 The final item of business is a member's business debate on motion 138, in the name of Monica Lennon, on historical forced adoption. This debate will be concluded without any questions being put. Would those members who wish to speak in the debate please press their request to speak buttons? I call on Monica Lennon to open the debate. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I'm grateful to members for supporting the motion and for taking part in the debate tonight. Historic forced adoption was most common in the 1950s to the 1970s, but for the victims the pain continues to this day. What happened was beyond cruel. Women were shamed for being pregnant outside of marriage. State sanctioned abuse made them believe that they were unfit to be mothers. It can never ever be justified. The practice of separating unmarried mothers from their babies and removing them for adoption was of course not unique to Scotland and the UK. In other countries, notably Australia, Canada and Ireland, Governments have apologised on behalf of the state for the injustice that changed the course of the victims' lives forever. For the 60,000 women in Scotland who were the victims of forced adoption, there has been no inquiry and no apology. Many women have already gone to their graves believing that they were bad mothers. Dr Cynthia McVeigh has spent decades supporting the victims of forced adoption. She says that without an apology from the Scottish Government, many of those women will never be able to forgive themselves. I cannot think of one single good reason to delay or deny them a formal apology. Evelyn Robinson was a victim of forced adoption in Edinburgh at 19. Her journey took her to Australia, where she became part of the Australian Apology, issued by former Prime Minister Julia Gillard on behalf of the Australian Government in 2013. It shows us what is possible. That landmark apology continues to give women in Scotland hope. Gillard's opening words were that, today, this Parliament, on behalf of the Australian people, takes responsibility and apologises for the policies and practices that force the separation of mothers from their babies, which created a lifelong legacy of pain and suffering. If Australia can acknowledge the profound effect of those policies, why can't Scotland? For eight years, campaigners in Scotland have been waiting to hear those words from the Scottish Government. The act of forced adoption is the historic injustice that we are debating in the chamber tonight, but the lack of an apology is today's injustice. Award-winning journalist Marion Scott has supported campaigners for over a decade, giving them a platform and forcing us, the politicians, to listen. Marion is a fierce advocate for women and I hope her persistence pays off. For the women that Marion is supporting, time is running out. Two weeks ago, my colleague Neil Bibby spoke powerfully at First Minister's Questions on behalf of his constituent, Mary McMillan, a victim of forced adoption, who continues to campaign for an apology despite being terminally ill. I will now read a statement from Mary McMillan, whose son was taken for adoption from a mother and baby home in 1967. Marion says, I sincerely hope that Scotland will finally take the opportunity to make an official apology to the 60,000 vulnerable mothers who had their babies taken from them simply because they were not married. What happened to all of us was a dreadful abuse of our human rights and set in motion lifelong pain and psychological damage to the women and the children. Mothers spent their life searching for the babies that they were forced to hand over. I remember crying and telling the authorities that my baby already had a mummy, but they simply took my son from my arms and left me weeping. Our children suffered too. They also had no choice in what happened to them. Many were left deeply scarred, told their mother that they did not want them or that their mother was dead. Those policies condemned many to a lifetime searching for who they really are and looking for their parents within a system that put up many barriers in the way of any reunion. In 2015, I met Government ministers to ask if Scotland would take the step taken by Australia—an official apology is something that would acknowledge the wrong that was done to all of us. It is sadden me greatly that the opportunity was not taken then. However, I hope that the Government will listen carefully now to the personal stories of those affected and finally take the step of apologising for what was done. Those simple three words, we are sorry, seem to have been the hardest of all and we cannot understand why. Scotland still has the opportunity to lead the way in the UK by doing that. I hope that the support from all political parties will show that the time is right for us to do the right thing. It is clear that Mary Macmillan is not giving up. That is despite the bombshell revelation reported in the ferret today that ahead of that ministerial meeting in 2015, Scottish Government officials warned ministers not to apologise and to avoid the issue when meeting Marian and campaigners. Documents that were released to the ferret published today confirmed that. I have that briefing to SNP ministers in my hand, which warned that a commitment to replicate the public apology made by Australia and forced adoptions should be resisted. Officials also contacted the UK Government to ask for a steer on the issue to which the Department for Education confirmed our lines also resist calls for a public apology. Although it is welcome that the joint committee on human rights in Westminster, chaired by Harriet Harman MP, will be investigating historical forced adoption, we simply cannot wait for the UK Government to act. I know that the minister is due to meet her UK Government