Seòmar agus comataidhean

That was a good speech from Mr Choudhury, although I would not have used the word “enlivened” about Neil Findlay, but there we go.

I want to focus on civil business. Most of the debate has rightly been about the criminal process and courts but, for most members of the public, the interaction that they have with the court process will be in the civil courts, whether that is to contribute in contractual disputes, delictual actions or matrimonial disputes, or to cases involving divorce, contact, residency, confirmation of an executry, interdicts and so on. Of course, there are also cases in our commercial courts.

Much in the process has already been simplified, which I welcome. I welcome the fact that we are moving to more online work, which will reduce costs, as will the electronic transfer of documents. However, delays matter as much to the individuals involved in civil court business, whether they are the pursuer or the defender, as to those involved in criminal proceedings. Of course, in the sheriff court, criminal proceedings rightly take precedence, because they involve issues of custody, loss of liberty and criminal records. However, to the pursuer or defender in a civil case, it is urgent.

Even when viewed impartially, some cases would seem urgent to anyone. For example, interim interdicts against a bad neighbour or when something else is going on are needed pretty quickly. Interim orders in relation to children, and young children in particular, are another example. If a parent or carer does not get to see a child for a while, the whole relationship can disappear into the mists. We have talked about domestic abuse in the criminal setting but, in the civil setting, exclusion orders to prevent an abusive partner from getting into the home are important.

In passing, I say to Pauline McNeill that I am sympathetic to domestic abuse courts and to specialist courts more widely, such as specialist sheriffs in family law and specialist sheriffs and judges in commercial actions. It is important that we take an interest in that.

It might seem to members that commercial cases in the Court of Session are not something that we should bother about, but we should bother about them. Such cases often require timeous action, too. A pursuer might have a choice of jurisdiction in which to bring a substantial court case. If they are to choose Scotland to bring a large commercial case that has legal ramifications and involves a large amount of money, they will want to know that the case will progress timeously. If the case does not progress timeously, they might take it to another jurisdiction. There are ramifications for our senior courts in progressing such cases timeously. That is important to progressing Scots law and maintaining its status.

There has been reference to mediation. I do not know where we are with that, but it seems like decades since, as convener of the Justice Committee, I went to Baltimore with a whole lot of high-falutin’ justice people to look at the way that mediation operates there.

Mediation was used there not just in family cases but in large commercial cases. The pursuer and the defender, who are the big guys in those cases, knew that, at the end of the day, there had to be a resolution and that it is better to get it done through mediation, without all the ramifications of huge expenses. As we know, when people go to court, they might get judicial expenses, but they will not get all their expenses.

I make a clear distinction between mediation and arbitration. Arbitration is when a decision is made by the arbiter, and mediation is when the parties who are engaged in a dispute come to a mutual agreement. I would like to see mediation pursued. A very robust mediation service would have ramifications, not just in matrimonial and family law cases, but in commercial cases, where disputes are brought in Scotland. I do not know where work on that has got to, but perhaps the cabinet secretary can tell me how it has developed over the years. I think that it is sometimes like pushing a great big rock up a hill and it rolling back, quite often to land on our toes.

I turn to civil legal aid. I appreciate that funding is not a bottomless pit and that the criminal legal aid system has to take priority. The funding must go there, because there is the possibility of criminal conviction and loss of liberty. However, if we use more efficacious ways of progressing civil court cases—such as working online, with electronic transfer of documents—which used to cost money in court process and documentation, is there a potential for savings, so that we could better fund the civil legal aid system? For example, we could raise the bar on the earnings and capital that people have. If they are very poor, they can use the civil legal aid system and, if they are very rich, they can afford to go to court, but a lot of people are jam-packed in the middle, so they have to make a decision about whether they go to court—because their contribution might be very high or they might even be excluded from legal aid. Justice should not depend on the depth of people’s pockets.

I will be brief—well, not that brief, because I have spoken for five minutes. Although I understand that the majority of focus is on criminal matters, I think that it is important to shift the balance and remember that it is in the civil courts that most people out there meet justice.

I thank Mr Mountain; I know that he borrowed the pen gesture from me, but it is not necessary, because I conclude my speech. [Laughter.]

The next group to be vaccinated is the cohort of 18 to 29-year-olds. I understand that they must be aged 18 by or on 17 May. How will those who attain the age of 18 after that date be contacted for vaccination, especially as many of them will be returning to college and university?

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I tried to vote yes, but the thing—whatever the thing is—had frozen.

I will certainly try to comply, Presiding Officer.

Will there be a review of the vaccination status scheme? I have constituents who were awaiting their second vaccination appointments but did not receive those, and then logged on to check their vaccination status only to find that it had been erroneously recorded that they had been vaccinated a second time. They then had to go through the helpline and all that. Will there be an assessment of the whole vaccination programme and, if so, can that issue be taken into account? Although it affects only a minority of people, it matters.

No, thank you. [Laughter.] That was unrehearsed, Mr Mundell, was it not?

If the school week or day is to be extended I would suggest, as I have before, that we consider summer schooling, to include sports, music, gardening and simply playing. That could do more for the health and wellbeing of our children than keeping them between the four walls of the classroom for more hours. I was pleased that the cabinet secretary mentioned summer activity programmes. I would like to know more about that. I am beginning to commend Mr Whittle. This is not a team effort, but Mr Whittle constantly talks about the importance of physical activity for mental wellbeing and educational attainment. He is absolutely right and I support him in that. Not only do such activities support learning, anything done outside is more resistant to Covid transmission. There could also be employment for outdoor activity businesses, which have lost revenue during lockdown, and additional transport opportunities and revenue for local bus services if things happen at night. Is the Government looking at that possibility?

