Holyrood, made browsable

Hansard

Every contribution to the Official Report — chamber and committee — searchable in one place. Pulled from data.parliament.scot, indexed for full-text search, linked through to every MSP.

129
Current MSPs
415
MSPs ever elected
13
Parties on record
2,355,091
Hansard contributions
1999–2026
Coverage span
Official Report

Search Hansard contributions

Clear
Showing 0 of 2,355,091 contributions in session S6, 16 Apr 2026 – 16 May 2026. Latest 30 days: 148. Coverage: 12 May 1999 — 14 May 2026.

No contributions match those filters.

← Back to list
Chamber

Meeting of the Parliament 24 October 2023

24 Oct 2023 · S6 · Meeting of the Parliament
Item of business
Transvaginal Mesh

Mesh campaigners have had to fight for many years for action on their concerns and the reality is that, despite the parallel universe set out by the minister, that fight continues.

The Scottish Government has promised to listen to and support the women involved, but progress has been glacial. There are reports that the complex mesh surgical service is not working. It was set up three years ago but the story now is one of long waiting lists and no follow-up care. I have been contacted by many women, including Lisa Megginson, who, having had mesh surgery herself, now supports women to access treatment through the complex mesh surgical service. She points to dither, delay and a lack of aftercare.

In the real world, Government figures reveal that women have waited up to 448 days for a first appointment at the service, with the subsequent wait for mesh removal surgery lasting up to 341 days. My information is the same as Tess White’s: urgent referrals have, in some cases, taken 82 weeks, which is a year and a half, and women who are being referred now are being offered appointments in 2025. Women have been left suicidal by the waits that they face and they daily suffer the risk of developing sepsis because of the constant infections caused by mesh. Must someone die before the Government takes swifter action?

The story is not much better when it comes to surgery. In a letter to the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee, the minister said that, by the end of July, only 89 women had undergone surgery in Glasgow, that 26 had travelled to the United States or to Bristol for surgery and that only 20 women had been reimbursed for surgery that they had sought and paid for out of their own pockets.

Although I understand that Dr Veronikis has been awarded another year-long contract, he has been told not to carry out any repairs to damage that he finds but only to remove mesh devices. When patients have already undergone removal surgery in Scotland, it is only once they are on the operating table in the US that Dr Veronikis can see the damage that has been caused. It cannot be morally acceptable to instruct a world-class surgeon to ignore the internal damage that he finds and to stick strictly to mesh removal only, so his contract must be reviewed and should be extended until all the women who need mesh removal have been treated.

Those who have been able to access the clinic and have received mesh removal report that follow-up support has been non-existent, leaving many feeling that they are in the same boat as they were 10 years ago. Maureen Kane from Fife underwent mesh removal surgery last November. Since then, Maureen feels as if she has, yet again, been left to suffer. She said:

“It is like we have been forgotten about. It’s just the same as before. I didn’t expect miracles from the operation but I did expect there to be some follow-up. I just feel like as soon as they have got the mesh out, they are done with you.”

Women like Maureen are on a merry-go-round of misery, dealing with this Government’s failure to provide any follow-up care.

Another woman returned from the United States with a catheter still inside her. She contacted the complex mesh service, which did not get back to her. She went to the Queen Elizabeth university hospital, only to be told that that hospital did not provide treatment for those who had had procedures overseas. The hospital eventually, and reluctantly, agreed to help her. She could have contracted sepsis and died. Why is there no follow up? Proactive follow-up services must be set up immediately to provide essential aftercare for those women.

Mesh-injured women face lifelong pain and disability. They will require adaptations to their houses and funding to support their lives. Many have lost jobs, careers, partners or homes as a direct result of becoming disabled due to the use of mesh.

The Cumberlege report, which was welcomed by the Government, called for the setting up of a redress scheme. Why has that not yet been set up? Why is there still a delay? That is simply unacceptable.

I turn to the reviews, of which there have been a number. The independent review on transvaginal mesh implants came to a series of conclusions and recommendations in 2017. How many of those have been implemented?

As we heard from Tess White, the first of Professor Britton’s investigative reviews, which was published in 2018, made 46 recommendations, but it would appear that not one has been implemented. We now have the second Professor Britton report, which was published in June 2023. That is extremely welcome, but what will the SNP do to implement its 21 recommendations—not just to endorse them, but to make them real? Are they simply to gather dust? Will the Government simply proceed at a snail’s pace?

The report exposed damning evidence of women being blatantly lied to and told that they had had a full mesh removal when that was not the case. There are cases where women were given mesh implants when they should never have been treated with them, causing them life-changing injuries. I ask the minister whether those cases are subject to criminal investigations. Can the Government explain why surgeons who were found to have lied are facing no consequences for their actions? Can the minister explain why those same surgeons are providing their opinions on the future care of the very women they harmed?

The problems are not just with transvaginal mesh. There are petitions before the Parliament calling on the Government to suspend the use of all surgical mesh and fixation devices. Similarly to transvaginal mesh-injured women, people who were fitted with mesh to treat things such as hernia have reported debilitating pain and issues with their mesh devices. There is a need for a viable and safe alternative to mesh. Transvaginal mesh-injured women were ignored for years, and now other mesh-injured survivors find themselves in the same position.

The issues are clear. The Scottish Government must urgently address delays in the Glasgow service, tackle long referral times, provide an aftercare service and actually listen to the experiences of patients. It must extend the contracts with specialists in the United States and Bristol and put in place a redress scheme. Failure to act will amount to a further betrayal of mesh-injured patients. The promise to listen to these women is one that the Scottish Government must not continue to break.

