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 17 March 2026 [Draft]

17 Mar 2026 · S6 · Meeting of the Parliament
Item of business
Non-surgical Procedures and Functions of Medical Reviewers (Scotland) Bill

I start by clarifying that the Liberal Democrats have sought to engage with the bill. It is unfortunate that the minister and I could not make our diaries align so that we could meet directly on it. I am grateful for her offer to do so, and I will take that up if there is time before the dissolution of Parliament. I will certainly work with whoever the minister in charge is in the next session of Parliament to make sure that the legislation works for everyone.

The bill brings forward important reforms that are necessary. Its intention is to strengthen public safety and, by so doing, improve confidence in the sector and in the regulation of non-surgical cosmetic procedures. We will support it at stage 3. However, I repeat the caveats that I made in my intervention on the minister and in my earlier remarks in relation to Ash Regan’s amendments: we must not plough on with this legislation and send to the wall those high-quality businesses and professionals who have sought to get the maximum qualifications and deliver the highest quality of service that they can.

As we know, part 1 of the bill addresses higher-risk procedures that appear to penetrate the skin, including treatments such as dermal fillers, botulinum toxin, thread lifts and deep chemical peels. Those procedures are often marketed as routine or low risk, but when they are carried out incorrectly or by people without adequate training, the harm can be serious, lifelong and deeply distressing.

For too long, regulation in the area has been fragmented and unclear. There has been no single framework that sets out where such procedures can take place, who is qualified to perform them and what minimum standards should apply in their administration. That lack of clarity benefits no one—neither patients nor responsible practitioners. For those reasons, Scottish Liberal Democrats have supported the principle of regulation at every stage as the bill has progressed through the Parliament.

We believe that the move towards a more risk-based and proportionate framework, with a distinction between higher-risk procedures and lower-risk ones, is sensible. Likewise, restricting higher-risk procedures to appropriate premises, providing proper oversight, prohibiting procedures for under-18s and giving Healthcare Improvement Scotland inspection and enforcement powers are all important steps forward.

However, I reiterate that we still have concerns about the bill’s potential impact on trained practitioners who are currently operating safely and responsibly. Those practitioners also want regulation and bad actors to be removed from this field of work. Throughout the committee’s scrutiny of the bill, we heard consistent evidence that many practitioners in the sector have, at massive personal cost, invested heavily in training, qualifications and professional standards under the existing system.

As I said, many of those practitioners support regulation, because they want bad actors to be removed and confidence to be strengthened. However, there remains the risk that, if the system is implemented with the inflexibility that we saw at stage 1, some responsible practitioners—many of whom are self-employed—in the largely female-led sector could find themselves regulated out of the profession altogether. I do not think that any of us wants that to happen. I am gratified that I think that I saw a chink of light in the minister’s remarks, in that, through regulation and the bill’s implementation phases, her Government will work with the sector on a more rational implementation.

An inflexible approach would not improve safety; it would simply remove skilled providers and risk pushing activity outside the regulated system. If we do not get this right, some of the procedures will still take place, but in a black market setting and at higher risk. As the framework that the bill will introduce is implemented, it will be important for the Government to engage closely with practitioners—I am glad that we have heard that today—to keep the framework under review and to ensure that the regulations remain proportionate, workable and focused on patient safety.

Scottish Liberal Democrats will support the overall aim of improving safety and strengthening oversight, but we offer the caveat that we must protect hard-working and well-qualified practitioners who just want to protect their businesses.

In the same item of business

The Deputy Presiding Officer (Annabelle Ewing) SNP
The next item of business is a debate on motion S6M-21100, in the name of Jenni Minto, on the Non-surgical Procedures and Functions of Medical Reviewers (Sco...
The Minister for Public Health and Women’s Health (Jenni Minto) SNP
I am delighted to speak to the general principles of the Non-surgical Procedures and Functions of Medical Reviewers (Scotland) Bill. It is, I believe, an imp...
Alex Cole-Hamilton (Edinburgh Western) (LD) LD
The minister refers to practitioners who go above and beyond in the qualifications that they seek out and the measures that they put in place to safeguard th...
Jenni Minto SNP
I thank Alex Cole-Hamilton for his intervention and I note again my disappointment that he has not engaged on the bill with me prior to this stage.I thank me...
Sandesh Gulhane (Glasgow) (Con) Con
As far as the part of the bill on certification of death is concerned, we agree with it.I begin with a declaration of my interest as a registered general pra...
Carol Mochan (South Scotland) (Lab) Lab
Scottish Labour’s approach to the bill is that patient safety should be our number 1 priority. We recognise that businesses in the sector provide services in...
Gillian Mackay (Central Scotland) (Green) Green
I begin by extending my thanks to the legislation team, which, as always, has been incredibly helpful and responsive throughout stages 2 and 3. A special men...
Alex Cole-Hamilton (Edinburgh Western) (LD) LD
I start by clarifying that the Liberal Democrats have sought to engage with the bill. It is unfortunate that the minister and I could not make our diaries al...
The Deputy Presiding Officer (Annabelle Ewing) SNP
We move to the open debate.16:22
Stuart McMillan (Greenock and Inverclyde) (SNP) SNP
The bill is important, as the sector that we are looking to regulate has grown vastly in recent years. Today, the Parliament is being asked to support crucia...
The Deputy Presiding Officer (Annabelle Ewing) SNP
Thank you, Mr McMillan. We now move to the closing speeches.16:25
Carol Mochan Lab
I thank all of those who have participated in this debate for their cross-party working. I also thank the clerks and the bill teams for their work throughout...
Brian Whittle (South Scotland) (Con) Con
I rise to close the stage 3 debate on the Non-surgical Procedures and Functions of Medical Reviewers (Scotland) Bill on behalf of the Scottish Conservatives....
Jenni Minto SNP
I thank all colleagues in the chamber for their constructive comments on part 1 of the bill.Stuart McMillan is absolutely right: when we are confronted by so...
The Deputy Presiding Officer (Liam McArthur) LD
That concludes the debate on the Non-surgical Procedures and Functions of Medical Reviewers (Scotland) Bill at stage 3.