Chamber and committees

I thank Collette Stevenson for securing today’s debate. Taking time to highlight the problems of domestic abuse, intimate partner violence and the challenges faced by members of the LGBT+ community is vitally important. Those issues demand constant attention and focus to ensure that we continue to progress in the right direction, by making it clear that there is no place for domestic abuse in Scotland and by furthering the rights and equality of LGBT+ people.

The motion references the view that structural inequalities could be prohibiting LGBT+ victims of domestic abuse from coming forward or receiving the support that they need. I will start by addressing those structural inequalities, because there is no doubt in my mind that, of late, the rhetoric in relation to LGBT+ people has become more toxic.

We have come a long way since the days of section 28 and the homophobia of years gone by, but there can be no mistaking—we should not kid ourselves that this is not the case—that homophobia and transphobia are still present in our politics, media and society. Some of the headlines in the press over the past few weeks, and some of the reactions and commentary on them, have crossed the line from nuanced, responsible and sensitive questioning of policy to full-throated stereotypical attacks that are met with hurt and, very often, fear by LGBT+ people across Scotland.

It is those feelings of hurt and fear that very often convince people that they will not be heard or taken seriously and that they are still looked on as other. When we talk about domestic abuse and intimate partner violence, both within and outwith the LGBT+ community, but we still cannot talk in a sensible way about inclusive education and support that treat LGBT+ identities as normal and valid, is it any wonder that we are concerned about the underreporting of the problems that people face? We have heard about some of that already, but it is why education is so important.

Education around domestic abuse and what it means to be LGBT+ in Scotland remains completely vital, and it is why I and many others across the chamber continue to support organisations such as the Time for Inclusive Education campaign, so that we can increase understanding and our support of young people.

There are still too many young LGBT+ people in Scotland who are scared to talk about themselves, their identity and their experiences, because they do not see themselves reflected in their education and in society. Tackling the general stigma faced by LGBT+ people and helping to empower them to speak out need to go hand in hand with tackling the general stigma and fear around domestic abuse and intimate partner violence. I recognise that we have made significant progress in the way that we talk about domestic abuse in the context of violence against women and girls. There is much more to do, and I stand with the work of the Government and the excellent work of organisations such as White Ribbon Scotland, particularly in ensuring that men take responsibility for changing our attitudes and behaviours.

We debate this motion at the beginning of the Government of a new First Minister and Deputy First Minister, and I want to take the opportunity to thank Emma Roddick, who is in the chamber, for all her work in her time as Minister for Equalities, Migration and Refugees, particularly in those areas in which I know that she took a keen interest. I wish her well on the back benches, where I know that she will continue to advocate on all those issues.

I say to the Government that we must not roll back now on the hard-fought rights of LGBT+ people; rather, the Government must show commitment and progress while building a consensus across our country, just as we have done at every milestone for LGBT+ people in the past. As I have said previously in the chamber, we are not going back into the closet, we are not going to hide and we are not going to be ashamed of who we are. I support the calls in the motion for a national LGBT+ domestic abuse strategy to raise awareness and improve services so that they are accessible to everyone in that community, and I call on the Government to reflect on that in its response. We must start the journey of tackling this important issue today.

To ask the Scottish Government when it last met with Renfrewshire health and social care partnership. (S6O-03381)

I welcomed the news on Tuesday that the integration joint board in Renfrewshire has abandoned the proposals to close or merge the Milldale and Mirin day centres for people with additional support needs. I congratulate all service users and their families on their tireless campaign to save those services. However, it should not have taken such intense efforts or legal action to change the proposal.

Other services are not being spared, such as Montrose care home in Paisley. The underlying problem remains that the Government is chronically underfunding HSCPs and slashing their budgets. When will the minister deliver for people in Renfrewshire—especially the most vulnerable—with proper funding to avoid cuts and by taking action to end residential care charges and bring people who have a learning disability home to their areas, as has been promised by the Government for years?

I had that conversation with WASPI women in this very Parliament at the event that I spoke about, and Labour is very clear that we support the principles contained in the PHSO report, which includes the principle that we must compensate those women. The First Minister says that we do not need to talk about the level of compensation, but his motion speaks quite specifically about the level, so we have to reflect on that as well. [Interruption.] I think that I have been clear that we are in support of the principle of compensation, so I am not quite sure—[Interruption.]

Thank you.

It was important that the WASPI women who are listening in the gallery could hear what I just said, instead of the barracking that we had from the back benchers, who clearly want to make this a political issue about the Labour Party.

As I have said, Labour supports the delivery of justice for WASPI women, but we are very clear that we need to ensure that WASPI women are part of that process and that any system of compensation is designed with those women in mind and that they are around the table when those decisions are made, because the ombudsman has made a number of recommendations about how any such system might work. Of course, it could involve blanket compensation or it could be about looking at individual cases, and I know that there is a variance of views among women on what should be done.

I am conscious that the Deputy Presiding Officer is looking at me to wrap up. There have been a number of exchanges. However, as I said at the outset, I am clear that Labour will support the WASPI women, support the outcomes of the recommendation in the report and support pensioners more widely, through the triple lock and other measures that we will seek to take.

I move amendment S6M-13041.1, to insert at end:

“notes the work of UK Parliament Select Committees to scrutinise the UK Government in response to the report; reiterates calls for the UK Government to publish its response to the findings of the report without delay; acknowledges the current dire state of the UK Government’s finances, due to the unfunded spending commitments of Liz Truss; notes the lack of action by the UK Government regarding compensation that is still owed to individuals as a result of other scandals, such as the infected blood and Windrush scandals; believes that there must be clarity on how any compensation scheme would operate; acknowledges the need for any credible government to only make spending promises that it knows it can deliver and pay for, in order to maintain wider economic stability; endorses the Labour Party’s calls for a clear system for notifications about any future changes to pensions, and supports the commitments from any incoming UK Labour administration to give pensioners greater security and stability through committing to the pension triple lock.”

Now that we have made progress on the infrastructure in place, are you concerned that on-going resourcing might become the more substantive issue?

Do you recognise that there is a significant challenge in those additional services that are tangential to the work of delivering the MAT standards, such as social work, advice on rights and all the support that sits around that? I take from your answer that we need to take a holistic look at service delivery.

You expect to see progress, first, on the benchmarking that will come out in the summer and, secondly, on the challenges that were presented to us this morning, such as the fact that same-day prescribing is not working as effectively as it should. I also note the clear comment that was made about the standards being embedded where people and their families, in their lived experience, feel that there has been demonstrable progress in areas such as same-day prescribing. Will you consider specific action there, as a result of what comes out of the benchmarking, in order to develop that further?

I find it bewildering that the Government has decided not to back a reasonable amendment from the Labour Party that seeks to create a consensus and support the voice of WASPI women in the preparation of that compensation scheme. Crucially, the amendment also seeks to protect the triple lock. I find it very strange indeed.

Does there need to be a better way to capture and measure that lived experience and what those people are telling you?