Chamber and committees

Refugees are people who have fled war, violence, conflict or persecution and have crossed an international border to find safety in another country. They are defined and protected in international law. The 1951 Refugee Convention is a key legal document that defines a refugee as:

“someone who is unable or unwilling to return to their country of origin owing to a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion.”

Article 14 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that everybody is entitled to seek asylum.

Here, in the UK, we should reflect on how our involvement in various conflicts destabilised many of the regions and countries that folk are having to flee from, but that will need a whole other debate. Therefore, today, as we focus on refugees, let us simply ask ourselves this: if we were fleeing for our very lives, and with a right to seek asylum guaranteed under international law, how would we wish to be treated at the places where we sought sanctuary? If we or our families, friends or loved ones had cause to flee from our homes, towns or villages, taking only what we could carry and in fear for our lives, how would we want to be treated? Would we want to be shown compassion, care, decency and humanity? Would we expect to be able to work and contribute to our new community?

How we treat those who need our help defines who we are and what we value as individuals and as a society. We have a moral and legal obligation to provide refuge to our brothers and sisters who find themselves in that situation. However, the UK Government is abdicating responsibility for those moral and legal obligations through its planned offshoring of asylum processing. Priti Patel, Boris Johnson’s Home Secretary, has described the deal, which will cost at least £120 million in the next five years, as a “first-class policy”. The United Nations does not agree, and it stated in its analysis of the scheme that it is

“incompatible with the letter and spirit of the 1951 Refugee Convention.”

The UN also raised a host of potential problems, including a shortage of interpreters in Rwanda, a risk of discrimination against LGBTQ people and a lack of capacity to process hundreds, if not thousands, of diverted asylum claims.

Officials said that there would be 130 people on the first flight to Kigali, but, after dozens of successful legal challenges, only seven asylum seekers were taken to the airbase. Liz Truss, the Foreign Secretary, told the media:

“I can’t say exactly how many people will be on the flight. But the really important thing is that we establish the principle.”

The principle of rich countries buying their way out of international obligations and trading in human misery by paying poorer countries to take vulnerable humans to somewhere where they might be at further risk of harm is not a principle that I share. I agree with the UN’s assessment that it is wrong. It is also expensive and ineffective in meeting the UK Government’s stated aims of preventing people from crossing the Channel.

As the minister pointed out in opening the debate, that can be done by providing safe routes and by removing the financial incentive for traffickers by disrupting the market for humans. In particular, in relation to women and girls who are trafficked for prostitution, it can be done with a robust justice response to men who purchase sex. The UK Government’s approach will not work. Even former hardline Prime Minister Theresa May of the “go home” vans is criticising the plan on the grounds of “legality, practicality and efficacy.”

I hope that Scottish Conservative colleagues in this chamber will be given cause for concern and do what they can by either speaking out or speaking privately and using whatever influence they have with their UK Government colleagues to change that inhumane and ineffective policy, which is shaming us all globally.

We could do so much better. As well as the simple democratic case for our nation restoring its independence, there are a myriad of specific policy reasons. A different approach to foreign policy and migration is one of those. With independence, and full power over migration policy, we can build an asylum and immigration system that is geared to meeting Scotland’s needs, which are different from those of the rest of the UK. For example, we need more working age people here.

We could have a system that is founded on fairness and human rights, which we have shown is possible with the Scottish social security system. An immigration system that fulfils our moral and legal obligations and that brings benefits to our nation is achievable for Scotland, but to achieve it we must have the full powers that only an independent nation has.

I welcome people who have sought refuge in Scotland over the years and recognise the contribution that those who have arrived here make to our culture and communities. Refugees are welcome here. Our country is richer for the diversity that you have brought—thank you.

I thank Christine Grahame for bringing this important topic to the chamber and highlighting the positive impact of men’s sheds. I also welcome the shedders who are in the gallery, and I congratulate Clare Prenton, Inspiring Life and the gentlemen of Peebles and District men’s shed, who collaborated to create and produce “Men Don’t Talk”.

