Chamber and committees

I will pick up a point that Marion Davis made. Does the increased focus on parents affect the scale of provision for other groups, such as young people and disabled people, or the way that they are treated?

Keith Robson, do you want to come in?

I am grateful for the opportunity to appear before the committee again.

I met both petitioners yesterday. Roseanna Clerkin is personally affected, as one of the individuals who has suffered from debilitating chronic pain and life-altering injury after undergoing a mesh procedure. Lauren McDougall’s mother, who has now passed away, was also affected, and I know that the committee has received testimonies from many other individuals who have been affected.

As the committee knows, the mesh used in hernia operations is different to transvaginal mesh, but many of the issues are similar, and they affect both men and women. However, there is a lack of data on the extent of the problem. That is why the petitioners are asking for an independent review; they want that data to be gathered, and the use of surgical mesh and fixation devices to be suspended until such a review has been concluded.

I have submitted freedom of information requests to every health board in Scotland, because I wanted to know the number of patients who were treated for hernias using surgical mesh and who had been readmitted to hospital following complications that arose from mesh. Most health boards did not provide information, but some did respond. NHS Ayrshire and Arran revealed that 8 per cent of all patients who were implanted with mesh to treat a hernia in its hospitals were subsequently readmitted due to complications arising from the mesh, while NHS Lanarkshire said that the figure was 10 per cent.

That data suggests that the petitioners are right to highlight the need for a review to explore the issue further, yet the Scottish Government continues to refuse to engage with them—indeed, the minister and the former minister refused to meet with the petitioners directly. Given that lack of engagement with the petitioners by Scottish ministers, I urge the committee to consider asking the Cabinet Secretary for NHS Recovery, Health and Social Care to appear before the committee and give evidence so that we can consider the issues further.

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I could not get connected. I would have voted no.

I welcome anything that is done to alleviate the current situation, but, as the cabinet secretary well knows, islanders on Arran continue to have significant problems. However, I was focusing on a very specific issue that has been raised by islanders, who are asking that priority be given to essential goods such as food and to postal services, because there are repeated problems with such essentials when ferries are cancelled. I wrote to the cabinet secretary and her predecessors about the issue, and I suspect that others have done so.

CalMac’s socioeconomic report from 2020 showed that its services generated over £227 million in turnover and had a footprint of more than £350 million. A 2020 North Ayrshire Council and Fraser of Allander Institute report estimated that, for each day of ferry operation, there is a contribution of, on average, just under £170,000 to Arran’s economy. Of course, that figure will be greater now.

There is absolutely no doubt that functioning lifeline ferry services have a significant impact on the economies of island communities—that cannot be overestimated. Tourism businesses estimate that they lose tens of thousands of pounds every time one of the two ferries serving Arran is diverted to support services elsewhere.

Labour’s motion insists that the Scottish Government establish a resilience fund to help businesses that are affected by CalMac cancellations. Islanders are in this situation because of the decisions of politicians, which have meant that we have not procured the vessels needed for many years. I hope that Parliament will support the motion.

I am grateful for the opportunity to speak, particularly on behalf of my constituents on the Clyde islands of Arran and Cumbrae, who, like thousands of others, are regularly impacted by the on-going ferry crisis, which is causing chaos.

As we all know, when a ferry breaks down on a lifeline route, it affects islanders’ ability to attend hospital appointments, work, funerals and a wide range of other commitments on the mainland, as well as others’ ability to visit the island. The declining resilience of CalMac ferries has an impact on almost every aspect of island life and on the economies of island communities. It has a disproportionate impact on those producing goods with short shelf lives and on those trying to buy or sell such goods, such as food.

Over the festive period, many constituents were in touch with me—and, no doubt, with others in the chamber—about the empty food shelves in shops on Arran due to ferry cancellations. Unfortunately that is becoming a regular occurrence. Constituents on Cumbrae have been in touch about problems with postal services, as well as many other things, as a result of the problems with the ferry service there.

Significant problems have been caused on Arran and Cumbrae by the failure of CalMac to give priority to essential goods such as food.

As I have indicated, I do not plan to press amendment 23 to the vote. However, I fear that this is not an issue that will go away, because the injuries that are suffered by the people who are affected are significant. The minister is, of course, the decision maker in this matter. I look forward to engaging further with her on the issue, and I strongly urge her to meet campaigners and to give further consideration to these matters.

Amendment 23, by agreement, withdrawn.

Section 12—Power to require information

I lodged amendment 23 having worked with campaigners who are suffering from debilitating chronic pain and life-altering injury after undergoing a mesh procedure.

