Seòmar agus comataidhean

I am pleased to speak in the debate and I thank Emma Harper for bringing this important issue to the chamber. I also thank Breast Cancer Now and Make 2nds Count for their helpful briefings for the debate. Those organisations have worked tirelessly, alongside many fantastic organisations in the third sector, to highlight the issue of secondary breast cancer. I hope that colleagues can join me in paying tribute to some of those organisations and the important work that they do, which includes funding vital research, pushing for better access to specialist care and supporting patients and their families. That work reminds us that, although research and data are crucial, compassion and care are just as important to so many people.

October marked breast cancer awareness month, which was an opportunity to pause and recognise all those who have been affected by the condition in the past, and all those who are presently living with breast cancer. As Emma Harper’s motion highlights, it is also an opportunity to raise awareness of secondary breast cancer. Despite the condition’s serious nature, awareness and understanding of secondary breast cancer remain far too low. For example, many people are unaware that breast cancer can return and spread to other parts of the body, and there are many misconceptions around the symptoms that occur. Just as with many types of cancer, raising public awareness of secondary breast cancer is vital, and breast cancer awareness month is a huge opportunity for us to do that.

For many people, living with the condition can mean a continuous cycle of hospital visits, treatment and much uncertainty. All too often, the experience is made even harder by a lack of recognition. The truth is that no accurate data exists on how many people are suffering from secondary breast cancer in Scotland. Public Health Scotland data shows that around 4,200 patients were living with secondary breast cancer in 2023. However, that does not include those who were diagnosed following a recurrence or spread of the disease.

For our national health service, and for the many important third sector organisations that work alongside it, the lack of data means that it can be very difficult to tackle the issue. Without that data, we do not know how many people are living with the condition or are being treated, and we do not know how we can ensure improved outcomes for the future. That means that there are potentially thousands of people across Scotland who are not getting the treatment and support that they require.

It is now nearly 10 years since the Scottish Government first committed to collecting data on those with secondary breast cancer in Scotland. It is time that we finally see real progress on the issue, and I hope that the minister will make that assertion in summing up.

We also know that access to specialist nurses and palliative care is not consistent across health boards in Scotland. Patients deserve better than a postcode lottery in dealing with cancer treatment, and better links between oncology services and palliative care are required.

I hope that the Scottish Government can commit to delivering on its “Cancer Action Plan for Scotland 2023-2026” and ensure that no one who is living with secondary breast cancer is ever made to feel invisible or forgotten again because, at the moment, they are.

I am pleased to speak in this evening’s debate, and I thank Paul Sweeney for bringing this important issue to the chamber. As someone who previously served as my party’s spokesperson on older people, and as the current shadow cabinet secretary for social security, I am delighted to speak on this topic and to congratulate Marie Curie on its work.

Marie Curie has raised issues that are important not just to the communities that I represent but to areas across Scotland. Its report, which comprises research by Marie Curie and by Loughborough University, shines a light on the reality for thousands of people across Scotland who are spending their final months in poverty.

The basic statistics are quite grim—more than 6,500 people with a terminal illness are in poverty at the end of life. In 2021, more than 56,000 people in Scotland died with a palliative care need, and the Scottish Government’s analysis shows that that figure could increase to 63,000 by 2040. I have no doubt that members on all sides of the chamber can agree that no one who is at the end of their life should have to spend their final days worrying about financial issues.

As with many health-related issues, the problem does not affect all parts of Scotland equally. The Government’s palliative care strategy, which was published last year, identified that levels of palliative care services vary significantly across different health boards.

In areas such as Glasgow and Dundee, the figure is one in three, but this is not just an urban problem; it affects rural communities such as the ones that I represent across Mid Scotland and Fife. In Clackmannanshire, which is in my region, transport barriers can limit access to specialist healthcare, and energy costs can make it very expensive for mains-powered medical devices to be plugged in at home.

For those who are living with a terminal illness, such pressures can be overwhelming. They can also be challenging for unpaid carers, who remain the backbone of the social care system.

Marie Curie rightly highlighted that local authorities have a role to play in tackling the issue. It identified the example from Manchester of discretionary council tax support, which is helping to support those with a terminal illness. Individual councils are well placed to decide how to provide extra support. Councils need to be properly funded in order to provide the right level of support. The onus is on the Scottish Government to discuss how the issue could be dealt with and how funding could be provided.

