 Rhaid i chi'n gallu ei wneud o'i ddechrau'n cymh CC-95 o'r ffordd Cymru ar oedd McNeir yn mythnos i gynhyrchu'n cefnodiol Cymru i gael ddiweddol i'n dweud i gael'i sgwrthu'n cymunedol i ddechrau, a'r ddynsgol wedi bod yn gweithio, tech chi'n ddim yn chael y cyfrifasol a'r gweithio i ddefnyddio i ddefnyddio, a'r ddiffnyddio i ddefnyddio i ddefnyddio i ddefnyddio, Cymru. I'm delighted to have secured this debate to mark Action, Missy Thuloma Day, on the 7th of July. I thank all colleagues for supporting my motion and welcoming intention to speak in the debate. It's very important that once again we approach this on a cross-party basis. I acknowledge the contribution made across the chamber to keep a focus on Missy Thuloma and the wider impact as best as it has had on our constituents. I begin my contribution by welcoming the Clydebank asbestos group to our Parliament, and I know, Presiding Officer, that you and all members here are very pleased that they are able to join us. In Clydebank Mwgai, we owe them a debt or gratitude for the work that they have done for those impacted by asbestos, and the compassionate support that they give to families and other loved ones at often very difficult times, as well as providing excellent and compassionate support, the determination for truth and justice is resolute and strong. I also welcome to the gallery members of the Clydebank group holidays project, who have also travelled through to support the debate. Action, Missy Thuloma, 2023, on the 7th of July seeks to raise awareness of Missy Thuloma. I congratulate Action, Missol and all the support groups up and down the country for the determined efforts to raise awareness of this disease. As part of the campaign, we've been asked to turn landmarks blue to raise awareness, and I am pleased to advise that our Clydebank district heating centre on the former John Brown's shipyard site will be lit up blue on the 7th of July, as well as the Bedmore's ramly sculpture in Darmure. Missy Thuloma is a cancer caused by exposure to asbestos fibres. It is a type of cancer that begins to grow in the lining of certain organs, most commonly it affects the lining of the lungs, and it can also affect the lining of the abdomen or the lining of the heart. It has a long latency period. We're followed by cancer, stating that it can take anywhere from 20 to 50 years from the first exposure to asbestos and a diagnosis of Missy Thuloma. It is an equitable disease, but some people can survive for many years after diagnosis. I welcome the recent developments that have been in treatment and research and commend the Scottish Missy Thuloma network, Missy Thuloma UK, Cancer Research campaigners and health professionals for all their work, and they can't underestimate its importance. The most appalling thing about this disease is that it's preventable. Cancer Research UK estimates that there are around 2,700 new cases in the UK every year. That's more than seven a day. The latest health and safety executive statistics show that the local authority area that covers Clydebank has a second highest male and fourth highest female death rate in the UK. Clydebank was once known as the Missy Thuloma capital of Europe because of high mortality rates. It's a horrible description that for us has a real person behind each number. Our industrial history is the main reason for this unwanted legacy of our town. John Brown Shipyard, the Singer's Machine factory, and Turner's asbestos cement factory are industries that I've often put the prioritisation of profit and production over the safety and welfare of workers. In their little book Little Work, Ronald Johnston and Arthur McIver illustrate the dreadful work conditions that were experienced by many in the shipbuilding industry. A lager that he interviewed gave a horrific account of his job. He opened the mat up and left enough so that he could stitch it up. He filled it with asbestos, folded his cloth and patted it all to try to make it the same. Sometimes it was hard stuff, so he got big lumps of wood and battered it. He worked in a fog making this up. Those conditions were appalling and were responsible for the murder of many people from our town. Unfortunately, there are also exposures to asbestos, causing Missy Thuloma that are not linked to our past industrial history. There have been emerging cases of younger people affected with one person being supported by the Clibank asbestos group after being diagnosed at just 30 years of age. Also, the health and safety executive reports some evidence of young teachers being diagnosed with Missy Thuloma. This question has continued wisdom of the health and safety executive advice that asbestos has been held in situ and the built environment provides the least risk to exposure. Instead, we need to see consideration given to a programme of phase removal from all public buildings, starting with schools, and calling the Scottish Government to work with COSLA and the health and safety executive to bring that to fruition. That is the best way to reduce exposure and further cases of Missy Thuloma. The support that we give to those impacted by Missy Thuloma also requires a social security system and legal compensation schemes that are there for people at their time of greatest need. I have listened to the Clibank asbestos group about the running down of DLP industrial injuries disabling benefit office at Phoenix House in Barrow. Although it is a reserved matter, I have raised it in this Parliament and colleagues have raised it in Westminster. The refusal to U-turn on this decision is very disappointing. The transfer