With our eyes, we see only a tiny fraction of the light in the universe. To see more, we need instruments that can see light we can't. Like gamma rays, the result of subatomic particles accelerated in violent places like stellar explosions or the jets discharged by supermassive black holes. Nothing generated on Earth comes close to the energy of the highest energy gamma rays. They can fly through the universe without getting scrambled by magnetic fields. We can't see them coming, but they travel directly towards us. But they never actually make it to the Earth's surface. They interact with the atmosphere, producing cascades of high-energy subatomic particles. These energetic particles move faster than the light in the air. And like a plane creates a sonic boom, they create a photonic boom. It's called Cherenkov light. It's blue, and it's spectacular. But this happens in a billionth of a second, so we need powerful telescopes to see it. Like CTA, two arrays of telescopes, one in the Atacama Desert in Chile and another atop the Spanish island of La Palma. The Cherenkov light will flash and disappear. This faint glimmer can be collected by the telescope's mirrors and reflected into cameras, capturing a billion frames per second. The light will be captured by sensors able to detect a single photon and turn it into digital data. Data centers will store and process the information, so scientists can work with it. The telescopes are positioned to increase our chances of detecting Cherenkov light. More telescopes gives us more information. By layering these images, we can estimate the energy of the gamma ray and pinpoint its direction in the sky. The data will be accessible to anyone, anywhere, so the discoveries are limitless. Precious information, carried by invisible gamma rays, allowing us to see into the most unknown parts of the universe to help unlock its secrets.


Oh my god. Oh my god. Oh my god grab grab grab.  Yeah, man We haven't been fishing long, bro. I know we have not been fishing long See you later Mike Oh All right, I will catch y'all give me it. Give me a Yes, I want to see you better come back with your PV Mike All right Ryan hey, how's fishing been dude? Dude, it's uh, I don't know Really I've been catching fish for sure. I've been getting bites, but Man not what flesh and I are just in that other boat and we're just watching you guys like double up And I'm like what is going on? What are we doing wrong? so hoping that this kind of swap will switch up our luck a little bit and Get on some good one. So what how many fish have you got today? Oh, dude I got like three three and they're all under two. All right. We're gonna get on some big ones. You ready? I've actually been waiting to hit this right here. This whole open bank. Okay, save the best for me. So I Think we're about to get on them really good between this stress and there's a little grass patch on this point. I Think it's gonna be really good.  Oh You've been catching them deep in the trees. Um, honestly that bank behind These are weird old squeaky the way he was running he seemed like a good one Dude, I caught a two-pounder earlier and I he literally fought harder than seven. Wow. Yeah Well Or he wasn't even like a big meatball he was more like just a good overall finish like He wasn't really skinny anywhere, you know, it was a good healthy Yeah, that bank behind us. I caught him on the edge But I have caught a ton up shallow Like way up in the trees But yeah, the bank behind us, man, they were hanging off on the edge in about 10 foot He's like, I'm not even gonna fight Big bump and then when you actually That's fine. There should be a few up there. I was waiting on it man. I saw that that's mainly what I was coming to fish and Oh my gosh, the way he loaded up on a drop your bait right there You're really in a little closer Should eat it.  Oh Gosh, that's a really good one, dude.  Do you want me to land it for you? Yeah It's a good one dude. So that's a four plus. Yeah Just take a seat while we land Just pop a squat There's a freaking good one, right? That's what you need. I'm gonna be the second biggest fish of the day Nope, that might be a three-pounder Dude that is a nice fish look at that one his teeth are Thank you, I will take that Yeah, the audience. That's a good fish dude. Look at this Brian just got on the boat and got him a freaking good one Is what we need. I do have a spot in mind coming up. So once we hear this we're kind of head that way. I Have a few spots in mind today. I've been kind of sitting whatever Yeah, he was running Splash water on you. Did he get you?  You can see a lot of beds on it and I was throwing that Texas rig, but I was like I'm gonna pick up this Chatterdunk just because I can kind of fancast it here and cover more water There's so many beds It's freezing right now we're touching bad fish That was so crazy What is going on bro? I'm so mad. Yeah, I know Do that hair and literally like warned all day. Hey warn the fish to bite me Worn the fish to bite me told the gator get out of here What was that dude? That was the craziest thing. I hope that didn't spook off everything. I doubt it did If it was a boat, I understand but like they're used to them gators That has to be just another day type type thing that little guy hammered this That was a lot to take in in about 15 seconds. You got him. What you think? Oh Get him. Let's see see what we're working with check that one about there Oh, dude, they are they're literally where that gator was.  