Chamber and committees

I will come back to community involvement and representation but, on unbundling, we have heard views that it would be a negative development for the working conditions of CalMac staff. Are you able to respond to that view and those concerns?

Is there a NorthLink view on the unbundling debate?

I go back to the issue of community involvement. Robbie Drummond, we have heard calls for direct community representation on the CalMac Ferries board. Do you support that?

Thank you; that is helpful. You will be aware that Scottish Rail Holdings now has the general secretary of the Scottish Trades Union Congress on the board as a non-executive director. What is your view on relevant trade unions having similar representation on CalMac’s board?

Will the member give way?

Some important points have been made about the future of apprenticeships. I know that the minister has paid a lot of attention to the cross-party group on construction, but in the week before recess, serious concerns were raised about the future of plumbers, electricians, decorators and other trades. Concerns were raised that apprentices might not get jobs after their apprenticeships end. Those are important points. Perhaps the minister, who is listening, would engage with the group urgently, because there are genuine concerns out there.

I want to pick up those themes around inequality and the need for flexibility. We hear a lot from women who have real trouble having the conversation with their employer or manager to get time off work. What discussions is the minister having with employers and trade unions about how we can remind people of fair work principles, to ensure that, in particular, women who are in precarious and low-paid work do not face additional barriers, which is the reality for many people in our communities?

I am sorry, Presiding Officer—my throat has been struggling all day, so I will keep this brief. I join colleagues in paying tribute to Ruth Maguire, and I thank her not only for lodging the motion and making the debate possible, but for speaking about something that is deeply personal to her. Those of us who know Ruth know that she is a modest person who is feeling uncomfortable about doing that, but we thank her for putting herself, and her pain and experience, out there. I know that her family, friends and loved ones, who will be listening and watching, will be feeling very proud of her, and we are all glad that she is back in the Parliament.

I was struck by something that Ruth said in her interview with The Sunday Post. She said,

“I didn’t have time to have cancer”,

which stopped me in my tracks on the Sunday morning when I read it. That is a theme in today’s debate, and it was a theme at the recent event that took place in Parliament. I was not able to attend that event because of a funeral, but I chair the cross-party group on women’s health, at which we heard from another woman about her experience and her reality. The issue of not having the time came up again there, because, as women, we so often put ourselves at the back of the queue. We are juggling work and childcare and caring responsibilities, and so much more, so we all have to get real about the issue of time. Life is short, and it is precious, and we have to look after ourselves, so I am glad that Ruth made that point in her interview.

Another woman whom I want to speak about in my brief remarks is Emma Keyes, who is a constituent of mine. Emma is a young mum—she is now 31, and she has three children. She is a very busy and energetic young woman, and those of us who have met her are inspired by her. I know that the minister has previously given her time to meet with Emma, so I remind her that Emma has not gone away. She is a survivor, and she is very much fighting to make sure, as other members have said, that we get there by not simply talking about an elimination strategy but really picking up the pace on cervical cancer.

Emma wants to remind the Parliament and the Government of her story. She says:

“After being diagnosed with cervical cancer and understanding that this is a preventable cancer, it sickens me that other women have to go through this. If we get the right testing implemented, that increases uptake and fewer women will have to hear those dreaded words, ‘You have cervical cancer’. Fewer women will have to face harsh treatments resulting in fertility loss”,

which was Emma’s experience.

She goes on to say:

“HPV home testing kits give us a better chance to treat a pre-cancerous stage as opposed to this horrible cancer diagnosis for a younger age group. If we can increase the uptake with HPV home testing, as has been shown in the trials, then why would not we roll this out sooner? This will literally save women’s lives and take away the many barriers that come along with smear testing.”

That is what Emma has to say. Like other members, therefore, I am really keen to hear from the minister about where we have got to following the trials in Dumfries and Galloway, how we can speed up the process and how we can ensure that, whether in Parliament, in Government or in our own lives, we make the time to treat this issue seriously and use all the tools at our disposal to eliminate cervical cancer.

Okay. I have a final question. I want to get this on the record. I think that I heard Charles Holmes say that the fines are £300, £600 and £1,000. Is that correct? Can you give an example of the types of non-compliance that would result in fines of those amounts?

I appreciate that, today, we are looking at the order but, as MSPs, we are all getting emails and inquiries from businesses and producers that still feel a bit uncertain about some parts of the wider legislation. They are not entirely sure of what they need to do to fully comply, but here we are today talking about potential fines. What would you say to reassure businesses that they will have clarity, guidance and support so that we are not just talking about punishment? There is a place for enforcement, but how will we make sure that people have the knowledge and the tools to fully comply?