Chamber and committees

I nominate Gillian Martin.

Gillian Martin was chosen as convener.

I welcome the opportunity to speak in the debate, and I congratulate Bob Doris on bringing it to the chamber, and on his excellent contribution. I also acknowledge and thank Christina McKelvie for the huge amount of work that she has put into raising awareness of MND, and for previously leading the debate in Parliament over a number of years.

My contribution will focus on the fantastic work of MND Scotland, both nationally and across my South Scotland region, the groundbreaking medical advances that have been made over the past 12 months, and on some points of interest in my region.

As Bob Doris said, this June marks 40 years since police officer John Macleod and his wife, Peigi, first launched MND Scotland from their living room, after John was diagnosed with motor neurone disease. Since then, many people—activists, healthcare professionals, researchers and those who have been diagnosed with MND—have helped to create a movement to fight back against MND through research and clinical trials. They have also helped to power MND Scotland’s life-changing support services through fundraising, donations and political action.

Across Scotland, including in my South Scotland region, MND Scotland provides support services for those who are living with MND, including through face-to-face support services, emergency financial grants, advocacy services and, during the current Covid-19 pandemic, video support and one-to-one phone calls. The charity’s work has been a lifeline for many, and I thank John and Peigi and all at MND Scotland, past and present, for the outstanding job that they do.

I highlight that Dumfries and Galloway in my South Scotland region has a particularly high prevalence of MND—higher than in other areas of Scotland. Across Dumfries and Galloway, an average of 15 people per 100,000 are diagnosed with MND, which compares with a United Kingdom average of five to seven people per 100,000. Figures show that the issue is particularly acute in Stranraer, where the statistics translate to 57 people per 100,000 being diagnosed with MND. I am thinking of my colleague the former MP Richard Arkless, his wife Anne and their family at this time, because both Richard and Anne have lost close members of their family to MND. No one knows exactly why MND is so prevalent in Dumfries and Galloway. MND has such a profound and devastating impact on the lives of so many, and there is a clear need for further research across the south-west of Scotland.

I welcome the significant advances in MND research over the past 12 months. Currently, almost everyone in Scotland who is living with MND is participating in MND Scotland’s new clinical trial, MND-SMART. Although typical clinical trials focus on a single drug, MND-SMART will allow more than one treatment to be tested at a time, which will give patients a higher chance of receiving an active treatment rather than a placebo. The project, which is being led by researchers at the Euan MacDonald Centre at the University of Edinburgh, has been developed to find effective medicines more quickly. The clinical trial will include as many people who have been diagnosed with MND as possible, regardless of how the disease or current treatments affect them.

The first trial is looking at amyotrophic lateral sclerosis and involves interleukin-2, which is used for treating some types of cancer. The study will focus on immune cells in the blood, which can influence the speed at which ALS progresses. I welcome the research and agree that it will improve the life chances of people who are living with MND in Scotland.

I wish MND Scotland a happy 40 years and every success as it moves forward. Again, I highlight the high levels of MND across Dumfries and Galloway, and I ask the minister to bear that in mind as policies move forward.

I welcome the opportunity to speak in this important debate on Scotland’s drug policy. I agree with the Government that the drug-related death figures that were published in December are unacceptable, and I welcome the fact that we are moving forward with updated, innovative and person-centred approaches to better address problem drug use in Scotland.

I welcome the publication of the medication-assisted treatment standards and all the work that the minister outlined in her opening remarks. There is so much going on, and I look forward to any progress. I agree that it is crucial to address inequality, listen to lived experience and work in partnership with housing, the police and families.

I am keen to continue supporting efforts to enhance ways of working. I plan to continue to be part of the cross-party group on drug and alcohol misuse, along with my colleague Monica Lennon, and I would welcome others who might wish to join that cross-party group.

In the previous session, as the deputy convener of the Health and Sport Committee, I had the opportunity to participate in the Scottish Affairs Committee’s inquiry into Scottish drug-related deaths in 2019. The inquiry heard directly from drug and alcohol support agencies, health services, academics, those with lived experience and families who had been affected by problem drug use. All the witnesses agreed that urgent reform is needed to solve the issue of drug deaths in Scotland.

