to a constituent’s concerns. I am also well acquainted with “The Wheels on the Bus” and other ditties.

There are folk for whom the library is a destination where they can pick up a book or two and have a wee chat with the librarian, and keep warm now that their winter fuel payment, at least for this year, is gone—that is politics. I do even better—I am provided with a cup of coffee and, depending on the duty librarian, even a biscuit or two, so I am right in there in the thick of it with what libraries are all about.

I end on this quote from Laura Ward, an American singer:

“Libraries always remind me that there are good things in this world.”

Let us keep our libraries, with all the diverse opportunities and spaces that they provide, right at the heart of their communities—and if they try to close one in my constituency, I will be right there, barricading the doors.

Will the minister take an intervention?

I thank those members who signed the motion to allow the debate to take place, as it is quite controversial.

I have been campaigning on the Lockerbie bombing, and on whether the conviction of Abdelbaset al-Megrahi was safe, for decades, but not for as long as Dr Jim Swire has done. His daughter, Flora, on her way to meet her American boyfriend, was murdered on 21 December 1988 when Pan Am flight 103 blew up over Lockerbie, killing all 243 passengers, 16 crew and 11 Lockerbie residents—270 folk in all. Of those, 190 were American citizens and 43 were British—all individuals with their lives ahead of them. Nineteen other nationalities were represented, and those killed included a group of US intelligence specialists.

Because of time pressure, this is a potted history. The suspicion initially fell on Iran. Five months before Lockerbie, an American warship, the USS Vincennes, shot down an Iranian passenger airliner over the Persian Gulf after mistaking it for a fighter jet. A total of 290 men, women and children on board were killed. Iran swore revenge. In October that year, West German police raided flats in Frankfurt where members of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine—General Command were preparing bombs in radio-cassette players. They had timetables for airlines, including Pan Am. Less than two months later, Pan Am 103 was brought down.

Three years later, in 1999, after a joint investigation by Dumfries and Galloway Constabulary and the Federal Bureau of Investigation—for some of us, this came out of the blue—arrest warrants were issued for two Libyans. That was after negotiations and the lifting of United Nations sanctions against Libya. When Gaddafi handed over two men for trial at a special court at Camp Zeist in the Netherlands, held under Scots law and before three judges, the case against one of the accused, Fhima, was found not proven; Megrahi was found guilty.

I turn to the significant role of the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission. Megrahi lost his first appeal against his conviction in 2002, but won a second right to appeal after a four-year investigation and referral by the independent SCCRC. The commission found that there was no proper basis in allegations that investigators had manipulated, altered or fabricated evidence to make a case against Megrahi. However, it concluded that the court had “no reasonable basis” for finding that Megrahi bought the clothes in Malta, undermining a cornerstone of the prosecution case. It said that the verdict had been “unreasonable” and that Megrahi might have suffered a miscarriage of justice.

Terminally ill, Megrahi was freed on compassionate grounds by the Scottish Government in 2009, abandoning his second appeal. He died three years later in Tripoli.

In 2020, after a request from Megrahi’s family, the SCCRC referred the case back to the appeal court. The commission said that the trial court should not have accepted that Megrahi bought the clothes that were beside the bomb. It also said that he was denied a fair trial because of non-disclosure, as the prosecution did not give the defence certain information that could have helped him. However, five of Scotland’s most senior judges upheld the conviction, saying that the identification of Megrahi was just one part of the overall picture and the information that was not disclosed to the defence would not have changed the verdict.

There are many aspects of the evidence that led to the conviction that give me cause for concern. However, given the time that is allocated to me, I recommend that members read for themselves writings on both sides of the arguments for and against the conviction, and make up their own minds.

To give some context, the wreckage of the crash was scattered over 770 square miles, and 4 million pieces of wreckage in total were collected and registered on computer files. That gives an idea of the size of the crime scene.

A key piece of evidence comprised recovered fragments of a Samsonite suitcase that was believed to have contained the bomb, together with parts of a circuit board that were identified as components of a Toshiba BomBeat RT-SF16 radio-cassette player, which was similar to that used to conceal a Semtex bomb that West German police had seized from the Palestinian militant group PFLP-GC two months earlier. There were also items of clothing, subsequently proven to have been made in Malta, that were thought to have come from the same suitcase.

Those clothes were traced to a Maltese merchant, Tony Gauci, who became a key prosecution witness, testifying that he had sold them to a man of Libyan appearance. Gauci was interviewed 23 times, giving contradictory evidence about who had bought the clothes, that person’s age and appearance and the date of purchase, but he later identified Abdelbaset al-Megrahi.

