The next item of business is a debate on motion 116.08 in the name of co-cab Stuart on behalf of the Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee on Asylum Seekers in Scotland. I invite members wishing to take part to press the request speak buttons now or as soon as possible and I invite co-cab Stuart to open the debate around 10 minutes, Mr Stuart. Thank you, Presiding Officer. Just before I commence my remarks on behalf of the committee, I encourage members to reflect on the tragic news that we have heard from the baby stock home this morning. I move the motion in my name on behalf of the Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee. The committee's inquiry into the human rights of asylum seekers ran from late April through to June this year, which followed an evidence session on race inequality earlier in the year, during which organisations, including the Scottish Refugee Council and Maryhill Integration Network, told us that they considered that the Scottish Government could do more with its devolved powers to support asylum seekers. I want to thank and acknowledge all those who provided evidence to the committee, both in written and oral evidence. I would like to thank the clerking team, Spice and the wider team who provided excellent support to the committee during our weeks of evidence taking and engagement with the draft report. I especially want to thank those asylum seekers and refugees who gave us an insight into the lived experiences at our engagement events held here in the Parliament and at the Maryhill Integration Network. We, as the committee, appreciate that it will not have been easy for those brave individuals to speak with us and having to relive some of their experiences. We hope that, through our report, their voices and experiences have been reflected and that the Scottish Government can bring forward initiatives and solutions to address the challenges that they face. I recommend to any member who has not yet had the opportunity to visit the committee's webpage and read the notes of those engagement sessions that really drive home the challenges asylum seekers and refugees face. Before I move on to the substantive content of the report, I want to pay tribute and thank those organisations that do so much with the limited resources to support asylum seekers and refugees to understand their rights and, again, limited entitlements. Those organisations such as Maryhill Integration Network, the Amnabarth Companions, Refugee, Refugees for Justice, Scottish Refugee Council, Friends of Scottish Settlers and Grampian Regional Equality Council also helped to facilitate our engagement sessions alongside the committee clerks and the Parliament's participation and community's team, and we are very grateful to them. Presiding Officer, while immigration and asylum are reserved matters, we heard that there are ways in which, with some innovation and radical thinking, the Scottish Government and local authorities can address some of the issues that are faced by asylum seekers, particularly in terms of integration. One of the keys to integration is being able to travel, whether it is to attend GP or solicitor appointments, or to access advice, support education services, or just to have the opportunity to visit other places and prevent isolation. We know that the financial burden that is associated with bus travel is an obstacle for many asylum seekers. We heard that consistently throughout our inquiry. Our report strongly supports the extension of the existing national concessionary scheme to include all asylum seekers. That would be transformative, and as Paul Sweeney, my colleague, noted, during his member's debate on 26 October, there is cross-party support for that, including with Jackson Carlaw as convener of the Citizens Participation and Public Petitions Committee, having recently raised that directly with the First Minister at a recent conveners group meeting. The subsequent announcement from the First Minister at the start of November that £2 million has been set aside in next year's budget to allow for the scheme to include all asylum seekers is very much welcomed. We look forward to next week's budget statement to understand more about how that will be rolled out and how the £2 million will be allocated. The committee heard about the pilot schemes that have been running in Aberdeen and Glasgow and hoped that those will help to inform how the scheme is extended. We note also other policies and strategies that the Scottish Government has in place, including the announcement in February this year of an additional £1.6 million in funding focus on the development of a refreshed new Scots refugee strategy, the ending destitution strategy and the new guardianship service for unaccompanied asylum seeking and trafficked children. Our report reflects the legislative context, including the illegal migration act and the current asylum process. We heard strongly expressed views that the illegal migration act will change the landscape for asylum seekers seeking legal protection in the UK. We agree with calls from the Scottish Refugee Council and the Children and Young People's Commissioner that, as far as is possible within the devolved powers the Scottish Government works with local authorities and other relevant bodies to maintain the integrity of the looked-after children's system, scrutinise the age assessment regime set out in the 2022 Nationality and Borders act, as well as the illegal migration act. We also strongly recommend—yes, I will. Alex Cole-Hamilton. I am very grateful to the co-capture for taking my intervention. I agree with absolutely everything that she says and all that the committee has done in their report. Does she agree with my party's position that asylum seekers should be allowed the opportunity to work while their claims are being processed by potentially giving them a sense of freedom and also reducing the financial impact on the state? I cannot comment on that as the convener, but in my personal capacity I do agree. We also strongly recommend that the Scottish Government work with third sector partners and public agencies to develop trauma-informed and skilled training for all those working to support asylum seekers. Housing is another key area where there are many consents. There is a lack of appropriate and affordable accommodation across Scotland and the rest of the UK. Our report notes that there is no easily identifiable solution. We heard a lot of evidence on the use of temporary accommodation, particularly the use of hotels. We are concerned that that practice is being increasingly used and for longer periods of time, therefore leading to the practice being normalised, which it should not be. The impact on families and on mental health and wellbeing of individuals is significant. Hotels and other forms of institutional accommodation are inappropriate and should only be used as a temporary measure when absolutely necessary. We recognise the current housing crisis and the challenges that this represents to local authorities in providing that appropriate accommodation. Our report urgently seeks clarification on what the Scottish Government is doing or intends to do to address this situation. Linked to that, we recognise the impact of wider dispersal policies that are likely to pose. Our report asks the Scottish Government what preparations it has in place to support local authorities meet the challenges that the policy will have on them. It also seeks the commitment from the Scottish Government to work with COSLA and individual councils to identify issues that are unique to them. We would also welcome an update and some clarity from the Scottish Government on funding and resource support for those third sector organisations, particularly those outside Glasgow, who provide asylum-seeking individuals with advice about their rights and the services that they are entitled to access. I hope that the minister might be able to address those in her remarks. Witnesses also raised another potential impact of the illegal migration act with strongly expressed views that it will effectively end the protection for survivors of trafficked exploitation and modern slavery, which was provided under the Human Trafficking and Exploitation Scotland Act 2015. In our report, we urged the Scottish Government to develop guidance to ensure robust and equivalent form of support to that currently provided under that legislation. We also asked the Government to consider the calls for a national referral mechanism proposed by the Scottish Refugee Council. We heard concerns about the impact on children, including unaccompanied and the use of mother and baby units. We heard conflicting accounts about unaccompanied children living in hotels. Our report expresses the committee's frustration not being able to clarify whether or not there are unaccompanied children living in hotels. That is very concerning and we asked the Government to investigate and clarify the position as a matter of urgency. We are also keen to understand the Scottish Government's plans on how it will safeguard children, including unaccompanied children, in the light of the power of the illegal migration act to remove them from local authority areas.  The committee has asked the Scottish Government to investigate this and to report back accordingly and it might be helpful to have an indication of how long that investigation might take. Presiding Officer, I understand that I have completely run out of time and I have not yet covered areas but just a few seconds just to say that I was going to go on to talk about English for speakers of other languages but I note that my colleagues may bring that into the matter that was raised. I will move straight on to asylum seekers that have experienced trauma so we encourage a trauma informed approach to reduce isolation. Finally, Presiding Officer, I look forward to this afternoon's debate and hearing the members' reflections on our committee report, as well as the minister's response. I want to start just by echoing the convener's comments there and acknowledging the sad reports that a person seeking asylum and living on the baby stock home has died.  It would be inappropriate to speculate on the circumstances at this point but I expect the UK Government to meet the Home Secretary's commitment to investigate fully. I know myself having appeared in front of the committee during this inquiry that the breadth of evidence that it was presented was very impressive. From local authorities in COSLA to third sector support organisations in Mears Group, I want to acknowledge just how much information the committee has considered in completing the report. Of course, I also took questions at that time from a citizens panel and I know that committees across the Parliament have been exploring ways to bring the public into policy scrutiny, which I absolutely welcome. It is great to see the committee exploring and testing ways of doing that. The day I sat in front of the committee was World Refugee Day on 20 June. Now, of course, we are marking the 75th anniversary of the Refugee Convention and I attended a local meeting of the Global Refugee Forum this morning. The context of the work that we are doing in the wider picture of asylum policy in the UK and across the world is very important. We have proud history in Scotland of helping those in need, providing sanctuary and our communities have long been enriched by diversity. I share the committee's passion for doing all that we can to improve the experience of asylum seekers here in Scotland. I am considering its report carefully and will respond in due course. I want to reflect on the fact that, acknowledged by the convener that, naturally, with asylum being a reserved matter, much of the evidence that the committee heard was about the impact of reserved policy on people in Scotland, both for asylum seekers themselves and the communities and services that support them. That has included everything from delays in processing asylum applications, plans under what is now sadly the illegal migration act. Many of us hope that it would not make it past being the bill that it was during the inquiry to the overall hostile environment approach that we see from the UK Government. As the convener will know, I share her concern about the impact of the act. She will recall that we wish to withhold consent to the bill at the time and we continue to explore ways to mitigate its worst impacts. During my time as Minister for Migration, I have tried very hard to get the message across to asylum seekers and refugees here in Scotland that their Government wants to help them, that we care about them, that we welcome them, that we don't want anyone to feel afraid or that they are not worth the same or entitled to the same rights as anyone else. Operating that way successfully is very difficult when you are inextricably linked to the actions of a UK Government, which is often very hostile. During my summer recess visits, when I spoke and listened to communities across Scotland, there were stories in the press at the time about Robert Jenrick ordering murals to be painted over at detention centres that were there to make children feel a little less stressed. When I ate dinner after a long day meeting some children of former asylum seekers, a waiter came over and asked if I was the immigration minister. I said, yes, migration, but yes. He says, I'm from Rwanda and he said it very defensively as if daring me to object to him. So I thanked him for coming to speak to me and we had a very pleasant conversation, but I'm very aware that the perception around and the expectation of an immigration minister is one that's quite tough for us to get over to then have those open, honest conversations that we need to have from lived experience to know where the real problems are that we have to solve. So I acknowledge and welcome the committee's role in helping to platform that lived experience. The committee has acknowledged the reserved nature of immigration and relevant areas of welfare. The most significant issues raised in the report are reserved, asylum accommodation and support, asylum decision making, policy restricting right to work and now restricting