Chamber and committees

When people say that politics is personal, this is what it means to me. I must say that it is really hard for me to write about something as important as this when I have spent my life as a neurodivergent person feeling misunderstood and worrying that it will happen again.

Years ago, a professional told me that my child could not be autistic because he made eye contact. At home, we barely slept. He climbed out of windows, escaped through cat flaps and ran across busy roads completely unaware of the danger. He climbed an eight-foot fence to escape from school. He dug holes into our walls in the house. I had tried everything and tried so hard, but nothing was working.

And then there was the judgment. I remember a parent saying to me when they were giving out birthday party invitations to the rest of his class and they missed him out, “That kid just needs a good hiding.” Imagine hearing that when you are already exhausted, worried, sick, and doing everything that you possibly can to try to advocate for your child.

Eventually, after a very long battle, he was diagnosed as being autistic and, later, having ADHD. That gave me access to a course—an early bird course, it was called at the time—where I met people who finally understood the life that we had been living without judging my parenting. One evening, I opened a book that I had borrowed from that course. It was “Martian in the Playground” by Clare Sainsbury. I read the first pages through tears, not because I recognised my child, but because I recognised myself. School, work and relationships—so much of my life finally made sense.

That is why diagnosis is not just a label. I have seen the difference when a teacher understands. My child seemed completely different from one school to the next, but he was the same child—it was just that the understanding was different. I have also sat in a meeting in a school, after diagnosis, and heard a teacher say to my child, “But that wasn’t your ADHD—that was just you.” I saw the educational psychologist peep up from her notes, scowling. That is the type of misunderstanding that we are battling, so I want people to know this: I know, I see you and I validate your experiences.

Imagine getting instructions that might as well be in another language, or getting work wrong at school and being told, “You’re not even trying.” Classroom observations matter, but they cannot become a barrier to any type of assessment. Teachers need training and specialist support, but we do not need legislation for mandatory training. I would like to see that implemented as soon as possible.

A right on paper is not enough if families cannot access it in practice. When a child is repeatedly sent home, who leaves work? Who cuts their hours? How does a parent hold down a job around that? We discuss getting parents into work and breaking cycles of poverty as though those are separate conversations. We must consider the adult who wants to work but struggles to organise tasks, judge time or complete applications. That can be due to executive dysfunction and not a lack of ambition. Do more complicated forms help? No. When we add in poverty, care experience and disability, the barriers only grow.

I have been on some prison visits lately where people told me about their ADHD, their drug use and how they ended up there. A Swedish study of nearly 150,000 people with ADHD associated medication with lower rates of substance misuse and criminal convictions. Tomorrow, we will debate alcohol and drug deaths, and that evidence belongs in that debate, too. When somebody reaches services in desperation, with depression, anxiety or eating disorders, are their neurodevelopmental needs being understood, too?

Dr Jason Lang made an analogy related to ASN in schools that has stuck with me. If 43 per cent of a supermarket’s customers could not reach the shelves, would it keep sending staff around with stepladders or would it redesign the shelves? We keep handing out individual adjustments to help people to survive systems that were never designed with them in mind. Sometimes the answer is to change the system. Clearer instructions, predictable processes and more accessible environments make things better for everybody.

If the Scottish Government wants to tackle drug deaths and alcohol harm, it must look at neurodivergence. If it wants to reduce crime, it must look at neurodivergence. If it wants to break cycles of poverty, improve attainment and help people to stay in work, it must look at neurodivergence. If it wants fewer people to reach mental health crisis, it must look at neurodivergence. I am not asking the Government to put its other priorities aside; I am asking it to understand that neurodivergence is a part of how it delivers them. As much as we are trauma informed, we must be neurodivergence informed in public services, in private workplaces and in how we write policy.

I understand why people want a bill, but I do not want a bill to be the be-all and end-all. It might be part of an answer—I just do not believe that it is the whole answer. People have explained the problem to us enough. The next stage has to be delivery, training, accessible routes to assessment, support through transitions, and stronger duties where the evidence tells us that they are needed. I will work across parties to do those things.

Before this parliamentary session ends, I want to see fewer children being sent home, fewer parents being forced out of work, fewer people reaching the point where they use drugs or alcohol to self-medicate for their distress, and fewer lives being pulled into the criminal justice system through the harm that can follow addiction. I want more people to get help before they reach crisis.