counterpart, but it is time for the Scottish Government to act. In 2015, an Edinburgh University report warned Scottish ministers that as many as one in three mothers with experience of forced adoption may suffer from severe mental health issues. Researchers concluded that tens of thousands of birth mothers in Scotland would benefit from acknowledgement of their experiences and an offer of help in dealing with the lifelong consequences of adoption. In conclusion, I appeal to the minister and to Nicola Sturgeon not to wait for the UK Government to act, ditch the bad advice and find the compassion and the courage to do the right thing, deliver this long overdue apology and finally give the women and all the families affected the recognition and the support that they deserve. I call Rona Mackay to be followed by Megan Gallacher. I am pleased to be speaking in this very important debate, and I thank Monica Lennon for bringing it to the chamber and for submitting her motion. This is a story that has to be told. It is a terrible indictment in our society that, not so long ago in my lifetime, an estimated 60,000 women had their child forcibly removed after birth simply because they were not married. The cruelty and inhumanity of this beggars belief. As a mother, I cannot imagine the horror of that. I am personally aware of women who have suffered this trauma of women who were told that their grandmother was their mother, although their mum was actually the woman who had thought of all their life as their sister. Despite that being utterly wrong and against all the rights of the biological mother, at least those women grew up with that child in their life. So many women, such as Marion McMillan, whom Monica Lennon spoke of, featured in the excellent report by Marion Scott in the Sunday Post, did not even have that. Women not just in Scotland or the UK, but throughout the world. In 1967, Marion was a single teenage mum from Strunrar, when she was forced to hand her baby over at a Salvation Army mother and baby home. She begged to keep him, but he was given to a married couple and Marion didn't see him again for almost 40 years. Ironically unaware that, while she was searching for him, he spent years searching for her. Speaking to the Sunday Post, Marion said, "...we were vulnerable young women who were bullied and told if we loved our babies, we'd give them up so they could have a mummy and daddy." I remember crying and telling them, but I miss mummy and begging them not to take my son. I was told, don't be silly, I'd get over it and I could always have other babies when I married. Incredibly, despite her lifelong trauma, Marion found the strength to reunite hundreds of mums and their children and gave testimony to a studio to secure an official apology there in 2013. She's also spearheading a campaign to get an official apology for mothers across Scotland and Monica Lennon calls for this in her motion. I personally wholeheartedly support this and I'm pleased that the First Minister expressed her support for this too in the chamber just a few weeks ago. Marion said, "...I can't express how important an official apology is. It's unimaginable something that this could happen in Scotland, but it did and the legacy of pain devastated many lives, especially those who'd never found each other. There are thousands of silent, traumatised women in Scotland who will relate to this. Their pain and anguish held within them for years. An apology will not write the wrong stunt to them, but if it gives them some comfort, then it should happen." What happened to those women was unforgivable and thankfully wouldn't happen today, but it serves as a reminder that we must always be aware that equality and women's rights must never be rolled back. I'm talking about women's health, LGBTI equality, misogyny, violence against women, reproduction rights, pension rights and much more. We must never allow those who would push their own agenda of judgment and moral high ground to impede the advances that we've made in equality. What has happened to 60,000 women in Scotland should serve as a reminder that human rights and democracy can be fragile. I want the women who have suffered this in humanity to achieve not just an apology but a promise from us as legislators in this Parliament that we will protect future generations, their children and grandchildren, from ever having to face the horror that they've had to endure throughout their lives. I commend Monica Lennon for securing and bringing this important issue to the Parliament this afternoon. Every member in this chamber today recognises the pain and suffering that the historical practice of forced adoption has caused to many women and children throughout Scotland and the rest of the United Kingdom. I wish to add my voice to those of my colleagues and express my deepest sympathy to every person impacted by these events and the anguish that they have felt. Behind each figure mentioned in the motion was a young woman. A young woman who found herself unexpectedly pregnant was hidden away from society and was told to give up her child because she was unmarried. The women behind those figures were told this by organisations whom they trusted. Some were told that it was for the best, some were berated and it was even suggested that they were unsuitable mothers. Others were told that it was for their own self-respect that they should hand their newborn over to another married couple who could look after their child better as they had stability. There was no support and very little sympathy. It was either adopt your child or find a way to fend for yourself. In preparation for today's debate, I read stories about women who had their child taken from them. I could not believe the stories I read. Women pretending to be married to keep their