Chamber and committees

I do not disagree with the general point that Lorna Slater is making, but does she recognise that there are other mechanisms to protect the type of individuals whom she is talking about? For example, there are consumer rights, so there might be other mechanisms to address the issue.

I am grateful for the clarification on time, Presiding Officer, because Martin Whitfield told me on the way into the chamber that he was planning to speak for 30 minutes, and it frightened me that I might not get my lunch.

With that to one side, I associate myself with the kind words that have been said by many members in relation to Lady Paton. She has done an excellent job and has played a significant part in the fact that five Scottish Law Commission bills have proceeded during the parliamentary session.

Although today’s debate is in the graveyard slot and there is not a lot of controversy around it, we should not allow ourselves to mistake that for saying that the bill is not important. Parliament is not just here for headlines or to provide social media clips. The fact that we have waited almost a quarter of a century in the devolved era for this legislation to come forward poses some questions about how we do our business. Today’s debate is perhaps not the place to get into that, but there is room in a new parliamentary session for new thinking about further enhancing the processes that allow such bills to come forward and for allowing committees in general to introduce legislation.

Credit is due to Graeme Dey for pushing the process forward and for recognising the work of the DPLR Committee and the enthusiasm of its members, which is evident even today, just before Christmas. Credit is also due to Stuart McMillan in particular for making the time to look at the bills in such detail and with exactly the same consideration as would be given to any other legislation. As a past member of that committee, I know how well that has worked and how well the committee is supported by its clerks and the Parliament’s legal team.

As we have heard, there is little question about members’ support for the bill’s general principles. The only substantive opposition and concerns appear to have come from those who retain a romanticised attachment to common law and the institutional writers of ages past. When we look at the modern world and at some of the legislation that makes it on to the statute books, it is perhaps easy to see where such views come from. However, as other members have referenced, the world has changed and, if only we still had a reliable postal service to fall back on, things might be different.

I get that there is an attraction to maintaining traditions and distinctiveness in our legal system, but that has to be balanced and tempered by reality, both commercial and social. Predictability and accessibility in the law matter, and law does not exist in a vacuum, nor are its impacts confined exclusively within the bounds of Scotland. I think that that makes a strong case for careful and gradual codification in areas where uncertainty has emerged. It is important to recognise that that uncertainty has not emerged on purpose but through the absence, age and specific nature of case law.

In a number of key areas, the bill will make processes easier and will provide, as other members have referenced, a backstop or a starting point for contract formation. That is surely a good thing.

In closing, as we have already heard from any doubters, there will always be the opportunity for those who do not like the bill and its provisions to opt out and agree on alternatives. Those who stand to benefit most are the very individuals and small businesses that rely most on the law to establish fairness and balance. I therefore look forward to the bill moving forward to stages 2 and 3.

Although I do not think that it is directly relevant, I draw members’ attention to the fact that I am a board member at Scotland’s Rural College. That might loosely relate to rural support under agenda item 4.

I want to make it clear that I do not support the Early Release of Prisoners (Scotland) Regulations 2025. I believe that it is a disproportionate use of power and that such matters should not be decided by delegated legislation.

I start by congratulating Fulton MacGregor on securing this important debate. I always enjoy his members’ business debates and the campaigns that he works on, because not only does he bring the problems to the chamber but, often, he brings the solutions, too. I strongly associate myself with the calls that he has made on the Government, which all seem to be reasonable and practical steps that could make a real difference.

It is a pleasure to follow Paul McLennan, who has inspired me to get on and book an appointment to give blood. I was a regular donor in the past—I started when I was at school—and then, probably exactly as Fulton MacGregor mentioned, I was one of those people who got out of the way of it during the pandemic. I think that I have done it once since the pandemic. Although it is worth while and important to contribute to the debate and to encourage the Government to act, those of us who can should be looking to roll up our sleeves, and I reflect on the fact that I have not been good at doing that. Therefore, I am very grateful to the 112,251 active donors in Scotland, who make time to do that.

However, as we have heard, we are still facing on-going donation blood shortages, which is why it is really important that organisations such as Give Blood 4 Good play their important role in raising awareness. We must also recognise their ability to reach out in a different way. In the past, many initiatives have relied on adverts on the backs of buses or broadcast during television programmes, flyers posted through doors, or word of mouth. If we want to reach young people and a new audience, we need to meet people where they are. That is what is so good and inspiring about this initiative—it recognises the need to do that underlying work.

As we have heard, giving blood is life changing for both the donor and the person receiving the blood. In the speeches so far, we have heard about the range of people who need blood, often unexpectedly, after an operation, complications during childbirth or a serious accident. It could be a child battling cancer or a victim of a car crash. If we found ourselves or our families in any of those situations, we would be absolutely desperate to know that a blood transfusion was available, but that relies on each and every one of us playing our part.

It is interesting to reflect on the fact that, in other areas of medicine, lots of new treatments have become available and there have been lots of medical advances that have led to different types of care, but blood cannot be manufactured en masse. There is no laboratory that can step in to do that. We are the one source of this life-preserving fluid, which is what makes blood donation and increasing the number of blood donors so important. That is why the steps that have been outlined should be taken.

I pay tribute to the friends and family of Patrick Smith, whose example stands as an inspiration to us all. They can take a great deal of comfort in the organisation that has grown around him and the number of lives that, as Fulton MacGregor said, have potentially been saved. I hope that we will hear from the minister that at least some of the points that Fulton MacGregor set out are things that the Government can act on.

On a point of order, Deputy Presiding Officer. I apologise for delaying you and other colleagues longer than necessary. I have realised that I inadvertently used the wrong pre-Covid figure for the number of blood donors. I wanted to make members aware of that. My apologies.

To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to support NHS Dumfries and Galloway in addressing financial pressures. (S6O-05007)

Any additional money is welcome, but with a record deficit of £58 million, as predicted by the health and social care partnership for 2025-26, the board’s financial position continues to deteriorate.

Local communities have real concerns about the impact of drastic reductions in spending. Fundamentally, it will not be possible to save such a sum without reducing services, which will leave rural communities even more isolated. Cost pressures are starting to dictate services, rather than, as the cabinet secretary talked about, services becoming more patient led.

To ask the Scottish Government what steps it is taking to ensure that pupils attending smaller rural schools are receiving the additional support for learning that they need. (S6O-04957)

On behalf of parents, pupils and teachers, I ask the cabinet secretary: what are they to do when that does not happen? In Dumfries and Galloway, resources are being rationed and smaller schools are being disadvantaged, often having a learning assistant for a fraction of the week. I hope that the cabinet secretary, as a former teacher, will understand the pressure that it creates when support is not there for a young person at the time when they need it, which can often be unpredictable.