There are no easy solutions to bring recovery for Scotland’s pupils from nursery school through to tertiary learning. I have skimmed across a wide surface, but I return to where I began. The most valuable asset in a school or a nursery is its teaching staff—with the exception of the aforementioned bad apples and those who support them. Teachers have been asked to do so much over recent months and they have delivered. On behalf of my constituents in Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale, I extend my sincere thanks for all that teachers have done and continue to do in educating—in the broadest sense—those in their charge.

I am glad that I took Mr Whittle’s intervention. If there are others in the chamber who have experienced such issues on their patches, we should get together to talk about that. Parents are often overwhelmed by authorities saying, “There’s nothing to see here.” Politicians should not have to step in; I am not giving myself a pat on the back. I am angry that the system let them down for years and that a criminal prosecution was the only thing that brought the council to book, at least to some extent.

I note that there are suggestions south of the border that the school day should be extended to allow pupils to “catch up”. I agree with Fulton MacGregor that that is an unfortunate and unhelpful term. I have reservations about the implications that that would have for the wellbeing of both staff and pupils. Children already spend long enough in school.

School is about more than the basics of academic learning and of exams. It is about socialising and—dare I say it?—having fun, although not at the expense of the class teacher, which I do not encourage.

Presiding Officer, I formally welcome you to your position and the cabinet secretary to hers. Following on from Fulton MacGregor, I thank my campaign team and the people of Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale, who returned me with an increased majority. [Interruption.] Thank you, Ms Baillie.

I do not think that anyone needs to tell anyone here about the value of a good state education, least of all me. I was interested in Pam Gosal’s speech. I kind of lost heart when she got on to the union, but we will dispute that in a civilised fashion as the months go on.

I say to Ms Gosal that this is not a competition, but decades ago—I am not asking her to count them—I was the oldest child of five living in a council house. I was the first girl to stay on at school beyond the age of 15. In those days, girls left at 15 and got married at 18, but I did not do either of those things. I was the first to attend university. A couple of degrees later and after two professions—as a secondary teacher and a solicitor—I, like others here, value state education, from early years through to university, and I want other people to have that.

I do not always commend the Government for everything, but I commend it for the 1,140 hours of early years education; for universal school meals, which are coming for primary schools and are part of the educational process; and for no tuition fees. Those are all good interventions.

It is a long time since I was a secondary teacher, and I would not dare say that I know what that job now entails, even though I have two sisters who are former primary teachers and a niece who is now a deputy head. During the tough lockdown days, secondary teachers delivered online tutoring and they turned up at family homes with paperwork. They are now back in our schools, lateral flow testing and delivering for their charges in their classes. Sometimes the whole school needs to be shut because of the invasive virus. Teachers are on the front line.

We rightly applauded our front-line social care and healthcare staff, and today, in this debate, through our contributions I know that we will applaud the teachers and support staff who work in each individual—and individualistic—school community. Parents, grandparents and carers stoically became tutors, and we give our thanks to them, too.

It hardly needs saying that there is no doubt that the pandemic and its fallout have impacted on the wellbeing of Scotland’s pupils, staff and the wider community—and indeed ourselves—perhaps more than we yet know. I say to Oliver Mundell, who failed to take my intervention—big mistake—that he completely sidestepped the impact of Covid on public services over these one and a half years. I am not saying that Governments do not make mistakes, but at least he could have mentioned that impact.

I want to focus on staff. What support is being given to them, given the stresses that they have had and continue to cope with? What issues have the various professional bodies raised with the cabinet secretary? We are asking staff to do a lot, so we have to maintain their wellbeing.

I turn to our children, for whom face masks—others have mentioned this—have become the norm. For a long time, the closest that they came to human interaction outwith their own household units was to sit at a computer, making friends with strangers. Each pupil had a different experience based on whether they had full-time access to the internet, especially in the early days; whether they had space at home in which to work and concentrate; and whether adults in the household had time to dedicate to them—although it was no fault of theirs if they did not.

I note that funding has been provided to local authorities to assist with the mental health and wellbeing fallout of our pupils. I believe in local democracy, but will there be an audit of how councils have utilised that ring-fenced funding so that outcomes can be measured? How is that funding being applied to vulnerable children and to those with additional learning needs?

I will digress slightly, because I did not get to ask the First Minister a question. In almost every walk of life, there is at least one bad apple. The cabinet secretary may be aware that some children in my constituency with additional needs were subject to sustained abuse by their teacher. That was denied by Scottish Borders Council years ago, when it claimed that an independent inquiry had exonerated her. Only a subsequent and recent criminal prosecution with a conviction, inter alia, of serious assault, and pressure from me as the local MSP have pushed the council to pursue yet another independent inquiry. Is there a role for the cabinet secretary or for her office in monitoring that? The cabinet secretary will appreciate why the parents and carers of the affected children are sceptical.

Of course, because Mr Whittle will take one from me next time.

I welcome the First Minister’s announcement that the Borders will move to level 1, but I will focus on the vaccination roll-out. I have constituents who have been failed by the national vaccine helpline and the missing appointments process. Will the efficacy of such processes be assessed, which includes asking the public about their experiences? A small minority have been affected, but the situation is stressful for them.

made a solemn affirmation.