Oh, we went underwater to that gator. It's pretty tank You think Be careful, dude, there's a gator. Yeah, I'll feed my small ones All right, dude, that's a five pounder Look at that thing belly that is a freaky meat ball the hook fell out. What? Okay, yeah, definitely way this one that gator is kind of freaking me out. I really thought He did go under I'm telling you somewhere nearby. We got I got to be careful releasing this fish I usually get a soft release, but I'm probably it's not tossing That is the second giant. You know the scale. So look at this fish with me That's bigger than mine. I mean for sure. Come on, dude Well, that's I don't know if he is five, but he's up there like look at the belly. The belly is unbelievable That's a nice bass. You're good guys. That's about five pounder If he ain't five, he's a high four You just need to hit the gas buddy I'm gonna grab her if I need to I think she's fine though. I have her Yeah, she bought a kick It's a healthy fish dude, look at her. She's getting look at that. Look at that. That was so cool. Oh, man Guys Yeah, he was off the bank a little bit. He was more to the right He was like kind of on that right hand corner But he was off a little bit more It is where a big one will hang guys He big and I fight I want to say the big ones are biting but they're but they're near between my best five today. I have If that fishery is actually a five pounder Then I got about Plus about 21 pounds of my best five, which is pretty great. Oh, did you see my rod? I Still feeling a worm So now that has one really big one on a worm one really big one on the Chatter bait I almost predict where these fish are they're biting so dang good It is dude these fish are biting so good. Oh Oh Bro, that one was actually a good one. That's that's actually really annoying. I think that was another big one Two times. Oh, I got another one to bite.  I'll throw it in there. Anyways. Yeah, there's a lot of fish right here. Do you know I'm strong? Yeah Not a big one, but it's good He's a good little fat guy There's a lot of fish a Lot of fish my hook just came out. I'm kind of worried about that hook That hook is doing some interesting things.  By the way, if you guys want to check out any of the striking baits or Lose discounts. I have them in the link or in the description box down below. I got the links down there You guys want to check out any of the kicking combos are only available on kicking their best calm link to be in the description But we might get on another big right up here. Please stop Nat. They're not the smartest things are they? This whole banks been a little dry. Oh As I said that that was a good buy. Oh My god, dude, I I really I'm really starting to question this hook. He just had the tail.  He keeps grabbing my tail, but he feels kind of heavy.  I can't I can't see he might be in your lawn Yeah, yeah, I got out of it Haha Is he I Skipped up on that tree didn't happen. He's grabbing. That's a good fish. It's a two-pounder Dude, I don't know how I just did that, but we're gonna go with it That was a nice little fish guys. I skipped up there. I don't know what happened to me last five cast But I was throwing up there man, and they were just I don't know what they're doing Oh I got one too.   Yeah Ever since that hook kind of got worn out ever since I got that five dude.  I mean this is small one, but he's fighting like you're dang 13 pounds He's like They're all on the corner these That's a big Not a big game.  Why do you feel like you're six? You feel bigger than that five I had earlier. I was confident in saying that too I was like I definitely have a big fish Couldn't even move his little head. It's very odd Dude, I mean like the moment it hit the water might not click my really added this rod is a little That was a long distance Just a little too flimsy for that one chief All right, we'll heat it again. I didn't stick them I think this bank might be better There's a lot you see that Some jumped out there. How you guys doing? Yeah, we caught a couple These things just fight like They don't fight like no they fight like some


