Chamber and committees

First, I thank my colleague Stuart McMillan for bringing the debate to the chamber. From the number of speakers who are lined up, it is clear how important it is for the subject to be debated.

I did not like history when I was at school, and pretty much everything I now know about Scottish history I have learned during the decades since I left school. I learned more about the battle of Hastings and Oliver Cromwell than I did about the battle of Bannockburn and the Highland clearances. I have tried to analyse why I found the subject boring, and I can only conclude that it was because I had no interest in learning a timeline of dates of battles—the battle of Hastings springs to mind—nor the succession of the royal family. To be honest, I still have no interest in those things. I realise that my generation learned little or no Scottish history—the history of my own nation.

What I have learned since my school days, however, I find fascinating. Scotland has a rich, enlightened history that I could never find boring. These days, I lap up the fascinating histories of countries all over the world.

I am aware that history as it is taught throughout schools in Scotland now is more relevant, but no nation should allow the erasing of its history. It was erased in the curriculum, and I find that shocking.

Erasing women from our history was also common, and it is only now gradually beginning to get better. We did learn about a handful of our great Scottish inventors, such as Alexander Fleming and John Logie Baird, but I would love to have known about Elsie Inglis, Jane Haining, the Edinburgh seven, Victoria Drummond, and so many more women pioneers to whom Scotland is indebted.

I would also like to have known about the part that Scotland played in the slave trade, burning witches, the clan wars and the clearances. Those are just some of the historical events in which we hardly covered ourselves in glory, and they should have been taught.

Those stories were not told, and therein lies the problem. Young people deserve to see the full picture of their nation’s historical past. As Stuart McMillan’s motion acknowledges, it is just as important for children to know about the history of their local areas as it is for them to know about the history of Scotland the nation.

Huntershill house in Bishopbriggs in my constituency of Strathkelvin and Bearsden was the birthplace of Scotland’s father of democracy, Thomas Muir. Sadly, the house has been sold off to a developer and left to rot, to the shame of our local council. Thomas Muir was a towering figure in Scottish history, yet I learned nothing of him at school. The local campaign group, Friends of Thomas Muir, does great work in my constituency in promoting his memory today. I believe that his legacy is now taught in schools in East Dunbartonshire, but too many people of my generation will be completely unaware of that incredible man.

I welcome any move that will educate our young people about Scotland’s history, warts and all. Without knowing where we have been, we do not know where we are now, and how far we have come. I thank the many teachers, community groups, and museums throughout Scotland that recognise that and are dedicated to educating our youngsters on their history.

Finally, I thank Stuart McMillan again for securing this important debate.

I thank Martin Whitfield for bringing this important debate to the chamber. I am pleased to contribute to it.

Martin Whitfield is right. The wording of his motion championing the right to holistic family support is important—in particular, where it says

“that article 18 of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child establishes the right of families to help and support”.

Support for families that are struggling or going through difficulties has always been needed, but it is especially needed now, in the midst of a horrible global pandemic, the impact of which affects vulnerable children, young people and families most. That is why holistic family support is so important and necessary.

I am thankful that there are excellent organisations that are skilled at providing that, including Action for Children, Home-Start Scotland, Barnardo’s Scotland, Aberlour Child Care Trust, Children 1st and many more that provide care and nurture to families across Scotland.

Action for Children protects and supports children and young people and provides practical and emotional care, thereby bringing lasting improvements to their lives. It runs 87 services across Scotland, and its 800 staff support, care for, and love more than 20,000 children and families across 31 of our 32 local authorities.

Home-Start Scotland is a local community network of trained volunteers and expert support that helps families with young children through challenging times in their own homes. In the previous parliamentary session, I attended a Home-Start parliamentary reception that was inspirational, to say the least, and at which I learned much more about what it does. Barnardo’s supports thousands of individuals, and Children 1st is an exemplary pioneer of caring for children and families throughout Scotland.

Those are just some of the fantastic support organisations that help families who are in need. The difference in their holistic approach is that they do not tell parents what to do or lecture them; rather, they empower them to take control in an entirely non-judgmental and non-stigmatising way.

Families can need temporary support because of an unexpected crisis, a health issue, a dependency issue or financial trouble. Such life events could happen to any one of us at any time. If they are addressed early, those problems can be resolved or mitigated to allow the family to heal. Children are always given a voice so that they can help to play a part in creating a happier family environment.

