Chamber and committees

More than £441 million that was allocated to local authorities for this year is yet to be formally allocated by the joint settlement and distribution group. Given the need to invest in further health and social care integration, and given that North Ayrshire moved to critical care-only provision in April, can the First Minister say when those resources will be distributed and how much will be allocated to North Ayrshire?

I very much welcome the extensive package of measures that the Scottish Government has put in place to tackle child poverty, as well as the allocation of £19 million for local employability partnerships and regional transport partnerships to help to remove barriers to work.

What more can the Scottish Government do to boost the take-up of employability programmes, especially for those who are furthest away from work, who might also require support in building soft skills?

Today, we pay tribute to Jo Cox, who is often quoted as saying that there is more that unites us than divides us. Truly, if we could remember that and live with that in mind, whatever our roles in life are, our more respectful politics will have a strong basis on which to survive and thrive.

I join others in congratulating Jenny Young on securing this evening’s debate to commemorate the political contribution of Jo Cox and to pay tribute to her legacy.

I was a member of the UK Parliament on the day that Jo Cox was killed. I was out visiting a secondary school that I had been working in right up until the election in May 2015. The school was not in my constituency; I was visiting former colleagues who were keen to catch up and pupils with whom I had built good relationships, and they had loads of questions about my life as an MP. It was a happy visit, with laughter, anecdotes and memories of my time with staff and pupils, which had ended on the day that the Scottish National Party swept into Westminster on a wave of support, the scale of which no one had predicted.

That day, I was in the class with my former secondary 2 pupils, and the teacher had been discussing how Westminster operates. He had played a clip, and as the clip ended, the television reverted to live broadcast. The news flashed up that an MP had been seriously injured following an attack, and the children’s levity came very abruptly to an end. Everybody was really shocked. For the children, it had been a very interesting visit from a former teacher who now seemed to have quite an exciting job, which then became a visit from a former teacher who now had what they perceived to be a really dangerous job.

Even from the initial reports, it seemed impossible to imagine—despite the deranged attack on Jo Cox and what she suffered—that she would not come through it. We certainly all hoped and prayed that she would. It was a very sombre time in the Commons when we reconvened the following Monday. All we could think about was, how could this happen? What does it say about the political climate in which we live? Inevitably, we wondered which one of us would be next.

Like many in the SNP group, Jo Cox had been elected only the preceding year, and, like many of us, she was still finding her feet and had been taken by surprise at the ferocious hatred that was being spouted out on social media platforms, where good intentions are twisted and misrepresented. It is a digital town square, complete with digital pitchforks, to attack and abuse anyone—especially politicians, but not just politicians—who raises their head even slightly above the parapet. We knew that it was only a matter of time before another such attack took place—and it did subsequently, claiming the life of David Amess, a long-standing MP who was respected and admired across the house.

I recall the five-year anniversary of Jo’s death and how her sister, Kim Leadbeater MP, led a debate in the House of Commons to celebrate her sister’s life and legacy while continuing to fight for the values that cost Jo Cox her life. Kim’s speech on that day, witnessed by her and Jo’s parents, was moving, inspiring, powerful and memorable. Ten years on, with two MPs murdered in the line of duty and countless others abused and subjected to intimidating tactics on social media, it is a good time to take stock of where we are, because politics has become increasingly divided by extremism. That is bad enough, but in that particular context we must all be more mindful of the language that we use and how we debate and interact with each other.

People often blame the nastiness that is spouted on the influence of social media. Members have done that today, and I completely understand why. However, I say this: social media does not operate in a vacuum. It gives me no pleasure to say that, sadly, some elements of the media need to have a care about their contribution to the creation in our virtual town squares of digital stocks and pitchforks that are increasingly the norm on social media. We all know that words—outpourings—can move or motivate others into deadly action. I say that because, when I was in the House of Commons, I did not meet one MP—not one—who had not suffered at least one death threat or a threat of some kind of physical harm. That is a terrible thing to say. When elected representatives in democratic nations are attacked and killed for their beliefs, it is our democratic values that are being attacked. Those values are too precious to lose without challenge from those of us who hold them dear.

