Seòmar agus comataidhean

I thank Beatrice Wishart for bringing this debate—the final one of the parliamentary year—to the chamber, and I am pleased to join her in making the case for all of our citizens to have access to good digital connectivity.

It is important to recognise that this is a matter for the UK Government as well as the Scottish Government, and I ask the Scottish Government to ensure from the outset that it works closely with the UK Government to progress it. Indeed, we can make that progress if we co-ordinate and manage the multiple issues that we have heard about.

Sometimes there is a sense that access to technology and the internet is a bit of a luxury and that it is not really essential to be digitally connected. However, as we have heard in the chamber already, we all understand that that is not the case. Those who are not online or who do not have the same access as others to the digital connectivity that we are talking about are definitely being left behind.

I remind members that digital poverty affects one in seven people across the UK. Ofcom’s 2023 “Online Nation” report found that a surprising 7 per cent of British households had no internet access at all in their home. The reality is that digital poverty exacerbates the hardships that people face and for those in that situation in 2024 it can be difficult to access many forms of healthcare, employment opportunities, and basic information about transport, weather problems or service changes, as well as many other things that, as members have said, we all take for granted.

I understand that R100 aims to be one of the most ambitious infrastructure programmes in Europe and to ensure that most rural parts of Scotland achieve parity in digital connection, and I acknowledge that that is what the Scottish Government is seeking. However, the Government’s ambition was to connect every household to superfast broadband by 2021, and it is now estimated that full R100 roll-out will not be achieved until 2028.

I understand from research that I have undertaken for the debate that although many homes have access to superfast broadband, as with much in the digital era, it is the same households and communities that are suffering from the divide and the slow progress. In this case, it is our more rural and island communities that have suffered. Members might be surprised to learn, though, that I have been contacted by communities in Lanark that are having some problems with weak connection and are needing help; indeed, businesses are being affected.

The R100 Scottish broadband voucher scheme, which was launched in September 2020, ensures that any home or business that is not in scope of the R100 contracts or planned commercial build can get access through a voucher worth up to £5,000. However, as we have heard from Beatrice Wishart and others, the scheme has not been without its difficulties, and I hope that in his closing speech the minister will address some of Beatrice Wishart’s specific points.

There are many myths about access to digital technology, and the motion clearly and correctly details some of the very real realities facing people who live in our rural or island communities. The reality is that the broadband that many have access to is very slow; the ambition to connect people is there—I understand that—but again and again, the reality on the ground for the same people is that the current system is slow and needs to be reinvigorated.

I once again thank Beatrice Wishart and all of the members who have contributed to the debate, and I hope that the minister has some positive feedback to give us in his closing speech.

I thank Marie McNair for securing this important debate again this year. On behalf of Scottish Labour, I welcome action mesothelioma day 2024, which we will mark next Friday.

As we have heard, mesothelioma is a rare and hard-to-treat form of cancer. Asbestos was banned more than a quarter of a century ago, but many worked in environments where it was present, and it can still be found in buildings across Scotland. As other members have said, the issue needs to be taken very seriously by Government. Each Government, whether at UK or Scottish level, must do all that it can to ensure that we get rid of this. Almost 3,000 new cases are diagnosed every year in the UK—200 of them in Scotland—so it remains of the utmost importance that we raise awareness of the symptoms of the illness and encourage people to be cautious and have their symptoms checked, because, as with other forms of cancer, identifying the illness quickly can prolong life.

It should not go unmentioned that mesothelioma is in many ways an industrial illness. Asbestos was prominent in mining, and it is therefore no surprise that former coalminers and their families have been asking for protection and compensation right up until today. As others have said, as the impacts of the environment in which miners worked became more apparent, they realised the connection. I fully support those calls from miners, who played such an important role in this country’s industrial heritage and risked their lives in what were often unsafe environments. Miners and their families really created a spirit in their communities, and it is right that we stand with them in times of illness, particularly illness related to the work that they did.

I want to emphasise a key part of the motion, which is the focus on investing in research. Improving our knowledge base and understanding of an illness is the only way in which we can truly tackle it. Mesothelioma, like other cancers, is a complex illness, with tiny fibres getting into the lungs and damaging them over time. As we have heard, that is due to exposure to asbestos. As we mark this action day, we must redouble our efforts to secure investment in research in the hope that we can effectively support those who are affected by this terrible disease. I share Marie McNair’s interest in the significant grant that Cancer Research UK has given to the University of Glasgow to conduct studies to further understand why it can take so long after exposure for cancer to develop. The research work is necessary. With it, alongside the efforts of this place, and the work that is going on in many of our communities—many key groups working with those affected by asbestos are in the gallery—we can effectively raise awareness of symptoms and, I hope, improve outcomes in the long term.

I again thank Marie McNair for bringing the debate. As has been said, this action day cannot be just a one-off event. We MSPs must come together and work together. We must take a united position in the chamber and work to make proper developments in research to support those who are already suffering from the condition and to tackle the big issues that the Governments of this country need to look at in the long-term to ensure that we reduce and eradicate this dreadful disease.

I commit my party to those efforts and I look forward to hearing other members’ contributions.

I thank Humza Yousaf for bringing this important debate to the chamber. At a time when eyes have begun to turn away from the atrocities and horrors that are being inflicted on the people of Palestine, it is important that we in Parliament continue to raise their voices.

I, along with many members from across the chamber, believe that Palestine is the moral question of our time and that this is not just a matter of standing up for a ceasefire in the here and now. As others have said in this and previous debates in the chamber, more than 75 years after Palestinians were promised a state of their own and after 56 years of illegal occupation, more than 100 countries now recognise Palestine. It is not out of step for them to do so.

