Seòmar agus comataidhean

I thank Pam Gosal for bringing the debate to the chamber. One of my first speeches last year was in the debate on eliminating violence against women. I remember in my speech reflecting on the fact that, although the work around the globe on the issue is to be commended and is essential, it must make us think. We, the elected members in this Parliament, have a responsibility to work hard, make decisions, make action happen and ensure that we do not have to make the same remarks in years to come. I am here speaking again to ensure that we in the Scottish Parliament do all that we can to raise awareness, change and implement suitable laws, and amplify the voices of women and girls.

The theme this year is “UNITE! Activism to end violence against women and girls”. I again thank Pam Gosal for allowing us to do just that here, in the chamber.

As the motion says, violence against women and girls continues to be one of the “most pervasive” human rights violations worldwide. The statistics are damning:

“it affects more than an estimated 1 in 3 women ... it is estimated that on average a woman or girl is killed by someone in her own family every 11 minutes across the globe”.

Since the outbreak of Covid-19, emerging data and reports from people on the front line have shown that all types of violence against women and girls—particularly domestic violence, as we have heard—have intensified.

Each woman who is a victim of violence must be treated equally and fairly by an establishment that understands, or at least seeks to begin to understand, why they have gone through it. We need a global collective effort to prevent it, and we need to understand that everyone has a role to play. That begins with accepting that the problem is a serious one around the globe and that we do not have it under control. That means more honesty from Governments, and it means direct engagement with grass-roots organisations, health and recovery charities and global institutions. It means having prevention strategies focused on early education, respectful relationships and working with men and boys, especially through and in the media, the sports industry and the world of work. As my colleague Pauline McNeill has mentioned, the social media aspect is coming much more to the fore. We must tackle the issue in Scotland and right around the globe.

As parliamentarians, we must push to ensure women’s representation at all levels in politics, economic development, governance and planning—the list is endless—but, until women and girls have full and equal representation, it is unlikely that we will change what are dreadful statistics.

There is so much to be done, but I thank my colleagues here today, who have raised some really important issues about violence against women and girls from right around the globe. I know that we can unite in the Parliament to end this outrageous blight on global society, ensuring that we tackle violence against women and girls.

It is old and tired rhetoric that the Government uses. The Government constantly ignores its own position in Scotland.

I actually wanted to say that I was heartened by the opposition in the chamber to the notion of privatisation of our much-loved NHS. I believe the Government in that regard, but I ask Stuart McMillan whether he actually believes that the BBC was lying to us about what happened. We should not understate how concerning the broadcast reports of creeping privatisation were; they truly sent a shockwave through the NHS and the public when the story broke.

In closing for Scottish Labour, I want to be clear that our motion has been brought to the chamber to ensure that the voices of patients, carers, GPs and all primary care staff are heard loud and clear—oh boy, has that been necessary. It is obvious that the SNP Government and SNP back benchers are ignoring the pleas for help from all corners of our healthcare system.

It is unfortunate that, in his amendment to our motion, the cabinet secretary suggests that the pressures on primary care are due only

“to the effects of Brexit, the global pandemic and the cost of living crisis”.

Granted, those issues contribute to the pressures that exist—of course they do—but there is a glaring omission, because those pressures are also due to his, the First Minister’s and the entire Government’s shocking mismanagement of the health service in Scotland, their lack of openness to scrutiny and their constant harking back to what happened many years ago. My colleague Paul O’Kane pointed out that the SNP has been in government for 15 years. Given the cabinet secretary’s closed approach, it is disappointing—although not surprising—that allies of the SNP are considering options such as privatisation of the NHS in Scotland.

I would like clarification of whether there are hurdles that Suzanne McGuinness feels could be overcome to get mental health into the bill, and whether she feels that we will not be able to get mental health services in the bill.

Yes. We took evidence about inspections yesterday from people who work in the field. We know about the importance of going in and seeing how services are performing. There was talk about joint inspections during the pandemic. What were the benefits of that? In relation to the bill, would it be beneficial to look at who is inspecting services, and how and why?

Yes.

Excuse me, convener. If we have finished the evidence-taking session, I wonder whether I might bring up an issue with the committee.

I would quite like to raise the matter now if that is possible.

Thank you, and sorry for interrupting.

Given that we are engaged in scrutiny of the proposed national care service, I thought that yesterday’s reports about a two-tier national health service were quite alarming. I seek the committee’s advice on whether we should seek clarification on some of that, as it very much links in with the work that we are doing. I seek clarity from the committee on that.

Okay.