Chamber and committees

I hope that the cabinet secretary will accept that the waiting times for payment decisions are unacceptably long—they are more than double the waiting time in England and Wales. That cannot be something that we should accept. Does she agree with that?

I am saying to the cabinet—

I congratulate Paul Sweeney on securing what is an important debate, and I thank him for his tireless campaigning on the issue. Most of us in the Parliament agree that the UK presides over an asylum system that treats asylum seekers inhumanely.

Earlier this week, I visited the Muthu Glasgow River hotel in Erskine, which currently provides accommodation for around 160 asylum seekers. From the discussions that I had there, it was clear that travel costs remain a major financial burden for asylum seekers. Under current Home Office rules, as we know, asylum seekers are prevented from working, even though many have skills that we need. At Erskine, they receive a payment of £9.50 to cover essential costs, including travel. As Paul Sweeney and others have indicated, many at other sites receive far less.

It was clear that a lot of work has been done in Erskine. The staff have worked with Renfrewshire Council to ensure that young asylum seekers at the hotel are provided with concessionary bus travel under the scheme for people who are under 22 years old. That allows about 10 asylum seekers at the hotel to have bus passes, but that means that the remainder—the majority—are ineligible for any concessionary travel schemes that are currently offered.

Given the hotel’s location in Erskine, asylum seekers there often have to rely on bus travel to reach other parts of Renfrewshire or greater Glasgow—for example, to go to college. They often need to travel to appointments with their lawyers or to access volunteering and—as I said—education, but also to connect with members of their community who live further afield. We need to be aware of the language issues, as many asylum seekers do not yet have good English. Bus fares in the Erskine area can be as high as £5.20 per day, which is more than half the £9.50 payment that asylum seekers are given.

The recent travel choices trial that took place in Glasgow earlier this year highlights the positive impact that free bus travel can have on asylum seekers. It is clear that free bus travel for asylum seekers can work, and it is crucial that we encourage integration from day 1. I would be interested if the minister could outline any work that has been done on costings for such a scheme, to enable further discussion. It is important that the Parliament uses the powers that are available to us to ensure that asylum seekers in Scotland are treated as humanely as possible.

I fully appreciate that everybody on the panel plays a particular role within the judicial system and that they did not create the system as it looks. However, I would just say, speaking particularly as an Opposition member of this committee, that our role is to ask whether the bill will make any difference at all. Everybody on the committee—and this picks up on what Rona Mackay has said—has had many dozens of conversations about how the system is not working for those who are victims of rape, in particular, but other offences, too.

It has been said quite a number of times now that we have an adversarial system. The big question, then, is: is it possible to make changes to an adversarial system to deal with some of the genuine concerns that have been raised repeatedly, or do we need to look at a more inquisitorial model? If changes have already been made, what do they look like? If they do not seem to be resulting in a significant belief that things have changed substantially, would it be possible to make what would be relatively minor changes to address some of the genuine concerns that have been raised with us?

Does anyone on the panel have a view on that? Stuart, do you want to come in?

I welcome the Scottish Government’s response to the crisis. Given that aid is currently not getting into Gaza, how does the minister expect the money that has already been committed to be used? What work is being done to look at further support that could be given, in light of the siege and the worsening conditions?

We welcome the fund, which we hope will help many women. However, organisations such as Rape Crisis and Women’s Aid highlight other barriers that women face when looking to escape from abusive partners. Those include the lack of available accommodation and the fact that housing benefit rates are sometimes not high enough to cover the cost of a refuge. Will the Scottish Government seek to explore ways to improve the availability of safe housing for women who are experiencing domestic abuse?

The First Minister announced a freeze to council tax without consulting local authorities or his own Cabinet. Council tax is clearly a regressive tax. In the past, the Scottish Government has spoken about having a cross-party working group to look at alternatives, but that group has never been convened. What work is the Scottish Government doing to look at a replacement for council tax or alternative funding streams for local government?

I start by paying tribute to the tireless campaigning of mesh-injured women. It is their campaigning that has been the driving force for much of the progress that we have seen on transvaginal mesh. The independent reviews, the creation of the complex mesh surgical service and the reimbursement scheme are all testament to their efforts.

That is one of the reasons why it is so disappointing that many of those women continue to experience so many problems in accessing the medical care that they need. Some have shared publicly their experience in dealing with GPs who still lack basic knowledge and understanding of the complications arising from transvaginal mesh implants. Others have spoken about the long referral times in order to access care and support at the complex mesh surgical service. Women who have been referred to the complex mesh surgical service have also described the lack of a full range of treatment and support options, and women who have had mesh surgically removed have spoken about the lack of aftercare support in relation to their mental health and the trauma that they have endured.

According to Professor Britton, whose initial report on the issue was published back in 2018, the Scottish Government has yet to act on her recommendations. That has been said a number of times in this debate. In her second report, which was published earlier this year, Professor Britton made a series of recommendations to improve the healthcare experience of mesh-injured women. Those recommendations include improving support mechanisms for women who wish to raise concerns with their GP following transvaginal mesh surgery, the creation of a mesh register to keep track of surgeries that have been carried out, and putting patient consent at the heart of healthcare. Labour urges the minister to come forward with recommendations and to deliver. We hope that she is able to give a commitment on that today.

My own office is still receiving new cases from mesh-injured women who are suffering complications and getting in touch. They are currently not getting adequate support from their GP, and they are unaware of the complex mesh surgical service. It is clear that the Scottish Government must do more to support those who are injured and that the issue continues to have an impact on too many lives even after a decade of campaigning by those affected.

The minister will be aware of the work that I have been doing with my constituents Roseanna Clarkin and Lauren McDougall on surgical mesh that is used to treat hernias. Informed consent has been discussed in the debate. Roseanna gave me permission to say that she was told that pig skin, and not the mesh that was used, would be used in her procedure. Such surgical mesh differs from transvaginal mesh, but many people are now suffering from similar complications and life-altering injuries to those that were observed in women who were implanted with transvaginal mesh.

Roseanna and Lauren have a petition before Parliament that calls for an independent review of the use of such mesh and for its use by NHS Scotland to be suspended pending the outcome of that review. I am grateful to the Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee for its on-going work on the petition. I know that many of that committee’s members were involved in the initial petitions on transvaginal mesh and recognise the parallels in the experiences of those who have been implanted with surgical mesh to treat hernias.

Despite years of campaigning, Roseanna and Lauren have found the Scottish Government unwilling to engage or failing to take their concerns seriously. The same disregard for the lived experiences of mesh-injured people delayed progress on addressing issues that related to transvaginal mesh. I fear that we are at risk of making the same mistake with surgical mesh that is used to treat hernias.

I therefore very much welcome the fact that the minister recently agreed to meet my constituents and me in the coming weeks to discuss the issue. The need for an urgent independent review could not be clearer, and I hope that the minister will give that further serious consideration.

I previously submitted freedom of information requests to every health board across Scotland in an attempt to establish the scale of the problem with surgical mesh that is used to treat hernias. Many health boards did not hold the requested information or did not respond, but the health boards that did provide information showed the scale of the problem. In NHS Ayrshire and Arran, 8 per cent of patients who were implanted with surgical mesh to treat hernias said that they had complications, and the figure in NHS Lanarkshire was 10 per cent.

I very much look forward to hearing the minister’s response to my points.

Gordon MacRae has already spoken about reprioritisation. You will be aware that the medium-term financial strategy analysis highlighted a funding gap for the Scottish Government. In the light of that, how should the Scottish Government respond, and how should it prioritise its budget?