The inquiry also heard from experts from Portugal, Germany and Canada, who examined the international evidence from countries that are taking a more progressive public health approach, not a punitive criminal justice approach, to tackling problem drug use. We found that the levels of deaths associated with drug misuse and eviction in those countries had reduced significantly, including by as much as 40 per cent in Canada. One recommendation from the Scottish Affairs Committee was that the UK Government must urgently introduce legislation to allow the Scottish Parliament to take its own approach to this hugely significant issue.

I support the motion, which calls for a four-nations summit, and I agree that the 50-year-old law needs to be reformed. A collective, four-nations approach could recommend and achieve law reform. The Conservatives’ amendment does not go far enough in addressing that. Working constructively is welcome, but continuing with a criminal justice approach, not a public health approach, is wrong according to the current evidence-based approaches that we are reading about. I am not surprised by the Conservatives’ amendment, however, as the UK Government’s Home Secretary, Priti Patel, has consistently stated that she will not give the powers over drug policy to this Parliament or change the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971. Indeed, she has stated that the drugs law is fit for purpose. However, maintaining the status quo isnae gonnae work.

In the past few months, much welcome work has been undertaken by the SNP Government, which has committed £250 million of additional funding for urgent action to deal with addiction issues and the harm caused by addiction. We are preventing and reducing both alcohol and drug harm among many individuals by establishing the new national mission to reduce drug-related deaths and harms. The mission was announced by the First Minister and is supported by an additional £50 million per year.

Drug and alcohol services have been supported during the Covid-19 pandemic, including in Dumfries and Galloway, in my South Scotland region, where assertive outreach is under way. The investment, through the programme for government in 2021-22, of a further £20 million over two years to tackle illicit drugs is also really important.

Brian Whittle talked about street benzos, and that subject has been covered extensively in my South Scotland area by the BBC. More people are accessing illicit street benzos through the internet, through Facebook advertisements and so on. My understanding is that street benzos are being used when people cannot access their heroin or cocaine dealers. Street benzos can be much more potent in their strength, especially when consumed with alcohol, and that leads to the devastating consequences of death that we are seeing.

In addition to other areas that the Government is investing in, I am interested in what the minister said about the £1.4 million and the 10 third sector projects that are being funded through the national development project fund. That is also welcome, as we know how important our third sector partners are.

I will highlight some further issues for the minister. Anything that we undertake needs to tackle stigma and discrimination, which are a huge issue, especially in rural areas. I also ask for a commitment from the minister that any new policy approach will ensure that rural parts of Scotland are included. I look forward to seeing progress across the whole of Scotland, including in my South Scotland region. I welcome the acknowledgement that we need to achieve better outcomes and support services and that we must talk about compassionate communities.

I look forward to hearing the minister’s response at the conclusion of the debate.

Will the cabinet secretary expand a bit on how people across Scottish communities, particularly in rural areas such as Dumfries and Galloway and the Scottish Borders, can use the advice from the Climate Change Committee and on how action can be taken from that advice?

I welcome the opportunity to speak in the debate, and I thank Douglas Ross for bringing it to the chamber today. I also acknowledge that Richard Lochhead, who is the constituency MSP for Elgin, has been very active on the matter, and it is good to see cross-party working on the issue.

I will focus my remarks on the Scottish Government’s review of maternity services at Dr Gray’s hospital, and on similar issues presented by rurality that are experienced by women across Dumfries and Galloway in my South Scotland region, particularly in Stranraer and Wigtownshire.

I agree with the motion that the decision to downgrade maternity services in Elgin, albeit on clinical safety grounds, has caused serious concern for many women and families across the area. Douglas Ross mentioned travel distances for mums who are on a green pathway, but for many expecting mothers with medium or high-risk pregnancies, the prospect of travelling many miles for maternity services will cause much anxiety. It is a 150-mile round trip from Stranraer to Dumfries, and friends’ experiences tell me that many people get anxious when having to travel such a distance.