of the benefit to Scotland allows us to devise a system that is more receptive to needs and one that looks at creating a modern scheme once the full and safe transfer of cases has taken place. I have already secured a meeting where the asbestos group gave clear views on that to the minister and I look forward to this dialogue continuing. I also welcome the contribution that Mark Griffin is making to this debate with the Scottish Employment Injuries Advisory Council. As a member of the Social Justice and Social Security Committee, I look forward to taking evidence and scrutinising the bill. In the area of compensation, the three-year time bar must end. Although the courts have the right to exercise discretion in those cases, the legal test is often failed. It cannot be right that this Parliament expected justice to be denied in this way. That is why I have raised this matter in Parliament with the Justice Minister and secured a commitment to hear from a delegation, including the Clibank asbestos group. I am hopeful that the outcome of the work by the Scottish Law Commission will make positive recommendations to resolve the difficulties in raising proceedings in asbestos-related cases. If those recommendations move us to a better place, I want to see them implemented within this Parliament term. In conclusion, Presiding Officer, this debate is important to my constituents and the many others that are impacted by emisifidlioma. We use it to remember those who have lost this horrible and tragically preventable disease, but we also use it to thank people like the Clibank asbestos group, researchers and charities who fight with resolute dedication for much better outcomes. We can thank them most effectively by acting where we can and by standing with them in the pursuit for truth and justice. We now move to the open debate. I call for Sanders Galhany to be followed by Paul Sweeney up to four minutes, Dr Galhany. I wish to draw members to a register of interest as a practicing NHS GP. In fact, as a junior doctor in FY1, I saw a lot of asbestos exposure long x-rays. I thank Murray McNair for bringing this motion to Parliament ahead of mesifidlioma day, which this year falls on 7 July. Mesifidlioma is a devastating disease that continues to afflict countless lives. Mesifidlioma is a rare and aggressive form of cancer that affects the lining of lungs, hearts or abdomen, primarily caused by exposure to asbestos. It is a disease that demands our attention, empathy and action. Mesifidlioma Day serves as a crucial reminder of the ongoing struggle faced by patients, their families and medical professionals in combating this merciless disease. It is my wish that we can shed light on its impact, foster understanding and advocate for better support systems and resources. First, awareness is the cornerstone of progress. The more we understand mesifidlioma, its causes, symptoms and effects, the better equipped we become to address it. By disseminating knowledge about the risks associated with asbestos exposure, we can prevent future cases and protect vulnerable individuals, including workers and industry that still use or handle asbestos. Educating the public, policy makers and employers about the dangers of asbestos and the importance of safety measures is crucial to prevent needless suffering. Second, empathy and support are essential in the fight against mesifidlioma. This disease not only affects the physical health of patients but also takes a toll on their mental and emotional wellbeing. By extending our compassion and understanding to those impacted by mesifidlioma, we can create a supportive environment where they can find solace, comfort and the strength to face challenges. Though we have local support groups, we also have online communities and counselling services and groups like we have here today in Parliament, and through these groups we can ensure that no-one faces this battle alone. Furthermore, research and innovation is vital as we want to be in pursuit of better treatments. Allocating resources to medical research institutes and universities enables scientists and medical professionals to make breakthroughs and understanding to disease and developing more effective therapies. By supporting and funding research initiatives, we can bring forward to those affected and accelerate progress towards better treatment options and improved patient outcomes. Finally, advocacy plays a vital role in shaping policies and regulations that protect individuals from asbestos exposure and support mesifidlioma patients. By raising our voices and supporting organisations dedicated to mesifidlioma advocacy, we can push for stricter safety regulations, improved compensation for affected individuals and increased funding for research and patient support programmes. In conclusion, we can make a tangible difference in the lives of those impacted by this relentless disease, and we should support all efforts to reduce mesifidlioma to nothing but a chapter in the history of human suffering. I am grateful for the opportunity to contribute to this afternoon's debate. I thank the member for a Clydebank and will Guy for bringing this motion on mesifidlioma to the chamber. I would also like to commend and echo the comments of colleagues in commending the work of Clydebank asbestos group and action on asbestos for all they have done to support people in their families, dealing with diagnoses that were bestos related to conditions for some three decades. I know that my colleague the member for Dumbarton is a long-standing supporter of their work, and she was disappointed not to