Chamber and committees

I am conscious that I have spoken many times today, and members will be relieved that this will be the final time. By this point, there is little to be said that has not already been said, but I make no apologies for repeating myself.

I am grateful that we finished stage 3 today as we started stage 1—with respect, candour and the best interests of those using services front and centre.

It cannot be said too often that women’s access to healthcare is not up for debate. Women who seek to access a very personal form of healthcare should not be judged or condemned by strangers. The people—most of whom are female—who provide those services to women should not go to work expecting or fearing that they will be confronted or called names.

I introduced the bill because women and staff deserve abortion services that are provided with the same privacy and respect as any other piece of medical care.

I note that the bill has been explicitly drafted so that activities that support abortion could amount to an offence in exactly the same way as activities that oppose abortion. That underlines the central point that medical services should not be a battleground. Away from the places that provide abortion services, people can continue to debate the topic of abortion. Within 200m of premises that provide abortion services, women and staff will be protected. As I said at the beginning of the debate, the protections are limited, but the benefits are huge.

I hope that, while abortion rights in some parts of the world are going backwards, Scotland can be seen as cause for hope.

I want to use most of my time to thank those who made the bill a reality. As Maggie Chapman did, I thank Clare Bailey for blazing a trail for us all to follow.

I also thank all the organisations that have been involved in and championed the bill from the start.

It cannot be overstated how instrumental Back Off Scotland and the British Pregnancy Advisory Service have been in getting the bill to where it is.

Other supporters include the Royal College of Nursing, the Scottish Trades Union Congress women’s committee, the Humanist Society Scotland, the royal colleges, the British Medical Association, Abortion Rights Scotland, Engender and the University and College Union.

Clinical staff and their unions not only spoke up about the impact of activity outside their services but took time to answer questions about clinical care, access routes and service locations to inform our understanding. Their time, effort and obvious passion for helping women, whatever their circumstances, has been hugely appreciated.

To colleagues from all parties across the chamber who provided encouragement and support from the outset, I have been more grateful than they know.

I thank my wonderful Green colleagues for their support, for substituting for me at committee and the Parliamentary Bureau when I needed to do other things and, in general, for being the cheerleaders that they are.

I give a huge thank you to the current and former ministers for women’s health. Not only have they been an incredible support to the bill, they have been wonderful friends and have encouraged me and shared their experience. I absolutely have a new-found respect for ministers as a result of this process.

To all the First Ministers in this parliamentary session who have given their support and the support of the Government to the bill, I give a huge thank you. Their support and expertise have been invaluable to the progress of the bill.

That leads me nicely to one of the biggest thank yous. Bills are never by any means a solo effort. MSPs are just the ones who are privileged enough to be allowed to guide them through. The real heroes are the officials and the staff teams who help to make them a reality. The abortion policy team has been incredible. Team members have taken me under their wing and delivered above and beyond on everything that we have asked for. The team answered all the daft questions that I had and poured its all into the bill.

My office team and the wider Green group staff, both past and present, have been second to none. They are our squad of cheerleaders, my fairest critics and the ones who make sure that everything else gets done. I thank them for all their work. For their efforts, too, I thank all the staff teams of parties across the chamber who have moved meetings and supported their MSPs.

My second-to-last thank you has to go to my family, who have put up with listening to me talk about the bill endlessly for the past two and a half years and who have always had my back.

The biggest thank you has to go to those who came forward to share their experiences outside abortion clinics, even when it meant reliving incredibly difficult and painful experiences. I hope that they all know that the bill exists because of them. Maya Angelou said:

“Each time a woman stands up for herself ... she stands up for all women.”

That is exactly what each one of them did by speaking out.

I urge members to honour that and to stand up for women by voting yes to the bill at stage 3. [Applause.]

Good morning, everyone. We have heard continually about regional variability in the implementation of SDS, and the care experience survey that was published on 28 May reveals significant variability in the satisfaction and experiences of people who receive care.

What specific measures are you all taking to address regional disparities in social care? What best practices can be shared in an efficient manner by IJBs and HSCPs that are doing better than others?

How, functionally, has the evaluation and monitoring that you do changed with the change in approach? Are the evaluation and monitoring now much more conversational in relation to some of the softer objectives, rather than getting information on the number of care sessions that have been delivered and so on? Does that help to drive and inform other pieces of innovation and tweaks to the system in East Dunbartonshire?

What is the staff feedback on that change in how you do evaluation and monitoring? Is there good, back or indifferent feedback from the staff who undertake the evaluation and assessment?

Do any of the witnesses who are joining us online want to come in?

I want to build on the questions that the convener asked about training and awareness in local authorities. A lot of best practice guidance has been written over the past 10 years. What are the panel’s thoughts on the quality of the guidance, and on how it is or is not being used in local authorities? There is a lot of nodding going on. I will pick Donald Macleod first, if that is okay.

How do we balance the need for accountability and the need to capture high-quality data, and how can we have flexibility to adapt and improve indicators and targets? I take on board that many of the targets are not being hit at the moment. How can we use the data so that things are more realistic for people?

Is there any data that we should be capturing to inform the targets and indicators that we are not capturing now? If there is, what data should the Government capture?

The point about how the guidance is used and how it can be embedded is important. National consistency always comes up in relation to self-directed support. Which of the activities in the improvement plan will or will not help to address national consistency, and should or could any aspects of SDS be standardised nationally?

Good morning, panel. Audit Scotland has highlighted that waiting time standards

“do not provide a comprehensive picture of postpandemic service performance or recovery.”

What additional measures or indicators could offer a more comprehensive assessment of healthcare performance and recovery post pandemic?