Where one stands on the question matters. It matters because we must care about the future for Israel and Palestine. The hopes and the futures of all Israelis and Palestinians depend on what we do.

As a citizen of one of the most powerful countries in the world, I feel desperately ashamed that UK-funded weapons have been used to perpetuate this terrible episode in human history. No amount of gross domestic product is worth being involved in that. We need security and peace for the region. Internationally, we need to place pressure on the Netanyahu Government, which all in the chamber recognise.

As others have done, I have wept as entire families have been killed in Gaza. Children have woken up to find the refugee camps that they are living in with barely enough food or water completely ablaze after bombs were dropped on tents. Aid workers and journalists have been murdered in cold blood for simply trying to help people or to get to the truth. All that is going on as we speak, and it will still be happening tomorrow. How can we do anything other than speak up? We have a moral responsibility to do so.

As others have said, we need to recognise the root causes and address them. That requires us to recognise a Palestinian state and a two-state solution. The reality of the situation as it stands is that innocent people, including thousands of women, children and unborn children are being punished for a crime that they did not commit.

I thank Mr Yousaf for the stance that he took when he was First Minister, which was most welcome. He welcomed the support from Scottish Labour and across the chamber, and I believe that that reflected the overwhelming view in Scotland that we must strive for peace and reconciliation. Scotland must continue to use its voice whenever it can to draw attention to the plight of the Palestinians. We cannot let it be swept under the carpet, because it is that kind of attitude that has led to the constant instability in the region and the rise of leaders who are determined to use violence to get what they want.

I end by saying this to Governments around the world: selling weapons to a nation that is indiscriminately bombing civilian population centres is not a benign act. We have seen unimaginable scenes from Gaza of destruction and death. Across the world, we must speak out: stop the killing, bring the hostages home and recognise the state of Palestine so that we can begin the process of peace.

On statutory responsibility, including that of social workers—who are, I am sure you would accept, under enormous pressure—how do we support the statutory services, and particularly social workers, to get that information out as people start their journey in social care?

I am interested to know a little bit about funding for independent advocacy services. Do we have secure funding for those after 2027?

Good morning. Thank you for the introduction, which set out some of the things that we have heard in evidence on the approach and the differences in options that people have access to. My particular question is around the start of the journey, when people are provided with information and advice on self-directed support. I am interested in what we can do nationally to try to get consistency in that regard. Do you have anything in place at the moment? You talked about the new national care service. What could the Government do at the moment to try to help with that initial stage of information and choice around SDS?

I begin by thanking Evelyn Tweed for raising this issue in the chamber. We have discussed social security on many occasions, but I thank her for making very important points about stigma and about people’s rights and their entitlement to social security.

I listened carefully to the previous speakers and was particularly pleased to hear Christine Grahame’s contribution about entitlement and her point that people should know what their entitlement is.

Research evidence shows that stigma around social security is keenly felt and creates powerful barriers to accessing entitlements. The May 2024 report from the Get Heard Scotland citizens panel on the impact of stigma on benefit uptake found that uncertainty about eligibility and entitlement played into fears about talking with family and friends and the wider community about social security, and that it definitely stopped people even considering whether they might be entitled to something that would improve their quality of life.

Most panellists in that research agreed that stigma had become worse because of austerity, the UK Government’s welfare reforms and the cost of living crisis. I am sure that we know from our constituents that, when people feel that the language around that is negative, that hinders or stops them coming forward to receive what they are entitled to.

I am glad that the panellists largely agreed that, although not perfect, dealing with Social Security Scotland is a far less stigmatising experience. We should all be pleased about that. However, I am interested in hearing the minister’s remarks about how the Government will ensure that we increase the uptake of benefits because, despite that kinder approach, we need action on uptake, as other members have mentioned.

We know that there have been reports that the system is sluggish or not always straightforward and that there are various hurdles. As the motion states, many benefits remain unclaimed in Scotland. I am sure that the kinder approach shows that the minister and the Government want to ensure that people take up their entitlement.

I will pick up on the point about the economic reality for many of our fellow citizens, concentrating the last part of my contribution on children in Scotland. We know that a quarter of children in Scotland are growing up in poverty and that we need solutions to ensure that children have a fair chance of a life free from hardship and with opportunities.

To do that, we need a good social security system to allow children and families the opportunity to flourish. If we can do that for children and families, the ripple will help right across society, which is so important. That is why we must strive to ensure that people know that the welfare state is there for everyone in their time of need. When we support and help families to find ways out of poverty, and when we provide a social security system that is based on compassion, dignity and a person-centred approach, the benefits are multiplied, and they apply to everyone in our society.

I thank Evelyn Tweed for the mention of third sector organisations in her motion. Whenever they can, those organisations maximise people’s understanding of and opportunity to access the benefits system. Other members will know from speaking with constituents that Citizens Advice Scotland, Age UK and other organisations across the sector are praised by people for the help that they offer.

I thank members for their contributions to the debate. I know that everyone in the chamber wants stigma to be removed from people who require to access benefits and social security. I would really welcome the minister’s contribution on what the next steps will be to ensure that we maximise the entitlement uptake for everyone.

My question is in a similar vein to my colleague Foysol Choudhury’s question on the more likely lower vaccination rate in more deprived areas. I am interested in knowing whether the minister thinks that we could do more cross portfolio to ensure that uptake in those areas reaches the level that exists across the rest of Scotland.

The legislation has been acknowledged as being very good, but does anything else need to be in it to help us take things forward? Does anyone have a view on that?

I have one final question. Are people with self-directed support seen as having lower or moderate levels of needs? Can they dip in for things that might be seen as additional, such as a holiday? How does that sort of thing happen practically on the ground? Does it happen at all?