Meeting of the Parliament 17 March 2026 [Draft]
I will support Jeremy Balfour’s amendment 5.
Injectable aesthetics procedures are not typically taught as part of most undergraduate medical or nursing degrees. As a result, medical practitioners who enter the aesthetics sector often obtain their training in such procedures through separate aesthetics training courses. By contrast, non-medical practitioners, who often receive qualifications regulated up to level 7 in aesthetics practice, focus entirely on facial anatomy, complications management and safe aesthetics practice. The bill would create the odd position in which highly trained aesthetics practitioners would need to be supervised by a medical practitioner with possibly only a few hours of aesthetics training.
The bill also raises practical questions about capacity, as no clear data is available on how many prescribers actively work in the aesthetics sector or whether there would be sufficient numbers to support independent clinics across Scotland. As the minister has confirmed, the number of such clinics might be as high as 1,500.
The bill would force qualified, responsible providers to recruit medics to supervise them, but the Government cannot tell us whether that would be possible, given that data on the number of prescribers is not available. Furthermore, can the NHS afford to lose hundreds of prescribers to the aesthetics sector? A better way needs to be found, and there needs to be a pathway for non-medical but highly trained aesthetics providers to carry out perhaps not all but some treatments.
My amendments in the group would ensure that future regulations on qualifications and training properly recognise competence across the sector. Amendment 17 would require regulations to ensure that pathways exist for practitioners who hold relevant qualifications but are not healthcare providers. That would ensure that the regulatory framework recognises the range of qualified practitioners who currently operate in the sector. Amendment 18 would require ministers, when specifying qualification or training requirements, to
“have regard to recognised aesthetics qualifications.”
Amendment 23 is a consequential amendment.
Overall and taken together, the amendments would ensure that regulation is based on recognised competence and qualifications, while appropriate safeguards for patients would be maintained. They would not weaken the regulations but would ensure that the framework recognises qualified practitioners and allows ministers to regulate the sector proportionately rather than excluding the sector entirely. I hear from across the chamber that there is recognition that many women-led small businesses are going to be put out of business by the bill. If we do not support amendments such as those from Jeremy Balfour and me, there will be no pathway and those women-led businesses will be put out of business.