As I said earlier, the Covid crisis has also seen the need for family support soar, with many families reaching out for help for the first time. Action for Children experienced a 415 per cent surge in demand for parenting advice in the first three months of lockdown, compared with the same time the year before. That is why the Scottish Government’s commitment to deliver a whole family wellbeing fund of £500 million in the current parliamentary session is so welcome and important. The groundbreaking baby box and best start grants are testimony to our commitment to giving children the best start in life, as is our transformational early years programme.

However, we must continue to build on that—I agree with Martin Whitfield about consistency—so that families who are under pressure know that help and holistic support are there for them when they are going through the roughest of times.

I agree that more must be done in that sense, but establishing a fund—as we have done—is a start. As I said, that has to be built on so that the problem that Pam Duncan-Glancy has brought up is alleviated; I say that it has to be done soon.

Supporting families who are in need is at the core of creating a better society in Scotland. I thank all organisations and volunteers. To all struggling families out there, I stress that there is unconditional help for them, if they reach out.

My question is for Ms Medhurst and is about the resource implications of the initiative. How much additional time have prison staff spent on dealing with the initiative since it started? What impact has it had on their other work?

I want to ask a bit more about the response of prisoners to the initiative. The cabinet secretary said in his opening statement that prisoners had initially been hostile but that things have sort of calmed down. I ask Ms Medhurst for her view on why things have calmed down. Is that because the process is running smoothly?

Are there plans to carry out a mental health assessment of the impact on prisoners and their families? If so, can you give us an approximate timescale for that?

That is fine—thank you.

I completely understand what you are saying, but, when the pandemic has settled down, will some kind of assessment be done of how much time staff are spending on the initiative?

Thank you. That is fine, thank you convener.

I am pleased to be able to contribute to this important debate, and I thank my colleague Fulton MacGregor for bringing it to the chamber.

Giving blood means giving the ultimate gift. It does not cost the donor anything—just a short time out of their day—to give someone the chance of life, or a better life.

The Scottish National Blood Transfusion Service is a credit to our nation. It has been providing safe high-quality blood, tissues and cell products since the 1930s. That is quite a pedigree. If we are ever in need of blood—whether through illness or an accident, whether for ourselves or for our children—we assume that it will always be there, and thanks to thousands of donors, it is. However, during the surreal time that we are living through, with Covid dominating our lives and the NHS, it is more important than ever that there are enough supplies.

Today’s debate is important, because it might reach out to people who have always meant to donate blood—I include myself in that category. Sadly, as Fulton MacGregor articulated in his motion, there is concern that

“Scotland has fewer registered blood donors than at any other point this century”.

Over the past year, the number of people donating blood supplies has dropped by 13,000, and estimates suggest that the Scottish National Blood Transfusion Service needs another 3,300 donors per week to ensure that blood supplies remain at safe levels.

In 2016, I held a members’ business debate in the chamber, and I had a resolution passed at our party’s conference on the subject that Paul O’Kane has just excellently articulated: men who have sex with men being treated equally in regard to blood donations. At that time, a man who had had sex with another man in the previous 12 months could not give blood, albeit that they were in a monogamous relationship. Clearly, those rules were archaic and made no reference to someone’s personal risk of, for example, being a carrier of HIV, and a promiscuous straight person would be able to donate blood freely. Shockingly, if a same sex couple’s child ever needed a blood transfusion, and they were a match, they would not be allowed to save their own child’s life.

Thankfully, that inequality has now changed. In June last year, on world blood donor day, new legislation came into effect across Scotland, England and Wales, which means that donors’ eligibility is assessed on a person-by-person basis, rather than by the application of across-the-board restrictions. Gay men, who, for years, had suffered such discrimination, could safely and happily give much needed blood.

As many across the chamber have said, a person just never knows when they will need a blood donation. Many new mums owe their life, or their baby’s life—as we heard from Fulton MacGregor—to someone taking the short time to give a pint of blood. What could be more rewarding than being responsible for enabling that?

As the saying goes, not all heroes wear capes. They simply decide to donate a pint of blood and become a lifesaver, and a special thank you must go to the hard-working staff who enable that to happen.

I say to people: please, if you have one new year’s resolution to make that will really make a difference, please consider giving blood. It is painless, quick and easy, I am told. Visit the SNBTS website to find out how you can donate and where your nearest centre is, and make that positive step—a step that is needed today, as we battle our way through this pandemic, more than ever.

Will the First Minister explain how the Scottish Government is financially supporting people on low incomes who are required to self-isolate?