Chamber and committees

Many communities have completed their local place plans. With respect, I note that there is no mechanism for such plans to be adopted and for what communities want to happen to be brought to fruition. If local development plans are not going to be in place until 2028, there is an imbalance when it comes to how long communities might need to wait for any measures to be adopted or for feedback or direction from the local authority.

That is the feedback that I am getting from community councils and local communities. Their local place plans are already well advanced, but there is no communication from local authorities or the Scottish Government about when they will be adopted or about what parts of the local place plans will be included in the local development plan. There seems to be a bit of an imbalance. I am trying to ascertain how you will balance that out and how communities will be heard. How long will they have to wait before local authorities adopt local place plans?

How long will communities have to wait for the journey to be concluded?

The committee has heard evidence that overly rigid interpretation of NPF4 is potentially stifling development. Developers have stressed the importance of planning departments being properly resourced, local authorities being supported to adopt new LDPs within a good timeframe, and the chief planner continuing to give guidance to ensure that the objectives of NPF4 and LDPs are considered pragmatically, but also in the round. Evelyn Tweed made an important point about reviewing NPF4 to ensure that it is practical and that it is right for areas across Scotland.

The committee has heard evidence that the application of 20-minute neighbourhoods to remote and rural areas could stifle development or drive developers away. How do we overcome that? How do we encourage development and remove red tape so that development can happen in areas across the country?

Good morning. Evelyn Tweed asked about the minimum target of 25,000 new homes. The Scottish Government has a target: it is 110,000 affordable homes by 2032. Minister, you said that roughly 20,000 homes are being built each year. That is certainly not enough to achieve that target by 2032. In order for the Government to achieve its housing targets, what additional measures can be brought forward through NPF4, if that is to be the tool for getting those homes built?

Along with what happened at Grangemouth, the situation with Alexander Dennis represents a double blow to the people of Falkirk, and my thoughts are with them.

Following the loss of 400 jobs in Grangemouth, up to 1,600 jobs are now on the line as a result of Alexander Dennis being forced to relocate to Scarborough. When will the Scottish Government publish an economic impact assessment for the area?

Anything that can be done to try to increase the uptake is more than welcome, and I am sure that it would receive cross-party support. It is about protecting young women and girls from being diagnosed with cervical cancer later in life. No one wants that.

We heard from Alex Cole-Hamilton about transvaginal mesh issues, which have been raised many a time in the Parliament. Many MSPs in the chamber feel passionately about that issue and have driven it forward to get results. However, we have to keep driving it. We cannot stop now, because we need to ensure that anyone who has been impacted by the issue receives the support that they deserve because of what has happened to them.

Moving on to childcare-related issues—

On a point of consensus with Pam Duncan-Glancy, I am sure that my team also wishes that I did not have access to my social media accounts, because I see the abuse that I receive daily, and I have also seen the abuse that many other female MSPs receive daily. However, what we probably need to start doing is collectively calling it out, as that might make the Parliament a far better place than it is now.

I welcome the publication of the first annual statement on gender policy coherence in response to the National Advisory Council on Women and Girls. Members have spoken about healthcare, justice, childcare and the equality strategy. I want to dip into each of those topics in the time that I have.

I will start with healthcare, because there are a lot of areas of consensus, particularly in relation to plans around endometriosis and menopause. Any woman who has concerns regarding those issues should be able to be seen—and straight away. It is important that women have access to healthcare for those conditions as soon as possible.

Pam Duncan-Glancy raised an important issue about smear tests for disabled women. Too many of us take for granted being able to go for a smear test. As awkward as that is, disabled women have to add how they might feel about having to check with a GP to see whether they have the accessibility for them to come in and get their smear. That is on top of the worry and stress that naturally come with getting a smear test, which we have all felt at some point in our lives. If the Scottish Government can address that through conversations with GPs, that would be the right way forward to allow more women who have disabilities to access a smear test whenever they are called to receive one.

On the exchange that I had with Alex Cole-Hamilton about cervical cancer, that issue needs to be picked up by the Scottish Government. Children from the poorest areas are less likely to get an anti-cancer jab than those from affluent communities. Public Health Scotland has warned about the uptake in Scotland’s most deprived communities, which is 20 per cent lower than in more affluent areas. The Government needs to address that in the women’s health plan to ensure that, as well as addressing concerns for older women, we address concerns for younger women, get them on the right pathway and ensure that they are vaccinated.

Earlier, I said “PVG vaccine” instead of “HPV vaccine”, so I apologise for that.

I am not entirely sure whether I have time.

I had a members’ business debate on that exact issue. Wishaw is in my region and I believe passionately that women should have access to neonatal services as close to home as possible. I will always stand up for Lanarkshire mums who want to go to Wishaw to receive that service if they and their babies need it.

I will move on to childcare. I have already gone off on a tangent, as per my usual approach. Childcare was mentioned by a number of MSPs. We have 30 hours of free or funded childcare. The cabinet secretary said that that was the most generous offering in the United Kingdom, but the Scottish Government also promised to roll that out for children who are nine months and older, yet we have not seen any progress on that. It is incumbent on the Government to update Parliament on whether that is still its ambition or whether it is no longer its ambition to have free or funded childcare from nine months onwards. We are talking about getting our economy moving and getting women back into work if they want to do so, so that would be widely welcomed and, I am sure, supported by parties across the chamber.

Justice issues have been raised throughout the debate, but I will not have time to go through all of them. I will move to the equality strategy, about which members raised a lot of issues. We have issues in relation to widening pay gaps, and the misogyny bill has been dropped, which is yet another Scottish Government promise that has not been maintained in this parliamentary session. Some people will feel desperately let down that that bill is not coming to the Scottish Parliament in this session. Sharon Dowey was right that there is a lot of talk but not so much action on inequality issues. That is where improvements need to be made.

Paul O’Kane, Ben Macpherson and others talked about the attitudes of boys and young men and how we can improve outcomes for women by tackling issues such as violence against women and girls.

I will finish on a point that Tess White raised about sex and gender, which is important because we are talking about women and girls and sex-based rights. My point relates to the Supreme Court ruling on single-sex spaces. Last night, the Scottish Government issued a response, which said:

“The Scottish Government has been clear that we accept the Supreme Court judgment. We are reviewing policies, guidance and legislation potentially impacted by the judgment.”

It went on to say:

“The Scottish Government’s approach is aligned with that of the UK Government and Welsh Government in awaiting the EHRC’s revised statutory code of practice.”

I must say that that is a rather peculiar statement. In a meeting this morning, which my colleague Tess White mentioned, the EHRC was crystal clear that the Scottish Government can get on with it and that it should comply with the law now. We need to find out today why the Government is, in my view, unnecessarily delaying the implementation of the Supreme Court ruling.

I am not entirely sure that Alex Cole-Hamilton listened to what I said. The call, which came directly from the EHRC, took place this morning; MSPs were present and listened to what the EHRC said. The commission was clear that public bodies can get on with implementing the Supreme Court ruling, so why the delay? Why are we not getting on with that now?