I, too, commend the work of the Keep MUM group in ensuring that a proper, consultant-led maternity service is restored at Dr Gray’s hospital as soon as possible. I also commend the work of the doctors, midwives, nurses and the whole multidisciplinary team at Dr Gray’s hospital for their professionalism in working with mothers and all other patients.

I welcome the fact that, in March, the Scottish Government commissioned an independent review into maternity services at Dr Gray’s hospital, which is being chaired by Ralph Roberts, the chief executive of NHS Borders. The independent review is currently considering

“how a consultant-led service could be reinstated that is safe, deliverable and sustainable and will take into account the views of women, their families, staff and stakeholders.”

The review is due to publish its findings later this month, and I look forward to seeing its recommendations. I welcome the Scottish Government’s action to see a safe, consultant-led maternity service for mothers across Elgin and wider Moray.

Across Wigtownshire in my South Scotland region, expecting mothers have also faced issues when it comes to maternity services. Since 2018, there have only been out-patient maternity services at the Galloway community hospital, meaning that expecting mothers have to either have a home birth or travel on a 150-mile round trip to Dumfries and Galloway royal infirmary when they go into labour. However, a number of antenatal services such as ultrasound, treatment of early-onset complications, such as pre-eclampsia, and managing post-delivery issues are being delivered at the Galloway community hospital.

The situation has presented many challenges for women across the area, particularly when it comes to urgent cases and medium and high-risk pregnancies. Therefore, I ask the cabinet secretary in his closing speech to confirm whether there are options available for rural hospitals such as the Galloway community hospital and Dr Gray’s. I also ask him whether the review is looking at the whole multidisciplinary team with regard to the required skills and competence and the support that is needed to re-establish an obstetrician-led team at Dr Gray’s. In my experience as a clinical nurse educator in NHS Dumfries and Galloway before coming to the Parliament, I know how important it is to have safety as the number 1 priority.

I welcome the debate and the action that the Scottish Government is taking to allow for the re-establishment of a consultant-led maternity service at Dr Gray’s hospital in Elgin. I repeat my ask that the cabinet secretary explores innovative ways for rural health board settings, such as in Galloway and Elgin, to continue to deliver to meet the needs of the local people.

I congratulate the cabinet secretary on his new role and the new members who have given their first speeches today.

I welcome the debate and the Scottish Government’s vision for a safe, just and resilient Scotland. The Government’s ambition will ensure that our justice services have the resources that are required to meet the challenges that the Covid-19 pandemic presents and to bring about lasting change and positive transformation as we move forward. I echo James Dornan’s thanks to all our police officers who have worked tirelessly on the front line throughout the pandemic.

My speech will focus on three key areas: the lessons that our justice system can learn from the pandemic; access to medications in custody settings; and the arrangements surrounding youth remand and detention.

First, I welcome the Government’s commitment in this year’s budget to an additional £50 million to support recovery across the justice system. That includes funding for the court recovery programme, which will increase capacity in the High Court and in sheriff courts across Scotland. I welcome the recommendation from the Lord Justice Clerk’s restarting solemn trials working group that remote jury centres should continue, as that will be the most effective solution to increase trial capacity and reduce delays for cases going to trial. That important change could bring about a lasting impact through people not having to travel to attend jury service, which would also reduce emissions. As we heard from yesterday’s debate, tackling the climate emergency applies to all portfolios.

Similarly, it is welcome that people in Police Scotland custody suites have the option to attend court via videolink. The evidence shows that that has reduced the stress and cost of people in custody being transferred to a court and then detained until the court can hear their case. Such innovations are extremely positive, and I hope that they will remain in place as the Government carries out its review of the prosecution system. I have no doubt that the changes will help us towards our aim of delivering fairer, faster and more effective justice.

However, during the pandemic, jury trials at Dumfries and Stranraer sheriff courts have been moved to Ayr. Although the majority of jurors and accused have been able to appear virtually, I ask for an assurance from the cabinet secretary that the arrangement will be considered in the Government’s review and that those who are involved with the justice sector in Dumfries and Galloway will be able to feed in to it.