child, women trying to hide their baby, others seeking refuge with a charity before their child was taken from them. That really was a horrific policy and I can only imagine how they must have felt losing the child that they loved. Since 1975, many brave women have put their head above the parapet to talk about their experience and how they lost their child, not due to an illness or a sad circumstance, but simply because they had fallen pregnant at a young age. One of the many stories that I read was of Marion McMillan. Marion is rightly campaigning for the Government to investigate historical force adoption in Scotland and for them to issue a formal apology. It is disappointing though that, after six years of hard working efforts, Marion and others are still waiting on her apology. Although we can all accept that society has come a long way since then and attitudes towards younger parents have changed, for the women who were told to give up their child, the pain and suffering lives on, many women affected are now in their 70s or 80s and time is of the essence. As Monica Lennon said, some women have sadly passed away without hearing this apology. We know that an apology will not rectify the life-changing events experienced by young mothers, but it could go some way to acknowledging the wrongdoing and how they were failed by organisations, Governments and society. The devastating consequences for the mothers and for their adopted children are clear to see. Mothers often talk about how they feel guilty, how they are ashamed and how they grieve, as many do not know if their child is still alive. Adopted children also suffer. For those who are reunited with their mothers, they feel rejected, struggle to reconnect and bond as they spent the majority of their life living with an adopted family and not their biological parent. Those people were severely let down by society. That is why the Scottish Conservatives agree that an inquiry should take place regarding the practice of adoption in Scotland and a formal apology should be issued to acknowledge any wrongdoing as soon as possible. I also strongly agree with the wording of Monica Lennon's motion in relation to the support that must be offered to families impacted by historical forced adoption. As I mentioned earlier, women have been campaigning for an apology for over six years. In 2013, Australia became the first country in the world to apologise for its history of forced adoptions. We can no longer drag our heels over this important issue. We now need to follow in Australia's example and make sure that we provide women and children impacted with a heartfelt and appropriate apology. To conclude, I support the motion that was brought before Parliament today. It is a duty for MSPs to start this inquiry soon, to ensure that those who are impacted receive the outcome and justice that they deserve. Thank you very much indeed. I now call on Neil Bibby, who will be followed by Christine Graham. Neil Bibby, around four minutes. Thank you, Presiding Officer. Forced adoptions were women were made or coerced by those more powerful than them to give up their babies as many young Scottish women were forced to do so in the 50s, 60s and even in the 70s were perhaps amongst the most heinous of injustices our society inflicted on women a tragedy for all involved. A tragedy for the babies taken from their mother's arms and forced to live with no knowledge of their birth parents or wider family. A tragedy for families whose relationships were often broken beyond repair. A tragedy for the women shamed and shunned by society. We should never forget or ignore the appalling cruelties inflicted on those young women, some of whom we will now perceive as children themselves and the lack of power and agency they then had. I therefore congratulate my colleague Monica Lennon for facilitating this debate. Forced adoption is one of the greatest hidden untold scandals of the 20th century. The scale outlined by Monica Lennon and others is truly staggering. It's nearly five years since SDV screened a documentary on this subject, exposing the injustice of forced adoption on national television, and yet women and their children are still waiting for the Scottish Government to issue an apology on behalf of the entire nation. The Sunday Post have drawn attention to the tragedy and hurt inflicted on my constituent Mary McMillan and her son, as well as Mary's long campaign for Scottish ministers to say sorry. Mary, originally from Stranraer, who now lives in Paisley, was 17 when she was sent to a Salvation Army mother and baby home. There, her son was taken from her, even though she begged for him to stay. Mary speaks movingly about hearing her baby crying in a nearby room and having to sneak in to cover for him because contact was forbidden, punished with extra chores. Newspapers have printed one of the only photographs of a young Marion with her baby son, taking with a camera that mothers had to hide so that he could have a permanent reminder of the short precious time they would have together with their babies. Marion's baby was eventually adopted and she was told she could be jailed if she ever attempted to find him. Despite both searching for each other, it was 40 years before Marion and her son would meet again. Through its credit, the Salvation Army has apologised to Marion, something that many others involved in the cruelty of forced adoption have yet to do. For years, Marion worked to support women from around the world who experienced this injustice. She helped to reunite families. She gave evidence alongside Evelyn Robinson and many others in support of a national apology in Australia. Australia went on to become the first country in the world to issue a formal apology for what happened. Marion now, as Monica Lennon said, has terminal