I will restrict my comments to the evidence of the Maltese shopkeeper, Tony Gauci, whose identification of Megrahi as the man who bought the suitcase containing the clothes that hid the bomb timer was key to Megrahi’s conviction. Incidentally, Gauci was reportedly also in receipt of $2 million. He described Megrahi as 50 years old, over 6 feet tall, dark skinned and heavily built. At the time, however, Megrahi was aged 36, 5 feet 8, light skinned and slightly built. Indeed, five years after the trial, the former Lord Advocate, Lord Fraser of Carmyllie, publicly described Gauci as being

“an apple short of a picnic”

and

“not quite the full shilling”.

So much more can be said, but—at the very least—doubts over that identification should be enough for a public inquiry into all the circumstances surrounding the events, from the day on which the Iranian passenger plane was shot out of the sky by an American warship while that plane was flying over Iranian airspace to date. Subsequent United Kingdom Governments have prevented the publication of documents that are said to have indicated that Palestinian militants were involved in bombing Pan Am 103. Indeed, in 2020, the then Foreign Secretary, Dominic Raab, imposed public interest immunity certificates on the documents, so no one has access to them. At the very least, those documents should be released.

Finally, although decades have passed, my condolences go to all those who have been affected by this cruel terrorist act. My thanks go to the people of Lockerbie who, at the time, provided what comfort they could to distraught friends and relatives, even washing the clothes of the deceased once they were no longer needed for forensic evidence. They commemorate those losses to this day.

I take no pleasure in reminding us all of that horrific day, but until there is full disclosure, these serious, unsettling questions about who committed this heinous crime and why it was committed will continue to be raised, certainly by me.

Will the minister take an intervention?

[Made a request to intervene.]

I have a lot of time for the member, but does he agree that, as we have got rid of prescription charges in Scotland, Labour in the UK should get rid of them there, as the charge is nearly £10 an item?

In my view, four key determinants are affecting the pressures on, and the delivery of, health and social care in Scotland today.

Covid disrupted the delivery of health services for two years. It brought a direct impact through deferred diagnoses, increases in mental health issues and long Covid. Covid meant that cancer was diagnosed at a later and more critical stage; many health services were paused during lockdown, which had an impact on health inequalities; and mental health was impacted. Therefore, the delivery of health and social care today has been profoundly altered. The idea that Covid is done and dusted is for the birds. That page has not been turned.

Brexit, too, had and is having a long-term impact on recruitment and retention across the health and care sectors. That has been well documented.

The next issue is Scotland’s demographics. With our population getting older, there are now more than a million people aged 65 or over in Scotland—20 per cent of the population. That is more than a quarter of a million higher than the number of people under 15. Pressures on the NHS and the care sector grow with ageing, as I know, as I am having to use NHS services more often.

The final issue relates to inflation, austerity and poverty. Inflation has an impact on energy, food and building costs, just for starters, and it has led to an increase in the number of people falling into poverty. Thankfully, the Scottish child payment—£26.70 for each child under 16 in a family that qualifies for certain benefits—is helping. For the coming winter, there is the £100 winter fuel payment for all pensioners who are not on pension credit. Getting rid of the two-child benefit cap will also help, because poverty, at whatever age, inevitably leads to both physical and mental ill health.

The Labour Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, Wes Streeting, admitted that, when it comes to NHS funding, Westminster is damaging Scotland’s NHS because of the austerity that we have suffered for 14 years. That page has not been turned; Wes can add the impact of the hike in employer national insurance contributions, which will have an impact across the health and care sector. I know that there are GP practices that are not taking on GPs because of the national insurance hike.

Those are the four things that have affected health and social care in Scotland: Covid fallout, Brexit, demographics, and inflation and austerity.

Each and every member of our health and care workforce became a hero during Covid. The Scottish Government values them, and so do I. Scotland remains the only country in the UK to have successfully averted NHS strikes over pay, and the pay deals that were offered by the Scottish Government played a crucial role in retaining Scotland’s NHS workforce, recognising their value and improving their wellbeing.

In September, unions voted unanimously to accept the pay uplift of 5.5 per cent for 2024-25. That is investment of more than £448 million and takes the total investment in pay over the past two years to over £1 billion. The Scottish Government puts its money where its mouth is.

Contrast that with Labour-run Wales, where, in January 2024, junior doctor strikes led to the cancellation of 6,500 outpatient appointments and 4,000 planned operations, which undoubtedly impacted on waiting times. That was dwarfed by the situation in England, where over 1.5 million medical appointments have been cancelled due to strike action since March 2023, at an estimated cost of over £3 billion.

I began by stating that, since Covid, the delivery of healthcare has changed—sometimes for the better and sometimes not. Increasing demands have led to innovatory improvements such as hospital at home, which was piloted in the Scottish Borders—where £600,000, the bulk of the national funding pot for the programme, has been allocated. Hospital at home does what it says on the tin and is delivered depending on clinical suitability and—of course—on the consent of the patients, most of whom are elderly. Over 90 per cent of patients who opted for it thought that it was grand to be treated in their own home and, of course, it freed up much-needed beds.