I first met Bill Michael in 1974 when we were in 10th grade together at Rochester, John Marshall. And if you look at his resume, you'll see, you know, he went to law school in Florida, and then he joined the J Corp, the judge advocates generals out of the United States Army. And Bill was one of only two attorneys in that program that ever became a Green Beret. And so when Bill puts his mind to something, he's really good at accomplishing what he wants through his hard work, dedication, resiliency. If Bill was going to play football, he was going to be the quarterback.  And he's very good at leading the team because he understands everybody's roles. Just like now as an attorney, he's very good at putting his team together to defend, you know, the defendants that they're representing in these white collar crime, you know, actions. So he loves putting a team together, but he outworks everybody. I mean, he is really dedicated to what he does. And so they get 24 of us out there on this course out in the cornfields down by LaSure. And we get to kind of choose which order we want to be in. So I asked Bill, Michael, to go behind me because I knew that Bill would not let me quit if I were to get tired or want to go, this isn't worth it, you know, because Bill is singularly focused. So Bill, I hold, you know, Bill in high regards because he got me through that obstacle course. And Bill is a unique individual, but he fits in so well with the community. I mean, the hard work, the resiliency, the dedication, the way that he, you know, gives back, he was on the board at Outward Bound. The way he mentors the younger attorneys at Meyer Brown and at Dorsey where he was before that. You know, Bill understands that he didn't get there all by himself and that he's giving back to the people that helped him get to a certain place and he's willing to do it, you know, the way, the way I guess Dave has taught us to do it.  So Bill is a guy that you want on your side because when you set a goal, he'll help you hit your goals, you know. So having him be a gusty is a good thing for all of us.


Ladies and gentlemen, please stand for the arrival of the official party and the playing of ruffles and flourishes. Please remain standing for the presentation of the colors and the singing of the National Anthem of the United States of America by technical sergeant Ainsley Dewitt. Oh, say can you see those early lights? What so proudly we hailed at the twilight's last gleaming? Who's broad stripes and bright stars through the perilous fight? O'er the ramparts we watched were so gallantly streaming? To honor guard, spirit of freedom, and sergeant Dewitt. Chaplain Luzeria Nwaga will now deliver the invocation. Please pray with me. Lord, we thank you for your presence at this Assumption of Command of the 88 Airbus Wing by Colonel Dustin Richards. As Colonel Richards assumes command of the 88 Airbus Wing today, Lord, I humbly ask your blessings upon him. Give him the strength and the courage that he will need to deal with the challenges that he will face in his task to which you have called him to. May you remain with him and his family as he prepares to lead this great Airbus Wing to new heights of excellence. Bless him with every grace of leadership. Strength that he will need. Watch over him and his family with your blessings and sound wisdom and judgment through the challenges that lies ahead of him, but family and professionally. As for his soon to be a leadership team, grant him success in every good endeavor so that through their collaborative work and decisions, the mission of the 88 Airbus Wing will be accomplished with great satisfaction. Please give Colonel Richards the strength to be a man of integrity, especially to have the compassion that will never him to be a leader in a way that is redemptive and caring. As he cares for his airmen and the mission of this Wing, may he always remember the words of President Reagan that says the greatest leader is not necessarily the one who does the greatest things, but the one that guides his people to do the greatest things. And finally, Lord, inspire us all to do our best each day to support him and his leadership team with energy, enthusiasm, and effectiveness as we continue to uphold our core values of integrity, service before self, and excellence in all we do. All this I pray to your most holy name, Amen. Ladies and gentlemen, please be seated. It is my pleasure to introduce our presiding official for today's ceremony, Lieutenant General Donna Shipton. Sing testing. There we go. Awesome. Okay. That's what good LT's are for. Thank you, LT. All right. Well, welcome everyone. First, I want to say, what a great way to start the day with that rendition. So if we could please just give the vocalist and the band a round of applause for what's wonderful. So it's my great pleasure to be here today as we do an assumption of command for the mighty 88. I want to, I know everyone's been introduced, but I do have a few thank yous to start with. So I especially want to thank our local mayors and county commissioners who are here. Thank you so much for being here. This is such a key relationship that we will have with the base. And so it really means a lot that you could take the time to be here. I also want to thank all of our state and local representatives who are here as well. Again, this is a key base in your districts. We appreciate that. We appreciate the support. And we know that we'll have a key relationship here in current Richards with you all. I would also like to thank Mrs. Step and Chief Fitch for being here from Air