Do you agree with that, Professor Jones?

Do the witnesses have any observations on the definition of wellbeing and the differences with the definition that is used in other legislation?

The SCOSS report highlighted that not all carers will be able to benefit from the full four-week extension to the run-on, because of the way that carer support interacts with universal credit. Can you update the committee on discussions that have taken place with the DWP to try to resolve that issue?

Thank you.

My final question is for you both. Given that the bill seeks to align the definition of sustainable development with the definition of wellbeing, and given that the definition of wellbeing relates to the wellbeing of

“individuals, families and other groups within society”,

is there a danger that, taken together, the definitions could go on to the statute books without explicit reference to environmental limits or constraints, which are described as “planetary boundaries” within the policy memorandum?

The statement indicates that there has been considerable improvement in CAMHS waiting times. However, some children are waiting as long as three years to access mental health support through the NHS, which is clearly unacceptable. What guarantees can the Scottish Government give that today’s announcement will result in waiting times being cut, or will we continue to leave our children behind?

An LCM relating to the Public Authorities (Fraud, Error and Recovery) Bill was considered by the Finance and Public Administration Committee in spring 2025, but that LCM only considered limited provisions in the bill. The Parliament then voted to give consent on 25 June 2025 in relation to clauses 72, 75, 78, 81, 83, 87 and 98. The LCM did not give a consent steer on the other clauses—namely clauses 89, 90, 92, 94 and 95—so the committee did not scrutinise them properly. The Scottish Government finally lodged a supplementary memorandum of consent on 3 October for the remaining bits of the bill, but the committee did not get the chance to scrutinise them at all.

We accept that, in this instance, there have been issues about the timescales for deliberation at Westminster and in Holyrood, and the October recess has an impact on that. However, we wish to put on record our belief that there should be the fullest scrutiny of all aspects of all legislation. For those reasons, we shall not support the LCM this evening.

The Parliament’s primary duty is to pass effective legislation, which, as members will agree, can be done only if there is effective scrutiny across the chamber and through committees.

The LCM before us relates to an important issue: fraud prevention. The Cabinet Secretary for Social Security and David Wallace attended the Finance and Public Administration Committee back in September. Every penny of public money that is lost to fraud is a penny taken from the hard-working taxpayers of Scotland—money that could be spent on our schools, hospitals or roads. Nurses, teachers and workers across Scotland deserve a Parliament that protects their contributions with unwavering diligence. We do not serve Scots by cutting corners or bypassing domestic processes. Regrettably, the process surrounding this consent motion has done that. For those reasons, the Scottish Conservatives will not support the legislative consent motion.

Fraud in the public sector does not just mean financial loss—it erodes public trust. When fraudsters exploit the system, they undermine the social contract that binds hard-working Scots to the services that they fund. The £36 million fraudulent benefit claim that was highlighted by an article in The Scotsman back in August is a stark reminder of the challenges that are being faced.

The Finance and Public Administration Committee recently sought answers from David Wallace from Social Security Scotland during his appearance before the committee on 16 September. His testimony was essential to members understanding our recovery of those funds. It was alarming to find that only 10 per cent of the funds lost to fraud in 2024-25 have been recovered. That is why the Scottish Conservatives agree with the principle of recovering wrongfully claimed funds and believe that the fraud-fighting toolkit must be modernised and strengthened.

A recent report has uncovered that NHS patients in my region and across Scotland were forced to receive electric shock treatment against their will almost 1,100 times last year. In around 2,000 cases out of 4,000, that outdated procedure was performed on people who, because of their mental state, were deemed incapable of giving consent. How will the Scottish Government act to ensure that vulnerable patients are protected from receiving that ethically unacceptable procedure?

I am pleased to speak in support of this crucial issue, and I congratulate my colleague Edward Mountain on bringing the debate to the chamber, and on the courage that he has shown in speaking about the topic. I join him in acknowledging that Scotland is indeed leading the way on bowel cancer screening across the United Kingdom.

The time between testing kits arriving on the doorsteps of the over-50s, and of those who would not normally receive a self-testing kit, is crucial. That is why it is critical to get out the message about recognising potential symptoms to members of the public of all ages. It is essential, in order that they have some opportunity to recognise potential symptoms, especially as we know that, if bowel cancer is diagnosed earlier, the outcomes are much better.

We all know that our NHS in Scotland is stretched, but I pay tribute to the staff working on the front line, who go above and beyond expectations to ensure that patients are supported. Many cancer charities have admirably stepped up to the challenge: Bowel Cancer UK and Beating Bowel Cancer, Bowel Research UK and many others are leading the charge in coaching the public in recognising symptoms of cancer.

I pay tribute to the Scottish cancer coalition, which is a group of around 30 charities that decided to work together to address key challenges facing cancer patients in Scotland. Although it is not a public-facing body, it lobbies and engages with the Scottish Government and external bodies such as the Scottish Medicines Consortium.

As today’s motion says, stoma awareness day was last Saturday and it was vitally important. The theme for this year was stoma myth busters and its aim was to break down the myths and stigma surrounding stomas of all types. As well as promoting education and providing support for the stoma community, the day encourages people to share their stories to challenge misinformation and build a more supportive environment for patients who have to wear stomas.

From first-hand family experience, I fully understand the vital need for early diagnosis, as well as the treatment that can be given, because it ensures that individuals who have a stoma can live a more normal life.

I also want to acknowledge where we are with the NHS, because it is essential that the NHS continues to get the support that it requires, alongside the many charities that support individuals financially and the volunteers who come to support and encourage. I truly commend them for the work they are doing to ensure that patients and families are supported.

I look forward to hearing from the minister about the measures that the Scottish Government is taking to ensure that we can continue this vital work for the communities that we represent.