The vast majority of elected representatives are in politics to stand up for ideals and better the lives of those we seek to represent. That is it. That is all. However, in some sections of the mainstream media, our motives are constantly questioned, our efforts constantly belittled and our visions constantly undermined through language that is nasty and excoriating, and that is the backdrop against which social media exists. To all politicians in this place and in all our democratic institutions, to everyone involved in the media—whether it be social, print or television—and to all those involved in the political process, I say that we should have a care with regard to how we speak to and about each other.

In this chamber and in wider society, we need to relearn how to disagree respectfully and not assume the worst of someone just because we disagree with their politics. Let us try to heal our politics, so that extremism cannot flourish.

To ask the Scottish Government when it expects a general practitioner walk-in centre to open in North Ayrshire. (S7O-00023)

Following the convictions for the murders of John McNab and Kayden Moy—who was killed on Irvine beach, in my constituency, last summer—the Scottish Violence Reduction Unit has said that knife possession increased by 15 per cent among 11 to 15-year-olds between 2020 and 2025. What further measures will the Scottish Government take to tackle the rise in knife crime and to divert young people away from gang membership?

North Ayrshire’s people have Scotland’s lowest healthy life expectancy. The average adult remains in full health until just 53 years old. More than 28 per cent of people live with a long-term health condition, which is 6 per cent higher than the Scottish average. In view of those facts, does the cabinet secretary agree that there is an urgent and compelling case for a GP walk-in centre in Cunninghame South to allow my constituents greater access to healthcare and advice?

My apologies, Presiding Officer.

I am delighted to have secured the very first members’ business debate in this session of Parliament, and I thank all members who supported my motion to make it possible.

May was national pre-eclampsia awareness month, and 22 May was world pre-eclampsia day. I believe that it is right and fitting that there is global recognition of this important maternal health issue. Pre-eclampsia is a condition that develops during pregnancy or shortly after birth and is characterised by high blood pressure and protein in the urine. It can affect the heart, liver, lungs, kidneys and brain, and it can cause blood clotting and lead to eclampsia, which is life threatening and involves seizures.

The World Health Organization estimates that pre-eclampsia affects between 3 and 8 per cent of women worldwide. A study that the WHO conducted only last year found that hypertensive disorders in pregnancy, including pre-eclampsia, are responsible for 16 per cent of maternal deaths globally.

Around 76,000 women and 500,000 babies die worldwide each year from eclampsia. While I welcome the focus that world pre-eclampsia day brings to this important issue, I believe that, given the stark figures that I have cited, pre-eclampsia should receive much more focus than it currently does.

I pay tribute to the work of Action on Pre-eclampsia, which is a United Kingdom charity that works to raise awareness of this life-threatening condition. As a first step, expectant mums should be aware of the symptoms of pre-eclampsia, as being aware could save their life and the life of their baby. Suffering during pregnancy from headaches, high blood pressure, blurry vision, upper right pain in the tummy, swelling and shortness of breath are all classic signs. More work needs to be done to ensure that pregnant women are provided with that information so that any symptoms can be investigated and addressed at the earliest opportunity.

Women who are at risk could, and should, benefit from preventative measures such as low-dose aspirin by 20 weeks or when antenatal care begins; calcium supplementation in settings with low dietary intake; and treatment of any pre-existing high blood pressure or associated conditions. Sadly, the picture is not what it needs to be in Scotland or across the UK, where it is estimated that 10 per cent of pregnancies are impacted by hypertensive disorders, including pre-eclampsia.

Specific data on the number of women in Scotland or the UK who are impacted is—astonishingly—not publicly available. Perhaps the Minister for Mental Wellbeing, Public Health, Sport, Alcohol and Drugs can tell us why that is. The information is held at national health service board level, and freedom of information requests would bring it into the public domain, but that should happen already. Unless that information is collated, a proper and robust strategy to track the long-term health of women who suffer from pre-eclampsia, and who may face serious health risks as a direct consequence, cannot be undertaken effectively. I therefore urge the minister to ensure that specific data on the number of women in Scotland who are impacted by pre-eclampsia is made publicly available.