Marie Curie’s report shows us that dying in poverty is far more widespread than we think. It is also difficult for us to solve the problem. As we have seen, very little has happened to reduce the statistics between the surveys that came out in 2019 and those that came out in 2024.

The suffering is not inevitable, nor is it necessary. Through access to all levels of Government, solutions can be put in place to tackle that. For all those who have suffered with end-of-life poverty in the past and for those who might be suffering as they go into the future, I hope that the Scottish Government can work constructively towards solutions in order to help to give people security. I look forward to hearing from the minister in his summing up what steps the Scottish Government is taking to achieve those goals.

As we have said, nobody should be put in such a position at the end of their life. We—the Government and us as a Parliament—have a role to play in ensuring that we do all that we can to help to end suffering. I commend Marie Curie and Paul Sweeney for what they have done on the issue so far.

One key solution to the housing crisis is to empower councils to purchase homes to create more social housing. A report last year found that Fife Council had purchased only four homes in the Dunfermline area and that the council’s buy-back scheme was underspent by £3.5 million. What more can the Scottish Government do to ensure that councils buy up more housing stock to create more affordable homes for their areas?

As a member of the Social Justice and Social Security Committee, I am pleased to speak about the findings of our inquiry into financial considerations when leaving an abusive relationship. The committee’s report highlights the serious challenges that are faced by domestic abuse victims and how basic financial protections are still missing for many of those individuals. The most recent statistics show that more than 63,000 domestic abuse incidents took place in Scotland in 2023-24: that is one incident every eight minutes.

The committee report confirms that, unfortunately, financial instability is one of the most common reasons why victims stay with their abuser. Many stakeholders were clear that victims who attempt to leave an abusive relationship often face unaffordable housing and rising living costs. Evidence has shown that that is particularly the case for older victims and those with a disability. Age Scotland highlighted that long waiting lists for properties can act as a significant barrier to those individuals. If new care arrangements are also required, the situation becomes even more difficult.

Among the issues in the committee’s report is access to advice and information. Too often, victims are not aware of where to turn when fleeing an abusive relationship. The Glasgow violence against women partnership revealed that a victim would contact, on average, up to 11 services before they get the information that they require.

Local authorities have an important role to play in helping domestic abuse victims. The committee report recommends that the Scottish Government work with COSLA to create a single point of contact within each council area where victims can seek support and advice. It also recommended that the Government work with COSLA to improve the consistency of financial support across different council areas. I hope that the Government will look at those recommendations closely.

We also heard evidence that, in single-sex relationships, it is often the main earner who is the victim of abuse. That challenges the common narrative that financial control always aligns with financial power. It is important that the equally safe framework is able to reflect the needs and circumstances of different victims, including those with protected characteristics.

The Scottish Government must play a role in providing victims with the funding that they need to leave an abusive relationship. In respect of that, the fund to leave pilot scheme is very much welcome. That funding plays a vital part in easing the financial burdens that many victims have to deal with when they leave. The recently announced additional £500,000 for the fund is also welcome. However, the Government must now confirm whether it intends to make the scheme permanent, as the committee’s report calls for.

The committee’s recommendations should be looked at in the light of the urgent need to stamp out domestic abuse altogether. Those of us who are committed to that want to see progress.

Where appropriate, offenders should also have the chance to undertake rehabilitation, in order to lower the number of repeat offenders. In Scotland, reoffending rates remain stubbornly high.

We must also help young people to understand the dangers of domestic abuse and to recognise when a relationship is becoming abusive.

With regard to those issues, I note that the Prevention of Domestic Abuse (Scotland) Bill, which was introduced by my colleague Pam Gosal, is currently being scrutinised by the Criminal Justice Committee. I urge the Scottish Government to support the bill’s important proposals on those issues when the time comes.

Domestic abuse victims deserve and need proper support from the Scottish Government. Those individuals should not have to suffer for a single day longer than is necessary. We hope that the Scottish Government will take the findings of the report seriously and implement some or all of those common-sense proposals to support victims of domestic abuse wherever possible. That is the least that we can do as a Parliament to support them as they progress through a difficult time.

