Chamber and committees

And that grant is available to landowners for improvements. How is its availability publicised?

In a future evidence session, we will discuss a number of petitions on healthcare in Caithness. I suggest that we invite the petitioner to join us at that meeting and that we examine all the petitions in that evidence session. Although they are all important individually and they are distinct, they are all part of the same theme and it would be helpful to speak to everyone together.

I have heard everyone say that deer management and invasive plants—rhododendron, for example—are the greatest threats, but we have spoken a lot about encroachment of commercial plantation tree species into ancient and native woodlands. I would like to hear the witnesses’ opinions on that. My first question is specifically for Doug Howieson from Scottish Forestry. What do you do to prevent that encroachment? How are you tackling that with new plantations? What are the opportunities to address the issue through “The UK Forestry Standard”?

Thank you. I am sorry for having interrupted you.

I suppose that I know the answer to this question, but why would a landowner not wish to implement that best practice, and what can we do to encourage them? For example, I was surprised to hear that the proposal for a bit of community woodland was refused. Can that sort of thing be addressed through stronger planning approaches such as community benefit clauses? How do we encourage those who do not wish to do the best, to do the best? I agree that commercial forestry is important to our economy, but we have to ensure that it does not come at too high a cost.

This is an important matter. Pam Duncan-Glancy’s response shows that it warrants a full investigation, and I wonder whether a subject committee could take on the petition. I do not know which would be the best committee for that—perhaps the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee or the Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee—but it would be helpful for a committee of this Parliament to investigate the matter properly and fully.

I congratulate Jenni Minto on securing the debate to celebrate, and reflect on, the incredible achievements of Dr Elsie Inglis.

Yesterday, we marked international women’s day, on which we celebrated women’s achievements, raised awareness against bias and took action for equality. It is only fitting that, today, we celebrate Dr Elsie Inglis by commemorating her achievements to raise awareness against bias and take action for equality. In a period when women were expected to be compliant in a masculine world, she challenged that attitude and became a surgeon, philanthropist, patriot and leader of the movement for the political emancipation of women.

From a young age, Elsie showed strength and resilience. Despite fierce prejudice from the medical establishment, she became one of the first women to study medicine in Scotland and, once qualified, devoted herself to improving the medical treatment of women. In 1894, she established an Edinburgh maternity hospital staffed entirely by women and, at the outbreak of the first world war, she organised all-women ambulance units.

When the War Office told her to

“go home and sit still”,

she refused. Instead, she raised funds and sent a medical team of 100 women to the front line in France to set up a field hospital. That was followed by 26 hospital units in several countries. She herself travelled to Serbia to set up three hospitals. Today, perhaps because of Dr Elsie Inglis, women are a staple of front-line medical roles.

However, Elsie did not confine her activities to medicine. It is no surprise that she became involved in the movement for women’s suffrage, taking on the role of honorary secretary of the Edinburgh National Society for Women’s Suffrage. She said herself that fate had placed her in the vanguard of a great movement, for which she was described as “a keen fighter”. Through her involvement, her tenacity and influence continue to affect the lives of all Scottish women.

To echo words that the First Minister once used to describe her, Elsie demonstrated that women were capable of performing roles that they had been denied. In Serbia, she is remembered with respect and affection. Fountains, buildings and memorials celebrate her life and legacy.

In Scotland, with the closure of the Elsie Inglis memorial hospital in 1988, there was a risk that she would be consigned to history and almost forgotten. We must not let that happen. On the centenary of her death in 2017, the Lord Provost of Edinburgh, Frank Ross, proposed a campaign to erect a statue in her memory. Sadly, although there was a list of notable supporters, the campaign ground to a halt because of the pandemic.

Like Elsie herself, Fiona Garwood and Thea Laurie decided not to sit still and pursued a pandemic project, picking up the mantle to fundraise for and build a memorial for Dr Elsie Inglis. I congratulate them both, as their campaign has mustered support from notable organisations and individuals, including medical and nursing organisations, historians and, in particular, Girlguiding Edinburgh.

I encourage everyone who is listening to get involved. I understand that there are a number of events on until 13 March. They have included various afternoon teas across the city and a Girlguiding sponsored “sit still” on the Meadows. Donations can also be made through the Elsie Inglis website.

Statues create a dialogue between the past and present. Elsie’s kindness, resilience, strength and determination make an incredible role model for generations to come. I agree with all who say that Dr Inglis is a truly revered and treasured figure, not just for Edinburgh but for Scotland. She deserves to be honoured.

I acknowledge the work of women’s groups and communities across Scotland and the world to tackle women’s inequality. The work that they do is important, often unpaid or underpaid and, sadly, frequently undervalued by some, but it makes a difference and is in many cases life saving. Thank you, sisters.

