Chamber and committees

I begin by recognising the many women and men who have come forward to discuss deeply personal accounts of the life-changing and lifelong consequences that mesh surgery can cause. Reliving that trauma must be difficult, but it gives MSPs the opportunity to pause, reflect and review treatments that are offered to people across Scotland. I also recognise those who have campaigned vigorously to ensure that any procedure involving mesh is low risk and appropriate.

In all our considerations of the use of such devices, people’s health, safety and wellbeing must be our first concern. The petition that we are debating, if approved by this Parliament, would suspend the use of all surgical mesh and fixation devices. I have some sympathy towards those who submitted the petition to the petitions committee, given the serious implications that the use of transvaginal mesh has had for many women globally.

Mesh was previously used to treat stress urinary incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse in women. However, in 2014, a petition was submitted on behalf of the Scottish Mesh Survivors’ hear our voice campaign. We have all heard from women who have bravely told their harrowing stories about how they were told that they were just experiencing “women’s problems” and that there was nothing seriously wrong. Taking the time to read some of their accounts helped me to understand the distrust that women felt towards the Government and our NHS for not being believed.

It was right that the 2017 Scottish independent review of transvaginal mesh implants recommended stopping the surgery after concerns were raised by women who suffered debilitating, severe and painful consequences. Thankfully, there are now specialised services in Scotland for women who have experienced complications from mesh implant surgery, and the Scottish Government officially signed a contract that allows women to have painful mesh implants removed by a specialist surgeon in the United States free of charge. The deal allows NHS patients in Scotland to travel to Dr Veronikis’s clinic in Missouri for transvaginal mesh removal surgery. Earlier this year, a contract was also agreed with Spire Healthcare, where Professor Hashim Hashim operates, which gave women the option to go to Bristol for the surgery.

However, the points that Jackie Baillie raised in her speech were concerning, and I will not be the only MSP in the chamber today who wishes that the Government had acted sooner and more efficiently to support women who have had such surgery.

One takeaway from the whole debacle was that MSPs from across the chamber rallied together to ensure that mesh survivors not only had a clear route to treatment but were compensated if they had spent thousands of pounds of their own money to have their implants removed.

As my colleague Dr Sandesh Gulhane and others have articulated, there is more than one type of surgical mesh. With other kinds of mesh, such as that used for hernia, there appears to be evidence of issues arising that are similar to those that arose in relation to the use of transvaginal mesh. Potential complications include chronic pain, bowel obstruction, hernia recurrence and infection.

Given that those concerns have been raised, the need for data and evidence is essential when investigating the link between cause and treatment. For example, only a tiny percentage of hernia repairs involving mesh has resulted in mesh having to be removed. The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence found that post-operative complications from mesh were rare, so we need to be careful when looking at the use of mesh and any side-effects of having such surgery.

It is groundhog day. We have heard yet another statement in which the data is stacked against the Government, which has no meaningful solutions for improving education and the life chances of all children and young people. Questions must be asked about Scottish education reform funding. Gillian Hamilton, the chief executive of Education Scotland, has warned that it

“does not have capacity and/or capability to carry out this additional, very important work”,

which will have

“a significant detrimental impact on some key policy areas”,

including the Government’s flagship policy to close the

“poverty-related attainment gap”.

How serious is the Scottish Government about education reform?

Anyone experiencing any kind of pain should be treated with the utmost care, respect and dignity. Any patient who approaches any service in the NHS should expect that. I agree with Emma Harper that we should always look at those scenarios and make sure that we are moving in a positive and forward-thinking direction.

Moving on to the petition, the foundation behind the campaign is that the petitioners believe that the use of surgical mesh can lead to cancer. The petition also calls for mesh to be used only in life-and-death circumstances and for a full review of how surgical mesh is used. That is why I and other members have outlined the importance of evidence-based arguments. My colleague Sandesh Gulhane mentioned that earlier. Official sources such as the US Food and Drug Administration have said that they are sceptical of mesh leading to cancer. More evidence is needed, therefore, before we consider the petition further.