Understanding myself helped me to become a better mother and a stronger advocate for my children, and that journey brought me here. However, somebody who struggles just to get washed or to leave the house and then blames themselves for it deserves that understanding just as much as somebody who stands in this chamber. I found that understanding by chance in a book. Imagine what could change if that understanding was there from the beginning in our schools, our workplaces and every service that people turned to for help. It should not depend on chance for everyone.

We should keep the conversation on legislation going, but we must make progress on delivering for our neurodivergent population and hold services to account for the obligations that they are failing on now. Neurodivergent voices have told us what they need and it is time to take action.

Following last week’s decision on Jackdaw, which was welcomed by trade unions, Scottish Renewables has called for further action to support clean energy investment. SSE has also announced hundreds of skilled offshore wind jobs, including 400 in Scotland. What action is the Deputy First Minister taking to press the United Kingdom Government to remove the barriers to further renewables development, particularly transmission charging, so that we can deliver more skilled jobs for communities across Scotland?

Can the minister speak further on what work is under way to address the challenges around the sufficiency of foster care placements, and on how the Scottish Government is listening to the voices of those in the profession and those with lived experience to inform its approach?

I thank the member for his opening words. A member of my staff, Councillor Fatima Joji, has just messaged me to say that the earlier words of the member’s colleague Vic Currie were absolutely appalling and disgusting. Not only that, she said that his words make her afraid—afraid. Will the member absolutely disassociate himself from the words of his Reform colleague and the points that he made earlier?

I thank Iris Duane and congratulate her on bringing the debate to the chamber. Scotland should always be a country that celebrates our rich diversity and recognises our history, and I will always stand up for that. Those of us who are not black have a responsibility not only to challenge racism but also, and most importantly, to listen. We must hear those who experience it and let that shape what we do.

I wanted to do more listening than speaking, so I asked Councillor Fatima Joji, who is a member of my staff team, to help me with this speech, and she put a great deal of thought into it. Much of it will be her own words and I want to give her the credit that she deserves.

Fatima was born and raised in Scotland and still lives in the town where she grew up. Scotland is her home and I will not allow rhetoric that seeks to exclude her or our black Scottish communities, or to tell them that they cannot call themselves Scottish or that they must justify their place here. I have challenged, and will continue to challenge, such rhetoric in Parliament and beyond.

Fatima explained that being black and Scottish means that both parts of her identity belong together. Black history is a part of Scottish history, but it is not always taught or recognised in the way that it should be. For Fatima, black history month is about belonging and making sure that future generations grow up knowing that black people have always been a part of Scotland’s story and that they have every right to feel proud of being both black and Scottish. She also spoke about how Scotland and white allies, in particular, can honour black history month. She began with a phrase that we often hear: it is not enough not to be racist—we must be antiracist.

No country is immune to racism. It can be institutional and structural, manifesting through bias and prejudice and leading to unequal outcomes simply because of the colour of someone’s skin. Being antiracist means standing up for racial justice, because racism is not something that exists only in the past. It exists in the present, but it can be challenged, and black history month empowers us all to do that. It means challenging our own biases, educating ourselves and refusing to remain silent when we witness racism. It means dismantling the systems and structures that create and reinforce injustice and racial inequality. There is little more damaging to a society than division, and we can use this month to ask ourselves whether we are doing enough and what more we can do.

Black History Month Scotland reminds us that one month is not enough and that these stories remain largely absent from our history books. I want a Scotland that recognises the rich history and valuable contributions of people from the African and Caribbean diasporas in Scotland, but I want to stress something important. Our black communities should simply be able to be—they should not have to earn the right to be Scottish through extraordinary achievements or high-profile positions. Some work on zero-hours contracts; some work in our national health service; some run businesses, raise children and care about the bread-and-butter issues that affect us all. Being Scottish should not depend on extraordinary achievements or public recognition, or on anyone else’s approval. Black Scots are part of the fabric of our country and their place in Scotland should never be in question.

I hope that, one day, Councillor Fatima Joji will stand in the chamber as Fatima Joji MSP, delivering her own speech in her own words. We need more black voices in the Parliament, each bringing their own experiences, ideas and ambitions for Scotland’s future. I want to see a Scotland where racism is rooted out, where inequality is inexcusable and where injustice is intolerable.