As our justice system moves forwards, there is room to explore better health arrangements for access to medication—and, indeed, to medical technologies—in custody and detention centres. I recently contacted Police Scotland and the Scottish Prison Service to seek further information on the current policies relating to medication. I was told that the management of medication for a person in custody is the responsibility of a healthcare professional and that they assess a person’s needs and vulnerabilities on their arrival at a police station. However, there is no set time by which a person in police custody or a prison setting must be seen by a healthcare professional.

If, for example, a person who is arrested is wearing medical technology, such as a continuous glucose monitor or an insulin pump for diabetes management, those devices have to be removed when they enter a cell. As someone with type 1 diabetes, I know that even one hour without my insulin pump can cause serious hyperglycemia, which is a health emergency.

Police Scotland and the Scottish Prison Service have medication that is classed as either urgent or non-urgent. Examples of non-urgent medication include anti-anxiety medicine. I had a constituency case in which a young person was not able to access his anti-anxiety meds in custody, which caused much stress and frustration and, of course, increased anxiety. Given that, and the opportunity that we have to transform our policies, is the cabinet secretary open to exploring such issues further so that we can look at how we can improve the experiences and wellbeing of those in custody?

The last issue that I want to raise relates to youth remand. I had a case in which a young man was held on remand—that can be for anything up to 140 days—at Her Majesty’s Young Offenders Institution Polmont, meaning that he was unable to access any of the organised events and activities there. He was kept in a separate wing, he was isolated for 21 hours each day and he had only three family visits each week. Given the Government’s commitment to implementing the barnahus—or bairn’s hoose—model, which is a multidisciplinary or interagency approach for dealing with young people who are going through the justice system, I ask the cabinet secretary to prioritise youth remand in implementing the barnahus model, as he mentioned earlier. My constituents and I would be happy to feed into that process.

The Scottish Government’s firm focus on community safety, crime prevention and the rehabilitation of offenders has meant that there is less crime and fewer victims than there was a decade ago. That might help to answer one of Pam Gosal’s questions. I say to Alexander Stewart that he cannae just cite one year of figures—that is not a trend.

The Scottish crime and justice survey for 2019 to 2020, which captures incidents that were not reported to the police as well as those that were, shows that crime has fallen by 46 per cent since 2008 to 2009, with violent crime down by almost two fifths. [Interruption.] I am in my last 10 seconds. I used to live in Los Angeles, which is somewhere that people might be worried about their safety. The survey shows that there has been a reduction in violent crime and that the SNP’s approach to justice is working. Again, I welcome this debate and the steps that are being taken to improve our justice system for all.

Will the cabinet secretary outline what steps the Government will take to improve Scotland’s system of land ownership and use, so that our land can contribute to a fair and just society by balancing public and private interests?

Worldwide, we are in the midst of a climate and biodiversity emergency. It is the actions of leaders across the world that will determine the future of our world for future generations.

We know that the science is real. Climate change is real and human activities are the main cause of it. Scientifically, we are now firmly in the Anthropocene, a period of unstable global warming in which global temperature has risen by 1.1°C in the past 100 years. That temperature increase has caused immense damage, but it is not too late to act.

I grew up watching Sir David Attenborough and have witnessed his shift to being more protectionist with regard to our environment and biodiversity. At the age of 95, Sir David stated that he cannot just stand by, and I agree with him. In his latest television show, he said:

“We are at a unique stage in our history. Never before have we had such an awareness of what we are doing to the planet, and never before have we had the power to do something about that ... The future of humanity and indeed, all life on earth, now depends on us.”

Those are powerful words, which we must all heed.

What we have learned during the pandemic is that society is able to come together to take radical action for the common good and, as we head into recovery from Covid-19, we must keep that spirit alive to build a sustainable recovery.

