Chamber and committees

I think that the First Minister accepted that her Government’s strategy on the matter is fundamentally broken. I look forward to hearing more later this afternoon about what the Government will bring forward, because although the new standards that Angela Constance has already set out will be an important move in the right direction, they are not game changing. They are the basics; they are the very least that the Government should do.

People on the front line in the hardest-hit communities have been here before. They are hearing the same promises and warm words, but at the same time are seeing their families, friends and neighbours dying from drug abuse. All they hear is that, by next spring, the Government might manage to meet the bare minimum of expectations—which is that people who need treatment actually get it.

However, without teeth, the new standards will not make a dent in the crisis. Unless we give them a legal basis they are, in effect, optional and can be overlooked.

The Conservatives’ solution, which is backed by front-line campaigners, is a right to recovery bill that would give people a right in law to the treatment that they need.

Is the First Minister content to stop at the basics, or will she back our proposal and give people the power to get their lives back on track?

I absolutely agree with Richard Lochhead. There are not many campaigns that unite us, but we were united on the Plainstones in Elgin three years ago when the announcement was first made. As the local MP, I have campaigned hard for the restoration of the service, as has Richard Lochhead, as the local MSP. That shows that this is not a party-political issue. It was not a party-political issue years ago during the original campaign to have a consultant-led maternity unit. Margaret Ewing, who was the Scottish National Party MSP at the time, led the charge locally and worked with Michael Forsyth, who was the Conservative minister, to ensure that we had a consultant-led unit. We are all working again to restore the unit, because it is vital.

We have outstanding staff at Dr Gray’s. They want to help expectant mums. They will do that with the limited numbers of Moray mothers—fewer than 20 per cent—who give birth in Elgin at the moment, but many more Moray families should be able to experience that excellent care.

I hope that the cabinet secretary will give us an update on the independent review in his summing up, and that he will say how that will be outlined to the campaigners, NHS Grampian and others? Will key milestones be announced? Will there be timescales by which those milestones should be reached, to ensure that the service is restored? The review will also look at the progress that NHS Grampian has made to date in restoring consultant-led services in Elgin, following a request by the previous health secretary. If the review finds that no, or not enough, progress has been made, what action will be taken against NHS Grampian?

Expectant mums in Moray are worried about where they will deliver their children. I hope that the cabinet secretary and the Government will tell them tonight when there will once again be a consultant-led maternity unit at Dr Gray’s.

The cabinet secretary is right to focus on safety. We all accept and understand that, even with a full consultant-led service, a minority of women will be unable to give birth in Dr Gray’s in Elgin and would have to go to Aberdeen. However, those women should be the minority and not, as is currently the case, the majority. There is also a safety issue for those expectant mums—who are often in labour—who have to travel. It may be only 70 miles from Elgin or anywhere in Moray to Aberdeen, but passing the Glens of Foudland in winter is not an easy journey for people in any condition, let alone for women in labour. We must also consider the safety of those who have to travel to give birth or while they are in labour.

People all over the country will be frustrated at the news that restrictions might continue for weeks or even months. We had all hoped for a summer of freedom, but the stubborn virus is determined to keep us scunnered instead.

We are all thoroughly fed up with Covid and the damaging consequence that it is having on jobs, businesses and people’s mental and physical health. The vaccine remains our best hope of beating Covid. Our national health service, volunteers and armed forces are already pulling off incredible feats to vaccinate the numbers that the First Minister has outlined. We need to target as many resources as possible in their direction to ensure that the vaccine wins the race against the virus. When is the Government projecting that all adults will have received both doses of the vaccine?

Secondly, the on-going uncertainty is crippling to businesses, especially those that still do not know when they will be able to fully reopen. It is also hurtful for people planning major life events. For example, people still do not know whether they will be able to have more than 50 guests at their wedding. As I asked her last week, will the First Minister consider lifting the capacity constraints on weddings, especially in areas that are in level 2?

Yesterday, the national clinical director suggested that the new variant could delay lockdown exit by up to 10 weeks. Is the Government seriously considering delaying the move to level 0 until September?

Finally, but crucially, Cancer Research UK published figures today that show a ticking time bomb in cancer care. Around 4,000 fewer people have started cancer treatment in general, including 1,000 who have not commenced breast cancer treatment. Those figures must set alarm bells ringing. The cancer care crisis will continue to spiral without urgent action. When will the First Minister publish a catch-up plan for cancer care, and will she consider our proposals for a clinician-led NHS re-mobilisation task force to bring treatment times under control?

Thank you, deputy returning officer—sorry, Presiding Officer. The election seems far away now.

I declare an interest: my wife is due to have our second child a week from today, and all being well, we will have our second child—as we did our first child, Alistair—at Dr Gray’s maternity unit in Elgin. Presiding Officer, I hope that I have your permission to keep an eye on my phone, in case I get an urgent message that I should travel back to Moray.

I want to give some background to explain how we got into the situation about which I lodged the motion. In July 2018, NHS Grampian announced a temporary downgrading of the maternity unit at Dr Gray’s. The period was to be for up to a year—I remember that clearly, because the day when I got a phone call from Alasdair Pattinson, the general manager at Dr Gray’s, was the day when we found out that we were expecting our first child. I knew that, if the downgrading lasted for a full year, our first child might not be born at Dr Gray’s and might be one of a cohort of babies who could not be born in our local hospital.

Almost three years on, as we await the birth of our second child, the temporary downgrade is still in place. It is unacceptable for families and expectant mums across Moray that such uncertainty has been hanging over the issue for so long.