the right to claim asylum at all under the illegal migration act. I don't say that to wash my hands of any responsibility. Indeed, we very recently set out as a government what we would do in all of these areas given the opportunity and we are urging the UK government not only to make changes that we believe are right, but to give us the room to do things differently as well. I'll come on shortly to that which we do have some room to manoeuvre on within devolved competence, but some of the issues that I've focused on in dealings with the UK government have included urging UK ministers to uphold the UK's moral and international obligations under the 1951 convention on refugees, asking them to invest in the UK asylum system to increase the quality and speed of asylum decisions, calling on them to ensure that newly recognised refugees are not at risk of homelessness or destitution by extending the move on period from 28 days. On a call yesterday, I suggested 90 days in line with the notice that was given to move Afghans on from hotels or failing that 56 days, which would be in line with homelessness policy here. Another call in that space that we've made indeed I wrote to the former minister seeking urgent action on that was to provide funding to local authorities and work constructively with them, sharing information and good time to allow them to provide that wraparound support that we know many of them really want to. We've also asked for the right to work without restriction to the shortage occupation list for asylum seekers and to ensure that the financial element of asylum support reflects the real costs of daily life, including digital access and travel costs, because right now it is far from it. We also asked for an end to maximisation policy and use of unsuitable asylum accommodation. We've worked very hard in Scotland to try and keep it bay the worst suggestions. I don't think that it's even often about housing but just trying to keep as many asylum seekers in one place as possible. We know that some of the suggestions coming from the UK Government are simply not safe. We watch helplessly as the UK Government tries to push through its Wanda plan, with the new bill seeking to supply key sections of the Human Rights Act reducing what is required under domestic human rights law, in violation of the UK's international obligations and basic constitutional norms. We have to be unapologetic in calling that what it is removing human rights from humans. Going on to our approach, it is different. It has been established for a decade now and has been delivered through two new Scots refugee integration strategies. Our direction of travel here is clear and distinct from the UK's. New Scots has led in partnership by the Scottish Government, COSLA and Scottish Refugee Council and involves wider partners across public bodies, local authorities, third sector, private sector and community groups. It focuses on what can be done in the devolved context and we are willing to be and indeed have been creative. The key principle in the strategy is that integration should be supported from day one for people seeking asylum, as well as refugees, displaced people, stateless people and other forced migrants. I do not pretend that it is not difficult or problematic when asylum seekers are denied the right to work or social security from the beginning, but we are determined to stick to those principles as far as we can and call for action from the UK Government when it is out of our hands. As I mentioned, the Global Refugee Forum is taking place this week, starting tomorrow in Geneva. New Scots partners met this morning with refugee leaders as part of a local forum. I heard something at this morning's forum that will stick with me forever from one of the representatives. She said that there are asylum seekers living in Glasgow and she has been to visit them in their hotel. They had no idea that they were in Scotland. They had never heard of Scotland. They are new Scots and they have been so prevented from integrating into our communities that they have not even heard of their new home. That is how far removed we are being kept from those that we have a duty to support, a will to support. It is a stark reminder to me and to everyone here that there is so much more to do to communicate with people already living here, explain to them how much we value them and want to support them. It has been important to hear exactly— Yes, certainly. I thank you for that intervention and the minister makes excellent remarks there. With regard to children in that context, does she accept that it is even worse for children and does she have a response to the committee's calls for investigations regarding unaccompanied children? Yes, certainly. The convener will be aware that that was one of the key areas of concern that we had around the illegal migration act was how it prevented us from supporting unaccompanied minors and children who are victims of human trafficking over others. It is a deep concern for us. As I say, in terms of the committee's recommendations, I will provide a full written response as soon as I can. However, those comments from the forum this morning have been important to hear exactly because they are challenging to us. We are taking account of the impact of new context on refugees, asylum seekers and those who support them so that our vision, our principles and actions within the new Scots strategy remain relevant and can react to events and new legislation that has come since the 2014 edition. I commit to continuing to raise issues with reserved immigration and asylum policy, which impacts on people in Scotland with the UK Government. I will also continue to work with new Scots partners to support that integration from day 1. I look forward to responding fully to the committee in writing. I start by putting on record our concerns and thoughts at the reported death of the asylum seeker at the onthebibbistock home. I welcome the opportunity to speak in this committee debate and to discuss the findings of the report. I thank members and the clerks of the Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee for their work and all the organisations and individuals who have been involved. I think that this is a helpful and constructive report. I also thank the organisations across Scotland, the third sector, mostly, who provide support for people in Scotland. I think that we need to always acknowledge their work in our communities. Those who have been forced to leave their homes due to persecution should be allowed to seek asylum in the UK. However, that can only be done if they enter the country through a safe and legal route. Scotland has made its home to people all over the world throughout our history. Historically, we have seen people from the Indian subcontinent, Ireland, Poland and many more make their homes here more recently. That has also included Syrians and Ukrainians fleeing illegal wars. The committee report illustrates the significant challenges faced by both the UK and Scottish Governments in providing services, especially at a time when we are seeing our public services overstretched and failing to meet current needs and demands. For those who do not have available accommodation and cannot meet their own essential living costs, the Home Office can provide financial support in housing under section 95 of the Immigration Asylum Act 1999. As it stands, there are more than 5,500 people in Scotland who are receiving this support. Immigration and asylum are reserved matters, and it is therefore the responsibility of UK ministers and the UK Government to address many of the concerns highlighted in the report, and the committee has written to the Home Office on that. I accept the concerns from stakeholders about the slow rate of processing asylum applications and decisions being taken. I think that that is unacceptable. Perhaps the most critical section of the committee report highlights the pressures that local authorities in Scotland are under when they are supporting and assisting people. I want to take the opportunity to acknowledge and highlight the emergency response that many councils across Scotland, including my own here in Edinburgh City, have undertaken to support people and put in place resettlement schemes. For most of us who represent Edinburgh and Glasgow, we will also be acutely aware of the housing pressures that our communities face. That is why recently both Edinburgh and Glasgow City councils have declared housing emergencies. I was particularly interested in the position that the committee has taken in relation to housing and specifically around the use of hotels and guest houses for asylum seekers. We, as a Parliament, have not taken a position on housing children in temporary accommodation, but that is something that we should look at across portfolios. Members will know that I have consistently raised the number of Scottish children and families living in temporary accommodation and the lack of support services that are provided. As I have said, the committee has heard specific concerns about the use of hotels and the inspection regime around them. The committee agreed with the evidence that hotels and other forms of institutional accommodation are inappropriate and should only be used as a temporary measure where necessary, and I think that there is learning for all our housing policies in that. It also noted a significant negative impact that this form of housing has on families and individuals' mental health and wellbeing. The report makes it clear that ministers have to be upfront around the housing challenges that Scotland faces. As I have said, the report highlights evidence that mental health issues are widespread among those fleeing conflicts abroad and that, by living an unsuitable and unstabilising accommodation, those are often exasperated. Warnings in the report also showed that by housing people in this way, we risk seeing a significant negative impact on the mental health and wellbeing, not only of individuals of a wider family unit as well. I am very much in agreement of Dr Caruth's points regarding mental health. It is crucial that we understand that, for many of those coming to Scotland, they are very much in a vastly different understanding of mental health issues as we see it in this country. Realising that they can seek support for mental wellbeing is something that we should also make sure is always advertised and people know that they can speak out. I think that I have got the time. Stuart McMillan Thank you for taking the intervention. Just on the point of mental health, when more asylum seekers are coming to Scotland and there is no financial resource coming along to assist with asylum seekers, surely financial assistance came along from the UK government, that would have the potential to help when it comes to the mental health aspect because of the asylum seekers, if they have no vital to a way of money and vital to a way of engagement with the local community. I agree with the sentiments of what the member said. Those who are tasked with providing support services, especially mental health services, need to do that on a case-by-case basis. In terms of different communities, often that will also present an additional barrier for interpreters, for example, and where that can be funded. I think that that is something that should be considered. Again, health boards often find it difficult to provide that service currently as well. However, we need to do more to educate people on where they can find mental health services. That is something that was an important part of the report as well. Another concern, as has been highlighted by the convener, was around delays in processing information regarding asylum seekers and safeguarding of children. I agree with the points that were raised there. Some age assessments of asylum seekers can take months or years to process. In the meantime, children are often being placed in accommodation, unaccompanied with adults, which raises serious safety concerns. That is something that we should acknowledge in UK ministers and should be mindful. It is important that both the UK and Scottish Government develop a new policy around the age-disputed individuals who are currently being housed in adult accommodation services and what that model of different accommodation would look like. I am not quite sure that, in terms of Scottish families and Scottish children in temporary accommodation, we have that right in this country. We need to consider a different model as well. Regarding human trafficking and modern slavery, we are all aware that asylum seekers and refugees are among the most vulnerable to this apparent practice. The committee's recommendations that we uphold protections to all victims is one that we obviously agree with. The Scottish Refugees Council has made a number of recommendations in this area, which I think that Parliament should consider within our devolved settlement. I have already noted that this is a reserve matter. Nevertheless, the changes and suggestions put forward by the committee are important for both Parliaments to consider. It is essential that we make sure that we do genuinely take into account the needs of asylum seekers in Scotland and how they can be supported. The report has found that more can be done to protect those in Scotland who are in our asylum system. It is clear that both the UK Government and the Scottish Government can help to co-ordinate better a network of support, especially when we are working with our 32 different local authorities in hosting people in the asylum system. That means proper funding for alternative sites of accommodation and the over-reliance of hotels and emergency accommodation changing. It also means that additional resources need to be made available to our third sector organisations who do so much to support asylum seekers and offer so much themselves. That means looking towards how we can reform our public services to meet the challenge. Again, I welcome the work of the committee and thank it for the report. I look forward to this afternoon's debate. Thank you very much, Mr Wiggs. I just advised the chamber that we have a little bit of time in hand for this