Chamber and committees

Does Rachael Hamilton agree that, with rent controls on top of such measures, it will tend to be smaller landlords who will leave the sector? In rural areas in particular, the measures will not allow people to utilise the homes for the local rural economy, which is very important.

What work has been undertaken to show that the period should be five years? One of the main reasons why stakeholders are concerned about permanent rent controls is the lack of data analysis and work in that field, so we do not know exactly what the impacts will be in Scotland. What impact assessments did the Scottish Government carry out before arriving at the period of five years?

Ross Greer has raised a really important point. It has been 15 months since the findings in question were published, and I note, too, that the stage 1 report of the Housing (Scotland) Bill was published on 14 November 2024. In both, concerns about these issues from students, student bodies and student representatives feature heavily.

Basically, we are collectively saying that progress has been very slow. I, too, am concerned that if these amendments are not at least considered, there might not be an opportunity to legislate to help to protect students. The minister needs to take the matter seriously and I hope that he will conclude that he will work with members on some of these issues and tease things out before stage 3.

Absolutely—but, again, that issue is in the Scottish Government’s bundle of issues that are too hard and too difficult to sort out that we have been dealing with for many years. I do not believe that we have sufficient time to examine what council tax reform would look like. As I said, the principle may well be supported. However, there needs to be a wider discussion about what that would look like and what the party positions would be. Legislation would need to be brought forward by the Government and parties would need to make their own considerations following that wider piece of work. I do not mean to take away from the work that has already been undertaken and the assessments that were concluded.

I will leave my comments there, other than to say that amendment 132 is intended to be a probing amendment on the LBTT.

Amendment 427 seeks to insert a part called

“Student residential tenancies: rent variation instigated by landlord’s notice”,

and a section called

“Landlord’s power to increase rent”.

Amendments 427 to 439 all relate to a similar issue. They seek to bring student residential tenancies and purpose-built student accommodation into line with private residential tenancies regarding the landlord’s power to increase rent and the protocol to be followed. As I have described, they are part of a wider group of amendments whose purpose is to include PBSA when dealing with the determination of rent in the First-tier tribunal. I believe that my colleague Edward Mountain is seeking to bring those amendments back at stage 3, so it would be helpful to hear what the minister thinks about amendments 427 to 439.

Edward Mountain’s amendment 407 proposes a different approach to the tenancy deposits of students who are non-UK domiciled from that which we have just heard about from my colleague Maggie Chapman. In my view, we are facing huge issues when it comes to not only student accommodation but the ability of students who move across Scotland or the UK to find that accommodation. Amendment 407 sets out that landlords who let to overseas students without a UK guarantor should be able to increase the deposit to

“three times the monthly rent”.

Again, that is to secure accommodation for students who are moving across the UK in order to find a university place and accommodation close by as well.

On the amendments that my colleague Graham Simpson has set out, I agree that amendments in relation to students must be included in the bill. It is evident from the committee’s stage 1 report that students have not been front and centre in the bill. However, we are experiencing so many different issues in relation to students who are trying to find good accommodation and affordable rents that we must seek to improve the bill in that area.

We knew about the concerns previously. Whistleblowers at NHS Lothian raised concerns about staff shortages at a maternity unit last year, and an investigation that was launched back in 2024 found that there has been a toxic relationship between managers and midwives. One midwife, who remained anonymous, spoke to STV News last year and said:

“Management didn’t listen to staff concerns—we’d say we’re short staffed and they’d say it was fine.”

I imagine that that will not be the only case of such relationships between managers and midwives in a health board. How do we correct that culture to improve relationships between managers and midwives and encourage whistleblowing, should there be concerns?

To bring some common sense back to the chamber, I echo what Sue Webber said in her opening remarks. The SNP has indeed declared war on Scotland’s motorists. Whether it be low-emission zones, roads crumbling away with potholes being unfilled or proposed reductions in speed limits, the SNP is making life more difficult for people who choose to own a car.

I understand what the minister is saying. We are talking about how the implementation is going to be carried out—a lot of boards are involved, and various different people are being appointed to positions to carry it out. However, this is what parents need to know. If the Government continues with the downgrading of neonatal services and parents have to travel up to three hours to get to Aberdeen, if that is where they need to go, will there be a room for them to stay overnight with their babies, so that they can be close by should anything happen? If the answer is no, we should not be going for the downgrade.

Regarding the points that Jackie Baillie raised in relation to three or five units under the best start model, we have, again, to ask the question: why was the award-winning neonatal department at Wishaw general not included in the redesign?

Before I begin my remarks, I take the opportunity to thank the team at Bliss Scotland for working with me to lodge the motion in Parliament.