Force material command our headquarters. Thank you so much for being here. Additionally, I would like to thank the 88 leadership team. Curl Pond, Mr. Faulkner, wherever he might be. There you go. And Chief Morales, of course. You have been steadfast in your leadership over these past three and a half months of my tenure. And I just want to say thank you personally for all that you've done through these last three and a half months. Thank you. All right. Well, of course I would be remiss if I didn't thank some family members who are also here. So they've been introduced, but we have Curl Richards family from multiple states that are here today in force. And we're just so honored that you could be here to celebrate with Dustin and Ashley, Kennedy and Emily as we're here today with the family. So thank you, Mom and Dads, Sue and Steve. Mother-in-law and father-in-law Vicki and Doug. Thank you so much for all that you have done to help this family through their careers together and to get to this great day. You have raised wonderful children and now parents themselves. And so thank you for all that you've done as parents to get to this day. I want to give you a little sense for the man that is coming into this position. So if you'll allow me, I'll do a little bit of an introduction to him in his career. Let me take these off. So he has only one previous right pat tour at Appet. So we taught him how to be a scholar. Before even that, he started in Galapalese. Did I get it right? Oh, that's a hard one. Ohio where he was born. Gala police. Okay. All right. I knew I'd get that one. But he would grow up and spend a good number of his years at Wood River in Illinois. He went to East Alton Wood River High School where he was the salutatorian. Now he felt the need to apologize for that. And that he said the only reason he wasn't the valedictorian was because that individual was smart enough not to take honors biology. During which no other student, no student earned an A in honors biology. So he lettered in football, basketball and track. So it's very clear early on that he's an athlete as well as a scholar. He went on to Garner and ROTC scholarship where he went to the Rolls woman Institute of Technology in Terre Haute, Indiana, graduating with a bachelor of science in civil engineering. He entered active duty in 2001 and was stationed at his first duty location, Cannon Air Force Base. Yeah. And that would be a very important assignment because that would be where he met Ashley. Now he says that he gave up a short tour in Korea with a follow on to Italy in order to go to AFFET so that he could spend more time with Ashley while she was at law school. So I'm guessing that was a good bet that you made giving up on Italy. And that's just the beginning of the career.  But suffice to say, in addition to Cannon and his time at Wright-Pack, he would go on to Garner Experience in USAFE at Lake and Heath and Pac-Aff at Osan and Cousin and in multiple AFSAC tours where he was squadron commander, a deputy group commander, as well as a group commander. He had multiple Pentagon tours, both at the Headquarters Air Force as well as the Joint Staff. Most recently, he was the senior mil-assist to the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Energy, Installations, and Environment, which is principally the pentacle assignment for our CE career field in support of our entire Air Force from that perspective. Schools. So I mentioned he is an athlete scholar. He continued his schooling in our Air Force. I told you about AFED, but what I didn't mention was that he also won an award while he was there from the Society of the American Military Engineers for top program award. At SOS, he was the top third graduate as well as the number one flight. At the Marine Corps, Command and Staff College where we sent him for joint experience, he scored a superior on the Marine Combat Fitness Test. And I can tell you, nothing means more to a Marine than that. So well done. I'm sure you impressed a lot of folks while you were there. And then most recently, he was an Air Force Fellow at the Atlantic Council. Now I could give you multiple firsts, many strats, but I'll just mention a few. So from his performance reports, he was stratified number one of 24 squadron commanders, number one of four group commanders, and was promoted below the zone to both Lieutenant Colonel and Colonel. So that gives you a sense for his career. What about him as a person? So I asked him about his goals in life, and he said, have a successful marriage in progress. Raise our two daughters to be good humans, also in progress, and travel to all seven continents, which he's actually already completed. So be a good husband, be a good dad. Can't ask for better. Can't ask for better. So along the way, of course, through his career, eight years ago and five years ago, respectively, there'd be some additions to the family in both Kennedy and Emily. And I have to say, I think that from what I've heard, the two have already started investigating the right pat base. So the turtle pond, I think has already been viewed as well as the very large backyard. And the basement is now all set up for Barbies and Princesses, right? So girls, so far, I think we're good with Ohio. I'll get, okay, great.  