Seòmar agus comataidhean

I congratulate Collette Stevenson on securing the debate and bringing together members from across the chamber who, it is clear, are very passionate and concerned and want to make progress on the issue. It is always good in members’ business debates when we find out what members really care about. It is also really good that we now have a cross-party group on medicinal cannabis. That is a forum for change to happen, and I hope that, in due course, one of the ministers will be able to come along to it.

As a member of that group, I am pleased to be working with people across the Parliament and outside it. Therefore, it is good to see Anna Ross in the gallery, along with Lisa Quarrell. I can also see Councillor Monique McAdams, who has been a real ally and support to Lisa.

It cannot be left to individual parents and individual families to fight this battle; it is a battle for all of us. Much has been said about the barriers and the challenges, but the job that we have now is to focus on what we in the Scottish Parliament can do, rather than the things that we cannot do.

I spoke to Lisa about Cole’s situation. She is anxious that we make progress not just for Cole but for anybody who needs the medication. Lisa pointed out to me that the SIGN guideline that we have in Scotland is now quite old—I think that it is from 2013—so it is perhaps due an update. It would be good to hear from the minister in his closing speech what the situation is with that.

I will focus on Cole Thomson. I have mentioned him in the chamber before, so he is not a stranger to the Parliament or, indeed, to the First Minister or to Jeane Freeman, the former Cabinet Secretary for Health and Sport. When a parent has to become a carer for their child, it is absolutely exhausting but, when they also have to battle against systems and institutions and fight for everything, it is heartbreaking to watch. It is good that, in East Kilbride and Central Scotland, we have a number of MSPs who are willing to support Lisa, but change needs to come at Government level.

Cole is an exceptional wee boy. I have had the privilege of meeting him. What is really encouraging about his journey and the fact that he is now on the medication is not only that it is keeping him alive and seizure free, but that it has given him back his education and his hopes and dreams. I asked Lisa what Cole, who is nine and in primary 5, would say if he was here. She said that he said:

“I just don’t want to go back to being sick again and to go back to being in a wheelchair. I want to be a black belt.”

How wonderful is that? It is our duty not only to offer sympathy and warm words, but to show Cole and other children, such as Murray, what we will do to help them to realise their hopes and dreams. I think that Cole will achieve that black belt and a lot more, but he will need our help to get there.

It is also really important to mention the people who are willing to speak up and put their heads above the parapet. Mrs Graham is principal teacher in Cole’s school. She talks about the difference that the medication has made to his life. She is really proud of him because of that. She has written to the NHS and the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care, Humza Yousaf, to say that she has a duty of care to meet Cole’s educational needs, but she also says:

“Surely you”—

not you, Presiding Officer, but the NHS and the cabinet secretary—

“also have a duty of care: a duty to ensure that Cole gets the correct medication and treatment to give him the best quality of life.”

Tracy—I have forgotten her surname—from Unison, who works closely with Lisa Quarrell, reminds us that, in the NHS, we have the right to get treatment free at the point of need. Surely Cole has that right. Surely he has the right to grow up in Scotland with the right support and resources.

It has been a good debate. It has highlighted not only individuals who need support now, but the fact that we need to get it right for the people who do not have a voice—the people whose mums are perhaps not quite as vocal as Cole’s mum. I am keen to hear what the minister has to say because I think that members are all on the same page. We all want to go in the same direction—we want to give little boys such as Cole Thomson hope and the route map to get to that black belt.

Good morning, Franziska. It has been a pleasure to hear your contribution, so I thank you. Perhaps the committee could visit Freiburg at some point in the future.

In our inquiry into local government, we have heard many complaints about how slow councils can be in making decisions, particularly in the planning process. I am interested to hear that, in Freiburg, your city planning office is regarded as a think tank and an agenda setter.

Could you tell us a bit more about that? How do you ensure, in your municipality, that your work is widely recognised and appreciated, and that the staff feel motivated? Clearly, you feel very proud of the work that you are doing. Is that a feeling that the staff share? Do people want to work for the municipality?

Thank you.

I know that we do not have a lot of time, convener, so I will shortly pass back to you, but it would be interesting to hear from Freiburg in the future about the planning workforce, because we have questions about that workforce in Scotland. We have had a reduction in our planning workforce, so it would be interesting to see a comparison. In the interests of time, however, I will pass back to you, convener.

Maybe Liam Kerr wants to bring forward his own members’ business debate to get into that issue in much more detail. Tonight is about solar energy and, clearly, we need a robust plan for that. We need to get on with it, as the opportunity has been spelled out to all of us.

We have to look at where we are seeing pioneering work already. The solar farms in North Ayrshire, which have been pioneered by Scottish Labour, have not really been mentioned tonight. Hopefully, that work will continue and that innovation and good practice will be shared throughout Scotland. The work in North Ayrshire ties in nicely with the community wealth building agenda that we heard about in the chamber earlier. I congratulate Councillor Joe Cullinane on that work. It is pioneering and it also helps people with their energy bills.