cancer and is dying wishes that the Scottish Government will follow where Australia led and issue a formal apology to the women and to the children here who suffered as she did for so many years. The women affected are largely now in their 70s and 80s. As others have said, many are no longer with us sadly, but it is vitally important that what they went through is acknowledged and remembered for generations to come. Let there be a permanent record of Marion's own words in this Parliament. We were told that we were unfit and inadequate and that our babies would suffer if we denied them the chance to have two parents to love and look after them. We were told that if we really loved them, we would let them go to a good home and they would be selfish not to sign the papers. Our only sin was to fall in love in a different era and an official apology would mend some of the pain. Presiding Officer, this has been a shameful chapter in Scotland's history. It is time for the Scottish Government to acknowledge that and to assure apology that Marion and many others have waited on so long. Marion deserves her titan wish to be granted. Thank you very much. I now call on Christine Grahame, who will be followed by Miles Briggs. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. First, let me congratulate Monica Lennon on securing this debate on an extremely important, sensitive indeed, heartbreaking issue. I wanted to come into the debate as one of the few female members of the Parliament who was around as a teenager and indeed as a young woman in the years of the 60s and 70s, and I want to put the context of it then. Contraception was top secret and young men would go to the barbers we offered quotes something for the weekend. Contraception for women was not publicised or available unless in marriage and even then difficult to access. Parents, at least mine, told me nothing about sex and indeed it was almost a taboo subject. There was no sex education in my day at school. You had to pick up bits of information from magazines and science textbooks and friends, often much from the friends simply wrong. Good girls, in quotes, did not have sex out of wedlock, but for boys it could be put down to, in quotes, sewing their wild oats. Terms much in currency but then but how odd they sound now. The consequences for an unmarried girl becoming pregnant were drastic, in particular in those who where there was adoption under duress, of which I knew nothing then. The girl was rabled cruelly as quotes a slag, her child a bastard. These are not terms I endorse, but were common and accepted parlance at the time. Her options were in most cases, the boy was not usually held to blame, if family were supportive and somewhere a shotgun wedding to the father, usually young himself, or the child once born was presented, as others have said, as the child of the grandmother and the child's own mother as a sibling. Adoption known to be often under family pressure or later known institutional duress and, of course, illegal abortions and all the ensuing dangers. That was the culture of the day to which I, like my peers, subscribed. The contraceptive that was used by most girls and young women then was fear of pregnancy and that alone. It was only with introduction of the contraceptive pill that women were able to take control of their sex lives and relationships when and if they had children. It had a huge liberating impact on them. As I look back on those days and say now through the prism of retrospect, it was so wrong and so unfair to women who often paid a huge price, as I say, sometimes entering too young into unhappy marriages for both parties, mascarading as a sister, abortion, forced adoption. That is more controversial. Do I think that current governments should apologise? There were wrongs not against the pervading culture but in tune with it. In general terms, the question is, is it relevant to ask those today in power to apologise for historic actions that society willingly accepted at that time? That is why I hesitate to support what are known as official apologies. I recognise why women see it but I sometimes wonder of the value of that in real terms. Yes, certainly. Monica Lennon. I think that we were all proud in this Parliament when the First Minister gave an apology to men who had sex with men, gay men who were criminalised because of who they loved. That was the right thing to do. It had huge value. Do not these women deserve just the same? I tell you that controversialness is a personal view, not to do with the Government. Even for that, I thought, what is this thing about an official apology? What we need is writing wrongs of today. We cannot, in my view, go back through history. Where do you stop? What things do you officially apologise for and which ones do not you apologise for? Do not think for one minute that I am diminishing the position of these women. Just let me continue and I am happy to do it. You would be a difficult one but I felt it necessary to say it because sometimes we use it as if that is the solution and it is not really. I want to go on a bit more and say, and I come to you a bit about homosexuals. Just as homosexuals once pilloried, even criminalised, the blame is not on those today or even those in the past, not if society willingly accepted those moral rules. Wrong and cruel, as we now correctly say they are. We cannot apologise for everything in the past, which today quite rightly is seen as wrong. It was very, very wrong. Each generation must be responsible for the more it mollies by which it lives and regulates its citizens if that is by consent of the citizens. However, where historic actions breach the laws and morals of that society, then there must be accountability. Forced adoption by its very terms was morally and legally wrong. That