be able to contribute to this afternoon's debate. We are all certainly aware of the dangers of asbestos, but in previous years, prevalence was extremely high due to its affordability and durability. Indeed, its prevalence in the United Kingdom, and in Scotland in particular, is in direct proportion to the extent to which our country was the first in the world to industrialise and went through the most intensive period of industrialisation in world history. The industry was world leading in Scotland from the 1870s. Indeed, there were around 60 asbestos manufacturing companies in Scotland by around 1914, the most notable of which were in the Glasgow area, Turner and Newell in Dalmure, Cape and Springburn in Maronite in Glasgow as well. The fact that the UK Government was so late in banning this product is also a huge legacy that we are still dealing with today. Indeed, we are one of the last countries in the developed world to ban this product. Blue and brown asbestos banned in 1985, but full ban on asbestos products was only in 1999, so that is why even today we have relatively young people still suffering from these horrendous effects of this toxic product. Shipbuilding is one iconic example of an occupation that had very high levels of asbestos exposure, as it was used for fireproofing high heat equipment on ships such as steam turbines, incinerators and boilers. Further, it was also used throughout ship shellplating for insulation and to line pipes for heat resistance. Indeed, I remember as a young boy my dad coming in from Shifts at Yaros and the powder coming off of his overalls and his boiler suit as he would come in from work. That is why young people, even children today, can still be affected. It was not just the people working on the shop floor or on board the ships, it was the carrying at home that also caused terrible harms to family and friends in the household. Indeed, it was so ubiquitous across Scotland. Building contractors, housing contractors would use it, even asbestos fireproofing in school chemistry labs, using it to insulate boilers. It was everywhere, it still is everywhere and indeed it is worth noting in this country today that if 53 per cent Scotland still has the highest proportion of pre-1946 housing stock in Europe relative to 38 per cent in the UK as a whole and 22 per cent across the EU, so it is embedded across so much of our housing stock even to this day. It still is alive and present danger. I was at an event at the King's Theatre at the weekend, the National Theatre, we were doing a tribute to Billy Connolly and I distinctly remember him speaking at Jimmy Reid's funeral, talking about how it would be snowing asbestos on board the ships that he worked on at Alexander Stephen's shipyard in Lenthouse and that he described it as, you would come up for a cigarette and then go down for more fumes. It was one of the most appalling industrial environments to work in anywhere in the world shipbuilding. Although there's a lot of romance around it, having worked in the industry myself, although there's been great improvements, it certainly isn't a pleasant place to work in the winter months. That's simply added to the devastating exposure to industrial illness that we've seen in Scotland and the fact that there are still these difficulties in getting recognition and compensation, particularly around the time bar given the latency of the condition, is simply unacceptable. We must make urgent steps to recognise the distinct and particularly pernicious effects that Mesa The Leoma has in this country because of our industrial legacy and because of the length of time it takes for it to manifest itself. We must adapt our social security system accordingly. We must adapt our apparatus for industrial injury accordingly to recognise the particular prevalence of this condition in our society today. It's still very much with us, it's not a historic situation, and with that I will conclude my remarks. Thank you very much, Mr Sweeney. I now call Bill Kidd to be followed by Mark Griffin up to four minutes, Mr Kidd. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer, and I'd like to thank Marie McNair for bringing today's important debate to Parliament. Last year, the member secured a debate on the same issue and spoke movingly and passionately about her experiences as part of the nursing team at St Margaret of Scotland Hospice, seeing, as she said, firsthand how those types of cancer took away so many too soon, and recalling the many heartbreaking conversations about the impact of mesothelioma. As the MSP for Clydebank, a town in which she was brought up, the member knows better than most and has described today again the devastating effect mesothelioma can have on individuals, families and whole communities, and I applaud her for her commitment and dedication to this issue. An issue that has affected so many in the Clydebank area and beyond in my Glasgow and Eastland constituency and further afield instead. As we've heard, mesothelioma is particularly aggressive, painful and debilitating cancer, where the average life expectancy after diagnosis is between 12 and 21 months, often associated with exposure to asbestos, in fact very much so. Its dangers were first discovered as early as 1906, however it wasn't until the 50s and 60s that the link between asbestos, lung disease, cancer, mesothelioma and other diseases became established, leading, as has been said, to its total ban in the UK in 1999. Sadly, given the time between exposure and diagnosis, despite the ban on asbestos, mesothelioma continues to blight thousands of lives