According to Action on Pre-eclampsia, more than 5,000 pregnant women in the UK each year suffer from pre-eclampsia and 1,000 babies die from causes related to it. The lifelong health implications for those women are serious and potentially fatal, because they will have a fivefold increased risk of hypertension; three times the probability of a stroke; twice the risk of cardiovascular mortality; and a fourfold risk of suffering a major adverse cardiovascular event. In addition, such women have an increased risk of diabetes, kidney disease, liver disease and thrombosis.

We do not know whether pre-eclampsia causes those increased lifelong risks, or whether pre-eclampsia is caused by underlying conditions that elevate a woman’s likelihood of developing cardiovascular and other issues. We know, however, that women in Scotland—despite those extremely serious lifelong and life-threatening risks—have no long-term monitoring following pre-eclampsia in pregnancy.

The NHS Scotland website highlights potential long-term risks, but that falls very far short of what is required to address them. I understand that, in March, the Scottish Government indicated that women who have had pre-eclampsia would receive annual health reviews and long-term blood pressure monitoring as part of the Scottish cardiovascular disease risk factors programme. I welcome that, and I ask the minister what the timeline for the implementation of monitoring is. I am also keen to know whether that monitoring will be retrospective in order to include women who suffered from pre-eclampsia in years gone by, given that the health risks are lifelong.

I ask that because I suffered a stillbirth at full term in 2009 after developing HELLP—haemolysis, elevated liver enzymes and low platelets—syndrome, which is a very extreme form of pre-eclampsia and which, along with the mismanagement of my treatment, killed my son and very nearly killed me. After spending 10 days in intensive care and recovering for a further nine days in high dependency, I was discharged. No one, at any time, mentioned to me that I faced long-term serious health risks; it was not even touched on. Members can imagine my upset and anger when I discovered that purely by accident.

I am sure that many women have been impacted by pre-eclampsia with no, or very little, idea of the extremely serious health risks to which they have been exposed, and that is truly shocking. The minister is clearly not responsible if some clinicians do not make their patients aware of very important health risks that they face, but I ask her what she can do to ensure that clinicians share important medical information about health risks and to ensure that that falls under the statutory rights of patients.

The reality is simply that women who are impacted by pre-eclampsia are not always provided with that vital information, and that cannot be right. I know that good work on the issue is taking place in NHS Lothian, but the need is urgent across Scotland, including in my own Cunninghame South constituency.

I have spoken about the symptoms of pre-eclampsia and how pregnant women should be informed of them. When those symptoms appear, women do not always realise the danger that they and their babies might be in. Ensuring that expectant mums recognise the symptoms is important, but it is also vital that, when they present with symptoms, they are not dismissed and fobbed off, as I was. Half of all stillbirths occur after women present with concerns and are shooed away and told not to worry. Had I been listened to, my baby would not have died, my liver would not have ruptured and my husband would probably not have had to be asked to come to the hospital to bid me farewell because clinicians thought that I was going to die.

Will the minister work with the NHS to ensure that women, as a right, are better informed about pre-eclampsia symptoms as part of their antenatal care; are provided with vital information about the lifelong risks to their health following a birth that was impacted by pre-eclampsia; and receive lifelong monitoring of their health, particularly cardiovascular health, following pre-eclampsia? It would be good if that monitoring could include women who suffered pre-eclampsia in past years and who still face greater risks to their health.

Finally, will the minister work with health boards to centrally collect and collate data on the incidence of pre-eclampsia? That will enable a proper and robust strategy to track the long-term health of women who have suffered from pre-eclampsia. Such actions would do much to reassure me, and all women who face serious long-term health risks to which pre-eclampsia has given rise, that women’s health is an absolute priority for the Scottish Government.

Presiding Officer—[Inaudible.]

The 2026 bathing season is, indeed, upon us.

The cabinet secretary will be aware of SEPA’s proposals to close its network of live electronic signage, and instead of posting daily water quality predictions or pollution event warnings directly at beaches, it will rely on the use of a QR code and posters linking to the SEPA website. Does the cabinet secretary share my concerns that that might compromise accessible and clearly visible live public information at beach locations, which is a key statutory duty under the Bathing Waters (Scotland) Regulations 2008?