There is groundbreaking work out there but, when I look at my emails and at what people are getting in touch with me about, I see that they do not want business as usual, That is why we had a digital day of action on Friday to stop the Jackdaw gas field. Liam Kerr is happy to see the Jackdaw gas field and the Cambo oilfield approved, but we cannot continue like that.

We want to see more democratic control of energy. The system in the market has completely failed. When we heard from the Office of Gas and Electricity Markets in the committee inquiry recently, we found out that there is just no protection for consumers. We all know that we cannot continue as we are. We need to work together during the transition. I know that I am out of time, but I took a brief intervention. The points about planning, skills and so on are very relevant. The message that we are hearing from our constituents, young and old, is that the future is ours to create, and we just have to get on and do it. The time to act is now.

To ask the Scottish Government when the scoping exercise into the availability of specialist services within national health service boards for miscarriage and unexpected pregnancy complications will be completed. (S6O-01120)

It is a pleasure to speak in this extended debate. I congratulate Fergus Ewing, not only on securing the debate and getting this time in the chamber—and bringing some unexpected sunshine with him—but on the fact that so many members have taken part. That is encouraging and I have certainly learned a few things in the debate already.

When I saw that the motion and debate had been secured, I felt motivated to come and take part and listen tonight because of the work that I am doing with colleagues on the Net Zero Energy and Transport Committee—Liam Kerr and Mark Ruskell are also members. We are currently running an energy crisis inquiry looking at what needs to be done in the here and now as well as at longer-term actions. We will report on that shortly.

I was struck by comments that we heard from the fuel poverty charity Energy Action Scotland just a few weeks ago. It said that, unless the UK Government and the Scottish Government take bolder action now, there will be

“a catastrophic loss of life”—[Official Report, Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee, 26 April 2022; c 23]

this winter. I think that that is something that is very much in the minds of all of us when we think about our casework—the emails from people reaching out to us for help and assurance. I come to this thinking very much about the cost of living crisis and how that interacts with the climate and nature emergencies.

The young people of Scotland very much keep our feet to the fire on this. It is a pleasure to be back doing school visits and hearing from young people. Before the 26th United Nations climate change conference of the parties—COP26—I was doing a lot of that work. I have to say to all colleagues and all parties—I do so from the back benches; I do not get to speak in the chamber very often now—that we cannot just retreat to our party lines, our slogans and the usual banter. This is much more serious than any of that. We have to work together.

The Government has a massive job to do, as all Governments do, and the Net Zero Energy and Transport Committee has a very important role to play. In that committee, we try to leave our party politics at the door in order to work together. We need more of these debates because, frankly, since COP26 finished I feel like we have gone back to our business-as-usual approach, and we cannot have that. Quite often, the very important issues, as we are discussing tonight, are left to members’ business debates when they should be given Government time and Opposition party time. Let us look at that.

As Douglas Ross mentioned planning, does he agree that we need to properly resource our planning authorities? There has been around a 20 per cent reduction in the planning workforce and some of the technical skills that we have heard about tonight are very important. Does he agree that we have to support local government?

Presiding Officer, I should have said at the start that I, too, may have to leave before the end of the debate. Thank you for your permission to do that.

I appreciate that update from the minister. It has been three months since we met my constituent Louise Caldwell to discuss progress. I am a bit concerned that the questionnaire has not gone out yet, but I hope that the work will be completed by June.

Is the minister confident that the Government will have compassionate miscarriage services in place in every health board by the end of 2023, as was promised? Will she join me in paying tribute again to Louise Caldwell, who has single-handedly brought the matter to Parliament’s attention and is in touch with thousands of women in Scotland who need that action now?

Over the past decade or so, there have been reforms to the planning system. We have seen that in primary legislation. There has been an emphasis on front loading so that there is lots of dialogue with applicants, developers, communities and planning authorities at the early stage. That is supposed to be the place where some of the detail can be thrashed out to ensure that the information is robust and reliable for everyone involved.

Is that part of the process working as well as it should? As an industry, are you reflecting on what more you could do to build confidence at the start of it? We know that planning has a difficult job to do in taking into account all sorts of competing interests. We also know that studies on, for example, biodiversity or flooding are expensive and take time. Could more be done to front load planning, and could you guys contribute to that?

You made an important point about time constraints. Perhaps I could come to David Hammond about those in a second. First, though, Morag Watson, you spoke earlier about community benefit funding, and you gave an example involving £900,000 of funds. Do you agree that there is an opportunity for such funding to increase? Could it perhaps plug some of the gaps that we see—for example, by facilitating capacity building and engagement both in communities and with public sector partners, not just planning authorities? As the committee has seen and heard during this inquiry, in the contexts of the role of local government on the journey to net zero, and of financing, we seem to need a cross-sectoral approach. Could more be done to make community benefit funding a bit more generous?