Thank you, girls. So I guess to close here, I'll just say that, you know, his personal hobbies, we already mentioned, travel, all seven continents. I'm not sure what you do after you visited all seven continents. Like, what more can there be? I guess you got to do all again. Yeah. He roots for Ohio State. I'm sure that goes over well for some of the folks in the room. And he also roots, though, for St. Louis Cardinals. I'm not sure how well that goes over. He ran the US Marine Corps Marathon in 2018 before turning 40. So good on you. After 40, it's a little harder, but he is already signed up for the 2024 Air Force Marathon right here at Right Path. So you're going to see him running around the base a lot. Training. You know, when I asked him about his leadership philosophy, he said he leads with compassionate candor and is focused on building lasting relationships and wants each person he serves with to have their best possible life. And I think that he will do well here with those goals. So I like to look back as I'm looking at someone's career to their very first performance report.  Do you remember? Probably not. Well, thankfully, he had only good words to say. Excellent officer, respected by peers and subordinates. A dynamic team player who provides outstanding leadership. So pretty prescient if you were to ask me. And then I look at the last performance report.  You will have a bias for action with a commitment to airmen. And we can't ask more than that. So my charge to you today to continue to be that warrior scholar that you are. Build strong relationships both on and off base and lead our airmen with compassion, accountability and integrity. And with that, let's make it official. Thank you, General Shipton. Ladies and gentlemen, please stand for the assumption of command. The custom of assuming command of a military unit in formal ceremonies traces back as early as Roman times. This assumption of command is physically represented by the new commander accepting the command flag, the tangible symbol of the unit from the next senior commander. The formal ritual is conducted before assembled members of the unit, colleagues, military counterparts, honored guests, dignitaries, family and friends. I'll wish you order. Attention to orders. The Air Force Life Cycle Management Center Air Force Materiel Command right Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio. Under the provisions of Air Force Instruction 51509 and in accordance with special order number G2411, dated 8 April, 2024, Colonel Dustin C. Richards is hereby appointed commander of the 88th Air Base Wing, effective 9 April, 2024, signed Donna D. Shipton, Lieutenant General, United States Air Force. Ladies and gentlemen, please be seated. At this time, the men and women of the 88th Air Base Wing would like to render their first salute to Colonel Richards. It is my distinct honor to introduce the 41st commander of the 88th Air Base Wing, Colonel Dustin Richards. Thank you. Thank you all. Still going to shake this off a little bit. Ladies and gentlemen, Miss Esther, Chief Fitch, Mr. DiAngelo, Chief Weary, fellow commanders and directors, chiefs, first sergeants, national, state, local elected officials, Miami Valley business leaders, and members of the 88th Air Base Wing. Thank you for attending today. I am humbled and grateful for the chance to lead this wing and all struck at the atmosphere in this amazing venue. Nothing but thanks to the museum team, Mr. Tillitson and his team for the support and the partnership that we continue to have, to have this resource for the community and for the Air Force. I also want to say thank you to Tech Sergeant DeWitt and the band for that amazing rendition of our national anthem, Chaplain Nuwaga for his inspirational words, the protocol and public affairs teams for all the work that they've done behind the scenes and continue to do, Lieutenant Collins, thank you for narrating today. And all the volunteers that we don't even have time to mention who just put their work into making this a successful event and it's such a special occasion for my family who was able to be here today. So as General Shipton alluded, as a lieutenant pursuing my master's degree at APHIT 20 years ago, it never would have occurred to me that one day I'd end up on this stage. And over my career became something of a dream to one day command at the wing level. And so it's hard to believe that today that dream is coming true. So first and foremost, I would just like to express my appreciation to the Air Force and to General Shipton for entrusting me to lead the mighty 88th. Thank you, ma'am, for your kind words and for your trust and confidence. I owe a special thank you to the leadership of the 88th Air Base Wing. Colonel Pond, Mr. Faulkner, Chief Morales, Captain Luzerka, Tech Sergeant Lou Davis, Mrs. Agard, the front office team, thank you