Seòmar agus comataidhean

Another fantastic organisation has come to mind: Classrooms for Malawi, which is also based in Rutherglen. Over the years, we have joined forces on the issue of period dignity, and I know that it appreciates the cross-party work in the Parliament that led to the Period Products (Free Provision) (Scotland) Act 2021. Does the cabinet secretary recognise the good work that it does in his portfolio?

I have great faith in Edward Mountain, even though he might be talking himself down today. As convener, he expertly chairs the committee every Tuesday morning.

As I look around at the colleagues who are in the chamber, I know that we can do this. As Douglas Lumsden said—I think that he is flirting with the idea of supporting the bill—it matters to the people of the north-east of Scotland; it matters to my constituents; and it matters to us all.

There are technical points for us to deal with. I understand members’ frustration and curiosity about section 40 of the 2014 act and why there have been no prosecutions. Colleagues have raised concerns about whether we have the right resources in place for our regulators, including SEPA. I hope that the bill has allowed that debate to open up.

I thank Bill Kidd for mentioning Polly Higgins, and I want to mention those colleagues, including Richard Leonard, who brought tears to my eyes. I cannot take people being nice to me—I am not used to it.

However, I reassure members that this is not about being sentimental or about Scotland trying to get headlines. We are now one of the most nature-depleted countries in the world. We all love Scotland and we all care about its future, but we cannot be complacent any longer.

In committee, when the cabinet secretary was giving evidence, colleagues asked, “What if the bill puts off investment? What if people do not want to come to Scotland because we have an ecocide law?”. Well, I want people to know that we will have an ecocide law. We welcome investment and we want development, but we need it to be in the right place and done in the right way, and I have great trust in our planning authorities to do that. Maurice Golden is giving me a look; I note that my husband is a planner, so I have to say that I trust our planners. Planning is where I learned about protecting our environment, and we must recognise that planners already look at environmental impacts.

Amendments have already been set out in writing that we agree on, and we can work on them at pace. I am listening to all committee members, but it is up to the committee to agree the time to do the work. I will be working, and my door will be open to everybody. If we kick the issue down the road, we will do a great disservice not only to our current constituents but to future generations. That is why it is not just environmentalists backing the bill—it is health charities such as Asthma and Lung UK and bodies such as the Children and Young People’s Commissioner Scotland, because they know that our young people need a safer, healthier Scotland.

I thank the Scottish Government and all members who are backing the bill. To those who are not yet convinced because they are worried about the amount of time left, I ask them to give the bill a chance. I assure all members that I will work night and day to ensure that we will have a robust bill at the end of the process.

Absolutely, and if I had stuck to my speaking notes, Councillor Robert Brown would have been one of the first people I would have mentioned. When I became a South Lanarkshire councillor in 2012, Robert Brown was the first person to say hello and greet me as a fellow councillor, and we used to sit together on the licensing committee. I was pleased to see Councillor Brown expertly chair the AGM a few months ago. I know that he is completely dedicated, as are all the committee members.

A big thank you to all the volunteers, everyone who is sponsoring events and local businesses. I hope that everyone has a good time, and I look forward to hearing whether the cabinet secretary will partake in any of the events.

13:12

I congratulate Clare Haughey on securing the debate. It has been lovely to hear the contributions so far. Everyone has been so enthusiastic about Rutherglen and the many things that it is famous for. The longer you sit here, the more likely you are to think of something else that is worth mentioning.

I will add to the list the Scottish Catholic International Aid Fund, which was founded in Rutherglen. In recent months, there was a wonderful mass in St Columbkille’s church in Rutherglen to celebrate SCIAF’s anniversary. That is another reason to celebrate the wonderful town that is Rutherglen.

Of course, 2026 is the year of Rutherglen. The calendar of events and projects that Rutherglen 900 has pulled together is a testament to its communities. Rutherglen 900 is a grass-roots endeavour, although funding and support are being provided by Clyde Gateway, South Lanarkshire Council, local businesses and—I hope—the Scottish Government. I am sure that the cabinet secretary will be most welcome at all the events. In particular, the book festival jumps out at me.

As Annie Wells and Clare Haughey have said, the events celebrate Rutherglen’s past and retell it for a new generation. The involvement of children and young people, especially through the schools, means that the project will have a lasting legacy. It is not simply a case of coming along to some events and then moving on. The educational work that is being done is striking.

Efforts have also been made to capture the oral history of Rutherglen through the time capsules and the oral history podcast, an episode of which Michael Shanks, the local MP, recorded at Burgh primary school in the past few weeks. All those things will help to ensure that the stories that we tell one another will be safely passed on to the next generation.

It is a pity that we will not see Bob Doris partake in some Irish dancing, but you never know. If the organisers are listening—[Interruption.] The cabinet secretary agrees. It is not too late to add that to the programme.

We often discuss challenges and difficult issues in the chamber, but this is an opportunity to think about all the things that make our communities vibrant, all the great work that goes on and all the unsung heroes. It is a chance to bring people together for a happy occasion. Whether you are from Rutherglen, South Lanarkshire, Glasgow or beyond, this is a cause for national celebration. Rutherglen is a community with a deep, enduring place in our national story. I hope that everyone will feel welcome to come to Rutherglen to take part in these events or just to discover Rutherglen for the first time.

Members have mentioned some of the fantastic organisations that are at the heart of Rutherglen 900, including the Healthy n Happy Community Development Trust. I wish a fond farewell to Brendan Rooney, the chief executive, who is retiring. Bob Doris also mentioned Camglen Radio and Rutherglen Heritage Society.

When I went along to the annual general meeting of Rutherglen 900 last year, I was pleased to see some former town planning colleagues of mine who live locally. They are very active on the heritage side and in bringing together the volunteers.