every year. Focus of those at risk has also shifted with the realisation that many public buildings and particular schools, due to the use of asbestos in the building process, could pose a threat to those working there, especially if disturbed as they undergo refurbishment, repair work or demolition. Those are very real risks. The health and safety executive estimates that over 1 million tradespeople are still being exposed to asbestos every year. If we think about the fact that previous exposure to asbestos is still causing more than 5,000 deaths a year around 20 a week, we can see the continuing scale of the issue and the huge potential for future tragedy. That is why the work of groups such as Action on Asbestos, Clydebank Action on Asbestos Group and others is so important in ensuring that we do not lose sight of the challenges that we face or think of mesothelioma as a product of past industry in the past year. To applaud the work of those groups that have done over 30 years and the support and focus that they continue to provide, Action on Mesothelioma is very relevant to my constituency of Glasgow Annesland, too, with a proud history of shipbuilding and heavy engineering. It has suffered from the ravages of mesothelioma and, once again, the help and support of organisations such as Clydebank asbestos group and Action on Asbestos has been invaluable. The Scottish Government's continuing commitment to acknowledging and tackling this issue should also be commended. The establishment of the Scottish Mesothelioma Network in 2019 aims to improve outcomes for patients by taking a collaborative approach across Scotland and across various professions, meaning that all patients in Scotland could access the very best expertise and the care that they deserve, no matter what health board area they happen to live in. At this debate last year, we learned that the network had recently created the first set of national quality performance indicators, but those QPISs were not at that time all being met. Given that a year has passed, I hope that the minister will take the opportunity to provide an update on the work of the network and indeed progress towards meeting its target. Today's debate is relevant to the past, to now and also, sadly, to the future. As we learn of the potential harmful effects of new innovative materials, as best as once was, we need to learn from the mistakes of the past and ensure that they never happen again. For that to happen, we need to have more control of the development, licensing and distribution of new products. We need to have more control over seeing their use, namely through health and safety legislation. I urge the Government to call for these powers and, for all of us, to support those calls. I also want to congratulate Maria McNeill for bringing this timely debate to the chamber ahead of action on Mesa Salioma Day 2003 next week. I also thank her for her kind words on my work on my private members bill. I look forward to working with Maria McNeill and other members of the Social Security and Social Justice Committee as it makes its way through the parliamentary process. With around 200 new cases a year in Scotland, asbestos-related cancer and Mesa Salioma and the risks from asbestos have clearly not gone away. It is a painful, incurable and terminal disease, and like many other speakers in the chamber today, I want to pay tribute to the long-standing on-going work of Clydebank Asbestos Group for the information and support that they continue to provide to people with asbestos-related conditions. I also want to pay tribute to action on asbestos and asbestos action. Collectively, those organisations have provided decades of critical support, helping people across Scotland to suffer what is predominantly a workplace disease. Both action on asbestos and asbestos action have told me that their case load, the people who are coming to them to seek support for asbestos-related cancer, is now increasingly female. Nurses and care workers, hospital staff who have worked care for sick and dying friends and relatives for decades in buildings ridden with asbestos. Teachers who have worked in schools with asbestos are also increasingly suffering, and because the disease can take up to 20 years to develop long after they leave their work, most treatments simply rely on palliative care. The GEM study found in 2020 that the high-risk occupations for asbestos exposure differed entirely for men and women, but so, too, did the experiences of explanations and support provided at the time of their diagnosis. The gender roles also influenced how they coped with a diagnosis of mesothelioma. Those are the very real gender differences for which our industrial injuries system has not taken account at all. We can see the disparity in the applications for industrial injuries and disabled benefit, and that is something that must be addressed urgently, because the current benefit is highly gendered against women. For example, asbestos-related avarian cancer, which is the most common gynaecological cancer in the UK, is missing from the scheme and including men includes only a fifth of the cancers that European schemes recognise. I want to put on record my thanks to the charities that I mentioned earlier who are supporting those affected by asbestos for their support for my Scottish employment injuries advisory council bill. I think that having a new powerful independent council with workers at the heart of that new Scottish benefit that can conduct research into the extent of mesothelioma and asbestos-related cancer in modern workplaces is absolutely