Official Report search · Parliament Workbench

Committee

Public Petitions Committee 24 March 2021

24 Mar 2021 · S5 · Public Petitions Committee

Item of business

Continued Petitions

Polypropylene Mesh Medical Devices (PE1517)

Carlaw, Jackson Con Eastwood Watch on SPTV

Thank you, convener, for your engagement with the petition in the course of this parliamentary session. As this is the final day of the session, the final meeting of the committee and, probably, your final official function, I wish you every success and good wish for the future. I accept that petitions do not last for ever. As a member of the Public Petitions Committee in the previous parliamentary session, I remember the desire, as the session drew to a close, to draw to a conclusion petitions that had fulfilled their purpose. There were some petitions—I recall, for example, the petitions on the St Margaret of Scotland Hospice and on the fitting of seat belts into vehicles used for transporting children, such as minibuses—that were transferred across parliamentary sessions for good reason. The mesh petition has been one of the most significant that the Scottish Parliament has considered. It has an international perspective and has received continued international attention. I accept that there are aspects of the petitioners’ requests that may be best served by a fresh petition in the next session of Parliament, but how do we get to that point? Is there anything in the current petition that is still relevant? Yes, there is. I wrote a joint letter to the cabinet secretary on 3 March, with Neil Findlay and Alex Neil, outlining several concerns that we have been pursuing—if I can paraphrase, there have been three of us in this marriage in the Parliament and it has never felt crowded. We have worked closely together to pursue the issues that the petition has raised. I asked the cabinet secretary about the fundamental, first request of the petition, which was the continued suspension of mesh procedures. In her reply of 10 March, the cabinet secretary said: “I have been clear that I have no intention in lifting the halt in the use of transvaginal mesh. It is of course ... for the electorate to consider at the forthcoming election who they wish to form the next government, but—whatever the outcome—I have a high level of confidence that there will be in the next session of Parliament, as there has been in this, strong support across all parties for action to continue to improve vital services for those affected by mesh and wider women’s health issues.” Therefore, I appeal to the committee to hold the petition open for the next session in order that the new committee can write to the new Government of the day—whatever the outcome of the election, there will be a new health secretary as the current one is retiring—in order to establish what its approach will be to the issues and the specific opening request of the original petition. Depending on the answer, at that point, it might be that some of the fresh initiatives that the petitioners and others have raised could be best served by a new petition. The engagement of the Public Petitions Committee gives those involved in the issue a platform to ensure that the focus is not lost in the next session and so that I, and others concerned, can continue to do what we can to bring justice and ensure that we do not see any repeat of the fundamental, original errors.