I begin by declaring a financial interest, which is listed in my entry in the register of interests: I have received in-kind support from Stop Ecocide International.

Today, we have a historic opportunity to join a global movement and take the first step towards introducing ecocide law in Scotland. The bill recognises a simple truth: the most egregious acts of environmental destruction must be treated as the serious crimes that they are. Scotland must be more ambitious. The aim of the bill is to prevent mass environmental destruction by introducing severe penalties, including a new offence under criminal law. That is a deterrent that is designed to change corporate culture and to send an unmistakable signal that Scotland values our nature above illegal profit.

There is a growing international recognition that existing laws are insufficient to protect our planet. The bill has received wide-ranging support from the public, businesses, workers and experts, echoing a trend that has been seen in Belgium, in France and far beyond.

I am deeply inspired by the work of Polly Higgins, the late Scottish lawyer and environmentalist. Polly understood that, to protect nature, we must change the rules. By criminalising ecocide, Scotland would show solidarity with those nations that are most affected by climate change and biodiversity loss. As Polly once said, it is a

“simple law to protect the Earth”.

I agree. It is a necessary guardrail for our fragile planet, not just globally but locally.

This year, 2026, is the year of green activity, an initiative that was recently launched by Unison to underscore the movement of workers who demand greener and safeguarded workplaces and communities to live in.

Today is the culmination of stage 1 scrutiny. I thank the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee and the other committees involved for their diligent work. I am encouraged by the cross-party support for strengthening environmental law, and I warmly welcome the Scottish Government’s support for the general principles of the bill.

I acknowledge the committee’s concerns regarding the limited time that is left in this parliamentary session. To that end, my bill officials and I have been working intensively with the Scottish Government to draft amendments that address the themes that were raised during the evidence sessions. We are committed to consulting key stakeholders to ensure that their expertise fully informs stage 2.

I turn to the offence. The bill defines ecocide as causing “severe environmental harm” that is either reckless or intentional. Severe harm means harm that is either widespread or long-term. Critically, the bill allows for both individuals and organisations to be convicted. Penalties are significant: individuals could face up to 20 years in prison, and, for organisations, there is no limit on fines. Furthermore, the courts will be empowered to require compensation to repair or mitigate the damage caused.

I want to be clear on two points that were raised during scrutiny. First, on permits, I note that the bill would not criminalise legitimate licensed activities. It is not designed to target businesses that are operating responsibly under current regulations or to impact planning decisions. Members should think of it as a regulatory pyramid, with ecocide law overarching at the top.

Secondly, on the existing law that we have in Scotland, some people have asked whether we can simply amend the Regulatory Reform (Scotland) Act 2014. I do not believe that that is sufficient. The 2014 act deals with strict liability, but ecocide requires a stand-alone crime with a high threshold and corresponding penalties.

Last month, the United Kingdom Government published a national security assessment that identified ecosystem collapse as a direct threat to security and prosperity. That report, which was produced by the UK intelligence community, adds to the evidence base for the need to have an apex environmental law. I will probably return to that in more detail in my closing remarks, as I respond to colleagues’ questions about particular suggestions for amendments.

Our purpose today is not to resolve every technical detail but to agree on the general principles of the bill, so that we may proceed to stage 2. The committee’s main concern is time, not principle. I reassure members that the work to address concerns is well under way, for which I am extremely grateful to the cabinet secretary, her officials and the Parliament’s non-Government bills unit. To allow that work to continue at pace tomorrow, we can say yes today and take this urgent step towards preventing environmental destruction for generations to come.

I move,

That the Parliament agrees to the general principles of the Ecocide (Scotland) Bill.

I declare an interest as a fellow member of the committee, although I was recused from scrutiny of the bill.

I recognise that, like other committees, the committee has a high workload. However, does the member feel reassured by me and the cabinet secretary that work on the amendments has already started? The memorandum that the cabinet secretary sent to the committee in September set out the Government’s thinking. I have been working on the bill for a long time, and I will work rapidly to ensure that we have a small but streamlined set of amendments. Does the member put trust in me, as one of his fellow committee members, that I will not waste valuable parliamentary time but will work to ensure that he can vote on a bill that his constituents in North East Scotland also support?

Contemporary dance.

As dance partners.

I thank all colleagues for their contributions to the debate. It is clear that members have put a lot of thought into the points that they wanted to make. I will repeat what I said at the beginning of the debate: I take the committee’s report seriously, I am grateful for its work, and I understand the time constraints on everyone’s work in the Parliament in February, as we find ourselves just ahead of an election.

However, we have to make every minute in the Parliament count. I again assure Edward Mountain, who is the committee’s convener, and all colleagues that work is well under way to identify the areas for amendment on which the Government and I agree. I am genuinely looking at all the committee’s recommendations to see where amendments are appropriate. I will work at pace—not in a rush, and not like a headless chicken, but in a serious, committed way—to get this done. I give the Parliament my word on that.

I agree with Maurice Golden and other colleagues that the issue is too important to kick down the road. The cabinet secretary is right; it is not about Scotland trying to show off that we are the front runners—we are not; we are lagging behind our neighbours in the European Union.

This week, the issue was raised in the House of Commons, where ministers are looking at the issue across portfolios, including in the Ministry of Justice and the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, because, as Bill Kidd said, there was a bill in the House of Lords. I assure Bill Kidd that Baroness Rosie Boycott is a real person, who—like Russell Findlay, who is not here today—spent time as a journalist, investigating powerful, wealthy people and holding them to account. She worked with colleagues from across the benches in the House of Lords and also with people of no political persuasion.

As a socialist, I always have a glass that is half full, and I believe that we can get this done—I will move mountains to get this done.