urgent, but so, too, is the need to have that council, which has a driving mission at the heart of its purpose to close the gender gap in that benefit. Because asbestos is still found in many older buildings, it continues to put the communities and workforces in every one of our constituency and regions at risk, which is exactly why we must continue to recognise it in our policy decisions. There are homes right across the country that will need to retrofit for net zero that still have asbestos. They have at their loft their floor tiles their insulation. It is in the schools that need to be renovated or rebuilt. It is in the NHS, a state of hospitals which again will need to be rebuilt or maintained. Every day places that we live, work or study or just go for treatment, we can still be exposed to asbestos today. Although asbestos was completely banned in 1999, that exposure risk remains. There are real policy questions about managing and removing asbestos that we must tackle, and I hope that we can heed those calls and deliver the action required. Thank you very much, Mr Griffin. I now call Stuart McMillan to be followed by Richard Leonard up to four minutes. Thank you, Presiding Officer. First, I would like to refer members to my register of interests as a lifetime honour member of action on asbestos. I want to congratulate Marie McNair for securing this important members' debate, and as Marie McNair highlighted, asbestos related conditions in this case, Mr Thuleomer is still highly prevalent in society today. Mr Thuleomer is not only an awful condition which has no cure, but it also does not, excuse me, is not only a condition based on people solely working in our past traditional industries. As we have heard in this chamber, and this chamber certainly knows this because it has been spoken about many times before, asbestos is a product that was used in many buildings and constructions. As such, it will exist in buildings in the country today, as we have already heard regarding schools. With that, I actually want to echo Marie McNair's call regarding the programme going forward for public buildings. Crucially, however, if asbestos is not interfered with, it is considered to not pose a threat to the public, but I certainly agree with Marie McNair's call. I genuinely will never understand why asbestos was still used in buildings and constructions when it was well known for decades that it was a dangerous product. I also will never understand why there was such a lacyfair attitude from Governments with regards to health and safety in society when it came to this particular product. As someone who has campaigned over many years to improve the care and support given to people who have been affected by asbestos related to diseases, I recognise the importance of making days such as Action Musically on My Day to remind us that there is still a lot more to be done in this area. I coincidentally welcome the recent commitment from the Scottish Law Commission that it will as part of its 11th programme of law reform explore issues surrounding the current law of limitation where plural plaques are concerned. I had written to the SLC but also met with Lady Payton in this particular regard. I did this because I responded to the SLC's discussion paper on damages for personal injury published in February 2022 following correspondence from a constituent about this particular issue. For context, the way that the law currently stands, people who have been negligently exposed to asbestos have three years from the date of becoming aware of the fact that they have developed plural plaques to raise proceedings for damages. Given that plural plaques are an asymptomatic condition, I agreed with the SLC's position in the discussion paper that it is unlikely that a person diagnosed with this condition could know that they have a right of action as per the damages asbestos-related conditions at Scotland Act passed in 2009 in this parliament. Further, it is highly unlikely that they would then know that if they do not exercise that right within three years, it should develop a serious and fatal symptomatic condition, such as musically on my later in life, they would not have any remedy because of the failure to act. When my constituent got in contact to explain how this legislation actually prohibited their relative from making a claim for damages when they were later diagnosed with mesothelioma, as they were not aware of the three-year time bar, I knew that I had to raise this particular issue with the SLC who I knew were looking at similar issues. I am glad that the SLC has therefore confirmed that this will be looked at because I believe that it is grossly unfair to expect people diagnosed with plural plaques to know that they only have a short time frame to raise proceedings given not everyone goes on to develop a more serious health condition. Whilst it is known that fewer people are now being diagnosed with asbestos-related diseases, thanks to improvements in health and safety for workers, but as ways of working and industries change, there will no doubt be new industrial diseases that arise in the future. That is why law reform this area remains important. If we are to further improve working conditions for everyone across Scotland, irrespective of the job that they do, and with that, Presiding Officer, once again, I want to thank Marie McNair for securing this hugely important debate on action musically on my day. I thank Marie McNair for tabling this motion in Parliament. It comes at a time when working people are continuing to contend with a deregulated labour