Chamber and committees

What happens in the scenario where the cap is reached? What would be the impact on bus operators and users? You have talked about the modelling of this. What are the risk factors? How likely is the scenario that the cap could be reached within the financial year?

I am a little concerned. We discussed earlier how we want to get more people on to buses and sustainable transport. We want to ensure that that is sustainable. We could reach the cap if we continue to be successful in getting people on to buses, and we are asking operators to provide concessionary travel at a much reduced rate to them. They could come back and tell the minister or Transport Scotland that they can no longer run a service because it is not commercially viable. Is that part of your modelling? Do you have any reassuring answers, not only for people in my area of Central Scotland, but for all of us?

That is wonderful. Thank you.

I am glad that the minister is giving so much attention to Anne’s law. I know that Anne’s family are listening. Her husband, Campbell Duke, is listening, and her daughter, Natasha, will be listening. It is what they have to say that we all need to listen to.

I appeal to the minister to make time in her diary and that of the Government, between now and stage 2—if that is where we are heading—to listen to families such as Anne’s and so many others, who are not visitors but essential caregivers, and to take nothing off the table. We all agree that Anne’s law should be a reality. It is long overdue, and if there is a quicker and more effective route to that, let us not rule it out.

I am glad that Clare Haughey mentioned Anne’s law, and I welcome the report’s recommendations. I note that the committee agreed that Anne’s law should be fully implemented as soon as possible to ensure a human rights-based approach to care. Did it consider different options for its implementation, other than in the bill that was before the committee? Across the chamber, there is frustration in that, although we all agree on the need for Anne’s law, it perhaps does not need to be part of this bill. It could be implemented in other ways.

I thank the Solicitor General for that response and for clarifying the roles and responsibilities of the Lord Advocate. Her office will be aware that my constituents Ann and Gerry Stark were told repeatedly by the Crown Office and health authorities that all tissue samples of their deceased son, Richard, had been returned to the family, but that was not true. Does the Crown Office accept that the failings in that case should never have happened? Will the law officers take the opportunity to apologise to the family? Can we have more information about the urgent action that was taken since the scandal came to light last year, so that all families, including the Stark family, can have full confidence in the Crown Office when it investigates the sudden and unexplained death of our loved ones?

To ask the Scottish Government what action the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service takes to ensure that any information that it receives from pathology service providers is accurate and reliable. (S6O-03127)

To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking through the delivery of benefits to help families with the cost of nappies, in light of the reported increase in nappy theft linked to the cost of living crisis. (S6O-03109)

Notwithstanding the support that is available, we know that being unable to afford essential baby items is a reality for too many of our constituents. Nappy rationing is a horrible reality for many families and has a devastating impact on babies, children and parents.

The environmental benefits of reusable nappies are well known. They can also save families significant amounts of money, but the up-front costs can be a barrier. Scotland’s baby box gives families the opportunity to try reusable nappies, but the opt-in for that is quite low, at around 14 per cent. Will the cabinet secretary outline the ways in which the Government can come to understand that low uptake, raise awareness and make it easier for people to use such reusable products?

I will be guided by you as always, Deputy Presiding Officer.

I welcome the commitment that the minister gave to Stephen Kerr at the start of the debate on what workers and the people of Grangemouth—and, indeed, the people of Scotland—need, which is collaboration between not only the Scottish Government and the UK Government but all the key stakeholders. Stephanie Callaghan was right to bring us back to what matters. It is about people, their families and livelihoods. We can get caught up in the big economic picture, but the debate is about people and we need to hear their voices, too.

I am not a member of the Economy and Fair Work Committee, so I will defer to colleagues who were part of the inquiry into the just transition for Grangemouth. It is significant that the committee did that work. The report is good, and some things have been addressed.

However, I was concerned and disappointed to read at the very top of the report that Ineos turned down the committee’s opportunity to give evidence. I am not sure of the reason for that. That would have been a good opportunity to set out and get on the record what work the company is doing to contribute to Scotland’s net zero targets.