I welcome the opportunity to speak in the debate, and I congratulate Oliver Mundell on securing it.

I have been involved in the world of Robert Burns for 25 years, and I enjoy Burns season very much. I am privileged to be a past president of Dumfries ladies Burns club number 1.

I join Oliver Mundell in highlighting the many events, projects and initiatives that are taking place across Dumfriesshire and Galloway. He mentioned the schools competition, to which I will turn in a moment; the Big Burns Supper; and the collaboration between Annandale Distillery and the Globe Inn. He also highlighted the excellent work done by the team behind securing Robert Burns’s farm at Ellisland.

In the schools competition that is organised by Dumfries and Galloway Burns Association, the number of entrants has increased year on year—there are more than 200 this year. The performances of poetry, song and music demonstrate the talent of the young people and the great effort that they and their teachers put in through their rehearsal time. The competition went online during the Covid pandemic, which has proved to be pretty successful. My husband was involved in that, because he has really useful digital skills. The people involved are dedicated to keeping the memory of Robert Burns alive for future generations.

I, too, want to mention the work of the centre for Robert Burns studies at the University of Glasgow. I agree with Mr Mundell that the centre has been crucial in highlighting Burns’s economic, social and cultural contributions to Scotland. Its projects promote Scotland and our culture at home and internationally, and they include so much information. I explored the interactive map of Burns suppers, which was funded by US donors. It is a thorough repository of excellent information.

I have spoken about the US connection to Robert Burns in my own immortal memories at Burns suppers. I encourage members to delve into the words that the USA’s 16th president, Abraham Lincoln, used about the inspiration that he gained from reading the ploughman poet’s work. President Lincoln certainly had a fondness for Burns and Scottish culture, and he asked for a passage to Scotland to be booked so that he could visit our precious country, but he was assassinated before he could travel to Scotland. However, his wife, Mary Todd Lincoln, visited Scotland in 1869, and she said:

“Beautiful, glorious Scotland has spoiled me for every other country”.

Those are fabulous words.

One festival that promotes Burns is the Big Burns Supper—I will elaborate on that a wee bit. It is the United Kingdom’s largest celebration of Burns and involves a jam-packed schedule of events spanning from 17 January to 2 February. The Big Burns Supper is supported by Dumfries and Galloway Council, the Holywood Trust, the National Lottery Community Fund, EventScotland and others. This year, Eddi Reader and Wet Wet Wet are performing, and a big Burns supper on a bus—and even an underwater Burns supper—are just a few of the events that are happening.

Along with colleagues across the parties, I hosted meetings with the Big Burns Supper and partners to ensure that the festival could go ahead this year. I appreciate the time that Colin Smyth and Oliver Mundell gave to support that cross-party approach. It is great, therefore, to see the return of the Big Burns Supper, and I thank the trustees and the team for their work. I remind members that my husband is one of the volunteer trustees.

I finish with some words from our national bard, which are written on the foundations of our Parliament—his words hold up our Parliament. Given the current struggles that people around the globe are facing, these words are pretty powerful and worth repeating:

“Then let us pray that come it may,
As come it will for a’ that,
That Sense and Worth, o’er a’ the earth,
Shall bear the gree, an’ a’ that
For a’ that, an’ a’ that,
It’s coming yet for a’ that,
That Man to Man the world o’er,
Shall brithers be for a’ that.”

Thank you.

Thank you.

My question might relate more to the next theme, but I am interested in hearing your thoughts on the bill’s proposed age limit of 16, given that, in other legislation, the age limit is 18. That is clearly different.

Good morning, minister. I am interested in the science of food additives and have been following the work of Professor Tim Spector, Chris van Tulleken and Carlos Monteiro in São Paulo in Brazil on the chemicals that are added to ultraprocessed foods.

I agree with the minister that the public trust Food Standards Scotland and the Food Standards Agency because of their work, which includes work on food crime. Yesterday, I met the head of food crime at Food Standards Scotland, and it was pretty eye watering to hear about all the work that is being done on that.

The Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition looks at the evidence on new products that will potentially come on to the market, which will take up its time. Do you have enough assurance that that committee will keep you informed about all the products that are coming on to the market, especially as new evidence emerges, based on the work of Tim Spector and Chris van Tulleken?

It has been interesting to hear everybody so far this morning. I remind everyone that I am still a registered nurse.

I am interested in some of the issues that have come up at committee about the process or model, including the ability of doctors to assess capacity and coercion without specialist input or training; the involvement of GPs, given the pressure on GP services; the level and experience of doctors; how the bill will prevent doctor shopping; and other issues to do with conscientious objection. I have a longer list, but I will save the time. Do the witnesses have any opinions about the process or service model as described in the bill? Do they include sufficient safeguards? Do they offer the prospect of a high-quality service?

Not all COPD is terminal, and not all diabetes is terminal.

Dr Wright, I want to pick up on what you said about GPs working behind closed doors. I am a registered nurse and, in my experience, if somebody is given a terminal diagnosis, a multidisciplinary team of specialists will be working with them. That will include haematologists, surgeons, nurse practitioners and physiotherapists—a whole range of specialists will come into contact with the patient. If a patient makes a statement, therefore, in which they say, “I want to end this,” it is not then just going be up to a GP to make a decision behind closed doors.

Quite often, in my experience, if a physician comes to speak to a patient and there is a family member at the bedside, the patient will be asked whether it is okay for the family member to stay or whether they should leave, and it is up to the patient to make that decision. It is about choice and more than one person is making a decision, so I am not sure that I agree that GPs would be working behind closed doors and making a decision in a vacuum with regard to what somebody’s autonomous choice might be. I am thinking about the wider multidisciplinary team and about the decision being part of a care process.

Thanks. I do not want to take over anybody else’s questions, so I will leave it there.

Last week it came up that somebody might have a terminal illness but also have what might be considered to be a mental ill-health issue; the bill talks about the person having a “mental disorder”. However, somebody can have depression then get a terminal illness, too. That is the sort of thing that, down the line, should be addressed in further guidance—the bill supports the development of guidance—so that the assessment of adequate “capacity” can take into account that some people will have co-existing conditions.