market, the dilution of labour law and an onslaught on their trade unions. I raise this because a strong and vibrant trade union movement is a precondition of a free and democratic society. It is also a prerequisite for justice for the victims of occupational diseases like mesothelioma. For many years now, there have been domestic laws and international bans on exposure to asbestos in the workplace, but at the same time, there have been precious few convictions, even when we know that fatal exposure to these deadly fibres is still prevalent. That is why we should restore the civil liability for breach of health and safety regulations. It is why we should significantly increase the number of inspections carried out by HSE and local government inspectors. It is why we should bolster trade union rights as part of a wider transformative shift in power in favour of workers' democracy and equality. Today, as well as the trade union movement, we pay tribute to organisations like Action on Asbestos and the widely respected Clydebank Asbestos Group. Both provide not just practical help, not simply just monetary advice but compassion and emotional support, so they offer mutual aid, collective solidarity but they also campaign for justice and truth as well. Friday 7 July is a time of remembrance. On that day, I will shed a tear for my dear old comrade, Alex Falkiner. In my life, I have grieved and said it in early farewell to too many workers who, in this crucible of the industrial revolution, from the dockyards and the shipyards to the factories and the construction sites have paid with their lives, their families robbed of treasured years together. It is for them that we keep fighting and it is because of them that we shall never give up. Today, we also think of those fearless campaigners, like Bob Dickie, Joan Baird and Tommy Gorman, who gave evidence to the Public Petitions Committee of this Parliament on the need for urgent action on mesothelioma, to the greatly missed Frank Maguire and those who made the unanswerable case to this Parliament for legal reform, to MSPs like Bill Butler, Desmond Nulty, whose pioneering work led to the enactment of legislation which made the lives of the people we are here to serve a little better. The Scottish Parliament does have a proud record on this question and it is right that we hold this debate again this year, but we need to do more than simply debate it. We need action, more investment in health and care, in new research and in new treatments for a start, but we also need action now to tackle some of the outstanding legal matters too. A year ago, I called on the government to reform the so-called single action rule. Under this rule, a failure to lodge a claim for plural plaques within a three-year time limit prevents any subsequent claim for a more serious condition like mesothelioma being pursued, even though both were caused by the same negligence by the same employer. The Scottish Law Commission published a comprehensive and compelling case for reform back in February 2022. The consultation closed in mid-June 2022, but over a year later the Scottish Government still has not responded, not uttered a single word, never mind profed a remedy, so I'm bound to finish by warning that such inaction, such inertia, such indifference is not good enough, not good enough for a government, not good enough for this Parliament and certainly not good enough for all of those working-class families denied justice. So this afternoon, a year on, I hope that those families will finally get an answer from this Government. They are entitled to nothing less, they deserve the truth, they deserve answers and they deserve justice. Thank you Mr Leonard, I now invite, if I could perhaps ask those in the public gallery, I know again emotions run high on an issue like this, but I would ask you to refrain from participating, that includes applauding. I now invite the Minister Jenny Minto to respond to the debate around seven minutes. Thank you, Presiding Officer, and I too would like to pass my thanks on to Mary McNair for raising this subject in the chamber again, this really important subject again. And also her comment on the importance of cross-party work. I think that that's incredibly important too and I note what both Richard Leonard and Stuart McMillan have said. I'm also pleased to say that the Scottish Government buildings will be lit blue on the 7th of July to recognise the importance of this day and the idea of it being a moment to remember as well, I think, is incredibly important. So I welcome the opportunity to close today's debate on Mesotholomeoma and I too would like to welcome the Clive Bank asbestos group to the parliament as well. The Scottish Government is fully aware of the distress and impact this disease can have on individuals and their families. This is especially true for this cancer due to its latency, as many members have pointed out, and how widespread asbestos exposure was in the past without the knowledge of its long-term impacts. This can be particularly distressing due to the limitation of treatment options. However, research into the condition continues and there is hope that progress will be made in the coming years. If I may, I first heard about Mesotholomeoma when my husband was making a documentary for Frontline Scotland in 2000 and that really brought home to me the impact that it had on so many communities across Scotland. I would also like to reference Paul Sweeney's comments in setting the historical context, but also the fact that it rolls forward into the here and now as well. I think that that is