debate. I call Paul O'Kane for around seven minutes. Thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer. I am pleased to open this debate on behalf of Scottish Labour. I want to begin as others have in the chamber in expressing our sorrow at the news that someone seeking asylum has lost their lives on thebibase.com. Of course, as the minister said, we do not know yet the circumstances around that, but we hope for a full and frank investigation by the Home Office to understand what has happened there, but our thoughts are with all those connected to that incident. I want to begin also by thanking fellow members of the Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee for their work on the support, as well as all the parliamentary staff and clerks behind the scenes in the committee inquiry and report. It takes a team approach, of course, and that very much was the sense in committee when we were developing this piece of work. Scottish Labour welcomes the support into the challenges facing asylum seekers. I believe that it is a strong and important piece of work on how we can better support asylum seekers and their experience here in Scotland. It is hard for us all, I am sure, to imagine having to leave our home and our family because of horrors that this world can contain, both natural and man-made, and the decision to travel such great distances for the sake of yours and your family's safety to take a chance on asking others in a state that you may never have been to before for help is, in many ways, for so many of us, unthinkable. That is the context in which we must always approach the issues that we have sought to explore in our inquiry. It is a story that we have heard so many times from asylum seekers themselves and the organisations that support them in the course of taking evidence for this report. I want to take a moment to also thank all the individuals and organisations who were involved in their full and frank engagement with the committee and for sharing their stories and their work. Indeed, the stories from people seeking asylum are often very personal and I am sure that it is very difficult to share time and time again, and we are very grateful to everyone who did so. It is incumbent upon us to do all that we can to support people seeking asylum. At a bare minimum, we owe it to people not to make their lives more difficult, more stressful and more exhausting. Unfortunately, as we have heard at plenty points in our evidence, that is not always a task that we succeed at, both here in Scotland and across the UK. We meet today to debate the support in the context of a callous Conservative Government currently tearing itself apart on its inhumane and ineffective plan to send those seeking asylum to Rwanda. It is a Government in chaos that cannot and will not deliver an asylum system that works in the interests of those issues of humanity that I spoke about. Of the back of the shameful illegal migration act, we know that the challenges that have been posed by that act have debated them in the chamber before. Across the chamber, we have heard about how it will not do what the Government is seeking to do. It will not build a system that is rooted in humanity that I spoke about. In fact, it will do the complete opposite. I am grateful to Mr Cain for giving way, and I appreciate the comments that he has put on the record in his debate. Given all the failures of the Conservative system and their approach to all that, does he think that we have reached a moment where strategically the United Kingdom has to get to a different position on the question of migration to acknowledge that we are short of people in this country and that we could benefit from the expansion of the population, particularly the working-age population? There are ways in which that can be done through taking a completely different approach to the failed way of the Conservative Government, but we need to change attitudes and views within the approaches that are taken towards migration. I think that the Government is up for that agenda. Does Mr Cain share that view? I am grateful to John Swinney for that intervention. I will come on to speak about why we need fundamental change in the system, both in terms of migration to the United Kingdom and those who come to the shores to seek that refuge in asylum. We need a completely different approach, and Labour has outlined the approach that we would take in terms of the five-point plan that we have if we were to form the next Government, which would be a fundamentally different approach that would not seek to do many of the things that I have outlined. Of course, we need a broader conversation. Colleagues across those benches have mooted different suggestions about what might work in terms of looking around the world—for example, Canadian models—of looking at regional variations in terms of migration and the need in the workforce in different parts of the United Kingdom. We are very open to those concepts. I want to take some time to reflect on what we can do here in Scotland to ensure that we continue to improve the experience of asylum seekers. We must ensure that we develop trauma-informed approaches and training for anyone in the public sector who works with asylum seekers. We must ensure that there is adequate funding and support to asylum support organisations based across the country. We heard particularly in committee about the need for better access to support services for those living in rural and island communities and not living in close proximity to our urban centres. Many of the issues that we covered in our report are in the gift of the Scottish Government or, indeed, in their sphere of influence. Although we are seeing progress at last on some issues, we have more to do. One item that colleagues will comment on is the access to public transport and bus travel, in particular. I know that the Government has made a commitment around free bus travel for asylum seekers. We, of course, wait for the detail in the budget before coming to firm conclusions on the delivery of that, but I want to take that opportunity to pay tribute to my colleague Paul Sweeney for his many years of campaigning work along with other members across the chamber in order to secure that commitment from the Government. I very much hope that the minister will continue to engage on that and how that will be delivered. Members were also keen within the committee to hear more about the Government's plans in terms of mitigations to the illegal migration act. The minister and I have had an exchange before on that, so I would be keen if she might say more now that we are a little further along than when we last debated the issue about how some of the significant issues might be addressed, in line with the calls from the Scottish Refugee Council and others. I would say something about Labour's plans in terms of travel immigration at a UK level. We have outlined a five-point plan for dealing with the asylum system and small boat crossings. Focused on cracking down and smuggling gangs, we know that the issues are at play. Clearing the backlog and ending hotel use, we have heard much from colleagues already about hotel use, particularly for women who are pregnant and the issues that they are in and having to deal with that backlog and clear it. We also have issues around new agreements, safe returns, family union and tackling humanitarian crises at source. I am, of course, conscious of time and not to get into the detail of that. I am sure that it will come out as we progress the debate. To begin to conclude, I again praise the report and the work that has gone in. I hope that in responding to the debate, the minister will be able to provide more detail on the recommendations that we have outlined as a committee, not just to repeat old promises and warm words but to ensure that there are concrete solutions that we have control over here in Scotland that will help people who are fleeing violence and other terrible situations to ensure that they are not faced with the same challenges here in Scotland. Thank you very much indeed, Presiding Officer. I have enjoyed today's debate, which has fostered a largely consensual tone very much. I congratulate the work of the committee in this report. I should remind the chamber of my interest in the fact that I have been a member of the Homes for Ukraine scheme and hosted a Ukrainian refugee for nine months in our home. I also share the comments echoed around the chamber about the tragedy in Bibby's Stockholm. I hope that investigations will proceed with haste. Imagine the scene. You have just washed ashore at the beach at Dover. The leaky craft that you have just crossed the travel and channeling would not have lasted much longer anyway. You have just had to watch as the one carrying your brother and his family sank beneath the waves five miles from shore with the loss of all hands. You have made it the promise of a new life away from the religious persecution that you were running from is finally in reach. The year is 1685. Unsea-worthy boats have ferried those seeking safe harbour in our islands from France for centuries. The scene that I have just described refers to the Huguenot Exodus from France following the removal of the law that allowed them to practice their Protestant faith without fear of persecution and murder. Their arrival saw the first adoption of the French word refuge and by extension refugee into the English language as a description of our new guests in response to their persecution. The parliaments of England and Scotland even passed a law called the declaration of indulgence which allowed the freedom to practice any religion. For the 17th century that feels surprisingly welcoming, even progressive when you consider the debate and whether the debate around refugees and immigrants currently stands in the Britain of today. As we speak MPs in the House of Commons are preparing to vote on the second reading of the Conservative Government's Rwanda plan which we have heard so much this afternoon to send plain loads of those seeking refuge, seeking asylum on our shores 4,000 miles away to a country the UK Supreme Court last week deemed to be unsafe for asylum seekers. Instead of backing down, Rishi Sunak is now attempting to pass a bill which states that Rwanda is a safe country and which prevents judges from ruling otherwise, laying aside key aspects of our human rights legislation. That would bypass the human rights act entirely, undermine the independence of our courts and damage our reputation internationally. Even if the bill clears its first hurdle tonight that will only store up further trouble in the amendment phase when the factions of the Tory party not content with the damage they have already seen done will undoubtedly attempt to make the bill even more extreme. This entire scheme has felt doomed from the start and that has to be a good thing. Liberal Democrats believe that we have a human duty to offer both protection and safe legal routes to get people here from those who are fleeing torment. We also want the Government to create a dedicated unit to make asylum decisions quickly and more fairly. We have nearly a quarter of a million backlog in terms of the case load. It feels like that that is a policy decision to try and break the system and to deter others from coming. That was always about so much more than just simply stopping the boats. The legislation is an attempt by Rishi Sunak to heal a rift in his party, prevent the rise of another by so doing. It was designed in part to placate the right wing of the Tory party while at the same time an effort to neutralise the impact of the ascendancy of the anti-immigration reform party. All of this has laid bare the ignorant and inhumane attitude towards asylum seekers by some sections of the Conservative party, like Tory party Deputy Chair Lee Anderson, who suggested last month that asylum seekers should be sent to, and I quote, remote Scottish islands while they wait for their applications to be processed. It's like he's suggesting that they are some kind of malevolent bad actors. I remind the chamber of the words of the poet Barsan Shire, herself in this island seeking refugee, who said that nobody chooses to exchange home for the water unless home is the mouth of a shark. All of this is part of the Government's wider anti-immigration narrative, of which we have heard so much this afternoon, which recently saw the introduction of a new policy to increase the visa salary threshold for migrant workers of over £38,000 a year. That clearly hadn't been thought through, as we've already seen key workers who are from exempted professions or professions that earn more than that, saying that they will have to leave because their partners are no longer allowed to stay. Turning, if I may, to the law that is being debated in Ireland, I certainly will. John Swinney. I'm grateful to Mr Cole-Hamilton. Before he leaves that point, does he recognise that that approach that is being proposed, where spouses cannot accompany people who have come to this country, is going to have a catastrophic impact on the availability of people to work within our economy, and particularly within our public services and our caring services? Does he recognise that urgent necessity for a strong parliamentary expression of the importance of the dangers that we face as a consequence of that measure? I welcome the intervention from John Swinney. I agree with it entirely, and he's absolutely right that it's going to have a catastrophic impact on those key workers that the Government sought to exempt from those new rules. They didn't remember the partners that come with them, and the fact that nobody would choose to work in a country where their spouse was not welcome. Actually, that was, I believe, mooted during our time in government. We helped to put a stop to that suggestion, because not least, the Ministry of Defence raised serious concerns about the fact that they had armed service personnel returning overseas with new spouses from those countries in which they'd been deployed who could not hope to bring their partners over because of that income threshold. It is an ill-thought-out and ideologically-driven policy