Pharmacy first is another innovation, and it will be expanded where there is an appropriately-qualified pharmacist, which can allow community pharmacies to give people expert help for treating conditions like sore throats, earaches and cold sores. That will divert them away from GPs and A and E. Thirty-two per cent of the Scottish population used pharmacy first in the most recent 12 months that were reported on—April 2023 to March 2024. It is early days, but those are good signs.

On the downside, the pandemic exposed the inequalities across the care sector, despite the dedication of the care workers who delivered care above and beyond expectations, and often did not even go home. We need to tackle that inequality and I would rather that the national care service had been labelled “national care standards”, because the issue is about standards.

I find that the accessibility of some GP practices is not the best. It is not uncommon to be required to phone for an appointment between, say, 8 am and 10 am, and then to have a phone call from the GP rather than a face-to-face appointment. Of course, that is a matter for GP practices, which are, in the main, contracted to the NHS. It is not a matter for the NHS and it is not a matter for the Scottish Government; it is a matter for GP practices. I hope that, if we can shift the balance to pharmacies, opticians and other allied health professionals, more GPs will revert to the personal touch.

I welcome this debate, but let us not ignore context, whether that is the pandemic, Brexit, an ageing population, inflation eating into NHS budgets, the national insurance tax hike on GP practices and allied professionals, and increasing poverty. All of that matters and cannot just be ignored in this debate.

Will the member take an intervention?

I congratulate my colleague Clare Adamson on securing the debate.

From Shetland to the Scottish Borders, not one part of Scotland voted leave—not one single council area. However, that is the union for you, and that is democracy for you: it is part of the “union bonus.”

Even in England, 53 per cent of voters voted leave and 47 per cent voted remain, so even south of the border the vote was nip and tuck. There was no 60 per cent requirement, as is sometimes called for when there is a vote that affects the unwritten British constitution. Remember that, when it comes to a referendum on Scottish independence.

We now know that the British public was sold a pup. In fact, they were sold several pups, including the side of a bus showing the “Boris bonus” of £350 million a week for the NHS; cutting of immigration, although the majority of migrants were and are legal migrants; cutting of red tape for businesses and farmers; no border down the Irish Sea; reclaiming our seas; and the world waiting eagerly for our trade. It was all “oven ready”.

How did that go? The £350 million was not so much “oven ready” as it was a Boris porky pie. Immigration, both legal and illegal, has increased since Brexit. Indeed, leaving the EU has made co-operation with EU countries more difficult. As for increases in red tape, just ask businesses, farmers and the horticultural sector. There are special rules for trade between Éire, which is still in the EU, and Northern Ireland, which remains in the EU in all but name. As for trade bonuses, there are none.

The NFU Scotland overwhelmingly backed a remain vote because it knew what was coming if we left. The Confederation of British Industry was one of the most vocal opponents of Brexit, and stated that it would

“dent the economy and knock living standards.”

Then again, what do they know? Billions of pounds have been lost to the UK economy to date.

The loss of free movement in the workforce had immediate impacts on the NHS, the care sector, horticulture and hospitality—just for starters—all of which have affected my constituency.

What got the Brexit vote through by the skin of its teeth were allegations about damaging immigration. As for Boris Johnson’s yellow brick road, we know what Dorothy found at the end of that: a wee man masquerading as a great wizard. Boris Johnson, Donald Trump or Nigel Farage? Take your pick.

Some who were once forceful and vocal defenders of the EU now say that that ship has sailed. To continue the metaphor, I point out that a ship can change course, especially if the sea is stormy and you can see that rocks lie ahead.

Of course, the UK will not change course, but Scotland can do so as an independent nation. Let us have no nonsense about it taking decades to rejoin, or—worse—that we would not be welcome. Our laws are aligned with the EU. We are a rich nation that produces energy, food and drink. Our history with Europe differs from that of England. My goodness—the first language of Mary, Queen of Scots was French. That fact is handy for pub quizzes. However, I digress.

In the dismal years of “Trumpland” ahead, we need an EU that is both politically and economically strong, and we need not to be consigned to watch in painful embarrassment as the UK Prime Minister genuflects to Trump out of desperation to avoid tariffs. Indeed, “embarrassment” is not a strong enough word—it is more of a public humiliation.

We can change course. Scotland would and will rejoin the EU with those 27 other nations. Believe you me—rejoining the EU cannot come soon enough.

I, too, offer my condolences and thank all the emergency services.

Storm damage has left many people in need of urgent repairs, in many cases to roofing. I have no doubt that most roofers are decent, but there are unscrupulous opportunists who will prey on the elderly, especially those living alone, which is something that I experienced this weekend as an elderly person who lives alone. Thankfully, I saw through someone whom I consider to have been, at best, not trustworthy. Will the cabinet secretary take the opportunity to alert all who might be vulnerable and desperate for repairs but who do not already know a tradesman, and to advise them to be wary and, if possible, check with friends and neighbours before they part with any cash?