18:03

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer.

I will not take advice on fisheries from a party whose top priority is stopping boats.

The offshore renewables industry supports thousands of jobs and is part of Scotland’s energy future, but fishing cannot simply be expected to fit around everything else. Fishermen must be involved early enough in marine planning to genuinely influence what happens. What happens after the fish comes ashore determines how much of that value stays in our communities.

I supported the 70 per cent Scottish landing requirement for mackerel and herring, but I know that catchers have concerns about price, delays and capacity. Businesses in my constituency have told me that longer-term certainty would allow them to invest, expand and employ more people locally, and I find that hard to ignore. If we want more of our catch landed here, Scotland has to be competitive. Our harbours need the capacity, processors need the infrastructure and businesses need practical help to take Scottish seafood into international markets so that more of its value can support local jobs. Young people also need proper training, safe working conditions and realistic routes to progress. That future needs investment.

As has been said, Scotland has more than 60 per cent of the UK’s fishing capacity, but it received under 8 per cent of the £360 million fishing and coastal growth fund. I want it on the record that if that fund were devolved, it would not have to be Barnettised. Agricultural funding has previously been devolved without being Barnettised. It is a political choice that could be rectified with the stroke of a pen, and I implore members to tell their leaders at Westminster to do that.

We cannot talk about fishing now without talking about Brexit. I understand why many fishermen voted for it. They were promised control and told that fishing would finally be prioritised. Instead, they faced more paperwork and barriers, and businesses lost easier access to labour. I do not blame fishermen for believing what they were promised. The politicians who made those promises should answer for what they delivered.

Underneath all of that is that our fishing interests go through the UK now, as they did then—Scotland had the same problem before Brexit. Scotland has never had a negotiating voice in its own right, and an industry that is of enormous importance to us has always had to sit within wider UK priorities. I want Scotland to represent those interests for itself. Independence would not make every negotiation easy, but the Government making Scotland’s case would be our Government, which is answerable here for the deal that it secures and the choices that it makes. I believe that long-term security for an industry that feeds people, supports communities and gives Scotland so much economic potential lies in the power of an independent Scottish fisheries industry.

16:37

My constituency of Banffshire and Buchan Coast is one of the most important fishing constituencies in Scotland, and I will not hear anything else about that.

Peterhead is the UK’s leading fishing port, with landings worth more than £341 million last year. Fraserburgh is Scotland’s largest shellfish port and one of the biggest in Europe. Along the coast, through Macduff and Buckie, we have harbours, processors, engineers, hauliers and businesses whose livelihoods are tied to what comes out of our seas.

We are an island nation that is surrounded by an extraordinary natural food resource. Fish is nutritious and high in protein, and many of the species that we catch compare very favourably with other forms of high-protein food in relation to being low on carbon emissions. In an increasingly uncertain world, food security must be part of our thinking about how fishing is protected and our ability to produce food for the longer term.

Before I go any further, I want to acknowledge the people who go out to sea to bring that food home. It is hard, skilled and dangerous work. In communities such as mine, there are families who know the terrible cost when somebody does not come home. We should never forget that. When we make decisions about the industry’s future, we should always remember it.

Over the past few years, I have listened to catchers, processors, harbour boards and businesses right along my coastal community. They do not always agree, and I do not always agree with them, but the need for stability and confidence about where the industry is going comes through consistently in all our conversations.

I thank Mark Simpson for that intervention, but I will not take lectures from a party whose London-based leader was the architect of Brexit, which was an unmitigated disaster for the fishing industry. The fact that Reform members were sitting giggling about that earlier is an absolute disgrace. They do not take into account the number of businesses that were lost after Brexit, so they should reflect on that. Also, I do not think—

Families tell us that children are being left without the support that they need, while waiting sometimes years for a diagnosis. Not having a diagnosis should not be a barrier to people accessing support throughout that time. What help can the Government give to local organisations to ensure that they are publicising the support that is available and to increase the provision of local community services for people with a learning disability, autism or neurodivergence who may require that support?

I do not regret that, because I do not think that the answer to improving food security is to create an energy security problem, or vice versa. Scotland needs to address both issues.