Seòmar agus comataidhean

I am pleased to speak in the debate and congratulate my fellow member Foysol Choudhury on bringing it to the chamber.

At this early stage of my speech, I commend the excellent work of organisations such as the Brain Tumour Charity and Brain Tumour Research. In addition, I pay tribute to the phenomenal courage and resilience of patients and their families, who we regularly meet in the Parliament. It is good to have that exchange.

As the motion says, brain tumour awareness month is March, and it is dedicated to raising awareness of important brain tumour research and shining a light on patients across Scotland. That is not merely vitally important but essential, especially given, as we have heard today, the current situation with the diagnosis and treatment of brain tumours.

Early in the previous session of Parliament, I became aware of the tragic case of a constituent in Dunfermline, Mark Richardson. It was an awful situation. Back in 2017, when opening my members’ business debate on brain tumour research, I spoke about Mark, who had been a popular manager with Diageo and had a stepson and two toddlers. Once again, diagnosis was the problem. Mark was having blackouts and eye problems, and none of it was being followed up. Tragically, Mark died in July 2016 at the age of 32. He had experienced neck pain and an eye bleed. He had been to the optician, but nobody found that he had a cancerous brain tumour the size of a golf ball.

It is seven years since that debate. I said at the time:

“Brain tumours are a cancer of unmet need.”—[Official Report, 7 December 2017; c 28.]

Here we are, seven years later, saying exactly the same thing and calling on the Scottish Government and the NHS to focus on diagnosis and treatment. We need investment in research to improve diagnosis, find more effective and less harmful treatments and, ultimately, find a cure. In recent years, I have been whole-heartedly behind ensuring that we do that. Nearly a decade on, we are still struggling. Mark’s story made such an impact on me that I became much more involved in the Brain Tumour Charity. I have held round-table meetings, met consultants and had patients here in Parliament. MSPs have come to drop-in events. I was extremely humbled that, back in 2019, the Brain Tumour Charity nominated me as one of the influencers of the year.

I commend Beatrice Wishart and congratulate her on what she is trying to achieve, and I look forward to supporting her cross-party group. I urge the Scottish Government, brain tumour charities and health professionals to continue to work together to ensure that individuals are supported and protected throughout their journey. The Scottish Government must ensure that all brain tumour patients have access to a clinical nurse specialist or a key worker who carries out assessments of patients’ holistic requirements following their diagnosis. Signposts must be in place for the patient to access local support. Patients with brain tumours should have the option of discussing palliative care with consultants at the point of diagnosis.

I reiterate my pledge to do all that I can, in my position as a member of the Scottish Parliament, to fight individuals’ corner and maintain awareness. Maintaining awareness and ensuring that we keep brain tumours high profile will give many of those individuals hope for the future.

In her statement, the minister talked about a tobacco and vaping framework and about improving the existing register of tobacco and nicotine vapour product retailers. Nations such as the Netherlands take a more concise approach to the issue: all fruity flavours and aromas that might appeal to young people and those who are new to the habit are banned, and only tobacco flavours are allowed. Is the Scottish Government considering such measures under the tobacco and vaping framework?

To ask the Scottish Government how it plans to spend the £295 million in Barnett consequential funding arising from the United Kingdom Government’s 2024 spring budget. (S6O-03241)

The Scottish National Party Government consistently misleads the public about the amount of funding that it receives from the UK Government, but the facts speak for themselves. In 2024-25, the Scottish Government will get £43 billion in a block grant and will receive more than £2,000 per person for public services, but that advantage has been completely squandered by the SNP Government, which, due to its wasteful spending, has had to raise taxes on hard-working Scots. Does the cabinet secretary really think that spending money on independence papers while cutting national health service funding in real terms is the correct priority for the Government?

In October, Creative Scotland is due to decide on £87.4 million-worth of applications from 285 organisations, many of which are in the cinema sector. That gives an indication of the extent of the culture and creative sector that exists across Scotland. How can we ensure that the many applicants who aspire to enter cinematography who do not receive funding are not discouraged from entering the sector or the industry?