As I said in the Press and Journal today, where I put forward my views ahead of the debate, there is anxiety, not just for the mums who are told that they cannot give birth in Elgin and must travel outwith Moray to Aberdeen, Inverness or further afield, but for the mums who are on a green pathway. My wife, Krystle, has spoken of her concerns about going for a check-up with her midwife or doctor and being told, “Actually, you need to go to Aberdeen or Inverness.” Even the women who are on the more positive, green pathway and are expected to give birth in Elgin are worried about the possibility of having to travel further afield.

It is important to put the issue in context and to look at the numbers that we are talking about. Last night, I was grateful to have a discussion with Kirsty Watson and Marj Adams, from the Keep MUM—the maternity unit for Moray—campaign, which has made sterling efforts to restore the consultant-led maternity unit at Dr Gray’s. We went over some of the figures, and I think that it would be useful for members to hear them.

Between 2010 and 2017, which was the last full year of a fully consultant-led maternity unit, the average number of births at Dr Gray’s in Elgin was 1,052. In 2010, the average number was 1,097; in 2011, it was 1,100; in 2012, it was 1,072; in 2013, it was 1,029; in 2014, it was 1,073; in 2015, it was 1,050; and, in 2016, it was 1,036. In 2017, there were 959 births in Elgin, in our consultant-led maternity unit, under the great care of our outstanding midwives and staff, who continue to do terrific work day in, day out.

In 2020, the most recent full year for which we have figures, the number of births in Elgin was 178. Fewer than 20 per cent of Moray mums gave birth in Moray. Of the rest, 714 went to Aberdeen, 16 went to Raigmore and 13 were home births. The figures tell the story of so many mums having to travel outwith Moray.

That brings up many concerns. What happens during the couple of hours’ drive from Elgin to Aberdeen if something goes wrong when a mum is in labour? What happens to the family who are left at home worrying about a mum giving birth on their way through to Aberdeen? It creates more problems and difficulties for families with younger children. At the moment, we live five or six minutes away from Dr Gray’s. If Krystle has to give birth in Aberdeen, we are two-and-a-half hours away, and we have to worry about childcare for our two-and-a-bit-year-old son.

NHS Grampian has not properly addressed those issues, and I hope that we hear from the cabinet secretary about what will be done to ensure that the health board responds far more positively. NHS Grampian’s response has been dismal. I note that it submitted a briefing for today’s debate. I have to say that it is extremely disappointing. It consists of the fact that a debate is being held, a copied and pasted quote from the chief executive of NHS Grampian about the independent review, and a little bit about the pandemic response and additional use of ward 3. It is a page and a half from NHS Grampian that says nothing about what it has put women in Moray through for the past three years, nothing about what it has done to restore the consultant-led unit, and nothing about what it is doing now to engage positively with the campaigners, who are concerned that the health board has not listened to them, because they have not had a response from the chief executive and others to their serious concerns. The Keep MUM Facebook page contains a number of harrowing tales from mums following their birth experiences outwith Moray, and the health board is basically ignoring those. I would like the cabinet secretary to respond to those concerns in his summing up.

An independent review is under way. I welcome that and look forward to its findings. The Keep MUM campaigners whom I spoke to last night have certainly been impressed by the engagement from that group and Ralph Roberts. I hope that the review leads to a positive outcome.

We are, however, still in a situation in which, three years on, we have a continuing temporary downgrade, with no sign of it coming to an end.

I am sure that I speak on behalf of the whole Parliament in wishing Steve Clarke and his entire squad all the very best for the Euros. It has been a long 23-year wait for the men’s international team to qualify for a major finals and I know that, in their first match against the Czech Republic on Monday, against the auld enemy on Friday and in their final group stage match against Croatia on 22 June, they will have the support, hopes and backing of the entire country.

Does the First Minister stand by the statement that she made in the chamber when she said that grades will not be based on

“algorithms, statistical models or historical performance of schools”?—[Official Report, 3 June 2021; c 3.]

The First Minister says that she stands by her statement, but the evidence paints a very different picture. Let us go through some of that evidence. An Education Scotland report that was published last week says that three in four councils in Scotland are analysing results using historical attainment data. Some councils have published their own reports, and this is what they say. Inverclyde Council is holding “data analysis meetings” before submitting grades; the City of Edinburgh Council is making “adjustments” based on previous attainment data; and East Renfrewshire Council has a checklist to ensure that teachers compare this year’s grades to the past three years’ grades.

All that is in direct contradiction to the promise that the First Minister gave in the chamber last week and reiterated just a few moments ago. Once again, young people will lose out based solely on where they go to school. This is the same shambles as last year. It is just more sleekit because, instead of the SQA marking pupils down at the end of the process, the system will force teachers and schools to do it first. How on earth can young people have confidence in the system when the First Minister’s words do not match reality?

The First Minister chose to ignore all the points that I read out from Inverclyde Council, the City of Edinburgh Council and East Renfrewshire Council. The harsh reality of this system is that, if someone is lucky enough to attend a consistently high-achieving school, their grades will probably not be reviewed, but if they attend their local school, where people work hard but not everyone gets five As—the kind of school that the First Minister and I went to—their grades are more likely to be lower.

Last night, I met members of the Scottish Youth Parliament, who spoke about how unfair the system is. They feel that their voices have been ignored and that pupils with exceptional circumstances are being overlooked. This year, of all years, we should be going out of our way to recognise exceptional circumstances and listen to young people’s concerns. I asked them what they would say if they were able to put points to the First Minister. Cameron, Liam and Sophie all said that young people should be able to appeal their grade without the risk of it being downgraded. The appeals process is supposed to ensure that people get the grades that they deserve but, instead, this year’s system is asking them to roll the dice with their future. Will the First Minister do something about that now, by allowing an appeals process that does not risk downgrades and ensuring that we make the system fair?