I first raised issues surrounding the best start new model of neonatal care back in September 2023. News had broken of the intention to downgrade Wishaw general hospital’s neonatal department, in my region. That provoked a strong backlash from communities in Lanarkshire, especially from families who had received care and support from the award-winning team at the hospital.

A campaign group, led by the Wishaw neonatal warriors, has said that the plans would be “catastrophic” as expectant mums and their babies will need to travel to other hospitals to receive specialist care. The online petition has now surpassed 25,000 signatures, which is testament to the strength of feeling against this ill-thought-out decision.

At the time, I warned the Minister for Public Health and Women’s Health that

“Lanarkshire mums ... are the feisty type”,

and said that I knew that they would continue to fight against the downgrade

“every step of the way.”—[Official Report, 20 September 2023; c 98.]

They will continue to have my support, as I do not believe that Government ministers have truly considered the lasting impact of this decision on parents and their newborn babies, nor does the national health service have the adequate or sustained staffing levels to achieve the new model of neonatal care.

The best start model was first introduced in 2017, yet, eight years on, the new model has not been fully implemented and the resources that are needed to implement it safely while providing support to families have not been delivered in full. There remains great uncertainty over when or how full implementation of the neonatal model, as confirmed by the minister in July 2023, will take place. That is simply not good enough.

One in seven babies in the United Kingdom require some level of neonatal care after birth, and the care that they receive is vital to their long-term health. Approximately 5,200 babies are admitted to neonatal units in Scotland each year, and the care that they receive is often life-saving, but it can also be deeply traumatic for babies and their families. Babies, who have just opened their eyes for the first time, not only are adapting to their new surroundings but are exposed to stress and pain as a result of requiring additional care.

One of the main issues that I wish to raise concerns facilities for parents. I have just mentioned how deeply traumatising neonatal care is for parents and babies, yet, moments after giving birth, mums are routinely separated from their babies for extended periods, as most hospitals do not provide sufficient facilities to enable parents to stay overnight. That is undoubtedly detrimental to the health of not just the newborn baby, but of worried parents, who just want to be close so that they can comfort their child. The lack of that early contact can disrupt bonding and heighten stress, with an impact on both emotional wellbeing and physical development such as breastfeeding initiation.

Why, therefore, do we not have overnight accommodation for parents on neonatal wards? It is not easy for parents having to travel long distances to stay with their baby in a hospital overnight, especially when more than one child is involved. Indeed, the Bliss families kept apart campaign in Scotland found that for one in every 10 babies who need to stay overnight on a unit, there is only one room for a parent to stay with them. In 2025, that is scandalous.

Alternative arrangements are considered, but that usually comes at a cost to parents, who might not be able to afford to stay in a nearby hotel. There appear to be no solutions to provide parents with the reassurance that they will be able to stay by their newborn’s side. Regardless of whether the Scottish Government continues with what I feel is the wrong move in downgrading neonatal departments across Scotland, it must still ensure that there is overnight accommodation to enable parents to stay with their babies. Otherwise, it is willingly advocating for the sickest newborn babies to be separated from their parents. That would be not only morally wrong, but unforgivable, should any parent learn of a deterioration in their baby’s health without being close by.

Therefore, I call on the minister to commit today to ensuring that every hospital that is currently specialising in neonatal care has the appropriate accommodation for parents. That is essential for any new model of neonatal care. I cannot believe that we are even having this discussion today—it is just basic common sense.

The implementation of the best start model recommendations in the report “The Best Start—A Five-year Forward Plan for Maternity and Neonatal Care in Scotland” has been painfully slow. Even if people do not agree with all of those recommendations, the fact is that families who might be affected in the future—and, critically, the staff working in neonatal services departments across Scotland—deserve to know how long the new model will take to implement. If the Scottish Government is truly committed to providing high-quality care to the sickest babies, it needs to get a move on.

Ministers cannot continue to bury their heads in the sand over the downgrading of neonatal services. Regardless of whatever evidence they say has been produced, it is clear that communities are against the move, and ministers have ignored the fact that receiving care further from home can reduce parents’ ability to be partners in their baby’s care. In addition, ministers cannot overlook the need to ensure that overnight accommodation is provided to parents so that they can always be with their babies.

The minister must set out what the Government sees as essential criteria in the best start model, including adequate staffing provision, and the timescale for full implementation. Uncertainty causes alarm, and this debate provides an opportunity for the Scottish Government to outline those next steps today.

In my previous contribution on this topic, I said that the reason that I feel so passionately about the issue

“is because I am a mum.”—[Official Report, 20 September 2023; c 96.]

I will continue to push the Scottish Government to improve neonatal services across Scotland.

Oh, this will be good.