It is unclear how the required improvements to urgent and unscheduled care at NHS Forth Valley will take place, and the picture on psychological therapies and children’s mental health is extremely challenging. What improvements have been made and what action can be taken to ensure that patients are given the care that they require?

Will the cabinet secretary inform us when he first learned about the funding issues? Will he be transparent regarding the content of the application, by ensuring that it is published in full? Does he agree that Creative Scotland should urgently review all decision-making processes for funding applications?

I thank Keith Brown for bringing to the chamber this important debate to welcome the launch of the winning students 100 programme.

Scotland has long been a nation that has punched above its weight when it comes to sporting success. As well as having a rich pool of sporting talent, Scotland enjoys success that has been due in no small part to the support that athletes have received throughout their careers. Stirling university needs to be commended for, and congratulated on, its achievements.

For an example, we can look at the individuals who came from the previous winning students programme, which was launched back in 2008 and funded by the Scottish Funding Council. Some of the athletes who were supported by the programme are now, as we have heard, Olympic medallists and household names, such as Laura Muir and Duncan Scott.

The years that an athlete spends at university are an important opportunity for them to take part in their sport and take it to the next level. Those athletes face the challenge of combining their studies with their training and competitive programmes, so a balance needs to be struck. As we have heard, the winning students 100 programme provides students with grants of up to £3,000. However, the programme also provides much-needed academic flexibility for students, which allows them to train to the very best of their ability. The new winning students 100 programme has already awarded 106 scholarships across 28 different sports, including athletics, fencing, diving, hockey, rowing and triathlon.

As Scotland’s university for sporting excellence, it is only appropriate that Stirling university manages that programme, and that is a real feather in its cap. As we have heard, Stirling university is the jewel in the crown, and I certainly second that.

In the current economic climate, such programmes have a major impact. We know that, while Scotland has first-class sporting facilities, some of those are at risk across local authorities, and that needs to be talked about. Of course, universities play an important role in providing high-quality sports facilities, and I welcome the fact that Stirling has a new £20 million sports centre, which was opened back in 2020. For many councils and communities, however, swimming pools, leisure centres and athletics tracks are at risk. In order for Scotland to keep its reputation as a leading sports nation, it is vitally important that young athletes have access to world-class facilities across the country. However, in the current climate, there are real difficulties in that respect.

The winning students programme 100 is, therefore, needed to provide support. As I said, I would be the first to congratulate and commend everyone who is involved in it, because it produces world-class athletes for Scotland. Scotland has long been a sporting nation with an excellent reputation, and such programmes are key to maintaining that reputation in the future. I have no doubt that the 500 scholarships that will be awarded through the programme up to 2028 will lead to countless amazing sporting achievements.

I thank all those from the University of Stirling who have dedicated their time, commitment and passion to supporting those young individuals in their programmes. I wish all those talented athletes the success that they deserve, and I am sure that they will see many benefits from the programme as they go forward in the years to come.

I am pleased to open the debate on behalf of the Scottish Conservatives, although it is disappointing that the Government has chosen to waste parliamentary time by debating today’s farcical motion.

This is not the first time that that has happened this year. Only two weeks ago, the Parliament was debating hypothetical social security powers in a hypothetical independent Scotland. Anyone viewing today’s proceedings could be forgiven for thinking that Scottish Parliament TV has started showing repeats.

In the light of the motion that has been lodged today—

Thank you, Presiding Officer.

The SNP Government is clearly willing to continue the same old narrative week after week. Taking such an approach is within its gift—we know that it can do that, and it chooses to do it. However, members on the Conservative benches will continue to call out this Government’s abandonment of its duties and the communities that we represent. It is time for the SNP Government to end the grandstanding and the manufactured grievance, and to start using its powers to work towards delivering the Scotland that the public really want, and start delivering on their priorities. That is what our communities and our constituents want.

I move amendment S6M-12372.1, to leave out from “Scotland” to end and insert:

“the Scottish Government should accept the will of the people of Scotland as expressed in the clear and decisive result of the 2014 independence referendum, and calls on the Scottish Government to focus on Scotland’s real priorities, such as growing the economy, reducing NHS waiting times and violent crime, and improving education standards and public services.”