is why I support a UK-wide inquiry into who, which institutions are responsible for those actions, it is they who should be held to account and from whom apologies are at the very least due. I am talking about continuing institutions. I think that it is a very considered point in terms of the individual responsibility around that. In my view, as a Parliament, we do something to embody the nation and the spirit of the nation and the population as a whole. If we can, as a community, apologise to people against who have been so grievously wronged, then our Parliament performs that in some respects higher role in our country. Would we consider that to be a worthwhile thing to do? I think that it is a very interesting debating point, but you then have to recognise how far back you go and what particular wrongs that we now recognise. Do we then apologise for? Do we rank them? There is a really big philosophical debate here. I just felt that I had to say that because I have always had issues with us taking this route without considering further. I am getting a bit of a... Who are you taking intervention from? I have no idea, but I think that it is my colleague. Just to say that if an apology gives the women comfort, should that not be the reason why we should do it? If it gives them comfort, surely it is the right thing to do. As I said in general terms, I want us to examine how far back you go and who else comes along, and by no means am I diminishing what happened to those women? I want to separate the pain that anguish and the wrongs that are done by institutions and individuals from the general question of official apologies. Where are we going with them? What does it mean? How far back do we go? Which cases are there and so on? That is an important matter to explore. I thread it into this because that is why I have a certain discomfort with just saying that we will badge everything with an official apology. I do think that it is worth a discussion, but I want to go on and say apologies from those who were to blame and apologies from the institutions to blame. But thankfully today, my goodness, we have different values. Women and their rights have come a long way, though there is still much to do. Adoption laws, and I remember this taking place as a lawyer, have moved on so that the biological parents in an adoption can retain rights of contact to their child. It used to be wiped off the face, and that was bad. What we must do is recognise the awful pain and even guilt these mothers, often young, endured then and to this day. As a mother of two, I cannot begin to understand how awful it must feel for them and help them to reconnect if they wish. If appropriate, through the various agencies with their children now grown-ups, that is what Governments today should do while recognising so much that was wrong those decades ago by initiating an inquiry and supporting and helping these mothers when it is needed and requested and calling to account in my view those to blame. Thank you, Ms Graham. I noticed that Ms Graham is impervious to the waving of the Christine Graham pen, but I now call Miles Briggs, who will be followed by Paul O'Kane around four minutes. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer, and can I take this opportunity to welcome you to your position in Parliament as well and congratulate Monica Lennon on bringing forward this important motion for debate, and I was pleased to give it my full support. Also to congratulate my friend and colleague Megan Gallagher on the excellent speech that she made and welcome her to Parliament. Christine Graham set an important historical context in her contribution this evening. I do not necessarily agree with the conclusion that she reaches on a national apology, but I think that it is important in listening to the first part of her speech, I think that she set that context, which many of us find completely alien and is what shocked us today. It is debates like this debate this evening, which I think really makes me desperately want to see the day return when Parliament can actually open our doors and let the public back in, because I think that tonight, the member's debate, we would have seen a completely full public gallery and I have no doubt that people watching this debate really want to see their voices heard in this Parliament. Deputy Presiding Officer, the forced adoption scandal has clearly directly affected mothers and we have this evening heard from many members in harrowing terms that unimaginable impact it has had and is having every waking moment of their lives today and for those who are still alive. We must also consider the impact it has had on children and indeed fathers. I wanted to use the time that I have this evening to speak about my constituent, Marjorie White, who is 70. A former nursery teacher, Marjorie believes that she will be one of the oldest forced adoption babies in Scotland today. Marjorie spent 30 years searching for her father, Peter McAllister, only for him to sadly die before they could meet in person. She says that frustration and sadness of never being able to hug her own dad and only to have a few short conversations on the phone was truly devastating and traumatic to both her and to him. Marjorie was deeply affected by the sheer waste of it all and has spoken out now because she believes the children of forced adoption were never given a choice but many of them are equally suffering today. She believes that Scotland needs to find a way to make the records more accessible for individuals who are alive today when they are trying to trace their parentage. It is something that we have not really touched upon in this debate, but she has spent her whole adult life searching for her father. She has been able to discover, after searching for him, that link. For many