In Scotland, we are already delivering to address the climate and the biodiversity emergencies. In government, the SNP has made Scotland the first country in the world to declare a climate emergency and has since passed legislation for the world’s most ambitious emissions reduction targets, which aim to bring us to net zero emissions by 2045. We have already halved our greenhouse gas emissions since 1990 and we are world renowned for having underpinned our net zero targets with a legislative commitment to a just transition, ensuring that no one is left behind. We have committed to a green recovery from Covid-19 and have announced a £62 million investment in an energy transition fund. Further, we have been active on the world stage, leading the Edinburgh process on biodiversity and publishing the Edinburgh declaration, which calls for increased action to tackle biodiversity loss.

Scotland is playing its part, but we must have an international approach as well as a local approach that takes our communities and citizens with us on this vital journey.

Scotland is leading the way in the UK on tree planting, with 82 per cent of UK woodland being in Scotland. In 2019-20, we planted 11,050 hectares of new woodland, exceeding our annual 10,000 hectares target. That is extremely welcome. However, if we are to be truly serious about addressing the climate and biodiversity emergency, we will have to change land use as we currently understand it and focus on forest and woodland, peatland and renewable energy.

I have been contacted by some constituents who have concerns about proposed forestry, woodland and wind farm developments across the south of Scotland. Those concerns range from the percentage of Sitka spruce compared to the percentage of native broadleaf species that are planted, to the visual impact of offshore and onshore wind farm development. I am interested in pursuing thorough community engagement so that offshore wind farming could be created if it were to bring good green jobs and much-needed community benefit—especially to Wigtownshire in my region of South Scotland.

I am pleased to see the commitment from the Government in the revised climate change plan to hold

“early engagement, consistent communication, and genuine dialogue between different groups and communities.”

I ask the cabinet secretary to outline how that engagement will be done, and whether local authority planning frameworks will be changed to enable development, given the urgent need.

The Government has funded the restoration of more than 25,000 hectares of degraded Scottish peatland. Some of that funding has come direct to the Crichton Carbon Centre and the Galloway Fisheries Trust in Dumfries and Galloway, where peatland expert Dr Emily Taylor and the team are restoring more than 17,000 hectares of peat in the River Luce catchment area. That is important work, as peatlands are capable of absorbing and storing 50 per cent more carbon than some of our trees can.

When I visited a peatland restoration project with Dr Taylor, at Carsegowan Moss near Wigtown, we measured the peat bog at 6m deep. That is good, because deep peat is normally measured at 40 cm. One issue that Dr Taylor raised with me was that there is currently no international agreed definition of deep peat. Given that peatlands have a proven ability to sequester carbon, I ask the cabinet secretary to pursue an international agreement on peat level definitions, so that carbon sequestration can be calculated more efficiently.

I welcome the debate and the progress that is being made on the climate and biodiversity crises in Scotland, but I repeat the need for international co-operation and for bringing people with us on the journey.

I have written to the minister regarding the progress in infrastructure projects around South Scotland, such as the reopening of the Beattock railway station and the upgrading of the A75 and A77. Those projects were identified as part of the STPR2 process through community consultation that involved more than 2,000 people, whereas the UK Government union connectivity review engaged with no people in South Scotland. I therefore press the minister to give timescales for the implementation of the STPR2 recommendations, which will improve the lives of people across South Scotland.

Ractopamine, cloxacillin, and butylated hydroxyanisole—BHA—are just a few of the chemicals that I am concerned about with regard to any trade deal. Those chemicals have been banned across the EU since 1981 on health grounds, with restrictions also placed on imports of hormone-treated beef from third countries.

Ractopamine is a growth hormone used to make cattle, turkeys and pigs leaner before slaughter, and the US dairy industry uses it to increase milk production. Cloxacillin is a veterinary antibiotic growth promoter, which is used in Australia but banned for use in the EU, and butylated hydroxyanisole is a toluene-based antioxidant, which is used in the USA in many products, from crisps to sausages. It is known to be a carcinogen and is banned for use in the EU.

I welcome the opportunity to speak in this vital debate and I congratulate my colleague Jim Fairlie on securing it. I am concerned about the impact of trade deals on Scottish agriculture. I am also concerned about the drugs that are used on animals.