Chamber and committees

Both the Faculty of Advocates and the Sheriffs and Summary Sheriffs Association have said that section 23 of the bill could be modified to deal with exceptional circumstances in which a judicial factor had acted unreasonably but not negligently in relation to litigation and so could be found personally liable for legal costs. Does the commission have any comments on the current policy and on the drafting of section 23?

Do any changes need to be made to clarify things?

Section 34 sets out the rule that discharge usually frees the judicial factor from liability as a factor under civil law. Section 38 requires the Accountant of Court to report to the court where “serious misconduct” or other material failures are found. The court then has a discretion to dispose of the matter as “it considers appropriate”. For the benefit of the committee, what is the commission’s understanding of the interrelationship between the two provisions? Does the commission think that any drafting changes are required to improve clarity?

Normally, the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission acts as a gatekeeper for all complaints about solicitors in Scotland although a complaint about conduct may be referred back to the Law Society to determine its substance. Section 38 of the bill places a duty on the accountant to report misconduct or failure of a judicial factor to their professional body. Is there therefore a potential policy issue in relation to bypassing the SLCC’s usual role and applying a different threshold for referral to the Law Society than the SLCC is required to apply?

I will in a minute. I have a lot to go through.

Today, however, the warm platitudes that the culture sector is given do not reflect the situation on the ground. Last year, the Scotland + Venice project, which facilitates Scotland’s participation in the Venice biennale, had its funding paused by the Scottish Government. The project’s mission statement is that it will

“promote the best of contemporary art and architecture from Scotland on the world stage”,

but it has had to petition the Scottish Parliament to fight for its participation in that international festival. That does not align with the sentiment of the Government’s motion or the strategy.

The Scottish Government has neglected the culture sector for too long and the sector is feeling the effects of that. Meghan Gallacher mentioned the 10 per cent cut to Creative Scotland; there have also been standstill budgets for our national performing companies, and funding has been pulled from Edinburgh Deaf Festival. None of that points to a Government that appreciates the value of Scotland’s deep and rich culture or to one that wishes to make it accessible for all.

As the cabinet secretary, Angus Robertson, said, the sector has been hit with various pressures in recent years, but we must understand that it is during such times that Government co-operation is key. In Edinburgh, the Filmhouse will be able to reopen its doors after getting an award from the UK Government’s community ownership fund, and the King’s theatre has received funding that will go towards making that facility accessible for all. Those projects will mean revitalisation of a community hub and they will mean culture being made accessible to people who were previously shut out. They are examples of what we could achieve if the Scottish Government were to fully support the sector.

Scottish cultural institutions must have sustainable and predictable funding, and should not have to rely on philanthropy in order for them to operate. As my colleague Neil Bibby said, if we want our culture to continue to be strong abroad, we must have a strong culture sector domestically. The extra funding that will be available for culture over the next five years will help to support the sector, but the work must not stop there. We cannot allow one of our greatest assets to be let down by SNP inaction. That is why Scottish Labour’s amendment calls on the Scottish Government

“to convene an urgent summit with the culture sector to discuss how to protect and support Scotland’s festivals”

over the coming years. As Neil Bibby outlined, Scottish Labour is committed to using the culture sector to grow Scotland’s soft power globally.

The focus on promoting Scottish culture and the recognition of the importance of international collaboration are welcome. However, as has been made clear today, if we are to be strong internationally, we must support the culture sector at home.

As we have heard today, Scotland’s culture and creative sectors are world class. As Michelle Thomson said,

“we punch well above our weight”

when it comes to influence and global recognition, whether in our world-leading festivals and our food and arts sectors.

International cultural engagement can bring a world of benefit to Scotland. As Alex Cole-Hamilton said, our vibrant and diverse culture attracts tourists from around the globe. An international strategy can deepen relationships with our international partners and increase opportunities for collaboration. Many members have said that we should welcome the importance of international engagement to Scotland’s cultural sector.

The struggles that are faced by touring artists since Brexit are noted. As Clare Adamson pointed out, the increased regulation and costs that are associated with touring are hurting artists and making Scotland less attractive as a cultural destination. If cultural collaboration is to remain strong, the regulations that are placed on artists and creatives must be made simpler. As my colleague Neil Bibby said, a UK Labour Government will push for a touring agreement with the EU to keep Scotland as a premier place for global talent.

I congratulate Christine Grahame on bringing this motion to the chamber and Crystal FM on winning the award for best community radio broadcaster at the SME News Scottish enterprise awards for the second year running.

The station came into being when Ofcom refused to extend the signal of another station. It is a true do-it-yourself story to be proud of. With more than 50 presenters and 24/7 programming, it is impressive how Crystal FM has been able to mobilise the community to make the project a success. It is a great achievement, reflecting the dedication of everyone who gives their time to the station.

Community radio stations such as Crystal FM help people of all ages—including my colleague Craig Hoy—to develop new skills, meet new people and increase their confidence. That belief is shared by many Scots, with a Scottish Government review of community radio in 2012 finding that 49 per cent of people said that it was important to have a community radio station in their area.