that will have far-reaching consequences, as Mr Swinney rightly identifies. It's all about trying to heal that rift in the Conservative Party. It's about understanding that the rule of law matters, and I'm so glad that it still appears to matter to certain elements of the Conservative Party. I hope that they vote with their consciences on that tonight. However, I agree with the Law Society of Scotland's president, Sheila Webster, when she said that the Law Society and I, quote, were very concerned about this particular bill, and particularly sections that would undermine the independence of our judiciary, along with the UK's commitment to human rights in international law. Our international reputation is in jeopardy, her words, Presiding Officer. That is fundamentally what, as I say, matters. It should matter to all of us. I'll conclude by saying what Liberals would do. Immediately scrap this bill, fix the broken asylum system, as I suggested in my intervention to Corkab Stuart, allowing asylum seekers to work, making sure that we process decisions quickly, fairly and with a degree of humanity, provide those safe and legal routes to sanctuary for refugees from all countries, and expand properly funded resettlement programmes. Our island story is a tapestry of cultures and traditions. When you offer someone a chance at a new life, they will pay that opportunity many times over. I was taught that by my Canadian immigrant mother, herself, a descendant of those Huguenots who fled to North America for much the same reasons as those who came here all those centuries ago. Hamilton, we now move to the open debate. I call Fulton McGregor to be followed by Alexander Stewart around six minutes. Thank you, Presiding Officer, and like others, my thoughts are with all those who have been affected by the events reported on the Bibby Stockholm this morning. Amidst headlines of Tory inviting international lobbying broken and a carousel of home secretaries, you would be forgiven for thinking that the UK is fast becoming inhospitable to those in the international community who need our help the most. What started as Theresa May's hostile environment escalated to seller referring to refugees as invaders in a statement last year? Westminster has thoroughly demonised those slain conflict and persecution, and they have actively pushed this vulnerable cohort into destitution. I fully reject those dehumanising policies from the Tories and want to reiterate that every asylum seeker and refugee should be treated with utmost dignity and compassion. Here in Scotland, the last two years alone, we have seen a massive international crisis in Afghanistan and Ukraine, which has led to large-scale resettlement efforts. So many of those fleeing the conflict in Ukraine are actually now settled in my constituency of Coatbridge and Chrysyn, where they have integrated with the community and been welcomed by their neighbours during what must be the most difficult periods in their lives. Although the circumstances are tragic, I am proud that Scotland has made real efforts to help shelter and integrate those fleeing real danger in conflict rather than pushing them away and attempting to ship them off to Rwanda. I have had several events aimed at the Ukrainians who have settled in Coatbridge, and I was absolutely delighted to welcome them to this Parliament—their Parliament—just a couple of weeks ago. I am one of the committee members involved in this powerful inquiry. During evidence, we heard of the overwhelming damage that the UK Government's language has done for those seeking asylum. It was noted that more compassionate language was needed, which is something that the UK Government has actively drafted against. In April of this year, Graham O'Neill, of the Scottish Refugee Council, asserted to our committee that, since ex-prime ministers raised a May coin deterring hostile environment, as an official public policy asylum has been one of the casualties of the hostile environment. In May, when criticising Suvella Braverman's use of deterring invaders, Savin Cadir of Refugees for Justice told the committee that, if we do not have that type of language, we probably would not need more officers to deal with the tension that comes with it. The UK Home Office is creating this environment in which communities are being set against each other. While the committee heard a huge amount of criticism regarding the language of the UK Government, there was even more criticism of the actual policies that have been inflicted on asylum seekers by the UK Government. The Illegal Migration Act was not only seen as drachorean and dehumanising, but the committee heard of the huge number of negative consequences the bill could have. The Simon community noted that it would create a rough sleeping crisis, with charities and services being overwhelmed. The Children and Young People's Commission has commented that the bill effectively emboldened people trafficking and the Grampian Regional Equality Council simply said that the illegal migration bill will make matters worse at all levels. I will quote again from the Scottish Refugee Council, as I believe the vast majority of us in this chamber here would agree with the sentiment, or at least I hope they would. We regard the illegal migration bill as morally repugnant, and we also think that it will be practically unworkable. Although the evidence that we heard was valuable, if not quite unsettling and worrying, we were unable to hear from the UK Government as the Westminster Tory Government failed to respond to the committee's invitation to take part. The lack of active engagement from Westminster further serves to underline the sentiment that the Tory's seeming obsession with immigration and unworkable policies is simply being done to placate the increasingly far-right wing of their party. The UK and indeed those fleeing danger should not be held hostage to this fringe. In looking at how Scotland can once again mitigate the worst consequences of vital Tory policies, we are limited in what we can do as immigration, as we all know, and visas are of course reserved issues. However, the ending destitution together strategy, trafficking and exploitation strategy and the Scottish guardianship service are three further interventions that reflect Scotland's long history of welcoming refugees and asylum seekers. Caroline O'Connor of Migrant Health summed it up to the committee when she commented that she recognised that asylum seekers are coming to Scotland because they feel that services and support here are better. As I have said, immigration and asylum are reserved issues. However, we did not undertake an inquiry just to identify that and to state what we can't do. Those people who we spoke to in the inquiry expect us to do something to do what we can. We have heard a wee bit on that. The people who spoke to us on committee spoke a lot about transport. There was a lot of evidence for that. Connecting people would be really important. I know that the minister is working on this and that there is the pilots, but I would encourage more work in this area, because we have even heard that it can be as simple as getting to the gym. We have also heard a lot about ESOL, which the convener started to speak about. Again, it is very important but not enough coverage in some places. I want to pay tribute here to a great piece of work in my own constituency, the international conversation cafe, which is run at Summerleigh Museum every second Saturday. I went to visit it myself a few weeks ago there. It is an absolutely fantastic project. I would like to thank Kaji Hadji herself and Esol Lecturer at Coatbridge campus of New College Lanarkshire and the other volunteers. However, it should not just be down to volunteers to do this. We should have a national programme where we can, which is well resourced. The other thing that I want to say, and I do realise and run out of time, is that being involved in decision making in our rights-based approach as set out by the New Scotch refugee strategy is another thing that people told us that they wanted to be involved in. I did have so much to say, because it was an absolutely very powerful enquire, as I have already said, but I will need to skip some of it in the interests of time. In closing, we did hear a wide range of voices during this inquiry. We heard how current UK Government policy has created increasing community tensions and heard some of the harrowing coincidences of what would happen if current Tory policies passed in Westminster. The New Scotch approach that we promote here in Scotland was commended, but it was acknowledged that without full control of currently-deserved issues, we are hamstrung in our attempts to support and shelter asylum seekers while giving them the respect and compassion that they deserve. Thank you. Just to remind the chamber, we have probably exhausted most of the time that we had in hand, and I call Alexander Stewart to be followed by Stuart McMillan around six minutes. I am pleased to be able to contribute to this debate, which covers a number of issues that I encountered through my time as a member of the Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee. I welcome that the committee was able to launch its report and publish this inquiry. While immigration and asylum are reserved to United Kingdom Government, the committee report has produced a number of recommendations that are relevant to both the Scottish Government and local authorities. Therefore, I hope that today's debate can be about what the Scottish Government can do to improve the lives of asylum seekers here in Scotland. One of the key issues that the committee's inquiry considered was housing, and the on-going shortage of new affordable homes. The supply of those homes has decreased over the past 12 months. The Scottish Federation of Housing Associations has highlighted that the strain on supply is coming at the time when the demand is even higher. That is creating problems of finding suitable accommodation for asylum seekers and has led to the use of hotel accommodation, guest house and emergency accommodation, which is becoming too common. When an asylum seeker receives a positive decision on their application, the current lack of affordable housing is still creating problems for them, and they may find it hard to find a place to live. That is something that I get help that was talking about and is highly effective. We know that the housing crisis has consequences far more than just for asylum seekers. However, it is clear that the ambitious approach to what Scotland's housing crisis has required that the lack and the use of hotels and accommodation are not the best facilities to put those individuals in. That has been recognised by the committee and by individuals who gave of their time to come and tell them that. Another issue that the committee identified was the lack of suitable training for those who emerge with the asylum seeking. There are a variation of reports that have been significant problems, perhaps to be extended for those individuals who are dealing with them because they are in the housing or in a hotel accommodation, and they are not sometimes the best place to help those individuals. It is of course important that everyone who emerges with an asylum seeker is given the appropriate training, but the appropriate training has found difficult to be applied. A written submission from Meris highlighted some of the training that welfare support workers currently receive. Those include mandatory courses to help to identify asylum seekers with mental health issues, including training on how to de-escalate difficult situations when necessary, and many of those individuals find themselves in difficult situations just because of the situation that they find themselves in. We have already heard today that some of them did not even believe that they were in Scotland, so that in itself is a major issue that needs to be addressed. There are positive steps that need to be looked at to try and support those individuals. For this reason, the committee is right to recommend that the Scottish Government helps to develop specific training for all those who work with the asylum seekers and within the system. The committee has also received helpful evidence from Peace Scotland about this inquiry, and it is clear about what the police have to say about the important immersion game. I thank Alexander Stewart for taking the intervention. Mr Stewart agree with me that when asylum seekers are dispersed across the UK, the UK Government has provided the funding to help with the training that Mr Stewart is asking for. Alexander Stewart makes a very valid point. There is a requirement to be co-operation, and that co-operation should take place, so there may well be the requirement for the money to follow the process, and if that can help the process, I would certainly support that. The committee, as I said, had numerous ideas that came from Police Scotland about what would take place. We know that trust in the police is second nature to us here, but that is not always the case for individuals who may come from a very different cultural background where police were not seen as being supportive. Certain amounts of the buying is required to get full co-operation from asylum seekers in that kind of engagement, and that has to be recognised. A key part of that engagement is third party reporting centres, which have been put up by many organisations and individuals. We now know that more than 400 venues across Scotland are run by experienced third party sector organisations. Those centres are an important part to support the network of asylum seekers here in Scotland. They also allow asylum seekers to engage with police and others who may require that support. Police Scotland has said that more and more organisations are coming forward to be involved with the process, which includes high street venues such as coffee shops, which is also very welcome. Going forward, it is important that Police Scotland continue to support and break down as many of the barriers that asylum seekers have, because they are given that opportunity to see a number of challenges that are faced by asylum seekers. We have