Chamber and committees

To ask the First Minister how the Scottish Government is working to ensure that patients are accurately informed of waiting times for NHS treatments following referrals to a specialist. (S6F-04173)

I join members in congratulating Colin Smyth on bringing this issue to the chamber once more, and I pay tribute to him for his long-standing campaigning for the Fornethy survivors. I also join members in welcoming survivors and campaigners who are watching in the gallery today, and I praise their bravery and resolve.

Since 2023, I have sat on the Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee, where we considered the petition that calls for the Fornethy survivors to have access to Scotland’s redress scheme. The committee does not often come to strong united conclusions on petitions, but in this case, we have directly recommended to the Scottish Government that the redress scheme be widened to allow those who experienced abuse at Fornethy access to the scheme. We have concluded that an injustice has occurred and that current legislation is not fit for purpose in this case.

To be clear, seeking redress is not about money. No amount of money can undo what those women went through or the life-long consequences of that abuse.

In considering evidence, we heard three major reasons why Fornethy survivors would not be eligible under the redress scheme: the fact that the redress scheme covers only abuse in long-term care; the lack of detailed records available; and the claim that children were sent to Fornethy with parental consent. However, let us be clear that these children were in the care of the state. They were sent to Fornethy at the recommendation of the state, through teachers or medical staff who were employed by Glasgow Corporation. Therefore, it is the responsibility of the state to step up and offer meaningful redress to those affected. It should not matter for how long a person was abused when it comes to getting recognition of the pain that has been caused. There is no time limit for trauma.

On parental consent, submitted evidence includes allegations that children were told what to write home to their parents, and that they could not contact them freely. That is hardly informed parental consent.

On records, we heard from Redress Scotland that there is a presumption of truth, and that it works on a balance of probabilities when considering cases, which means that a lack of detailed records should not be a barrier to change.

The committee recommended the Scottish Government consult on extending redress. If we believe survivors, which I am sure all members do, we should at least consider what more we can do to support them.

I again pay tribute to the brave campaigners who are here today, who have not stopped fighting for recognition of the abuse that they endured. However, paying tribute means nothing if we do not offer redress and change to ensure that this never happens again.

I join members in congratulating Miles Briggs on bringing this issue to the chamber.

Anyone who uses the A720 city bypass for commuting or travel will agree on its importance. However, they, like me, will have spent hours in slow-moving, congested traffic, faced frustration at longer journey times and wondered why no progress has been made on delivering a grade-separated junction at Sheriffhall roundabout.

It has been clear for a while that change is needed. Sheriffhall was named Scotland’s most dangerous roundabout and topped the roundabout league of shame in 2019. Midlothian and East Lothian are Scotland’s fastest-growing local authority areas, and their populations are expected to grow by 15 per cent and 7 per cent, respectively. That will bring more cars, more congestion and more accidents, if nothing changes.

The A720 is also a strategically important road for Scotland’s economy. It connects Edinburgh with our largest trading partners in England; it also connects to one of our busiest cargo airports, Edinburgh airport. We must ensure that our infrastructure is a positive factor in driving growth and we must enable people and goods to move freely and easily. Upgrading Sheriffhall will enable that to happen over the coming decades, as tens of thousands of people will continue to use the bypass and junctions, even as we progress to net zero.

The motion notes that

“motorists ... have been waiting seven years”

for construction to begin, but the need for a flyover was first identified in the 2008 strategic transport projects review. The same point was made then: a flyover will contribute to road safety and reduce emissions. The proposals that ministers are considering will not only achieve those goals, but allow work on the proposed extension of Edinburgh tram and orbital bus routes to progress. Active travel is also included in the proposals. However, those things cannot happen if progress is not made.

I recognise that the process must be followed, but it is not acceptable that seven years have passed since a commitment was made, with no spades in the ground or timeline decided. There is also now doubt over the £120 million costing.

All this speaks to a wider issue with a planning system that is holding Scotland back and undermining investment in all areas of our economy. We are discussing Sheriffhall today, but we have to be clear that it is by no means an isolated case.

Today, I am hoping for transparency from the Scottish Government on funding. I want the Government to reaffirm its commitment to the project and, for safety, the economy and road users, commit to a timeline for its completion.

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I could not connect. I would have voted yes.

Constituents frequently contact me about waits with children in unsuitable temporary accommodation lasting years. We are now seeing a concerning rise in the number of children housed in hostels and bed and breakfasts. Given that Scottish National Party members voted down amendments from my colleague Mark Griffin to require consideration of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child when allocating temporary accommodation, how can the Scottish Government say that it is serious about ending the housing emergency and stopping the unacceptable increase in the number of children being housed in B and Bs?

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on how it is working to reduce the average time families spend in temporary accommodation. (S6O-04763)

Maurice Golden has already asked the question that I was going to ask, so you have already touched on that particular issue.

Quite a lot of historical buildings are connected with Scottish history. Do you have any data on buildings that have been lying empty for a very long time and which have not been touched, or for which there is no plan for any future works? What is the longest time that a building has lain empty? Do you have any data on that?

I think that we also had a members’ business debate on the matter. I would write to the Scottish Government to ask what engagement it has had with the private rented sector, what specific steps it will take to implement similar provisions to Awaab’s law for private tenants in Scotland using existing powers and what plans it has for statutory intervention to require all remedial work in relation to damp and mould to be done to defined high standards. I would keep the petition open.

May I—

Yes, and there is a housing emergency.