I move amendment S6M-10915.2, to insert at end:

“; is concerned by the long waits for a first appointment at the Complex Mesh Surgical Service, whilst some women have reported a lack of clarity around accessing the full range of support available for mesh-related injuries; regrets that not all of the recommendations of the reviews by Professor Britton have been implemented; agrees that a realistic medicine approach is essential going forward, where patients are empowered and supported to be in control of their healthcare, and calls on the Scottish Government to set out how it will eradicate long waits for appointments and ensure that women affected by transvaginal mesh are informed and able to easily access the range of support available, which should be person-centred and trauma-informed ongoing care, and to publish both a strategy for increased surgical training and capacity building in alternative procedures to mesh, and data on waiting times for alternative procedures.”

16:17  
References in this contribution

Motions, questions or amendments mentioned by their reference code.

In the same item of business

The Deputy Presiding Officer (Liam McArthur) LD
The next item of business is a debate on motion S6M-10915, in the name of Jenni Minto, on transvaginal mesh. I invite members who wish to participate in the ...
The Minister for Public Health and Women’s Health (Jenni Minto) SNP
The motion to which I speak is on the impact of transvaginal mesh on women’s health, which the Parliament has rightly debated on a number of occasions in thi...
Daniel Johnson (Edinburgh Southern) (Lab) Lab
I am grateful to the minister for giving way. She highlights the important issues that the review has identified, but it is important to understand that this...
Jenni Minto SNP
I believe that the rest of my speech will answer a lot of Daniel Johnson’s questions. The Glasgow mesh service is listening to women and amending the way tha...
Jackson Carlaw (Eastwood) (Con) Con
I am listening with interest, and I will obviously have an opportunity to say more in my contribution. Does the minister not accept that, for most women at t...
Jenni Minto SNP
I thank Jackson Carlaw for his intervention, and I recognise the fantastic work that he has done in supporting women in this situation. Women have the optio...
Tess White (North East Scotland) (Con) Con
At the outset, I want to recognise the hundreds of mesh-injured women who have fought so hard for so long for their voices to be heard. They have lived with ...
Daniel Johnson Lab
Does the member agree that alignment will happen only once every person who has survived mesh knows what treatment they will get and is satisfied with the ou...
Tess White Con
I strongly support and echo that. Women need to build back trust. The minister talked about building trust, but the fact that not a single one of Professor B...
Jackie Baillie (Dumbarton) (Lab) Lab
Mesh campaigners have had to fight for many years for action on their concerns and the reality is that, despite the parallel universe set out by the minister...
Alex Cole-Hamilton (Edinburgh Western) (LD) LD
In the seven years for which I have been an MSP, I have spoken on the subject of transvaginal mesh several times, as have many of the speakers in this aftern...
Jackson Carlaw Con
I mean no disrespect to the minister, but Mr Cole-Hamilton mentioned the many debates on the subject in which he has participated, and I note that, in nearly...
Alex Cole-Hamilton LD
That observation is correct. This debate, like those that preceded it, will be watched far beyond the chamber by the many victims of mesh, who will share Jac...
The Deputy Presiding Officer LD
I give a reminder, as we move into the open debate, that we are very tight for time, so we will stick to the allotted speaking times. 16:23
Rona Mackay (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (SNP) SNP
This debate on what is a tragic and complicated issue is one of many in which I have taken part, as has Alex Cole-Hamilton, since I was elected in 2016. I w...
Sandesh Gulhane (Glasgow) (Con) Con
I refer members to my entry in the register of members’ interests. I am a practising NHS GP. In the past two decades, some 20,000 women in Scotland underwe...
Evelyn Tweed (Stirling) (SNP) SNP
As we have heard, complications relating to the use of vaginal mesh have caused widespread and severe symptoms in thousands of women. Those patients have bee...
Katy Clark (West Scotland) (Lab) Lab
I start by paying tribute to the tireless campaigning of mesh-injured women. It is their campaigning that has been the driving force for much of the progress...
The Presiding Officer (Alison Johnstone) NPA
Ms Clark, I ask you to conclude.
Katy Clark Lab
I very much look forward to hearing the minister’s response to my points. 16:48
Stuart McMillan (Greenock and Inverclyde) (SNP) SNP
I am speaking in the debate because, as I have previously mentioned in the chamber, I have met several of my constituents who have suffered with the horrors ...
Daniel Johnson Lab
Stuart McMillan is right to say that this is not about hindsight. However, the reality is that acknowledging recommendations is not enough. Too many women ar...
Stuart McMillan SNP
I do not disagree at all. I have spoken in similar debates in the past. My comments in those are on the record, so if the member wishes to go and have a look...
Stuart McMillan SNP
Two wee seconds. The contrast was stark. I welcome that change, but it does not take away the mental challenges that those women have had to endure for many...
Gillian Mackay (Central Scotland) (Green) Green
Like many others, I pay tribute to the incredible efforts of the mesh survivors in bringing this issue to light in order to secure justice. Their bravery and...
Clare Haughey (Rutherglen) (SNP) SNP
Like many, if not all, members, I have heard from constituents over the years whose lives were devastated as a result of mesh implants. As we know, mesh was ...
Sue Webber (Lothian) (Con) Con
I have raised questions about vaginal mesh in the chamber before and have written articles in support of the women affected, and I welcome the chance to spea...
Daniel Johnson (Edinburgh Southern) (Lab) Lab
When we have discussed transvaginal mesh in previous debates, I have started by paying tribute to fellow MSPs who have campaigned on the issue. However, I do...
David Torrance (Kirkcaldy) (SNP) SNP
I welcome the opportunity to speak in this important debate. As always, I extend my gratitude to the campaigners, medical professionals, researchers and cons...
Jackie Baillie Lab
I am grateful to the member for taking an intervention. We have debated the Cumberlege report before, which proposed a redress scheme. Can the member shed an...