heard that already today, who arrive in Scotland. That report has been able to shine a light on all that is happening in the area. As well as tackling the on-going housing crisis, it is important that the Government does what it can to support both the police and local authorities, and numerous hard-working third sector organisations who continue to provide support for asylum seekers. As I said, I pay tribute to all those who have taken the time and the talent to enforce that. In conclusion, if the Government is able to take the approach of tackling those issues, I have no doubt that it will pine support across many parts of the chamber. That is what we want to do. We all want to try to support individuals who come here to give them the best start in a new world, in a new area, so that they can move forward. Stuart McMillan, to be followed by Paul Sweeney, in six minutes. Thank you very much. First of all, I welcome this report by the Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee. It is not the first time that a report of this nature has been produced by a committee in the Parliament, but it is certainly very much welcome. I want to begin by affirming that every asylum seeker and refugee should be treated with dignity and compassion, along with colleagues. I do express my condolences and sadness at the death of their asylum seeker today. They are people just like you and me, and the only difference being that they are from a country where they are no longer safe. That can be because of war or persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality or membership of a particular social group or political opinion. While not included in the official definition of a refugee, many people flee their homes because of climate damage. According to the UN Refugee Agency, the climate crisis is driving displacement and making life harder for those who are already forced to flee. That demonstrates how addressing the climate emergency is also a social justice issue. I am proud that Scotland has a long history of welcoming refugees and asylum seekers and recognises that it is a human right to be able to seek asylum in another country. My group number five constituency, like others across Scotland, rallied round to support Ukrainians who fled at their homes following Russia's illegal invasion of their country. Many of those Ukrainians now feel able to make a new life for themselves and are required, having been welcomed with open arms by the community. More recently, the UK Government has situated asylum seekers in the Holiday Inn Express in Greenock. In response to that, the Greenock Baptist Church has opened its doors to provide a safe space for asylum seekers to socialise and spend time out of the hotel and also in the community. Local charities also donate items to ensure that asylum seekers do not go without essentials such as warm clothing and toiletries. Since 2017, Your Voice, which is a third sector organisation in Inverclyde, has been running their new Scots project, which welcomes families and individuals from multicultural backgrounds as they navigate their new home. The word home is important. As people seeking asylum are looking for a new home, somewhere to put down roots is to look for work as well as potentially raising a family. However, the UK Government's hostile environment, approach to asylum seekers and refugees is sadly quite the opposite to Scotland's sense of welcome. Labour's language around migration also leaves much to be desired as the shadow Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, as Kendall said in a recent interview, that Labour agrees with the Tories increasing the salary threshold for overseas workers. That will have a huge detrimental effect on my constituency, which is already facing population decline. In October 2023, net migration is too high. In November 2023, Labour pledged to raise a salary bar for a skilled worker visa. In May 2023, Labour would put time limits on hiring overseas workers to curb migration. I will also go back to May 2013, which is when immigration must come down. Going back to the committee report, those seeking asylum are some of the most vulnerable people across the world, and they should be protected and also welcomed. Last week, the Prime Minister held a press conference about his asylum plan. Tonight, the Commons will vote on the new Rwanda bill. Now, where was his press conference about the cost of living crisis? High inflation or mortgage interest rates? Issues affecting every single person living in the UK. As asylum is a dog whistle issue to his party, his party base and back benchers, he sees it as sadly his primary focus. Now, sadly, Labour once again appears to support the Tory Prime Minister on this. The member seems to be suggesting that Labour is somehow in support of today's bill, in the House of Commons, or indeed the rhetoric that is coming from the Government. I outline quite clearly in my speech what Labour's approach is to immigration, what a future Labour Government would do, but it is clear that Labour MPs tonight in the House of Commons will be opposing the Conservative bill opposite. I think that Mr O'Kane has to go back and look at the official records that I did not say supported the bill. Putting this issue to the front and centre sadly perpetuates the notion that asylum seekers, refugees and immigrants are to blame for the issues facing the UK. I totally reject both the policy and language that the UK Government has used in recent years. I note that the committee has heard extensive evidence around the hostile narrative. Remember that it was the ex-Prime Minister, the three as I may, who coined the term hostile environment as the official public policy in 2012. In no uncertain terms, this is a deliberate ploy by the Tories to degrade the rights of asylum seekers and also to dehumanise them. They wanted to create an environment where people are not welcomed, in the hopes that those seeking asylum decide to go elsewhere rather than building a life for themselves in the UK. This shows how utterly out of touch the Tory UK Government is and why the Supreme Court was right to shut down their inhumane and morally bankrupt Rwanda policy. Sadly, that vote will come back to the Commons tonight. Instead of creating a culture war that attacks the most vulnerable, the Tories should be investing in clearing the backlog and creating safe and legal routes to those fleeing war and also persecution. To provide some context to the debate, I will now comment on two myth-busting facts on the refugee council's website. First of all, in contrary to what the Tories want people to think, the UK is home to approximately 1 per cent of the 27.1 million people, refugees who are forcibly displaced across the world. Secondly, refugees make a huge contribution to the UK. For example, around 1,200 medically-qualified refugees are recorded on the BMA database. Combined with the conclusion of the report, I note that there were calls on more funding for the third sector to provide a whole systems approach. We are only all too aware of the challenging financial picture facing the Scottish Government. However, I agree that the third sector needs to be involved with the development of policy and funding mechanisms both at the Scottish and UK Government level. As I have already mentioned, third sector organisations in my constituency play a key role in helping refugees and asylum seekers to feel part of the community. To conclude, the UK Government's callous approach to asylum is at odds with Scotland's desire to provide sanctuary for the most vulnerable, and only with independence can we establish a compassionate approach. The Conservative UK Government sunk to an all-new low when it unveiled the newest iteration of its asylum policy. A policy devoid of humanity and empathy for people that have fled persecution and war. Today's tragic news from thebibbys.com underscores this heartbreaking situation. A person who had come to the UK in search of sanctuary has died in a place designed to demonstrate our cruelty and hostility to people like him. We had every means to help him but chose not to. It should be a mark of shame on us all. Details of this case are not yet clear, but the rate of suicide and self-harm amongst the people seeking asylum has soared in recent years. A system designed to strip people of all hope and humanity is beneath us and creates huge risks to life. It is shameful that, instead of welcoming people seeking asylum, the UK Government wants to ship them off to Rwanda, ignoring human rights concerns, and intent on making things as difficult as possible. The asylum system that is over by the Home Office is woefully inadequate as it is. Processing takes an unscrushating amount of time and asylum seekers are prohibited from getting a job, even though their skills and expertise will be welcomed in the labour market in this country. As the report claims, local authorities and the Scottish Government have it within their grasp to ease the pain for those seeking asylum and to do more to address the issues in Scotland. I welcome the Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee's recommendation to extend the concessionary bus travel scheme to people seeking asylum, which the Government has since adopted. Alongside the voices network and the Mary Ellen integration network, I campaigned with cross-party colleagues for around two years on those proposals, and it was powerful to have cross-party support from my colleagues across the Parliament set out in the report at such an important juncture in the campaign. I pay particular thanks to my colleagues, the member for Glasgow Kelvin and indeed my colleague Mr Cain, the member for West Scotland for their advocacy on this matter in the committee. As referenced earlier, asylum seekers are unable to work and are forced to live on just £6 a day, indeed as little as £1.36 for those put up in hotel accommodation. In my region of Glasgow, an all-day bus ticket can be an excess of £5, meaning asylum seekers must choose between eating or travelling to their various legal and medical appointments. Extending free bus travel to people seeking asylum will ease that burden of making these difficult decisions, and I am glad that, after a long campaign, the Scottish Government has seen the potential in this practical intervention to improve people's lives. I look forward to the funding commitment that may be sought more fully when the Deputy First Minister presents the budget to Parliament next week, and I look forward to hearing more details about how the scheme will be delivered in the coming months. The committee's report also raises the issue of asylum-seeker and refugee mental health. People who have fled horrendous situations and have gone through terrible ordeals will, of course, be at a heightened risk of experiencing depression, anxiety and post-traumatic stress disorder. As the report suggests, there should be efforts made in addition to what we do already to make it easier for those people to access mental health services in Scotland. The British Red Cross, in its Far from Home report, highlights that asylum seekers housed in hotels do not feel safe. It says that many are spending extended periods of time in rooms often with no windows, which can trigger trauma from the experiences that they have fled. Again, that has negative impacts on their mental health and wellbeing. There should be a greater effort to educate those seeking asylum on how to access mental health services, and it goes beyond mental health indeed. We must ensure that more is done to educate asylum seekers of their rights to healthcare, especially how to sign up to a GP practice. Housing for asylum seekers is also inadequate. The privatised home office accommodation contracts do not supply enough housing, and the likes of barges and military barracks have had to be used to house asylum seekers for extended periods of time. It is unacceptable. The blame for the poor housing and accommodation situation lies firmly at the door of those horrific and cynical home office contracts, but the Scottish housing regulator could be better used to monitor and raise the standard of accommodation provided for people seeking asylum across Scotland. In conclusion, that is a welcome report from the Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee. It shows that, whilst the Conservative UK Government is managing the asylum system so poorly and cruelly and intent on making it even more inhumane, the Scottish Government and local authorities in Scotland have it within their power to make practical changes to improve people's lives today. That is a moral obligation that we cannot deny. The report shows that the usual excuses of a lack of power under the devolved settlements are insufficient. The committee sets out exactly what can be done now to help asylum seekers in Scotland. The Scottish Government can and must introduce a comprehensive plan so that people seeking asylum can access the housing education and healthcare that they need. That is an obligation upon everyone in this chamber to see that it happens. First, I echo the sentiments of my colleagues in the chamber today in condemning the latest round of Westminster immigration policies. Human rights legislation sets out that their protections, including the right to seek asylum, are universal. To deny those rights to anyone is barbaric. My thoughts are with the friends and the family of the asylum seeker who sadly lost his life and his side on the Bibby stock home. Here in Scotland we know how important it is to offer refuge to those forced to flee their homes and seek sanctuary here, a decision that has never taken lightly. We also have seen what amazing contributions asylum seekers, refugees and migrants can make in our communities. That has certainly been the case in my own Stirling constituency. Integration into their communities is important for asylum seekers' wellbeing and language is a huge part of that. For example, the report highlights that asylum seekers who cannot speak English tend to shop in local cultural stores. Although that makes things easier, those shops are often more expensive and so their already minuscule allowance won't go as far. I was pleased to see a focus on that in the committee report and its recommendations around provision of English for speakers of other languages or ESOL, as we have already heard about. That is something that asylum seekers are eager for. In previous engagement barriers such as childcare and access to transport were highlighted by asylum seekers as preventing participation. Free bus travel for asylum seekers is to be welcomed. Access to ESOL classes is one of the many benefits that it will bring. However, ESOL provision is inconsistent across different regions. Research from COSLA shows that local authorities are innovative and inventive in the delivery of ESOL, and that is to be commended. However, reading the committee's report and hearing from local Stirling organisations working in this area, provision can be very patchy. Language skills through ESOL programmes can make a huge difference to wellbeing and community integration. However, learning a new language obviously takes time. In my constituency, a grassroots organisation has recognised this. There is much to be done. 8 Star provides much advocacy services and counselling for women from a range of backgrounds, including asylum seekers, refugees and ten languages. The organisation engages with service users with an understanding of how mental health is viewed in their faith and in their culture. The organisation provides practical support and opportunities for community building and ensures that women seeking asylum across Scotland can access support regardless of the language you speak. 