Chamber and committees

That is helpful, thank you.

That is helpful to know.

A few years ago—perhaps five or six years ago—you were on SEPA’s board, but there has been a lot of change since then. You have touched on some of the resource pressures. We hear in the committee and in our individual regions and constituencies that people feel that it is hard to get information if they report something to SEPA or have a concern about pollution, and the public do not always hear about the lighter touch that is taken by having a dialogue with people who might be causing pollution. It feels as though there is a growing gap between the concerns that are reported and what the public hear in relation to outcomes and resolutions.

You have talked about your role in the networks and your insight. I have given the example of SEPA, but it is not the only organisation with such issues. How do you see ESS being able to be fair but firm and being able to improve public understanding and confidence? Right now, people feel that there is not a lot of accountability.

I do not know what will happen after today, but I think that we need to hear more about that. Thank you for your answers.

Thank you—no pressure, convener.

Good morning, cabinet secretary. I want to return briefly to the issue of urban land and the convener’s questions about what is not in the bill. In your opening remarks, you talked about the Land Reform (Scotland) Bill being about both the national interest and local needs. It was helpful to hear you talk about the previous recommendations of the Land Commission; however, we are a few years down the line, and quite a lot has changed, including with other bills that the Government is considering.

Will you expand on the Government’s thinking? A constituent in Lanarkshire in my Central Scotland region might be wondering what is in the bill for them, and that will be the same for other communities up and down the country. What amendments are you thinking about?

In addition, related to that, you mentioned other bills, including on community wealth building, and work on community right to buy, purchase orders and compulsory sales orders. What is the Government doing to ensure that the work on this bill will align with those other bits of work? There might be a concern that there are some really good ambitions and objectives, particularly around sustainable development, but that the Government could be too busy, and we could miss the opportunity to make all those connections.

I thought that I had been forgotten there. Thank you, convener.

The committee has had quite a bit of feedback from stakeholders on the bill’s climate and nature aspirations, and I know that you have been listening keenly. You mentioned guidance and further consultation. Might stage 2 amendments be needed to clarify those aspects for landowners and communities?

It is helpful to hear that. The issue with guidance is that we cannot scrutinise it right now, so we are trying to get as much clarity as possible on what could be in the bill and what could be strengthened.

My final question is on urban land, because I think that I understand the points around scale and why there has been a focus on rural areas. In some urban areas, we could be talking about much smaller pieces of land, but there could still be wins for those communities through opportunities to protect and enhance biodiversity and to do work on climate mitigation and so on. Is the Government aware of that? We are behind on our climate and net zero targets in Scotland, so we need to do more and go faster. Can you reassure the committee that we will not miss the opportunity to have bold and ambitious reform in our urban communities?

We will approach the debate in good faith, because we have not yet read the framework. However, on the point about the territorial boards that have yet to make progress, can the minister give a timeline for when that work will be completed?

I agree that the antidote to stigma is compassion, love and care. A trauma-informed approach does not happen by chance. I have had a look at the framework and I am pleased that trauma-informed support is mentioned throughout it.

How can the minister reassure the Parliament that there will be investment in training and education, not just for the workforce in our maternity wards but for those working in primary care, and to ensure that, as others have mentioned, we reach workplaces, homes and communities?

I welcome the opportunity to speak in this important debate and am therefore grateful to the minister for bringing the motion to the Parliament. I associate myself with her remarks about sympathy for all those who have been affected and our collective efforts to smash the stigma. It is good to see the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care in the chamber, and I hope that that gives an indication of how important the issue is to the Government.

We all recognise that, for generations, miscarriage, stillbirth, baby loss and women’s health have not been high on the agenda for policy makers or Governments anywhere. The issues that we are debating today are certainly not unique to Scotland, but we all have a responsibility to right that injustice. That is why today’s debate is so important.

I am fortunate that I do not have the lived experience that many people have shared today, and I am grateful to hear from colleagues about their own experiences. As an MSP, I rely on my constituents to tell me about their experiences. It is a great privilege when they feel that they can open up and trust me with their trauma and loss.

Beatrice Wishart made an excellent contribution, and I am glad that she was able to take part. I know that she is claiming Louise Caldwell as a Shetlander, which she was briefly. I thank Beatrice Wishart for her genuine support and compassion for Louise Caldwell, who is one of my constituents in Central Scotland. Louise and her husband Craig are from East Kilbride and are in the public gallery and, true to form, I can see that they are sitting at the very back of it. Louise is incredibly modest about her campaigning work. I often use the word “changemaker” to describe Louise—I know that she will be blushing at that, but it is thoroughly deserved. I will come on to speak about the award that she received form the Sunday Mail.

Louise does not want to be in that position. She is a campaigner because she has the lived experience. She knows what it is to have experienced miscarriage and to have to find yourself in the general labour ward of your local maternity hospital in a nightmare situation. The balloons, cards, elated parents and newborn babies are in juxtaposition with the mothers, partners, dads and other family members who are in utter shock, disbelief and so much pain. When Louise came to me for help, of course, I was going to listen and do whatever I could.

It has been a privilege to help Louise to have a platform in the Scottish Parliament. Louise attended a meeting of the cross-party group on women’s health to share her experience, and I am glad that she was able to do that. This is the first time that Louise and Craig have ever been to the Scottish Parliament. I hope that their attendance reinforces the importance of opening up the Parliament to the people of Scotland. Rather than the Parliament just being a place where members come to talk among ourselves, it should be a place where people can feel seen and heard, can influence our policies and where investment goes, and can make change happen.

Louise Caldwell was crowned the Sunday Mail’s community champion in 2022, which is no mean feat and is a national recognition. Whether members represent Shetland, Central Scotland, the Borders or anywhere in between, the issues that we are debating affect every corner of Scotland. At the time, the Sunday Mail’s editor said:

“Extraordinary people rarely think they have done anything out of the ordinary. The courage, dedication and sheer determination of these unsung heroes make them Scotland’s champions.”

That was said in direct reference to Louise Caldwell.

I know that I am running out of time, but I will mention a couple of other things. I am really grateful that the Government included recognition of stillbirth. I know that Tess White is not in the chamber, but she and I, along with other campaigners, visited Bute house in the summer to talk about the impact of stillbirth and to campaign for the placental growth factor test, which helps to identify the risk of pre-eclampsia. I was with my good friend Lynsey Hamilton and her husband Bradley, who were there because of the loss of their baby, Carys. The outcome of that meeting shows that we can be a listening Parliament and that we can have a listening Government. We rely on the courage of the changemakers, such as Louise Caldwell and Lynsey Hamilton, to put pressure on us to ensure that we step up.

I asked the minister for an update on dedicated baby loss facilities. There is more work to do. Scottish Labour is entirely committed to playing our part to ensure that the words that we share in the Parliament turn into action.