people, the current systems in place do not allow them, in fact, to put in place barriers to them to find out about their past. It is important to consider that, as we see advances with modern medicine, people want to know and investigate if they may have risks of genetic diseases, cancers and other illnesses that might be passed through generations. That is part of this debate, which is important, I believe, as well. That can only be done if we have a way of people being able to access family medical records. That will be a debate for another day, but it is one that we should also look at people who are asking for that and asking for this Parliament to start considering that. Individuals knowing that they are at a genetic risk of disease is increasingly important and, arguably, today a basic human right. I would welcome, in response to the minister or maybe in writing, how this aspect of this debate can also be considered. The true extent of the scandal when mothers were forced to give their babies up for adoption between the 1950s and 80s, because they were not married, is only now truly being understood and realised. I would like to thank, like others have, the Sunday Post newspaper and, most important, the campaigning journalist, Marion Scott, for the relentless campaign that they have run and led on this over a number of years now to uncover the personal stories and also to look towards how difficult it is for people to tell those stories. For many women, this period of our history destroyed their right to a family life, but for many they have had to live with this in secret. Many will today be starting to read the stories or to watch the TV interviews that are now being shared on national television or even watching this debate potentially. That will be re-traumatising, but in many cases it is also very difficult, if not impossible, to tell their partners, their children and their grandchildren about that period in their own personal history. However, we need to therefore make sure that consideration is given to what support must be made available for women coming forward, and I hope that ministers will also look at starting those discussions as soon as possible. Like Monica Lennon, I would like to particularly attribute to Marion Macmillan a truly remarkable lady. She has driven this campaign forward and she should be incredibly proud of what she has achieved for so many women. So many people owe her a great deal for her strength. It is down to really the bravery of Marion telling her own heartbreaking story that many people would have never known about this dreadful human rights scandal happening in Scotland with 60,000 mums each of them having their babies taken away and families torn apart. The damage done was incalculable, but we only now today know how many people are actually impacted and maybe only really starting to scratch the surface of this scandal. I welcome the First Minister's commitment to looking at ways in which this national apology can indeed be taken place. To give Marion and many other women the never closure but opportunity to know that the nation acknowledges the pain that they went through. I hope that Scottish ministers will take care as they look at doing this and make sure that the Scottish Government actually works to get this right. I have been concerned with other scandals that we have seen, like the mesh scandal for example, that this has sat on ministers' deaths for far too long, so I hope that we will see action. In fact, the pressure that campaigners have delivered has seen other countries, and I think that it is important that we now act as a nation. Presiding Officer, to conclude, no one is pretending that an apology can right the wrongs done to them, but I hope that a national apology will give many who are today aging and in many cases suffering ill health some comfort. We cannot right the wrongs of the past, but we can say sorry and support everyone as they move forward with their lives, and to acknowledge how negatively so many of our fellow Scots have been impacted. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer, and I welcome you to your place. Can I begin by thanking my colleague Monica Lennon for securing this important debate this evening? I know Monica's motion and, indeed, her work on the issue over many years has enabled us all to give voice tonight to the painful experiences of our recent past here in Scotland. I also want to take the opportunity to highlight the work of my West Scotland colleague Neil Bibby, and what he has done, along with Paisley resident Marion McMillan, whose story we have heard articulated once again in this chamber tonight and so powerfully. Neil's work on the issue over many years with Marion is to be commended. I think that the emotion in speeches tonight has shown how deeply personally everyone has been affected and impacted by those stories. We are here because of Marion and so many like her who have bravely told those stories, and have tenaciously argued on behalf of some 60,000 women who were unfairly coerced resulting in their newborn babies being taken away simply because they were unmarried. Much of what we have heard tonight is hard for us to imagine in today's context, but it is a heartbreaking truth and a dark moment in our history. It is a time that must be confronted and from which there must be truth and the opening of doors to closure, reconciliation and on-going support. Instead of trying to support women in society shun them, instead of trying to understand communities' judgments, and instead of offering the care that they needed, people in positions of trust and in organisations where charity and compassion were supposed to be at the heart took their children away, telling them that it was for the best. Many women were told that if they truly