8 Star also works with survivors of gender-based violence who are seeking asylum here. Women who are forcibly displaced and are seeking asylum are disproportionately likely to have experienced gender-based violence. Those experiences are compounded by barriers to reporting and accessing support, including social isolation, language barriers and a fear of being deported. 8 Star provides counselling as well as helping them to access justice through the criminal injuries compensation authority. The service is much needed and has a great deal of success. More than 65 per cent of service users said that they became more active and open to their local community, as well as more confident and active citizens. 8 Star also reports a decrease in the feelings of isolation, stigma and loneliness to their service users. No recost to public funds is applied to asylum seekers, which prevents people from accessing most mainstream social security benefits, homelessness assistance and other services. The NRPF network highlights that there are significant gaps in statutory support for many victims of domestic abuse with no recost to public funds. 8 Star organisations like it fill some of those gaps with great success. However, being a small charity, 8 Star is facing many of the same challenges that the committee highlights in its report on availability of resources to fund their work. I commend her local example. The evidence in our report suggested that the ESOL provision was patchy across the country. Does she agree on calling on the Government to review its ESOL policy? I absolutely agree with the member on that point. I echo the calls of the committee for consistent and timely ESOL provision. I also ask that the Government continue to think creatively about funding to ensure that asylum seekers have access to the services that they need and that they are delivered in their local communities. I thank the committee for its comprehensive report on the human rights of asylum seekers in Scotland. The findings are truly shocking, and I challenge anyone to read it and not feel compelled to act. It is painfully clear that the Westminster Government has chosen to inflict unimaginable cruelty on people seeking refugee protection. We have seen the Prime Minister threaten to break international law and offshore refugees to Rwanda, and we have seen refugees forced into wildly inappropriate accommodation from army barracks to floating prisons. The news this morning of the death of a person on thebibbies.com is a huge tragedy for that person and all those people that love that person. This is somebody who will never see the freedom that they dreamed of in coming to this country. We have seen people stuck in hotels here in Scotland as well, sharing rooms with people they do not know for months on end, unable to access the support that they desperately need, people who are fragile, traumatised, people who need that mental health support. I was struck by the comment by the Minister at the beginning of this debate, and she recalled that there are some people who do not even know that they are in Scotland. I find that so sad, and it is just something that has to change. We have to welcome these people to our hearts. We are seeing a huge increase in the number of people forced into homelessness after being granted refugee status, with the Home Office evicting some people with barely a week's notice to find somewhere new to live. However, let us remember that this hostility towards people seeking refugee protection did not start with Suela Braverman or Ishi Sunak. It is unlikely to end with a change of guard at Westminster. With powers over immigration, Scotland could do so much better than that. We could do far more to protect the rights of refugees, people seeking asylum and all those who choose to make Scotland their home. We could choose to build a system based on compassion, empathy and solidarity, not cruelty, hostility and inhumanity. However, while we may want to dismantle this hostile environment in its entirety and start again, we cannot legislate to do that in this place, not yet at least. Right now, we remain limited to mitigating some of the worst impacts that Tory Government has sold on the right to asylum. This is our serious responsibility as a country committed to human rights and one that it is proud to protect refugees. The Scottish Government has shown leadership in protecting people seeking asylum through the limited powers available to us. The committee's report outlines where we have already taken steps. However, the report and evidence from witnesses is clear. With the assault on asylum so stark, we need to use all the powers that we have within our devolved competence to protect everyone who comes to Scotland in search of safety. With the stakes so high, we must do more. We must go further and we must be braver, because people seeking refugee protection are facing unimaginable hardships right now in our communities. They are banned from working, from accessing mainstream social security benefits. They are forced to live on just over £6 a day for all essential living needs. Clothing, travel, staying connected with loved ones, toiletries, school supplies for their kids, food and so much more. That is barely 60 per cent of what you and I would receive on universal credit and those living in hotels only receive around £1.40 a day. A recent survey by Asylum Matters of 300 people seeking asylum found that 91 per cent did not have enough money to buy food. Three quarters could not afford the medicines that they need. 95 per cent were not able to travel where they needed to by public transport. That is exactly what Justright Scotland has described as state-enforced destitution. The committee also heard from witnesses about the impact of this enforced poverty on people seeking asylum. They heard calls from within the refugee community that there was more that Scotland could do to alleviate this hardship. For the past two years, campaigners at Maryhill Integration Network and The Voices Network have been calling for the expansion of concessory bus travel to people seeking asylum. Alongside colleagues from across the chamber, particularly Paul Sweeney and Bob Doris, I have supported those inspiring campaigners. I was delighted to see the committee's report echo our call for change. Since then, we have managed to secure a £2 million commitment from the Scottish Government to finally grant bus travel to people seeking asylum, a measure that was announced by Patrick Harvey last month. I look forward to working closely with colleagues and with the two ministers and campaigners to get this delivered within the next year. This is just one example of how we can use the powers that we have within our devolved competence to protect everyone who comes to Scotland in search of safety. It will make an enormous difference to the lives of people who are rebuilding their lives here in Scotland and go some way towards mitigating those hardships inflicted by the Home Office. The committee report must be a wake-up call. We are witnessing an all-out assault on the rights of refugees in the UK, and our actions here must match the scale of that threat. We must stand up for our friends and neighbours and make sure that Scotland does everything that it can to be the welcoming nation that we strive to be. First and foremost, I also wish to express my profound regret at the sad news this morning at the loss of life aboard the Stockholm Bibby, and I wish to offer my condolences to the family and friends of their asylum seeker whose life was lost. As a member of the Equalities Committee, I often witness the tireless work of organisations and individuals to embed humanity into policy, and I am consistently reminded of the profound responsibility that we hold. The stories of asylum seekers in Scotland, detailed in the recent human rights report, are not just abstract accounts, they are vivid realities that demand our attention and action. The work that we undertook to gather the real-life experiences on a personal level will stay with me forever. I have been thinking about how easy it is to take for granted that we live in a country free from conflict, and what would happen if that ever changed? How would the world react to us if we ever needed to flee and seek refuge? Perhaps more profoundly so, at this time of year, coming up to Christmas, knowing that across the country there will be many children re-enacting a very familiar story of a family and their unborn child seeking refuge. The lived experiences of asylum seekers, as highlighted in the report, must guide our policies. Each individual brings a story, a narrative of loss, resilience and hope, and those are not mere tales, they are a reflection of our shared humanity. The UK Government's approach to immigration not only lacks compassion, it denies the rights of and dehumanises those seeking refuge as they are rightly entitled to do under article 14 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. On Sunday, we celebrated the 75th anniversary of that declaration and next year will mark 70 years since the United Nations Convention relating to the status of refugees came into force. A Conservative minister recently made the assertion that asylum seekers risking their lives crossing the channel have no excuse and are breaking into our country. This is not just insensitive, it is a stark dismissal of human rights. It is dog whistle politics at its worst and it serves only to marginalise further vulnerable individuals seeking safety and refuge and ignores the complex and often harrowing reasons that compel people to undertake such perilous journeys. Our response should be inclusive and supportive, not merely tolerant. For example, the need for mental health services, as underscored in the report, is critical. Many asylum seekers carry the scars of trauma and require culturally sensitive and accessible mental healthcare. Similarly, the importance of language assistance cannot be overstated. As noted, many asylum seekers struggle with language barriers hindring their ability to integrate and access vital services. Consider the potential of concessionary travel for all asylum seekers, a policy that embodies dignity and freedom, allowing them to explore and integrate into our communities. That is not just about policy, it is about sending a clear message.  It was plain to see the core need for the provision of accurate information was essential. Asylum seekers must be aware of their rights, particularly in healthcare and legal services. That is not just a policy imperative, it is a moral one. It ensures that everyone who arrives in Scotland is treated with the respect and care that they deserve. Our approach must be rooted in kindness, empathy and a commitment to human rights. Every policy, every number represents a human story and that deserves to be heard and acted upon. We can lead by example and show the power of compassion in asylum and immigration policies. We must not be swayed by political pressures or bureaucratic convenience, instead let our actions be guided by the warmth of our humanity and the strength of our convictions. We need a distinctly Scottish path, one marked by understanding and respect for human dignity. For example, this path could take the form of a new humanitarian strategy as proposed by the Scottish Refugees Council, one emphasising a protect nut penalised approach with anti-poverty and mental health initiatives to address the threats posed by serious and organised crime. While immigration and asylum remain reserved matters, there is much that we can do within our devolved powers. We can find innovative solutions for accommodation, extend support to third sector organisations and ensure access to essential services like ESL and healthcare. As I conclude, I ask that the response to asylum seekers be more than just a policy response. It must reflect our values as a society. It is about building a future where compassion and human dignity are the foundations of our approach to those who seek sanctuary on our shores. As we move forward, we must remember that our policies and our words have the power to uplift and harm. Let us choose kindness and respect and let us reaffirm our commitment to be in a society that welcomes, supports and values every human life, regardless of where they come from or where the journey they have endured to reach us began. I would like to express my sorrow at the distressing news of the death of an individual on the BBC token home earlier today. My prayers are with the family and friends. Presiding officer, Scotland should be a welcoming and safe place for asylum seekers. In the past few years, the UK