The Official Report is a written record of public meetings of the Parliament and committees.
All Official Reports of meetings in the Debating Chamber of the Scottish Parliament.
All Official Reports of public meetings of committees.
Displaying 919 contributions
Health, Social Care and Sport Committee
Meeting date: 9 December 2025
Patrick Harvie
I do not want to step on their toes.
Health, Social Care and Sport Committee
Meeting date: 9 December 2025
Patrick Harvie
Thank you.
Health, Social Care and Sport Committee
Meeting date: 9 December 2025
Patrick Harvie
Is that four-nations dialogue purely among your professional colleagues, or are you aware of that happening between Governments, too?
Health, Social Care and Sport Committee
Meeting date: 9 December 2025
Patrick Harvie
Good morning. I am curious. I was already thinking about this because of the term “medical aesthetics”, which has come up several times. There has been a discussion about the idea that some procedures have been demedicalised, or that the term “medical” is in contention. I have a basic question. What determines whether a procedure is medical? What defines medical aesthetics as opposed to non-medical procedures that people might have for aesthetic reasons? Is it the qualifications of the person who is conducting the procedures, the setting in which they are conducted, how they are regulated or whether they are done for medical reasons—in other words, to treat a medically diagnosed condition?
Health, Social Care and Sport Committee
Meeting date: 9 December 2025
Patrick Harvie
There is not an objective definition, then. We are using the term, “medical aesthetics”, but is there a clearly accepted definition of what that refers to and what it does not?
Health, Social Care and Sport Committee
Meeting date: 9 December 2025
Patrick Harvie
Even in that answer, you said, “these things”, but is there a clear definition of which things we are referring to as medical procedures?
Health, Social Care and Sport Committee
Meeting date: 9 December 2025
Patrick Harvie
Remmy Jones, do you have anything to add?
Health, Social Care and Sport Committee
Meeting date: 9 December 2025
Patrick Harvie
The only other point relating to consistency that I—
Health, Social Care and Sport Committee
Meeting date: 9 December 2025
Patrick Harvie
In that case I will stop there.
Health, Social Care and Sport Committee
Meeting date: 9 December 2025
Patrick Harvie
My question is about the consistency of regulation. On the question of consistency between different parts of the UK, one view is that we should generally err on the side of consistency and regulatory alignment, because that is simpler to communicate, it is easier for everyone to understand and it avoids unintended consequences in relation to the movement of people between different jurisdictions for one reason or another. Another view is that it is not good to prioritise alignment for its own sake, and that we should align with something only if we think that it is the right regulatory position. According to that view, we should not adopt a lower regulatory position just for the sake of alignment.
On where such regulatory decisions should sit, there is again a view that, in relation to devolved matters, the devolved Government and Parliament should decide whether divergence is justified to achieve a public policy objective such as patient safety. Another view, which is embodied in the United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020, is that the UK Government should decide, in the interests of market alignment and fairness for market operators, to impose a common approach.
What are your general views on, first, whether alignment between the different jurisdictions in the UK is important? Does it matter? Are there any unintended consequences of such alignment? Secondly, to what extent is the level of divergence or difference that is proposed in this legislation workable and manageable?