loved their child, they would give them up. It is hard to comprehend that level of emotional abuse and bullying. Those scars run deep. Indeed, constituents have contacted me, as I am sure they have many other members, to share their stories and to make the case for an apology. People like General Farmer from Bearsden who told me about a lifelong shame and the grief that she has experienced and the huge impact that the removal of a child has not only on their own life but on the life of the loved ones around them. Given that Australia, Canada and the Republic of Ireland have made apologies at a state and national level, it is time for both the UK and Scottish Governments to make such an apology. I commend the efforts of campaigners across the UK and of Labour colleagues such as Harriet Harman, who are working to secure such an apology in the House of Commons, but as Monica Lennon has said, we should not wait, we should act here in Scotland. In my remaining times, I want to turn to the importance of apology, but also the work that is required to underpin it. Trauma that is not transformed is transferred. The lack of closure, the lack of a healing process leaves a huge void in the life of so many, with pain relived every single day. An apology in itself cannot take the pain away, but I can acknowledge it and begin a process of reconciliation that I believe can lead to better long-term support for those living with trauma. An apology must be accompanied by an inquiry, leading to better supports such as access to bespoke therapies, counselling services and sustainable funding for organisations that provide those services. It cannot be acceptable, for example, that the only option when seeking counselling support for many women is that it is offered in settings where the walls are covered and posters promoting the positive experiences of adoption. Bespoke services are needed, designed in line with experience and needs of those that we have spoken about this evening. Indeed, I urge the chamber and the minister to look at the outcome of the Australian Parliament apology and inquiry, and indeed the Victorian state inquiry, which is due to report in August of this year. It has already included strong evidence from organisations calling for the provision of free specialist counselling and psychological services and a framework so that those services can be delivered independently. I think that there will be much in that report that we can learn from here in Scotland. To conclude, saying sorry has power. This Parliament, this place has power. In my first speech in this Parliament, I spoke about the power of Parliament to make things right. That is the place where an apology should happen. That is the place that Scotland looks to in times of joy and sorrow, in times of crisis and confidence. We have the power to say sorry for the actions of the past, but we also have the power to take action to improve the present and the future, and it is well past time that this happened. Thank you. I thank Monica Lennon for bringing forward this debate, and I welcome the opportunity to make some closing remarks. Like others that we have heard from during the debate, I am deeply saddened that in the past women were felt forced to give their children up for adoption due to the prevailing moral and social norms of the time. For the women, their children and wider families who have been affected by this issue, their lives have been profoundly changed by the experience, and I would like to offer my sincere sympathies for what they have endured. I would like to thank the women for their commitment, their courage and their determination to come forward and have their voices heard. I do not for one minute underestimate how harrowing it is for them to revisit their experiences, which I am sure will have sadly added to their pain. It is a complex issue and was influenced by many facets of society at that time. Those of us who have heard first-hand accounts or red research will have been moved, if not shocked, by the often heart-breaking experiences such as mothers being prevented from seeing their babies during birth and birth mothers feeling pressurised into giving up their child. The accounts shared today have again reiterated the terrible harm and long-lasting impact, and the practices may well be historical, however the effect that is had on these women is very real today. We sadly know from the numerous accounts of birth mothers' experiences that they suffered widespread social censure, condemnation, prejudice and stigma. Thankfully, those practices and morals have no place in our society today. Two weeks ago, the First Minister agreed to look at this matter properly, fully and quickly, and I am equally committed, having reached out to the movement for an adoption apology, and I am delighted that they have accepted my invitation to meet next week. I am actively working to establish future meetings with others affected by those historical practices. No voice speaks louder than the voice of lived experience in any issue, and the opportunity to discuss this directly with women who have suffered the trauma of separation and its lifelong effects is of paramount importance to me. As the chamber will know, I am fairly new to the role of children and young people's ministerial role. However, I understand that the movement for an adoption apology has campaigned for many years on this issue and is also called on the UK Government to issue an apology. I am also acutely aware that the group also recently reported that the adoption apology made by the Republic of Ireland Government earlier this year had, quote, not been well received and had been described as political waffle. That is why it is so important to me to have direct discussion with those with lived experience of adoption under those