According to the Scottish Men’s Sheds Association, there are 127 established men’s sheds in Scotland, three of which are in my constituency. They are Three Towns men’s shed, Irvine Harbourside men’s shed and Irvine Newtown men’s shed, which, in September 2019, along with Garnock Valley men’s shed, created the Ayrshire men’s shed network.

A man’s shed might conjure up the image of a lone man making or mending items by hand, content at the bottom of his garden, and away from the family, as Christine Grahame said. However, what we are talking about today is a wee bit different. Men’s sheds are about social connections, friendship building, sharing skills and knowledge, banter and, of course, a biscuit or two.

We all know that men’s health can be overlooked, with men being more predisposed to physical illness and injury, on top of being vastly more susceptible than women to mental health problems and suicide. It is often reported that men are less likely to access professional interventions. Men’s sheds raise awareness and encourage shedders to look after themselves and seek help when needed.

The Three Towns men’s shed, in conjunction with other organisations, co-ordinated a very successful men’s wellbeing event, which featured the Prostate Scotland virtual toolbox workshop to raise awareness of prostate disease.

The Scottish Shedder, the official free magazine of the Scottish Men’s Sheds Association, not only promotes news from men’s sheds across Scotland to showcase their successes, but includes a health section, which promotes topics from first aid to the benefits of physical activity and support services. It also includes personal stories from men on how becoming a member of their local shed helped to turn their lives around.

With an increase in online activities and the use of social media, one particular area of concern for men is social isolation and loneliness. As I am sure we can all understand, that was exacerbated during lockdown, when there were limited social interactions and community spaces were closed.

Organisations such as Age Scotland herald men’s sheds for offering opportunities to interact meaningfully with others. What is more, many sheds get involved in community projects such as restoring village features, helping to maintain parks and green spaces, and building things for schools, libraries and individuals in need.

At the end of last year, Irvine Harbourside men’s shed were made aware of a young apprentice joiner in the town who did not have any tools. It quickly stepped in to help by gifting a tool bag and basic toolkit to get him started. It also recently made planters and a bookshelf for the Puffer cafe at the Scottish Maritime Museum in Irvine.

The Three Towns men’s shed runs evening classes that provide basic do-it-yourself skills, camera skills and painting and decorating advice, which allow members to share their skill set with the wider community.

Irvine Newtown men’s shed turned pallets donated by a local business into fabulous benches, decorations and planters for the garden at Dreghorn library.

Men’s sheds are vital. They are community spaces for men to connect, converse and create. They help reduce loneliness and isolation and take into consideration differing male behaviours and the attitudes towards men’s physical and mental health. More importantly, they are fun and I wish them all the best.

I am interested to hear what the other students have to say about that, convener.

It has been good to hear about the positive working between the students and the colleges and about their getting to know the board and being able to go to them. I am particularly interested in Amy Monks’s remarks about the work that they did on a shared vision. However, I just want to flip that slightly and ask whether that work helped. After all, the student voice will not always share the board’s vision, and there might be conflict when the board wants to change things or do something that students do not agree with. Did the work on the positive side of things help to deal with that kind of conflict? Have you ever had to disagree with the direction that the management wanted to go in or with a specific thing that they wanted to do?

Do you feel that you can challenge decisions that you do not agree with?

Perhaps she can say what she wanted to say first. I do not want to cause any confusion.

That was helpful.

I am keen to hear from Heather Innes on this question. Obviously, you also have a big spread in the Highlands, and you have already talked about the number of leaders that you have had to engage with. I would be interested in hearing your perspective on this matter.

My colleague Graeme Dey will probably want to explore some of that with you, so I will go back to the question that I just asked. In some ways, you have already answered it, because it was about the challenges of being representatives. Given all the good work that is being done by the college itself to bring on representatives who feel able to challenge, have there been times when you have been able to challenge decisions and when you have felt that the work that was done helped you in that respect?

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I would have voted no.