Tory government have created a hostile environment for those coming to the UK seeking asylum. As my colleague Paul O'Kane noted, the UK government is, as we speak, debating its inhuman act which sought to ship those seeking asylum in the UK off to a third country. Then we have the Illegal Migration Act, which may force many vulnerable asylum seekers into the hands of human traffickers and criminal gangs. This comes in hand with the newly announced salary threshold for skilled workers' visas, as Alex Cole Hamilton, John Swinney and others rightly condemned. As Fulton MacGregor began, the UK government's hostile legislative action has led to the UK being painted as a country that does not welcome those who need our help the very most. That is why the Scottish Labour support the conclusion of the Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee's inquiry. The committee's inquiry sent a strong message that we should be using powers within the whole competence to improve the lives of asylum seekers in Scotland. Integration is important for this. As Cough of Stewards said, the Scottish Government must use its devolved powers to ensure asylum seekers are able to integrate fully into Scottish society. I took a look forward to the Scottish Government's plan on how asylum seekers can be included in consensual trouble plans what my colleague Paul Swinney has been working on. The Illegal Migration Act can amend the powers and duties of Scottish ministers to help victims of human trafficking under the Human Trafficking and Exploitation Act 2015. Miles Briggs earlier commented that asylum seekers are amongst the most vulnerable to human trafficking and exploitation. In October this year, I hosted a roundtable on the impact that the Illegal Migration Act may have on human trafficking and how it would interact with the Human Trafficking and Exploitation Act 2015. We heard from representatives from the Scottish Refugee Council, Just Right Scotland, Maryhill Integration Network and many more about just how this act has made life harder for survivors of human trafficking and modern slavery. Under this act, survivors of trafficking who have received an initial reasonable ground decision can be removed. Unaccompanied children arriving into Scotland can be subjected to mandatory scientific age testing including MRI scanning to try and determine their age. If they refuse, they will be processed as an adult. The committee's investigation makes clear that the Scottish Government can act within the devolved power to mitigate this impact of the Cruel Illegal Migration Act. So it must. We need to concentrate action on this to protect victims of human trafficking and uphold wherever possible the right to seek asylum in Scotland. Finally, Presiding Officer, the latest home office data showed that there were 662 asylum seekers housed in hotels across 10 Scottish local authorities. In addition, there were 4558 asylum seekers living in disparate accommodation. Let's not forget the Ukrainian refugees hosted on temporary boats because suitable accommodation could not be found for them. These are not solution. We are currently facing a housing crisis. The Scottish Refugee Council have warned that home office policies such as giving people just seven days to leave asylum accommodation mean that it could be a matter of time before someone dies on the streets due to lack of housing. Let's be clear. This is not the fault of asylum seekers. It is caused by a housing system that is not fit for purpose. The Scottish Government must provide a long-term housing plan. It must act on the conclusion of the inquiry to mitigate the damage of these inhuman Tory policies and ensure that asylum seekers are protected and welcomed in Scotland. Thank you, Mr Tridrie, and I now call on Megan Gallacher to close on behalf of the Scottish Conservatives around seven minutes please, Ms Gallacher. Thank you, Presiding Officer. Many speeches this afternoon began with the sad news that occurred on the Bibby stock home, and I want to echo the comments that have been raised by many members this afternoon and, of course, the calls to investigate what happened. Today's debate has been robust, with many contributions outlining what the Scottish Government can do within devolved competency to help to improve the lives of asylum seekers here in Scotland. The committee report outlined many important issues that we have discussed today, including the slow rate of processing asylum applications, the financial challenges asylum seekers face, the current housing crisis and how local authorities support those who can claim asylum here in Scotland. There were many points where members found consensus and, of course, areas of disagreement, whether that be in relation to reserved powers or the UK Government's plan to tackle illegal immigration. The committee within the report disagreed on the UK Government's approach to tackling illegal immigration. However, there is a real human cost when it comes to illegal immigration and the criminal activity that exploits so many vulnerable people. However, I do appreciate that it is an emotive topic that will cause a difference of opinion, and I will pick up on some of those points shortly. When I joined the Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee, members were concluding the report after taking weeks upon weeks of evidence on this topic. It is not an ideal time to join a committee because you feel disconnected from those who gave evidence and shared their own personal experiences with committee members. However, the work undertaken produced an important piece of work that sought to improve the lives of asylum seekers in Scotland. I hope that that is something that we can all agree on today. I hope that the Scottish Government will start recording data on human trafficking cases in relation to outstanding court backlogs. As I was concerned that recently, in response to Rachel Hamilton, the minister, Siobhan Brown, advised that the Scottish Government currently does not hold that information. Although that was not in the report, I believe that it is crucial to maintain data if we are serious about ending exploitation of vulnerable people here in Scotland. Members from across the chamber raised several points that were outlined in the committee report. The committee convener outlined the real-life experiences that were crucial to the written report that outlined the challenges that asylum seekers and refugees face. Paul Cain echoed that view and highlighted how difficult it must be for people to leave their homes to seek asylum in another country. Colcab Stewart also mentioned free bus travel for all asylum seekers that has previously been brought to this chamber by Paul Sweeney. The report asks the Scottish Government to develop a report on plans for a Scotland-wide roll-out following the pilot schemes in Aberdein and Glasgow. I am sure that MSPs will hear more on that when the Scottish Government develops its plans further. Miles Briggs and Alexander Stewart raised the housing emergency that we currently face here in Scotland. We know the issues surrounding the number of homeless applications and the number of children that have been assessed or threatened with homelessness over the past financial year. The 6,000 families who are stuck in temporary accommodation for over a year and the 450-plus people who have been turned down from receiving temporary accommodation from 2022-23. Therefore, I was pleased that, within the committee report, it sought clarification on what steps the Government is taking to address the overall issue of the housing crisis that we face, because it is urgent. If we want more people to come to Scotland, we need to have affordable homes available. As Alexander Stewart rightly said, the housing crisis does have consequences, especially when it comes to hotel accommodation for asylum seekers. The slow rate of processing for asylum seekers was also raised in the report and is something that I do accept and I agree with colleagues that that must be rectified at haste, not just to alleviate the concerns that were raised in the report, but to ensure that people are not stuck in the system after fleeing an already difficult and often traumatising situation in another country. Mental health was another big topic raised and debated by many today, and it is vital to this wraparound care that the minister mentioned in her opening contribution. Services are, of course, available for people to access here, but, as we know, they are under severe pressure. I accept that we need to raise awareness so that asylum seekers can access vital support networks. We need to make sure that there are no language barriers and that we tackle the challenges that we have across all our mental health services. I am running out of time, but there are many other topics that members raised today, including the support that local government can provide, but local government is another area that is under severe financial pressure just now, so that restricts what support it can give to asylum seekers and refugees in the respective areas. To conclude, there is clearly an appetite across party to do more to help those claiming asylum here in Scotland. Like many contributions today, I await updates from the Scottish Government on the recommendations of the report, because there is an important and overarching argument here today that we need to improve the lives of asylum seekers in Scotland. I now call the Minister Emma Roddick to close on behalf of the Scottish Government around eight minutes, please. I want to thank members for their contributions in this important debate. Again, the committee for its work on the inquiry and raising the UK asylum system issues impacting people in Scotland's communities. I reaffirm, as I did in my opening speech, my commitment to respond to the committee in full in writing in due course. Our building a new Scotland paper on migration was, of course, launched last month on 3 November and not only sets out the positive vision that we have for a humane welcoming migration system in Scotland post-independence, but comes from a position where we have already taken steps to do things differently within existing powers, particularly through our new Scots strategy. I will reassure Paul O'Kane and others on new Scots. Members will be aware that work is under way to develop a refresh strategy, which will be published next year. Engagement with sector professionals and refugee leaders took place in Aberdeen, Dundee, Edinburgh and Glasgow, as well as online in early November. Lived experience engagement will be taking place until the end of February. An action plan will follow the publication of the strategy, which will set out the work that partners will progress to support refugees, people seeking asylum and others who have been forced to seek safety as members of our communities. On detail, as Paul O'Kane and others requested, one example has already been discussed thoroughly throughout the debate, and that is the £2 million that has been set aside for next year's budget to support asylum seekers to access bus travel. The transport minister recently met with third sector representatives and agreed to set up a working group, which will consider how best that group of asylum seekers is not already able to access existing schemes that can be supported. That is important work to make sure that we do this in the most sensible way, and I will continue to engage with her on that. Of course, in the meantime, we do not discriminate against asylum seekers, and those who are under 22 over 60 or disabled can already access free bus travel like the rest of us through the existing concessionary travel scheme. Does shev any knowledge of what the composition of the working group will consist of? More than happy to get that information, I will refer to the minister for transport who can get in touch with the member. I also appreciate the points around ESOL that have been raised. For context, the new Scots partnership previously received £6 million from the EU's asylum migration and integration fund for our £6.6 million project to support integration. That included more than £500,000 in targeted funding for two of the highest priority areas being ESOL and employability. Due to Brexit, that funding comes to an end this month, but ESOL remains a priority area that is raised within the new Scots engagement. I will not surprise committee members that many people have directly raised issues with ESOL with me, and I know how important language is to integration. I am taking a personal interest in this and seeing what more we can do, and I am happy to commit now to looking into the specific issues that have been raised around ESOL in the committee's report. I thank the cabinet secretary for taking an intervention. I wonder if, from back to my speech, she would consider coming out and meeting the language, the conversation café, at some early in speaking to the folk there. I would love to, and I look forward to the member's formal invitation. I am speaking with my private office at the moment about getting out to do more in-person engagement around ESOL and figuring out where breast practice is already taking place. On healthcare, information to support refugees and asylum seekers to access healthcare in Scotland is available on the NHS Inform website. That includes links to GP registration cards. Those have been designed to support anyone who needs to register at a new GP practice. They set out information on rights to accessing healthcare, and they were developed along with people seeking asylum, as well as those experiencing homelessness, Gypsy travellers, to help to support them to access services and promote that they have the same rights to do so as anyone else. To Miles Briggs and Co-Cab Stewart's points, we take our responsibility to asylum-seeking children very seriously, both in terms of our legal and our remoral obligations. We launched the Guardianship Scotland service in April this year, a statutory service that provides specialist support to all asylum-seeking children who arrive alone in Scotland. Currently, that service is supporting around 800 people. There is still a shortfall in the funding that the Home