Health, Social Care and Sport Committee 11 November 2025
I thank all colleagues for their contributions. To touch on the points that Brian Whittle has just made, I certainly understand his intent. However, for reasons that other colleagues have flagged up, I think that, as currently drafted, amendments 155 and 196 are perhaps problematic. I reiterate the offer to work with Brian Whittle ahead of stage 3, but I also point to the General Medical Council guidance, which already sets out strict provisions in relation to undue influence of one practitioner over another. It is an area on which I am happy to work with Mr Whittle ahead of stage 3.
The exchanges so far this morning have underscored the crucial importance of training. I note, with perhaps a little regret, that I did not foresee that and put it in the bill in the first instance. The debate has highlighted the importance of such training to specific groups, whether that be people in the disability community, as Pam Duncan-Glancy referred to, or people under 25, as Daniel Johnson referred to on behalf of Jackie Baillie, as well as specific training and understanding in areas such as palliative care and coercive controlling behaviour.
In a sense, the Parliament has had an opportunity to set out its expectations on what the training would involve. For the reasons that Sandesh Gulhane underlined, there are risks in putting such provisions in the bill instead of allowing them to rest in secondary legislation or, more likely, in guidance, which is where such provisions sit at the moment.