Seòmar agus comataidhean

This week, I joined disabled people, third-party organisations and colleagues in welcoming the first disabled people’s cabinet, which was hosted by the First Minister. I was appalled to learn that the Labour Party has quietly lodged a motion to annul the changes that this Scottish National Party Government is trying to make to voting rights on local integration joint boards. Those changes would give disabled people, unpaid carers and people who use social care packages a vote on the services that affect them. Not content with stripping disabled people of their benefits, the Labour Party is trying to silence their voices when it comes to local services. Will the First Minister join me in calling on the Labour Party to back those voting rights for disabled people, carers and other people with lived experience, and to reverse this shameful betrayal?

This week, I joined disabled people, third-party organisations and colleagues in welcoming the first disabled people’s cabinet, which was hosted by the First Minister. I was appalled to learn that the Labour Party has quietly lodged a motion to annul the changes that this Scottish National Party Government is trying to make to voting rights on local integration joint boards. Those changes would give disabled people, unpaid carers and people who use social care packages a vote on the services that affect them. Not content with stripping disabled people of their benefits, the Labour Party is trying to silence their voices when it comes to local services. Will the First Minister join me in calling on the Labour Party to back those voting rights for disabled people, carers and other people with lived experience, and to reverse this shameful betrayal?

This week, I joined disabled people, third-party organisations and colleagues in welcoming the first disabled people’s cabinet, which was hosted by the First Minister. I was appalled to learn that the Labour Party has quietly lodged a motion to annul the changes that this Scottish National Party Government is trying to make to voting rights on local integration joint boards. Those changes would give disabled people, unpaid carers and people who use social care packages a vote on the services that affect them. Not content with stripping disabled people of their benefits, the Labour Party is trying to silence their voices when it comes to local services. Will the First Minister join me in calling on the Labour Party to back those voting rights for disabled people, carers and other people with lived experience, and to reverse this shameful betrayal?

It absolutely speaks to why it is important that those who have been impacted, some of whom are my constituents and some of whom I know personally, get the answers that they fully deserve.

It is to be welcomed that the independent clinical reviews were able to take place alongside the independent inquiry. The Government had to work hard for that to happen. As we all know, a public inquiry will tend to look at generalities, whereas the clinical reviews looked at what happened to many of Mr Eljamel’s patients specifically. That is good. My colleagues in Tayside—for example, Liz Smith—have worked well on the issue on a non-party-political basis. That is important.

I welcome the Hon Lord Weir and Professor Stephen Wigmore as chairs of the public inquiry and the independent clinical reviews respectively, and I note that Professor Wigmore is supported by expert neurosurgeons.

The health secretary has met a number of former patients and I understand that he was left in no doubt about the anger and pain that have been caused. I welcome his engagement. I emphasise once more that we must not lose focus on the patients and their families.

The Scottish NHS is something that we should all be extremely proud of. All of us in the chamber and everyone who is watching across the country will have benefited enormously from the work of our incredible NHS workforce, and I take this opportunity to thank all our NHS staff, who work tirelessly every day. They are a credit to Scotland. However, as we have heard today, sometimes things do not go as planned. When that happens—it is important to note that that is in a small minority of cases—it is imperative that those who are impacted get the answers that they deserve.

In the most serious cases, such as that of Sam Eljamel at NHS Tayside and those at the Queen Elizabeth university hospital, a public inquiry allows for an independent review to get answers on behalf of patients, with recommendations to ensure that it never happens again and to restore faith in our NHS that might have been lost as a consequence. The independence of a public inquiry is paramount.

I reiterate my support for full transparency in all the cases that have been mentioned in the chamber today. When I was Minister for Parliamentary Business, I introduced the bill that became the Lobbying (Scotland) Act 2016 to ensure openness and accountability, which are the founding principles of our national Parliament. Ten years on, I welcome the fact that the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee is considering how the 2016 act is working in practice. The same principles of openness and accountability must apply to all public bodies, including our NHS, and that is exactly why the Scottish Government established the independent public inquiries into the cases that I have spoken about. I stress again the importance of the independence of that process.

The Labour motion cannot be supported by Parliament. It explicitly calls on the Parliament to undermine the public inquiry by immediately releasing information prior to Lord Brodie publishing his final report. Not only would that be disrespectful to Lord Brodie, but it would potentially be illegal and do an injustice to the patients, families and whistleblowers who should be at the centre of all our thoughts today.