An LCM relating to the Public Authorities (Fraud, Error and Recovery) Bill was considered by the Finance and Public Administration Committee in spring 2025, but that LCM only considered limited provisions in the bill. The Parliament then voted to give consent on 25 June 2025 in relation to clauses 72, 75, 78, 81, 83, 87 and 98. The LCM did not give a consent steer on the other clauses—namely clauses 89, 90, 92, 94 and 95—so the committee did not scrutinise them properly. The Scottish Government finally lodged a supplementary memorandum of consent on 3 October for the remaining bits of the bill, but the committee did not get the chance to scrutinise them at all.

We accept that, in this instance, there have been issues about the timescales for deliberation at Westminster and in Holyrood, and the October recess has an impact on that. However, we wish to put on record our belief that there should be the fullest scrutiny of all aspects of all legislation. For those reasons, we shall not support the LCM this evening.

The statement indicates that there has been considerable improvement in CAMHS waiting times. However, some children are waiting as long as three years to access mental health support through the NHS, which is clearly unacceptable. What guarantees can the Scottish Government give that today’s announcement will result in waiting times being cut, or will we continue to leave our children behind?

The Parliament’s primary duty is to pass effective legislation, which, as members will agree, can be done only if there is effective scrutiny across the chamber and through committees.

The LCM before us relates to an important issue: fraud prevention. The Cabinet Secretary for Social Security and David Wallace attended the Finance and Public Administration Committee back in September. Every penny of public money that is lost to fraud is a penny taken from the hard-working taxpayers of Scotland—money that could be spent on our schools, hospitals or roads. Nurses, teachers and workers across Scotland deserve a Parliament that protects their contributions with unwavering diligence. We do not serve Scots by cutting corners or bypassing domestic processes. Regrettably, the process surrounding this consent motion has done that. For those reasons, the Scottish Conservatives will not support the legislative consent motion.

Fraud in the public sector does not just mean financial loss—it erodes public trust. When fraudsters exploit the system, they undermine the social contract that binds hard-working Scots to the services that they fund. The £36 million fraudulent benefit claim that was highlighted by an article in The Scotsman back in August is a stark reminder of the challenges that are being faced.

The Finance and Public Administration Committee recently sought answers from David Wallace from Social Security Scotland during his appearance before the committee on 16 September. His testimony was essential to members understanding our recovery of those funds. It was alarming to find that only 10 per cent of the funds lost to fraud in 2024-25 have been recovered. That is why the Scottish Conservatives agree with the principle of recovering wrongfully claimed funds and believe that the fraud-fighting toolkit must be modernised and strengthened.

A recent report has uncovered that NHS patients in my region and across Scotland were forced to receive electric shock treatment against their will almost 1,100 times last year. In around 2,000 cases out of 4,000, that outdated procedure was performed on people who, because of their mental state, were deemed incapable of giving consent. How will the Scottish Government act to ensure that vulnerable patients are protected from receiving that ethically unacceptable procedure?

Libraries have been proven to boost literacy, particularly among children from disadvantaged backgrounds. At least 16 per cent of public libraries in Scotland have closed since 2008, while a quarter of pupils entering secondary school struggle to read, write and count properly. Does the cabinet secretary accept that closing libraries cannot be improving children’s literacy outcomes?

Parliament’s prime duty is to pass effective legislation. I know that members will agree that that can be done only if effective scrutiny is undertaken by the Parliament and its committees. The legislative consent motion that will be debated tomorrow is important, as it relates to fraud prevention.

As was intimated by the convener of the Finance and Public Administration Committee, the Cabinet Secretary for Social Security and David Wallace of Social Security Scotland were asked to appear before that committee on 16 September because of concerns about an article that appeared in The Scotsman in August, which implied that the Scottish Government was unwilling to chase up £36 million of fraudulent benefit claims. That is a substantial sum of public money, on which the Finance and Public Administration Committee rightly sought to challenge the Government.

Presiding Officer, I am sure that you will agree that it is right that additional scrutiny takes place, just as it is important that we do not wave through LCMs without scrutiny. We accept that, in this instance, there have been issues relating to the timescales for deliberation at Westminster and at Holyrood, and the impact of the October recess on those. However, we wish to put on record that we believe that there should be the fullest scrutiny of all aspects of legislation. For that reason, we will not support the proposed suspension of standing orders at decision time.