Having said that, I will not speak against any individual’s personal experience of mesh complications. However, I believe that all avenues must be investigated, should someone experience any of the issues that have been identified by transvaginal and hernia mesh victims.

I want to mention hospital waiting lists, because they will undoubtedly impact people who are experiencing any symptoms that could come with mesh surgery. At present, many people cannot see a GP, be seen at accident and emergency within four hours or get through to NHS 24 on the phone. That, combined with budget cuts and NHS staff shortages, is deepening the crisis that has emerged in our healthcare service. If the Government does not get to grips with hospital waiting times, people will continue to suffer unnecessarily due to the pressures on our NHS and the lack of action from the Government.

Conservative members will continue to hold the Scottish National Party-Green Government to account to ensure that improvements are made to our healthcare service.

In 2022, there were more than 350 fewer primary school teachers than there were in 2021, and there were fewer teachers from the teacher induction scheme teaching in their post-probation year than at any time since the scheme began.

Key to restoring our education system to its world-class status is reducing class sizes. Why is the Government cutting teacher numbers when school pupils have faced so much disruption over the past three years?

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. My app froze. I would have voted no.

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. My laptop froze, so I am unsure whether my vote has been recorded. Can I please confirm whether it has been?

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I am concerned by the scheduling of business in this Parliament. As a new mum, I already struggle to find childcare during regular work hours, let alone until late at night. Last week’s business proposal said that we would be here until 11:30 tonight, so I made the best arrangement I possibly could. Today’s revision could mean that we will be here until late tonight and also tomorrow.

First, in line with my colleague Jeremy Balfour’s point of order, I ask whether any existing parliamentary processes include impact assessments of the effect of the scheduling of business on new parents. I ask that because, at the end of the previous session of Parliament, several members stood down citing the impossibility of working here while raising a young family. I fear that matters are becoming worse.

Secondly, is it your understanding that it would be possible within parliamentary processes for this week’s consideration of stage 3 amendments to have been split into three sessions, with the final debate on the Gender Recognition Reform Bill being moved into the first week of work in January, which currently has a blank business slot on Tuesday 10?

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I seek your guidance once more. In the run-up to the establishment of the Scottish Parliament, much was made of its proposed family-friendly principles. As it stands, the Parliament has today spent almost 10 hours debating the Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill. Many MSPs, including me, have young families and they will have had to make last-minute arrangements for childcare. If the Parliament is to conduct itself in such a way, Holyrood can no longer define itself as a family-friendly Parliament. My fear, as referenced earlier, is that I will not be the last MSP to state that late-night sittings are incompatible with working here while raising a young family.

Can the Presiding Officer advise whether late-night sittings are now standard, or whether amendments can be voted on over multiple dates, with the final debate taking place in January to better accommodate sitting hours?

It is a yes/no answer, Presiding Officer.

I said that I would take the minister in a little while.

A business will not survive if it is not able to identify and correct issues relating to its model, and I do not see why the Scottish Government should be exempt from acknowledging the problems that the PVI sector experiences daily. It is not as if the issue is not reported time and again in the press. As recently as this week, The Herald reported a case study of a childminder losing their income because of the need to complete paperwork, as the sector is in crisis. She revealed that she is losing in excess of £600 a month as she has to commit a full day each week to complete paperwork—time that she is not paid for. The childminder blamed the excessive level of lost income on the bureaucracy that I mentioned earlier, and said that it is having a huge impact on her business. She said:

“We can’t do paperwork when we’ve got children in our care ... I absolutely love the job I do. I love watching the children develop and being a key part of that but what I am in effect doing is paperwork for a job I love, but I’m not being paid for it.”

That childminder is not alone.

What has become clear to me is that—as we heard from Liz Smith, who gave the timeline of failings—the Scottish Government has been in power for so long that it has lost the will and desire to fix its failing policies.

The SNP often tells Opposition politicians that we do not come to the table with any solutions. Therefore, for the benefit of the cabinet secretary and others, I will offer solutions that will make the 1,140 policy fair for local authorities and the PVI sector. I am happy to give way to the minister on this point, with regard to the fixing of the funding formula. Will she commit to a review of the funding formula to make it fair for the PVI sector and local authority nurseries?