On the back of that, I understand that the process for monitoring how the standards are being implemented and delivered using a dispersed model and a tiered approach will involve self-assessment. Is that an acceptable approach?

Is that response based on work that is already being done in NHS reporting systems?

A lot of my questions have been answered.

I was just thinking about the gender identity healthcare services standards that were published by Health Improvement Scotland this month. I recognise that healthcare providers will be doing their best to provide the very best care. I am interested to hear your thoughts on those standards. What needs to be done with them? Which of them will be the most difficult to achieve? How we are doing at the moment? I am a nurse, so I know that we have been talking about how to deliver individual person-centred care for years, and that is obviously the goal of the standards. What needs to happen to ensure that they are achieved?

I have a final wee question. Ahead of today, in preparation, I was reading about how the system for people to access their GP works in Australia, Germany and other countries. There are opportunities for us to learn from approaches worldwide, looking at what works in other areas.

If GPs were to opt out from gender care, would that mean that we would miss young people who have neurodivergence or mental health issues? It is not just a black-and-white issue; this is about person-centred, total patient care and assessing individuals in a holistic way. We have been talking about a holistic approach. I am concerned that, if there were to be an opt-out, we would miss people who really need support with other conditions.

Just in a wee second.

I would welcome further discussion with the cabinet secretary about how we can push that provision further to tackle the discrimination and stigma that those speakin their native Scots tongue face.

I would like to use amendments at stage 2 to explore the issue of defining what the Scots language is. There are umbrella terms. In his evidence to the committee, Bruce Eunson said that the umbrella term “Scots” includes variants from across Scotland that differ depending on whether you are in Stranraer or Stromness. As we move forward, we could look at how the bill could further define the language. That point was also included in the evidence submitted by Time for Inclusive Education.

On what the member says about measuring success, there is one thing that I think might be useful. The census used to ask, “Do you speak Scots?”, but now it asks people whether they read, write, understand and speak Scots. Could we perhaps use those results as a measurement of success?

As co-convener of the cross-party group on the Scots language, and as a long-standing proponent of the Scots language, I welcome the fact that we have now reached the stage 1 debate on the Scottish Languages Bill.

At the outset, I thank the cabinet secretary for her engagement in meeting me and other members last week, and for her commitment to continuing to work on a cross-party basis to ensure that we get the bill right for all of Scotland’s Scots and Gaelic speakers. I also thank the Open University in Scotland and all the members of the Scots language cross-party group for their engagement regarding the bill. I welcome Dr Sylvia Warnecke to the public gallery of the chamber—thank you for being here.

Just on Saturday, I attended the Scots language awards in Cumnock’s toon hall. The breadth of talent and the dedication and commitment to preparing, shaping and advancing Scots were absolutely clear. That there is so much love for our Scots language was so evident in the performances and the words of the presenters at the awards on Saturday. Hands Up for Trad and everyone involved deserve huge recognition for that.

Today, I will focus my comments on the areas in which I would like the bill to be strengthened. One of the key policy objectives of the bill is

“to provide further support for the Scots language and improve its status, profile and use ... in public life”

and in our diverse communities, with the many variants of Scots that are spoken in those communities. A lot of work is already being done in the areas of housing and transport, which was mentioned in evidence at the Education, Children and Young People Committee. I think that the Deputy First Minister said earlier that, for example, when we build new housing, the street names could be named using Scots or Gaelic words, so that we can further enhance awareness and put the language out there right in everybody’s face when they drive into their new street.

The Scottish Government has consistently recognised that the Scots language is an important part of Scotland’s heritage, culture and national identity, but it is fair to say that the recognition could go further. A key discussion point that is consistently brought up at the cross-party group and by those who are involved in the Scots community is the need to tackle the stigma and discrimination that Scots speakers face. I have experienced that myself, and I know that other people have, too. When growing up, like many others, we would often be told to speak English, to speak properly and to stop speaking slang, and we hear that such comments are still prevalent today.

To highlight that stigma and discrimination, I note that, last year, when I invited prominent Scots author and broadcaster Billy Kay to present Parliament’s time for reflection in Scots, there was a huge backlash of negativity on social media. I therefore welcome the statement in section 26 of the bill that the Scots language will receive “official status in Scotland.” It is the first time that legislation has made a statement about the status of the Scots language.

I need to carry on.

Section 27 of the bill requires the Scottish ministers to

“prepare a Scots language strategy”

and sets out the required content of that strategy, along with the consultation and publication requirements and timescales for its preparation, review and revision. The provision in the bill to prepare that strategy will give importance to those priorities and to the work that Scots bodies and other authorities do to make progress on them.

I have a couple more points to make. Section 31 of the bill requires the Scottish ministers to

“promote, facilitate and support Scots language education in schools”,

which means that education authorities must also do that in the schools that they manage. There have already been some fantastic examples of that in Dumfries and Galloway, including at Troqueer primary school in Dumfries.

In preparing that guidance, the Scottish ministers must consult interested persons, who might include, for example, the Scots Language Centre—which has already been mentioned—Scots Hoose or Yaldi Books. That work will ensure that young people are exposed to Scots from an early age, and it should help to tackle some of the stigma surrounding the Scots language.

I have one ask—this issue was raised by the Open University—which is that the bill should place a statutory duty on public bodies in relation to their use of Scots, as is already the case for Gaelic. I would welcome further discussion of that with the cabinet secretary.

It is right that we are now providing greater recognition of the Scots language in education. As I said to the cabinet secretary, the bill is important in recognising how the history, heritage and culture of all our communities relate to Scots. I will support the bill at stage 1, and I look forward to working with the cabinet secretary as we move forward.