Chamber and committees

Ms Whitelock, do you have anything to add?

Thank you. Do you have any views, Ms Allison?

So, is that a soft “maybe”, depending on each case? I am seeing nods from across the panel. Is the view that it depends on the individual child one that you all share?

Mr Berry, I know that you provide adult services, but corporate parenting will—

Good morning. I would like to discuss the views on the proposal for single-member panels for children’s hearings. We have had mixed responses to that in our call for views, with some folk saying that it is a good idea and others saying that more clarity is needed on the decision-making powers for such panels. Indeed, Social Work Scotland said in its submission:

“There is general anxiety across ... members about the proposed single person panels”.

Mr Trainer, can you go into more detail on your views? What we can do about the issue?

How can we ensure that that happens?

I can understand why folk are frustrated at the moment, as we are several years into a cost of living crisis. However, there is consensus that—I have tried to word this very carefully—there are far too many asylum seekers living in hotels. That is the case, but this is where we differ. First, there is an easy way to reduce the number of asylum seekers, which is to process their applications more quickly and better. That would have the knock-on effect of allowing folk the chance to start rebuilding their lives, to get jobs and to find a community to settle in and become a part of. It also means that they are not spending months or even years in hotels.

I do not blame the people who are fleeing war and persecution for claiming asylum. I do not think that upholding international law or showing compassion is a bad thing, and I do not think that asylum seekers are the ones responsible for every problem in society today—I usually blame such things on the Tories, and I think that I am usually right to do so.

Right now, the asylum system is broken—I blame the Tories for breaking that too, by the way, although I think that Labour could be doing a better job of trying to fix it. For years, there have been far too few resources available to process applications, and losing the Dublin system following Brexit made that worse—Brexit, of course, being the gift that just keeps on giving since the last time a UK Government tried to appease Nigel Farage.

The system is broken as a consequence of trying to save a few quid on decision makers, and now we are spending fortunes on accommodating folk in hotels. I can understand why folk are angry about that, but I think that the Tory motion is particularly disgraceful, because it is trying to turn that anger against some of the most vulnerable folk in the country.

The divisive language and the misinformation that we have heard are outrageous. Seeking asylum is not illegal. It is a fundamental human right that is protected by international law. On the subject of misinformation, I will read out a bit of Shelter Scotland’s briefing for last month’s debate on a Tory motion on asylum seekers:

“Recent debates around the asylum system, refugee rights and homelessness have regrettably led to misinformation being widely shared. This has been particularly true of local connection legislation, which was suspended with parliamentary approval in 2022, during this parliamentary session. These changes to local connection legislation are completely unrelated to the issue of refugee homelessness—the changes did not alter rules for whether people recently granted refugee status can move to Scotland from elsewhere in the UK, or between Scottish local authorities. Those leaving the asylum system are not deemed in law to have formed a local connection to any area, and thus have always been able to move to a local authority of their choosing.”

I wonder whether Mr Findlay bothered to read that briefing or whether he just decided to double down anyway.

I am nearly out of time, so let me finish with a clear message. Refugees are welcome in Scotland. I say to refugees, wherever you are from—be that Ukraine, Syria, Afghanistan or elsewhere—if you have fled war or persecution, we will help you to rebuild your lives in Scotland as we work to build a better Scotland for everyone living here.

Let us focus on fixing the system and not blaming the folk trapped in it. Let us continue to send out a clear message that Scotland is a welcoming country.

I thank Edward Mountain for bringing the debate to the chamber. Bowel cancer is not a topic that we normally hear being freely discussed, so I thank him not only for bringing it to the chamber for debate but for being a man who is not afraid to speak about his health, and for being someone who was not afraid to speak out during his recovery and talk about his personal experience. I know that he gave folk courage and support by doing so. I also know that it is not easy to talk about things that have had a direct impact on you, especially when you are, as he is, a private person who is not in the habit of discussing publicly your private affairs.

Through you, Deputy Presiding Officer, I take the opportunity to say to Edward Mountain, following our conversation yesterday morning, that talking about this does not make him vulnerable; it makes him brave, in my eyes. As I know, some folk are too feart to poop on a stick; they just want to bury their heads in the sand, and they would rather not know. However, he went for the test and then went viral with his diagnosis and treatment, and he should be proud of himself for that.

As a woman of a certain age who gets the letters from NHS Scotland that ask people to get tested or checked for various things such as asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, smears, mammograms and bowel cancer, I can honestly say that jabbing your jobbie wi a stick is a dawdle. You do not have to put it in a Tiffany box, like Sharon Osbourne used to do before sending it to folk she didna like—you just stick it in the return envelope and post it back to the NHS. It is as simple as that.

In his motion, Edward Mountain

“congratulates the Scottish Government in taking the lead in bowel cancer screening”

and recognises

“that Scotland has the most sensitive level of screening in the whole of the UK”.

I echo that sentiment and add my congratulations.

However, as good as that news is, we as the public, and as individuals, have a part to play, as well. We need to take control of our own health—nobody else is going to do it for us. I say that because, according to the Public Health Scotland statistics report that was published in March this year, for the two-year period up to April 2024, more than 1.9 million folk were invited to complete a home bowel screening test. Two thirds of those folk successfully returned their kit—a 66 per cent uptake. The report notes that

“Uptake was higher in females ... than males”.

However, although an overall uptake of 66 per cent sounds like good news, that still leaves a third—approximately 600,000 people—who did not return their test. We, as individuals and as a Parliament, can and must do better in getting the message out about how important that wee test is.

We must remember that bowel cancer is one of the most common cancers in Scotland. Scotland has the highest rate of bowel cancer diagnosis in the UK. However, early diagnosis is key, with nine out of 10 people surviving if bowel cancer is found early. Men are more likely to have a positive screening result than women, yet fewer men return their stick.

If I can get one message out tonight, it would be this: please do the test—if not for yourself, for your family. You do not even have to leave the comfort of your own home. As I said, if you are diagnosed early, you have a 90 per cent chance of survival: nine out of 10 folk survive. How would you feel if a family member did not do the test because they were too feart and then left it too late? Do not be that family member—go jab your jobbie and stick it in the post.

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. My app did not work. I would have voted yes.

It is vital that secure care is more than a holding centre—that it keeps communities safe and keeps young people safe from harming themselves. Children and young people need help to break the potential progression into poorer life chances in adulthood, and secure care can do that by giving them access to the same standard of education as their peers. They must also have their underlying health and wellbeing needs addressed. The system must be one where children are still treated as children, with their rights and wellbeing at the heart of all decisions.