Skip to main content
Loading…

Chamber and committees

Official Report: search what was said in Parliament

The Official Report is a written record of public meetings of the Parliament and committees.  

Filter your results Hide all filters

Dates of parliamentary sessions
  1. Session 1: 12 May 1999 to 31 March 2003
  2. Session 2: 7 May 2003 to 2 April 2007
  3. Session 3: 9 May 2007 to 22 March 2011
  4. Session 4: 11 May 2011 to 23 March 2016
  5. Session 5: 12 May 2016 to 5 May 2021
  6. Current session: 12 May 2021 to 13 July 2025
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 1311 contributions

|

Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee [Draft]

Civil Legal Aid Inquiry

Meeting date: 13 May 2025

Marie McNair

Good morning. Aaliya Seyal, it is good to see you again, in a different committee.

The Scottish Government has proposed introducing block fees for legal work involving adults with incapacity. I am keen to hear your views on that. Earlier, you touched on your concerns about block fees, so could speak about that issue and expand on other aspects of block fees?

Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee [Draft]

Civil Legal Aid Inquiry

Meeting date: 13 May 2025

Marie McNair

Thank you. That was helpful. Pat Thom, do you have any similar concerns?

Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee [Draft]

Civil Legal Aid Inquiry

Meeting date: 13 May 2025

Marie McNair

Thank you. The Scottish Government has also proposed introducing standardised personal allowances for civil legal aid. I am keen to hear your views on any advantages or disadvantages to that approach.

Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee [Draft]

Civil Legal Aid Inquiry

Meeting date: 13 May 2025

Marie McNair

Thank you. That is helpful.

Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee [Draft]

Civil Legal Aid Inquiry

Meeting date: 13 May 2025

Marie McNair

That would definitely simplify the process there. Hyo Eun Shin, do you have anything to add?

Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee [Draft]

Civil Legal Aid Inquiry

Meeting date: 13 May 2025

Marie McNair

It is okay if you do not. I will pass over to Sally Mair. Do you have anything to add?

Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee [Draft]

Civil Legal Aid Inquiry

Meeting date: 13 May 2025

Marie McNair

Everything seems to come back to the eligibility criteria. Aaliya Seyal, do you have anything to add?

Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee [Draft]

Civil Legal Aid Inquiry

Meeting date: 13 May 2025

Marie McNair

Thanks for that. The Scottish Government is also proposing to introduce standard personal allowances for civil legal aid. Do you support that approach?

Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee [Draft]

Civil Legal Aid Inquiry

Meeting date: 13 May 2025

Marie McNair

Good morning, panel, and thanks for your time. I will stay on the same line of questioning that I had for the first panel. The Scottish Government is proposing to introduce block fees for work involving adults with incapacity and I am keen to hear your views on any advantages or disadvantages to that approach. I will start with Andy Sirel.

Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]

Assisted Dying for Terminally Ill Adults (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 13 May 2025

Marie McNair

Before I entered politics, I worked for 14 years as part of the nursing team at the St Margaret of Scotland hospice in Clydebank. It was an incredibly moving, but also immensely challenging, role. Caring for people at the end of their life is not an easy job by any means. However, it has instilled in me the fundamental belief that those at the end of their life deserve dignity and support. It instilled in me an understanding of the importance of compassionate and well-resourced palliative care. I want to see more focus and support being given to that.

Over the past year, I have met with constituents and stakeholders on both sides of the debate, listening carefully to their views. Although I respect constituents on both sides of the debate, I have decided that I cannot support the bill, for reasons that I will set out.

For many of the supporters of the proposal, it is about autonomy. However, regardless of any supported safeguards, the bill will have unintended consequences for society as a whole. As the Scottish Council on Human Bioethics stated:

“In an interactive society, making a choice about the value of a life ... means making a decision about the value of other lives.”

The bill would fundamentally change the relationship between patients and clinicians, influence culture and alter how we view ageing, illness and disability.

I believe that passing the bill would send a message that certain individuals’ lives are less valuable than others and that those individuals are considered a burden on society. That worry is articulated by disability organisations, which fear that the scope of the bill would quickly be expanded to include those with disabilities within the eligibility criteria—and with that can come coercion.

We risk creating an environment in which people feel pressure—however subtle—to choose death to spare others the burden of their care. If we look at other countries, such as Canada, we can see that health reports found that fear of being a burden and loneliness are high up among the top five reasons for people choosing medical assistance in dying.

I fully recognise that the bill focuses on

“mentally competent terminally ill eligible adults”,

but we fundamentally cannot guarantee with any certainty that the eligibility criteria will not be expanded in future years. We have seen that happen in Canada, Belgium and the Netherlands, where safeguards have been relaxed, widening access to more groups of people.