very important to recognise. Mark Griffin, the impact on women. My next meeting is with the women's champion for women's health, so I will drop a pebble into her mind about this as well, but women's health care and the gender disparities that we have to be very aware of, and I believe that the Scottish Government is. I would like to give special thanks to those people working across the NHS, as well as those who are working in social care and our third sector partners. I have already thanked them, but I would like to thank them again, Clydebank, a specialist group for their continuing work. Their support for not only an individual's physical needs but emotional and mental wellbeing is immensely important and one that we could not do without in the health sector. The work of our various partners in the community is absolutely crucial in supporting those affected. Bill Kidd asked about the Scottish Mesothlemia network, and it continues to be a valuable resource across Scotland ensuring best practice. Information and access to clinical trials is shared across the country. It has helped to ensure access to trials for people all across Scotland, which is so important where treatment options are otherwise so limited. The network also allows access to clinical nurse specialists who are there to support patients and their families. Patients also have access to specialist clinicians who are able to give the dedicated and expert treatment in care that they need and deserve. I am sure that members will be aware that the Scottish Government recently published our 10-year cancer strategy alongside a three-year cancer action plan. Over the next 10 years, our strategic aim is to improve cancer survival and provide excellent, equitably accessible care. The strategy and plan take a comprehensive approach to improving patient pathways from prevention and diagnosis through to treatment and post-treatment care. Our overall vision is that more cancers are prevented. Our compassionate and consistent cancer services provide excellent treatment and support throughout the cancer journey and improve outcomes and survival for people with cancer. For those individuals who are facing a mesothemiuma diagnosis today, we are able to support them as best possible throughout their care. We are continuing to fund our single point-of-contact initiative, which will help cancer patients, including those with mesothemiumaia. I am sorry to discuss any questions or anxieties related to their clinical care with a dedicated individual and will help them to self-manage some aspects of their condition and progress through their cancer journey. As we have heard today, up to 9 out of 10 people with the disease are directly linked to exposure to asbestos. I recognise the comments that Paul Sweeney was making about schools. I can remember in my science lab having an asbestos square for our Bunsen burner to sit on, and I see Richard Leonard nodding his head as well. Richard Leonard nodding his head as well. It has gone into many people's consciousness. It was interesting that the reference made in the debate to the law commission's project on damages for personal injury, which, under the current timetable, is due to report by mid 2024. Can the minister do anything at all to work with her colleagues across Government to expedite that, examine with the law commission a way to extra resource to be provided to analyse the responses to the consultation and try to speed up the policy consideration? I think getting enhanced legislation is really important. I thank Paul Sweeney for that intervention, and I am happy to discuss that with colleagues. The use of asbestos in the UK has, of course, been banned since 1999, where existing asbestos remains and there are licences required to work with it, and the use of strict control measures, including personal protective equipment such as respirators. As well as seeking to prevent exposure to asbestos and to provide appropriate medical care for those who have been affected by it, we also have worked hard to ensure appropriate rights to compensation. The Scottish Government in this Parliament has a strong record of supporting those who have been negligently exposed to asbestos. Significant changes regarding the law and damages for personal injuries has been made, including the most recently damages Scotland Act 2011. Although those preventative policies are welcome, there is the reality that many more individuals will continue to present with this disease due to often long periods before symptoms present. In conjunction with this, it can unfortunately be very difficult to treat. Nearly all treatment is aimed at controlling the disease for as long as possible in keeping symptoms under control. Doctors and researchers are working to improve treatment all the time. The Scottish Government encourages clinicians to ensure that, as many patients as possible are included in relevant and appropriate clinical trials. There is significant evidence that outcomes are improved for those patients treated in environments where research is the norm or for those patients who are involved in cancer trials. I would like to offer my sincere thanks to all members for their contributions in today's debate. It has reinforced the commitment that everyone here has to make a difference—sorry, it has reinforced the commitment that everyone here has to making a difference to those with musaflameoma and their families. Progress has been made in cancer diagnosis and treatment, but we know that there is much more work than can be done, and I hope that we can work together to improve that.