so much for the warm welcome, your guidance and leadership thus far. So Wright Patterson holds a special place in our nation's military history. It's the birthplace of aviation and a hub of innovation. This installation has been at the forefront of technological advancements that have shaped our Air Force. And that's not stopping, it's going to continue. To the outstanding airmen of the 88th Air Base Wing, it's inspiring to see you lined up in formation today as a total force. I want to personally acknowledge your dedication, professionalism, and unwavering commitment to service to each other and this great nation. You're doing amazing work. To paraphrase Teddy Roosevelt, it is not the critic who counts, not the one who points out how the strong stumble or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the one who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly, who errs, comes short again and again, but who does actually strive to do the deeds. Who knows the great enthusiasm, the great devotions, who spends themselves in a worthy cause, who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if they fail, at least fails while daring greatly, so that their place shall never be with those cold, intimate souls who know neither victory nor defeat. Each of you is in the arena, and you are in the arena at a critical juncture in our nation's history. You will play a vital role providing strength through support to our mission partners on Wright Patterson as we re-optimize the Air Force for great power competition. The success of that mission stems from the strength of our people, so I am committed to ensuring the well-being, professional development, and morale of each and every airman in this way. Together, we will create a culture of trust and mutual respect, which allows everyone to reach their fullest potential and live their best life. Together, we will dare greatly. I look forward to joining you in the arena. Our mission extends beyond the perimeter and into our surrounding community. We are part of a larger family of patriots ready to defend our nation's interests at home and abroad. Relationships are very important to me, and I will do all I can to strengthen the partnerships within the base and with the Miami Valley community so vibrantly represented here. The Dayton area and the state of Ohio have a well-deserved reputation for world-class support of the military, and I'm excited to experience it not only for the quality of life improvements that it brings, but to enhance our collective capabilities and ensure our collective success. In closing, I want to recognize my family. There are going to be some tokens of my appreciation coming, but Mom, Dad, thank you for everything, for being so present and supportive. And all the things that General Schimp did mentioned as I grew up, you were there for almost all of it, and so I couldn't be more grateful. Doug and Vicki, thank you for trusting me with your daughter, loving me like a second son. Kate, Doug, Tessa, thank you all for your love and for being here. This is the first time in my whole career that my extended family and friends have been able to attend a ceremony with us.  Thank you all for being here to share this moment with us. Chief Gilbert, thanks for being my wingman during our time together with Herbert, and thank you for making the trip up here. It means a lot. Your influence is present in how I lead and everything that I do. Finally, I'm going to thank my amazing wife, Ashley, for being my best friend, my trusted consigliere. She's a lawyer, retired Jag, so my consigliere, my confidant, and the love of my life. You're an amazing woman, and our family would not be what it is without your commitment and love. Kennedy, Emily, I've missed a few meals, missed a few movie nights, missed a few other events over this past year, and you've endured some long days without me around. But I know you're excited to start exploring your new home and taking advantage of all the opportunities it offers. The doll town you've created out of our basement definitely shows you off to a great start. I also want to thank all the leaders and colleagues who have mentored coached and supported me throughout my career, who are hopefully watching online. You know who you are. Whether you're here in person or online, you're in our thoughts and you have our appreciation and our gratitude. Again, I'm honored and humbled to serve alongside everyone in this room, and I look forward to the journey that lies ahead. Together, we will continue to write the history of the mighty 88th Air Base Wing and Wright-Patterson Air Force Base. Thank you. Thank you, Colonel Richards. Ladies and gentlemen, please stand for the playing of the Air Force song and remain in place for the departure of the official party. Ladies and gentlemen, this concludes today's ceremony. Please follow our distinguished visitors through the receiving line located at the Overlook and Hangar Four as we welcome our new commander, Colonel Richards and his family. Thank you for attending and have a pleasant day.