I especially mention North Ayrshire Women’s Aid and the North Ayrshire violence against women partnership, which will gather with the wider community for a reclaim the night march in Irvine this evening. I am sorry that I cannot join them.

Our debate takes place against a background of conflict and bloodshed around the world. We know that women and girls are disproportionately affected by war. Given this year’s focus on bias, it is worth reflecting a little on our collective response, on the rhetoric and action of Governments and Parliaments and on media coverage in regard to global conflicts and injustice.

In Afghanistan, there remains a devastating humanitarian and economic crisis. More than half the population is suffering extreme levels of hunger, and the UN has stated that an increase in child labour, child marriage and the sale of children has been observed. As Gillian Martin laid out eloquently, for Afghan women and girls, the de facto authorities have taken actions to curtail fundamental rights and freedoms. Women have been excluded from the workplace, and limitations on freedom of movement are negatively impacting other aspects of their lives, such as access to health services.

I do not think that war can be anything other than grotesque and unfair but in Yemen, for nearly seven years, a grossly asymmetrical war has seen Saudi bombs pummelling the country, sinking it into widespread famine and pushing it to the cusp of collapse. Instead of hearing widespread condemnation, Yemeni women who are struggling for their survival have heard very little from the rest of the world. That war has caused an estimated 233,000 deaths, including 131,000 from indirect causes such as a lack of food, of health services and of infrastructure because of a Saudi-led blockade.

In Palestine, ordinary Palestinian women and their families who are resisting state seizure of their homes in Sheikh Jarrah and other occupied territories are conflated with armed militants, which means that they are labelled and treated as terrorists. The recurrent killing of civilians in Gaza by Israeli air strikes is defended with the same excuse as Putin’s propaganda has adapted for Ukraine’s invasion—that women and children are being used as human shields, which justifies striking civilian targets. A shameful lie is just that, no matter who is telling it.

Those global events can feel entirely overwhelming when the Parliament has no powers over foreign affairs or immigration, but we are not powerless. As a nation, could Scotland direct resource to one of the countries that are doing the humane thing and opening their borders to provide sanctuary? Europe’s poorest country, Moldova, now has the largest proportion of refugees of any nation. Tens of thousands of people fleeing the Russian invasion have crossed its border from Ukraine, according to the country’s Prime Minister. As of Monday, of the 250,000 Ukrainians who had crossed the border since the war began, 120,000 have remained in Moldova.

Although our Parliament in Scotland does not yet have the power do something about the UK Government’s pitiful response to the refugee crisis, we can raise our voices and say that Scotland stands ready to accept those who are fleeing conflict. I am very grateful that our First Minister and her Government do just that. Refugees are welcome here.

We must maintain pressure on the UK Government to step up and do the right thing. I saw a clip yesterday of the Home Secretary seeming to say that the reason for not letting folk in was that there were trafficking gangs operating in Calais. Yes, Home Secretary, there are and there will be—and the direction of travel of your Government, with the Nationality and Borders Bill, plays right into their hands. Pushing displaced, traumatised women to the edges of society makes them even more vulnerable to traffickers—something that, according to Maria, a Ukrainian feminist activist, is already happening. In an interview with Julie Bindel that was published this morning, she speaks of

“Organised gangs ... trying to abduct young women on the Ukrainian Polish border”

and of girls being abducted by pimps from German refugee camps.

Sex trafficking is of course most prevalent in nations with legalised prostitution regimes. That is another thing that we can do right now: Scotland can ensure that there is no market here for the criminal gangs and sex traffickers to profit from by getting on with the job of adopting laws against sexual exploitation that are fit for the 21st century, making it a criminal offence to enable or profit from the prostitution of another person, tackling and ending male demand by criminalising paying for sex, and decriminalising and supporting victims of sexual exploitation.

With no home, no money, no job, no resources and a very limited legal framework protecting them, those displaced women are the most vulnerable in the world. From our position of safety here, we owe it to them, as well as to all the women and girls who are at risk of harm here, to take every action that we can and to use every power that we have to make the changes that are needed.

I appreciate that the cabinet secretary stated that the legislation and the policy of self-ID does not change the protections afforded by the Equality Act 2010 in terms of single-sex provision. That is the aspect of the bill that my constituents ask about the most. I understand that many organisations and institutions are already operating based on self-ID and that it may well be working for them. That does not take away the need for female spaces for others. If the policy of self-ID is made law, how will the Government ensure that single-sex spaces and services for the purposes of upholding privacy and dignity, for example hospital wards, therapy groups, refuges and accommodation, are available to women and girls who need them?

The strategy includes a welcome focus on improving wages and conditions in sectors where low pay and precarious work are most prevalent through the sectoral fair work agreements. Will the cabinet secretary provide further details as to how the Government will work with trade unions and industry to deliver high fair work standards?