I welcome the opportunity to speak in this debate and to add my condolences to those who have lost loved ones. We must not lose focus on the patients, families and whistleblowers who have campaigned tirelessly for justice as part of the Scottish hospitals inquiry. The pain and suffering of patients at Queen Elizabeth university hospital and their families is unthinkable. Those who have lost loved ones and have subsequently fought to establish the truth have my full support.

It should not happen in our NHS. The patients deserve better. We, as parliamentarians, expect and demand better. Full transparency is required to ensure that those who are impacted get the answers that they deserve. I am therefore grateful to Lord Brodie and the wider inquiry for ensuring that the voices of patients and their families are heard. I also welcome the First Minister’s commitment to acting on Lord Brodie’s recommendations when the full report is published.

I will use some of my time in this debate to mention those who are impacted by the actions of Sam Eljamel during his employment as a surgeon at NHS Tayside between 1995 and 2014. Many of Mr Eljamel’s former patients are constituents of mine, and a number of colleagues in the chamber also represent those who are impacted by the actions of that former employee at Ninewells hospital in my constituency.

It is crucial that every effort is made to ensure that those who are living with the consequences of Mr Eljamel’s actions get the answers that they deserve. I was therefore pleased that the Scottish Government established a public inquiry and an independent clinical review to give patients the option of a personalised review of their care, which would not have happened if there had been a public inquiry alone.

Colleges are vital for supporting people in their learning journeys and ensuring that Scotland has the skills that our economy needs. Will the cabinet secretary say more about how her budget will support the college sector, particularly the ambitious plans that are being developed by Dundee and Angus College?

The minister mentioned digital literacy. I remember learning, some 30 years ago, to touch type on software that would be unrecognisable now. Digital literacy is really important. My city of Dundee is renowned for its digital success.

What more are we doing to use online educational tools to support digital literacy, which is so important?

Leonard.

I commend Richard Leonard, as convener of the Public Audit Committee, for insisting that the Parliament should debate the conclusions and recommendations that are contained in the committee’s report, “The 2023/24 audit of Ferguson Marine (Port Glasgow) Holdings Limited”. Although I was not a member of the Public Audit Committee at the time, I acknowledge the hard work of the committee clerks and my colleagues on the committee, both past and present. I am also grateful to the Auditor General for Scotland for his thorough and detailed report.

I will highlight the response from the Scottish Government to the Public Audit Committee dated 27 August 2025, in which the Deputy First Minister welcomed the committee’s scrutiny and constructive recommendations. She acknowledged the frustration of the workforce, of the communities that will benefit from the ferries being built at the yard and of the Parliament, while sharing the committee’s ambition for a competitive, sustainable and well-managed shipyard. She also recognised key aspects of the report that, rightly, highlight concerns around standards and governance. Those aspects include leadership, board governance, Scottish Government engagement and support, internal audit capacity, oversight of staffing and contracts, and staff engagement.

Governance, internal controls and contractor oversight in the early years clearly did not meet the standards that are expected of a publicly funded body. I therefore welcome the significant improvements that have since been made through close collaboration between the Scottish Government’s strategic commercial assets division and Ferguson Marine’s board of senior management. Ferguson Marine’s leadership has been strengthened, robust governance processes are now in place and, crucially, transparency and accountability have improved. The Parliament has already heard that a new chief executive was appointed in May 2025, helping to drive the delivery of the MV Glen Rosa while learning lessons from the MV Glen Sannox project.

Other key aspects of the report focus on project delivery and financial controls, the future of the yard and reputation and performance.

Although it is crucial that lessons are learned and swift action is taken in the areas highlighted in the report and by colleagues from across parties, it must now be everyone’s focus to ensure a successful future for Ferguson Marine.

I accept that there have been difficulties. However, let us not forget the key fact that the SNP Scottish Government stepped in and saved the yard to save jobs. We will never apologise for that. Had it not been for the actions of the Scottish Government, there was a real risk that Ferguson Marine would have ceased trading on the Clyde and lots of jobs would have been lost.

I urge members to compare the SNP Scottish Government’s response to Ferguson Marine to the UK Labour Government’s response to Grangemouth. The Labour Government at Westminster has failed to fulfil its election promises to bring forward the necessary investment and action to save Grangemouth. Anas Sarwar pledged on national TV to

“step in to save the jobs at the refinery”.

His London bosses have, of course, found money to nationalise British Steel; they have found money for petrochemicals in Belgium; and they have found money to back the Ineos chairman’s development of Old Trafford. However, they have repeatedly failed to invest in the workers and industrial future of Grangemouth.

Again, I thank the Public Audit Committee and the Auditor General for Scotland for their reports. I am confident that, with the Scottish Government’s support, Ferguson Marine will once more be competitive on the open market.