Skip to main content

Language: English / Gàidhlig

Loading…

Seòmar agus comataidhean

Official Report: search what was said in Parliament

The Official Report is a written record of public meetings of the Parliament and committees.  

Criathragan Hide all filters

Dates of parliamentary sessions
  1. Session 1: 12 May 1999 to 31 March 2003
  2. Session 2: 7 May 2003 to 2 April 2007
  3. Session 3: 9 May 2007 to 22 March 2011
  4. Session 4: 11 May 2011 to 23 March 2016
  5. Session 5: 12 May 2016 to 5 May 2021
  6. Current session: 12 May 2021 to 4 April 2025
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 693 contributions

|

Health, Social Care and Sport Committee

Subordinate Legislation

Meeting date: 21 January 2025

Brian Whittle

In general, I do not see the advantage of removing ourselves from the process of double-checking the FSA and the FSS. As I have tried to say, probably clumsily, if we are consistently reviewing foodstuffs, renewing authorisations after 10 years is almost a rubber stamp, because there is not a huge amount of work to do at the end of the 10 years. Removing the 10-year review would mean that there was no need to consistently review products. I am not suggesting that that is what is happening, but if the resource given to the FSS is consistently reduced, it will be less and less able to review. That concerns me.

Having seen the issue come up several times in this committee over the past 10 years, I have always said that our food standards are extremely high, even in relation to the EU, so that is not what concerns me; my concern is whether the FSS has the ability to continually review at a level that we would accept. I am minded to accept the SI, but I would appreciate it if we could put those concerns in the letter to the Government.

Health, Social Care and Sport Committee

Subordinate Legislation

Meeting date: 21 January 2025

Brian Whittle

Good morning, minister. The standard of the food that is allowed to be consumed is an area that interests me greatly. If my reading is correct, under the current system, products are reviewed every 10 years, which prompts the question, “Are they not always continually assessed?” Conversely, if the requirement to review products every 10 years is taken away, my concern is that there will be no need to continually look at products.

At the end of the day, the issue comes down to resource. My concern is that the system that you are proposing to move to, if it is operated properly, will be more resource heavy, yet the resource that is provided to FSS is reducing. If we were to consent to the SI, which would take away ministerial responsibility, how could we guarantee that FSS would continually review products, when new evidence is always emerging?

Health, Social Care and Sport Committee

Subordinate Legislation

Meeting date: 21 January 2025

Brian Whittle

If we are doing that anyway, why do we need to change the policy?

Health, Social Care and Sport Committee

Assisted Dying for Terminally Ill Adults (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 21 January 2025

Brian Whittle

I will ask a wee supplementary to Emma Harper’s questions about the age of eligibility. That is a cluttered market. There are different legal ages for doing different things. The age for access to adult care support is 18 and the legal age for drinking alcohol is 18, for example. Even the judicial system treats people who are under the age of 25 differently than it treats the rest. Why 16 for this legislation? Why are you comfortable with 16?

Health, Social Care and Sport Committee

Assisted Dying for Terminally Ill Adults (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 21 January 2025

Brian Whittle

I am making an argument against it, but you are right that there are those who are mature and very capable at 16 and there are those who are older than that but are not. One of the dilemmas that we face with the bill is safeguards.

Health, Social Care and Sport Committee

Assisted Dying for Terminally Ill Adults (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 21 January 2025

Brian Whittle

On palliative care, based on the evidence that we have heard, there will be people who have witnessed loved ones in extraordinary pain at the end of life, asking for help. Because you are against the bill, you are saying that that help would not be forthcoming, which is extraordinarily difficult for the individual to hear—and for families who are not able to help to hear, as our overwhelming feeling and desire is to help our loved ones.

If palliative care, in the end, cannot alleviate physical pain or psychological pain, what do you do?

Health, Social Care and Sport Committee

Assisted Dying for Terminally Ill Adults (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 21 January 2025

Brian Whittle

If we extrapolate from that, were the bill to be passed, you would ask for there to be an increase in investment in palliative care at the same time. That is what you would expect to happen.

Health, Social Care and Sport Committee

Assisted Dying for Terminally Ill Adults (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 21 January 2025

Brian Whittle

That works only if palliative care is available.

Health, Social Care and Sport Committee

Assisted Dying for Terminally Ill Adults (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 21 January 2025

Brian Whittle

I do not think that anybody is arguing that we cannot do anything until palliative care is perfect, but people have been saying that there needs to be access to palliative care. That is the concern.

Health, Social Care and Sport Committee

Assisted Dying for Terminally Ill Adults (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 21 January 2025

Brian Whittle

I was not suggesting for one second that morphine is being administered specifically to end somebody’s life. You are saying that it would not be a contributing factor, because there is a balance between pain and the concern about the level of dosage. That is all that I was suggesting.