Office provides to local authorities for hosting unaccompanied children, but we remain committed to working with the Home Office to find solutions to the acute pressures being faced. A lot of that is down to adequate funding, but there are other things such as communication well in advance that could be very helpful. I was glad to hear from Fulton MacGregor that he has picked up on some people actively seeking to come to Scotland because they have heard that the support is good, and that is really positive, but I do worry about the impact that UK policy will have on the impression that people have of Scotland and other countries in the UK. On the illegal migration act and mitigations, Paul O'Kane will be aware of the difficulty that we face in providing detail on mitigations ahead of getting the details from the UK Government on commencement and implementation of the act, but we continue to work across government to consider all available options to us within our devolved powers and the law. We will keep speaking with stakeholders as we have done since the legislation was introduced. I am very grateful to the minister for giving me the reason that I raise it time and time again when we have these debates is because of the calls from the Scottish Refugee Council for that comprehensive piece of work. Can she say what interactions she has had with the Refugee Council on those particular points and on their calls for a clear mitigation plan? I engage regularly with the Scottish Refugee Council most recently this morning and I am always happy to continue to have these conversations with Paul O'Kane and his colleagues as well as our stakeholders, who, as I say, we engage extensively with. There is a sinister campaign going on to dehumanise asylum seekers and, indeed, all migrants. I think that that is why it is important that we feel the loss when there is news coverage of loss of life, like those that Alex Cole-Hamilton set out from centuries ago and today, due to the lack of safe and legal routes, whether that is about boats collapsing or people completing suicide while going through the system. There are so many people out there who will react differently to those news stories solely due to the victims being asylum seekers. There is perhaps a tendency to remove ourselves to protect ourselves, but from meeting with asylum seekers and former asylum seekers across Scotland in this role, I know that each of those lives lost is someone who could have been a business owner in Inverclyde or volunteering full-time for a charity in Glasgow or treating people in our NHS. Each of them could have been a new Scot and a valued member of our community. I agree with reflections on the hostile narrative, including the careless, off-hand proposal to send asylum seekers to, and I quote because I would not use those words, remote Scottish islands such as the Orkneys or even uninhabited islands where, of course, there would be no local support system for these marginalised people. The Rwanda plan itself is absolutely baffling. There is not much else to say about it and members commenting were right that this is a horrendous policy wrapped up in dangerous rhetoric. The UK should be upholding the refugee convention and looking at the real problems in its immigration system from decision-making timescales to working with Scotland to make use of migration to challenge our depopulation issues. Instead, it is pressing ahead with yet another nasty piece of legislation that is so incompatible with the rule of law that it is needing to remove human rights from people to make it work. Karen Adam was right to highlight that words can uplift as well as harm and I will be sure to consider that in the wording of my response to the committee, knowing that it will be read not just by colleagues in the committee but by those who are impacted by those policies. It is impossible to assess our abilities to support asylum seekers in Scotland while ignoring the context and actions and words of the UK Government. They limit our ability to act, poison the impression that asylum seekers across the UK have of how welcome they are and often without distinction, and they destroy our good reputation internationally. However, I will continue to engage in seeking concessions where they can be made and finding solutions with COSLA and the Scottish Refugee Council to many of the biggest issues that asylum seekers face today in Scotland. I now call on Maggie Chapman to wind up the debate on behalf of the committee. As deputy convener of the Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee, I am pleased to close this important and, in many ways, heartbreaking debate on the committee's behalf. I am grateful to all members for their participation this afternoon and for the commitment and co-operation that have been shown here. I echo co-cab stewards thanks to my fellow committee members, to our clerks, to SPICE and the participation and community staff who ensured our inquiry ran smoothly and that we were able to foreground the voices of those directly affected by the asylum system. I associate myself with the comments made about the tragic death today on board the Bibi Stockholm. As we have heard, among the aims of the committee's original inquiry, we are to find out more about what it means to be living in Scotland while seeking asylum, how the system impacts the daily lives of people seeking asylum, local communities and agencies, the human rights issues engaged and, in particular, the implications of the UK's illegal migration act. We heard evidence from a range of bodies and agencies, including third sector organisations, local authorities, police and many more, and we held two informal evidence sessions with asylum seekers and refugees themselves. I would like to thank everyone who contributed seriously and candidly to our inquiry, and especially to the refugees and people seeking asylum who shared their time and experiences so generously, speaking of matters that are inevitably intensely personal and painful. We welcome you to Scotland and we are deeply sorry that your experience in so many ways is not what it ought to be. The committee's report covers a wide range of issues and concerns, many of which have been highlighted by members this afternoon. I will highlight and summarise just some of the principal themes which the committee has considered and we have discussed here today. The Minister, Evelyn Tweed, Mark Ruskell and Stuart McMillan and others highlighted the value and immensely important contributions that asylum seekers and refugees have already and will continue to make to Scotland. Many colleagues this afternoon are right to point out that here in Scotland we seek to do something different in the asylum and refugee space to what we see happening in Westminster. We should all keep in our minds our international obligations under the 1951 refugee convention as well as other international treaties and conventions that speak to human rights. For none of us can ignore the massive and fundamental difficulties caused by the fact that immigration and asylum are reserved matters. The committee heard widespread and serious concern about the way in which the UK Government has legislated, including in the 2022 Nationality and Borders Act and the 2023 Illegal Migration Act, or Refugee Ban Bill, as it was widely known. Graham O'Neill of the Scottish Refugee Council spoke of the UK and I quote, turning its back on the most desperate people in the world with lethal consequences, while Helena Kennedy described the criminalisation of people seeking asylum as a breach of international law. Experts agree, and Foisal Children and others highlighted this today, that the act will make it much easier for traffickers to prey upon vulnerable people and much more difficult for them to be brought to justice. This afternoon we heard powerful contributions from Alec Hall-Hangleton on the importance both in terms of human dignity but also to the economic and social benefit of Scottish communities of giving asylum seekers the right to work. As a member of the Scottish Greens, like Mark Ruskell, I wish the UK Government would either grant this right or devolve the powers to this Parliament to allow us to do so. We heard about some of the underlying UK-wide and international issues that are contributing to the situation here in Scotland. Those include the global rise in the number of people seeking asylum as a result of increasing and intensifying war and conflict. They also include the UK Government's choice to make stop the boats, essential focus of its agenda, building on Theresa May's hostile environment and on what Graham O'Neill and others have described as a general erosion of the right to asylum over the past 15 to 20 years. We heard about home office delays so so severe that the decision process that should take six months can now sometimes last 10 years. I think some people who gave evidence to the committee would find it ironic, perhaps that's the kindest word I can use, of Miles Briggs comments about legal routes to seeking asylum. We heard very clearly from experts in committee and from asylum advocacy groups that no such routes now exist under the UK Government's policies. Paul O'Kane's excoriating assessment of the UK Government's Rwanda scheme, the scene from centuries ago painted by Alex Cole-Hamilton and the horrendous narratives of trauma experienced by asylum seekers outlined by Karen Adam, for example, lay bare some of the double-speak going on this afternoon. Karen Adam's statement, words have the power to uplift or harm. We would all do well to remember that. Essential issue in our report was the use of institutional accommodation, especially hotels, not just as temporary measures but as an increasingly normalised policy. The committee looked at the reports from the Asylum Inquiry Scotland and heard from Baroness Helena Kennedy who led that inquiry. It focused on events at the beginning of the Covid lockdown, finding that the park-in incident was, and I quote, an avoidable tragedy. Its findings reflect evidence heard by the committee about unsuitable food, insufficient space and resources for babies and toddlers to play and develop, barriers to accessing healthcare, especially mental health support and safety concerns about vulnerability to far-right intimidation and to trafficking and exploitation. Linked to that, as we heard from the Minister and others, it is vital that we do whatever we can in partnership with local government and third sector organisations to support the integration from day one of asylum seekers into our communities. Institutionalising people in hotels that could be anywhere is no way to treat anyone, never mind vulnerable asylum seekers. Issues of money, poverty and destitution are essential to the experiences of people seeking asylum with those in institutional accommodation where meals are provided, receiving only £9.58 per week for all of their other needs. Most people seeking asylum are not allowed to work with devastating effects on psychological as well as social and economic wellbeing. While delays in decision making add to financial pressures, with Andy Cyril of Just Right Scotland speaking of state-enforced destitution, the asylum decision itself, whichever way it goes, frequently triggers eviction, homelessness and further trauma. We heard much about access to support and services, some of which have been covered by Paul Sweeney, Evelyn Tweed, Fulton MacGregor and others. I want to pick up on just one issue, that of interpreter provision. Issues in terms of lack of access or shortage of quality interpreters were raised. We were told that interpreters, and I quote, don't always interpret the word said, they forget so make stuff up. When again I quote, every word counts in a person's asylum's journey, it must be accurate. Any inaccuracy creates further delay and frustration. I welcome the consensus this afternoon that we need to up our game on all of these issues. Finally, the committee considered the role of devolved Scottish legislation and policy, including the Human Trafficking and Exploitation Scotland Act 2015, the new Scots and Ending Destitution strategies, the guardianship service and tuition fee funding. We heard urgent calls to do all that we can to mitigate the damage caused by UK policies. That could include the kind of radical humanitarian strategy argued for by the Scottish Refugee Council, together with initiatives like free bus travel for people seeking asylum, something championed as we've heard already by Paul Sweeney and Mark Ruskell. Presiding Officer, I will conclude by urging all members to read the full committee report, which contains invaluable information and insights, including much that is deeply shocking. Some of the evidence was conflicting and members did not fully agree on all points, but there was a very high degree of shared consensus. That consensus of our committee represents deep concerns and anxieties, but also a determination to do all we can within our devolved powers to protect and enhance the human rights of people seeking asylum in Scotland. I know we look forward to the minister's response to our report in due course. My final words are for those asylum seekers. For those seeking asylum here, we are honoured by your presence, inspired by your journeys and enriched by our shared humanity. Thank you, Ms Chapman. That concludes the debate on asylum seekers in Scotland, and it is now time to move on to the next item of business. I am minded to accept emotion without notice under rule 11.2.4 of standing orders, that decision time be brought forward to now. I would invite the Minister for Parliamentary Business to move the motion. The question is that decision time be brought forward to now. Are we all agreed? We are all agreed. There is one question to be put as a result of today's business. The question is that motion 11608, in the name of Cokab Stewart, on behalf of the Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee, on asylum seekers in Scotland, be agreed. Are we all agreed? We are all agreed, and therefore that concludes decision time. There will be a short suspension before we move on to the final item of business, which is members' business. Thank you.