circumstances. It is right that we look at the issue properly, and for me that means listening to the voices of women, children and wider families whose lives have been profoundly changed by the experience. By doing that, we can work in partnership on the next steps. I am grateful to the minister for taking the intervention. I welcome those discussions and meetings that she is about to embark on, but women like Mary McMillan had those meetings in 2015 and told her story. We are telling it again tonight. Can I get a commitment that the First Minister will attend those meetings also? As we have heard tonight, the women and the families do not have time, and it is traumatising to tell your story over and over again. As a mental health professional, the minister knows that. Can we get a commitment that we can speed that up? We have paper work from the FOIs that shows that, in 2015, ministers were told what to say before the women had even opened their mouths. Let's get a commitment tonight from the minister that that will not happen again. We can move forward towards meaningful apology and the support that the women and the families need. I can certainly make a commitment that I will speak to everyone who wants to raise their voice. We are looking at ways in which we can ensure that we have the widest range of voices to inform us of what the women and their children need and what they want. We know that the Adoption and Children's Scotland Act 2007 requires local authorities to provide those affected by adoption with the support that they require. There are adoption support services available across the country, including in certain areas specialist agencies such as the Scottish Adoption Advice Service run by Bernados and Scottish Adoption. Those specialist agencies run extensive and well-established information, intermediary and counselling services, with provision available to local authorities. The Scottish Government funds and works closely with the organisation Birthlink, which also provides services to individuals and families separated by adoption, which includes maintaining the adoption contact register for Scotland. If any women, adoptees or others affected by those issues need support, their first step should be to contact their local authority adoption agency, who are ready and willing to support anyone affected by those issues. Despite those supports being in place, I recognise that they may not provide everything that those campaigning on those issues feel that they need. That is why it is critical for me to understand what really matters to those women and how they feel that they can be best supported moving forward, ensuring that they are treated with the sensitivity and the respect that they richly deserve. I thank the minister for taking the intervention. I accept that it is not the minister that was responsible for those horrific actions. I accept that it was not this First Minister, this Government or this Parliament that was responsible for those tragic circumstances. However, does she accept the principle that the Parliament is representative of the nation, and if the nation is going to accept the wrongs that we made as a nation, that means that this Parliament should speak with a united voice, meaning that its Government speaks with a united voice, to make these public apologies, to provide closure for those women and then to give the adequate support the follow-up. Does she accept the principle of that role and the role of this Parliament? What I do accept is that I am going to work really hard with those women and their families to find out exactly what it is that they want, because there is no one voice in this. We have one shot at getting this right, and I want to get it right. I give that commitment to Mr Sarwar that I will do my level best to try and assist in making this Parliament's voice heard. I am also mindful, though, that this issue has had a huge impact on the children. I think that Miles Briggs mentioned this. The children who were separated from their mothers all those years ago, and it is equally important that their voices and experiences are heard too. Given the importance of this issue, I have written to the UK Government in order to discuss historical adoption practices, as I know that it is a matter that is being discussed south of the border, as has been referenced by members in their speeches. Major shifts have occurred in adoption practice, as well as across society as a whole, and we are not complacent, though, and know that more can be done. That is why this year the First Minister committed to implementing the findings of the independent care review's promise. The promise recommends keeping families together where it is safe to do so, and that families must be given support together to overcome challenges experienced in their lives. Where it is not possible for the child to remain with her birth family, it is crucial that all parties are given the appropriate support, including therapeutic support, advocacy and engagement. I think that we have heard from some very powerful speakers this evening, and I would not want to single out any one of them, because I thought that people spoke very eloquently about the experience that their constituents have brought to them. I say to every member who has participated in this debate that I have certainly heard the words that you have said, and I will take your considerations on board. I would like to conclude by once again reiterating my deepest sympathies to all those who have been affected by historical adoption practices in Scotland. I made reference earlier to the bravery of the women who have made their voices heard, and I am committed to listening to those women, to their children and to others affected to work in partnership with them to explore our next steps.