Members will be aware of previous debates about transvaginal mesh and the detrimental impact that it has had on many lives. The mesh that is used in procedures such as hernia operations is different, but a significant number of people who have had hernia mesh procedures are experiencing health issues that are similar to those that were faced by women who were implanted with transvaginal mesh.

I have been contacted by a number of women and men who are affected. However, the lack of data means that we cannot establish the true scale of the issue. I have tried to gather data on the issue by submitting freedom of information requests to every health board in Scotland. I wanted to know the number of patients with a hernia who were treated with surgical mesh and who were subsequently readmitted to hospital because of complications arising from the mesh. Most health boards did not provide that information, but those that did supplied data that is concerning. NHS Ayrshire and Arran revealed that 8 per cent of all patients with a hernia who were treated with surgical mesh were subsequently readmitted to hospital because of complications arising from the mesh. In NHS Lanarkshire, that figure rose to 10 per cent.

Campaigners such as my constituents Roseanna Clarkin and Lauren McDougall have sought meetings with successive ministers to discuss an independent review of the use of surgical mesh and fixation devices in the national health service. So far, ministers have refused to meet those campaigners or to recognise the need for an independent review. I hope that my probing amendment will enable the minister to reconsider the issues and the need for a meeting, and to look at the case for an independent review.

Amendment 23 would require the patient safety commissioner to undertake an investigation into the use of surgical mesh within the first year of their appointment. The purpose of the investigation would be threefold: it would establish the scale of use of surgical mesh to treat hernias; it would provide data on the number of patients with a hernia that was treated using mesh who have subsequently been readmitted to hospital because of complications arising from the mesh; and it would outline the number of complaints that health boards have received from patients about complications arising from mesh and the details of those complications. The patient safety commissioner would then be expected to reach a conclusion on whether NHS Scotland should suspend the use of surgical mesh to treat hernias.

I do not intend to press amendment 23 to a vote today, but I will listen carefully to what the minister says. I hope that she will engage with people who have been affected, look into the issues further and explore the need for an independent review.

I move amendment 23.

Yes, I believe that, for many prisoners, and for women prisoners in particular, it would be better to spend the considerable amount of money that it costs to incarcerate them on interventions that might be less costly and more effective.

The new establishments will house only a minority of women prisoners unless we significantly reduce the overall numbers of women in custody in Scotland. We know that, overall, Scotland’s prison population is the highest in Europe, and that our remand figures are also significantly higher than those in other European countries. That is the case in both the men’s estate and the women’s estate: the remand rate in the men’s estate is currently around 29 per cent to 30 per cent, and the latest figure that we were given in relation to the remand rate for women’s prisoners is higher than that, at 39 per cent.

If we look at the pattern of offences, we can see that women account for different kinds of convictions from men, and we see relatively higher proportions of convictions for crimes such as shoplifting and fraud among the female prison population. It is fair to say that most women prisoners present less risk to society. However, obviously, they have challenges themselves and also present challenges to society, and, often, they will be in chaotic circumstances that are difficult for society to manage. Sheriffs have often said that they find it difficult to know what to do with women and will remand women as it is unclear what alternatives are available.

The low number of women offenders means that there are often fewer alternatives to custody available for women than there are for men. We need to focus on robust alternatives to custody, which are both more effective and cheaper. As I say, often, at the moment, those alternatives do not exist.

Custodial sentences can be blunt instruments. Only this week, a woman in England received a custodial sentence for procuring an illegal late-term abortion. We know that the offences that women who are convicted of murder are convicted of often relate to abusive partners, so offending patterns tend to be different among women prisoners.

Research from abroad and practices in places such as Scandinavia show that those countries have fewer women in custody and that they take a less punitive approach that emphasises rehabilitation. For example, community supervision and electronic monitoring are widely used in countries such as Sweden in relation to cases in which we would put somebody in prison.

For the most part, the types of models that are being adopted in other European countries are not available in Scotland, even though we know that only about 40 per cent of women who are charged are charged with a violent offence. We also know that women prisoners are vulnerable, are more likely to have suffered violence or sexual abuse, have caring responsibilities or are mothers. Recent research has also shown that many have repeated head injuries or, indeed, significant health issues.

I believe that there is a consensus in this Parliament that remand figures are too high and that we need to refocus the justice system, particularly for women offenders, and I warmly welcome all who are here today in the chamber and look forward to their contributions.

To ask the Scottish Government whether it has carried out an impact assessment of the reported withdrawal of appliances by the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service from stations across the country. (S6T-01438)