To ask the Scottish Government what steps it is taking to increase the number of student nurses. (S6O-01908)

I am delighted to close on behalf of the Scottish Conservatives in this debate marking the international day of women and girls in science. There are a number of reasons for that. First, I was fortunate enough to have two female science teachers at school. I dedicate this to Mrs Moug, who taught chemistry and is sadly no longer here, and Mrs Roley Walton, who may just be watching—who knows?

Another reason is that I am a life sciences graduate—in biochemistry—from the University of Edinburgh. Fortunately, to refer back to Jamie Hepburn’s comments, it is no longer 1896, and I was able to graduate quite successfully. What I learned then is now most likely taught at school, however, because understanding of the workings of the cell has progressed rapidly since then.

Imagine a time when every lab did not have a PCR—polymerase chain reaction—machine and genome-editing tools such as CRISPR-Cas9 did not exist. Whole-genome sequencing took years and fluorescent microscopy was only just becoming commercialised. Doing quality science under those conditions seems archaic, but that is what we were doing back then. The adaptation of new tools for simple and affordable use has increased the speed of research. If we look back 20 years, it reveals just how far we have come in terms of technology, but sadly not in terms of gender equality in the science world.

Although improvement has been made in increasing the number of women in STEM subjects, we have all agreed that more progress must be made, because the STEM sector is still dominated by men. As my colleague Pam Gosal mentioned, there is a big gender gap in science, with women making up just 7 per cent of STEM apprentices in training and only a quarter of the STEM sector. Entries in science subjects by women are also at their lowest level in five years at both national 5 and higher level.

Michael Marra—and, to be fair, many other members—spoke about the leaky talent pipeline that occurs throughout our careers, from as early as school all the way through to advanced science careers. I am a scientist, and I am probably part of that leaky pipeline now, because I am a politician. It could be much the same for Clare Adamson. It is clear that there is an on-going struggle to attract young women and girls to study STEM subjects and pursue STEM careers.

However, even when there is success in attracting women to the sector, there are, as has been said, issues in retaining female talent. Royal Society of Chemistry statistics show that, in 2021, more than 60 per cent of applicants accepted to university chemistry courses in Scotland were female—the highest figure of all the UK nations. That is laudable, but it is not good enough. At the same time, though, only 9 per cent of professors of chemistry are female. We heard from Audrey Nicoll about the page of grey-haired men that appears on our screens when we google professors, which is not quite what we like to imagine.

Scotland’s schools play a vital role in ensuring that STEM subjects are available to young women and encouraging young women to consider careers in science. I was not able to do all three sciences at the same time, so I did all three by staggering them. I recently helped a constituent to study all three sciences at the same time, but she had to move schools to do so. We need to get better at that. There were fewer science, maths, physics and computer science teachers in 2021 than there were in 2008. Computer science is the future, but we do not know what careers young people will be taking up. However, understanding programming and computers is the way forward, so we have to have more of those teachers.

My colleague Liz Smith made quite a contribution regarding the seven ladies of the University of Edinburgh’s medical school. It was a spine-tingling speech—the way that she animated the story was great. Liz Smith also mentioned that, in 2015, the Royal Society of Chemistry called for dedicated science teachers in each primary school. I support that, considering that gender inequality in participation in science and other STEM subjects starts at a very young age.

Although we commend the improvements in getting women into STEM, there are still massive improvements to be made, and not much progress is being made under the Scottish National Party Government. Martin Whitfield mentioned that there are very few references to women in the STEM education and training strategy. We have to set the example; we are the leaders in this, and it is up to us to ensure that, in our strategies and policies, we present a world that young women can aspire to be part of.

Scotland is home to world-leading organisations in science, and we have heard many examples today. Last year, I visited Q2 Solutions, which is a leading clinical laboratory services organisation in West Lothian. A senior female there, who is a friend of mine, was my link into that organisation. I give a shout out to Maggie Conacher.

Later this month, I will be visiting the National Robotarium, which has unrivalled facilities and world-leading expertise in robotics and artificial intelligence. That is out at Heriot-Watt University. I recently took part in a round-table event entitled “Innovating Healthcare Scotland” alongside remarkable women, including Dame Anna Dominiczak, a Polish-born medical researcher who is now our chief scientist.

Every single day, we should be actively encouraging young women to study STEM subjects and to pursue those careers. The Scottish Conservatives would fully fund the placement of dedicated STEM teachers in every primary school. We want to restore excellence in Scottish schools so that every child has the chance to succeed, no matter their background.

We will support the motion and both amendments today.

I thank the witnesses very much for their time. As ever, we have found it an informative session.

The public part of today’s meeting is now at an end and we will consider our final agenda items in private.

Thank you.

That has made the hairs on the back of my neck stand up. That is concerning, and it shows the power of examples.

That would be very useful for us. Thank you.

I will ask quite a curtailed question, which might help to bring in Mike and Louise. You mentioned that, although you understand the principles of transitions, experiences are varied. What specific reasons can you identify for the gap between the implementation of the policy with regard to the concept of transitions and the duties that exist, and what our young people experience?

Mike, I will come to you first.

We spoke about the cluttered nature of the landscape, given all the legislation and the various strategies and policies that are in place. I have quite a direct question to put to each of you, starting with Mike. Is the bill required in order to create better outcomes for disabled young people?

Do you have specific examples of that?

Does anyone else want to respond?