As members will know, Crystal FM was formed when a handful of volunteers donated £100 each. As most community stations run on the good will and donations of volunteers, they are free from commercial influences. That freedom allows communities to create programming that truly represents them. It also allows for a wide variety of programming, with Crystal FM broadcasting shows containing both reggae and Runrig. In the internet age, the barriers to entry for new stations have never been lower. Independent stations such as Crystal FM should be welcomed, because they give communities the opportunity for self-expression and foster the arts and culture across Scotland.

Community radio is also active in Lothian, which has stations such as EHFM and Black Diamond FM. The Black Diamond FM work experience scheme for high school pupils is an example of how community stations can do great work for their local area. EHFM, which celebrated its fifth anniversary last year, allows local artists to submit music to be played on the station, further developing Edinburgh’s music scene and its stature as a cultural hub.

It is clear that community stations do great work in helping people to develop new skills and in fostering culture across Scotland. I reiterate my congratulations to all who have worked to bring the award to Crystal FM. They have created something very special. I wish them all the best for their future broadcasting, and I look forward to tuning in.

Last year, I visited Empty Kitchens Full Hearts in Edinburgh, which is an organisation that creates meals for vulnerable people using surplus food. Surplus food sharing can help to fight food poverty and reduce food waste. Will the minister outline how the Scottish Government is encouraging businesses to join the surplus food scheme?

It is an honour to open my members’ business debate. I thank all the members who signed the motion, and my colleagues who have chosen to speak in the debate on such an important issue. I thank Thomas from the charity Brain Tumour Research, who is attending the debate. In addition, I welcome Nadia, who has campaigned to raise awareness of brain tumours since her son Rayhan sadly passed away after being diagnosed with a brain tumour in 2017.

We should also note that today is purple day, during which members have been raising awareness of epilepsy. Two in three people who are diagnosed with a brain tumour will experience epilepsy or seizures, and the most common symptom of brain tumours in adults is epilepsy.

I was happy to see so many members partaking in “Wear a hat” day and attending the Brain Tumour Research reception that was sponsored by Beatrice Wishart. Charities such as Brain Tumour Research do amazing work—the charity is funding cutting-edge research through its centres of excellence and offering support to those who are living with brain tumours.

However, we must do more to support the work of such charities. Outcomes for those who are living with brain tumours remain far worse than outcomes for those with other cancers. According to Cancer Research UK, each year, more than 450 people in Scotland die from brain tumours, which kill more men under 70 than prostate cancer does, and more women under 35 than breast cancer does. Brain Tumour Research found that the five-year survival rate for a person diagnosed with a brain tumour is just 12.9 per cent, in comparison with over 70 per cent for breast cancer.

Despite those alarming figures, however, brain tumours are not being treated as a priority. Just 1 per cent of United Kingdom spending on cancer research has been allocated to brain tumours since records began in 2002. Patients and their families are being let down by the lack of funding. More investment in research can lead to more clinical trials, new knowledge and improved options and outcomes for patients. We must take serious action so that clinical research and treatment of brain tumours is given the attention that it deserves.

Brain tumours act differently from other types of cancer and should be treated as such. Because of the differences in the way that they develop in comparison with other cancers, they are often missed by national health service cancer programmes or by general practitioners. That means that patients are often left in the dark, or find that they have a tumour when they are admitted to the accident and emergency department.

That was the case for Nadia. She took her son Rayhan to four different GPs, after he had been suffering with consistent symptoms. It took her taking him to A and E, where he had an MRI scan, for him finally to be diagnosed with a brain tumour.

A patron of Brain Tumour Research, Theo Burrell, was also misdiagnosed for six months; she suffered extreme migraines before a scan at A and E revealed that she had a tumour in her brain. Had the tumour not been found, she would have had only three months to live. That experience is far too common among those who are suffering with brain tumours. The Brain Tumour Charity found that 41 percent of people who were suffering from a brain tumour had to visit their GP three or more times before being diagnosed.

Getting diagnosed earlier can help with the uncertainty that many patients face, as it allows them to access emotional support and to better manage their symptoms. Quick diagnosis also gives patients the opportunity to take part in clinical trials, which, according to the Institute of Cancer Research, have the lowest recruitment levels of trials for any cancer.

The Scottish Government’s “Cancer Strategy for Scotland 2023-2033”, which was published last year, rightly focuses on cancers that have poorer survival rates, such as brain tumours. For that to be successful, however, funding must be ring fenced to allow for discovery research of innovative treatments. More needs to be done to develop specialist knowledge and clinical training among medical practitioners. A new diagnostic pathway should also be developed with clinical and laboratory leaders so that no one is left waiting for a diagnosis.

Brain tumours have been left ignored for too long. They should no longer be considered too difficult to plan for. It is time to act. A new strategy must be created that recognises the differences between brain tumours and other cancers, and which delivers for patients.

The most recent Scottish health and wellbeing census found that, for pupils between primary 5 and secondary 3, more than a third of bullying was online. Can the cabinet secretary please advise us what measures the Scottish Government has considered to limit harm to children during the roll-out of free digital devices?