ith a quote from a constituent. Of course, this bill is a long way to go to ensure that adequate safeguards are in place to ensure that vulnerable people should not feel pressurised in any way, but it has to start somewhere. You will know that a large majority of people in Scotland support a change in the law. I gather the bill needs to pass to stage 2, where amendments can be discussed fully and openly. I hope that colleagues will agree to allow those discussions about amendments to take place at stage 2 and will vote accordingly today. By doing so, that does not commit me or anyone else to vote in favour at stage 3, but it allows the debate to continue to see if we can formulate a bill with all the right safeguards and protections in place. Many thanks. I now call Nigel Dawn to be followed by Jean Urquhart. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer, and we can be absolutely clear that this isn't easy. I'm very grateful to Patrick Harvie for the way in which he's brought this bill forward, and I'm very grateful to the committee for the way in which it's interrogated isn't for their very lucid report. It seems to me, Presiding Officer, that if we need a bill on assisted dying, then we need to ensure that it's focused on the actual problem. And I'm grateful therefore that the committee at section 49 makes the point that the current lack of clarity as it sees it in the current law is no justification for bringing forward this bill. If there is a need to clarify the law, then that can be regarded as a separate issue. It also seems to me that this bill is drafted too widely. I'm entirely with Elaine Dr Elaine Murray here and others I might add, Siobhan McMahon being one, that anything that talks about a progressive life shortening condition is surely far too wide, because what I have, I think very clearly discerned from all the correspondence that I have had with my constituents and the many other bits of correspondence that we've had, is that the real issue is actually suffering at the end of life. Now, we recognise that it may not be terribly easy to know when we've got there, but I think actually people very often do. The bill as it stands, forgive me, the bill as it stands seems to me and to many others to undermine the value of life by allowing some shortening of life to be a justification for suicide and it seems to me that that is entirely wrong. We need to address, I think, issues of the end of life and as many others have said, the answer to that is clearly palliative care and I don't need to repeat that. I'm grateful to Nanette Milne for pointing out that most of the time that works, but she recognises and I'm grateful for expertise that sometimes it doesn't. Now the doctors I have spoken to on this agree with that view, but they do seem to take the view that sedation is something which they can provide and in their view that is a better route forward for those for whom genuine pain relief is not available. Now, I've not heard any further comments about that presiding officer and it does seem to me that that is an issue on which we could do with some research and some advice. But the major point that I'd like to focus on is the argument that I've heard now several times, I'm not even going to read you the list of members who've made it, which is that we can amend this at stage 2, we ought to pass it today in order to allow it to go forward so we can amend it at stage 2. Let us be clear, we can amend it at stage 2. There would undoubtedly be many amendments, evidence could be taken on those amendments and I have no doubt that the committee could fairly and reasonably weigh them and I have no concerns that it would be a relatively small committee. But the point that I would make to the chamber presiding officer is that once we get to the end of stage 2, even if we have in front of us the perfect answer, we won't know and we won't be in a position to take the evidence that will then tell us whether we have got the perfect answer. And that is why I am actually with Dennis Robertson on this but I think he's the only voice that's expressed it this way that actually whilst we may feel there is a bill in there trying to get out and there is a legal point that needs to be addressed, actually what we need to do is to turn it down this evening, which is what I am proposing to do, ask those who have reflected on what has gone on to try and bring forward another bill in due course and I know that builds in a delay but we should be able to get to the point where at stage 1 we have a committee able to report in terms other than the bill has significant flaws and major challenges because I think at that point we would be in a position to say well are there some amendments which we need to make? I am most uncomfortable with the idea that we go through stage 2 to try to deal with significant flaws and major challenges and then hope that at the end of the day when we get to stage 3 we can decide whether or not we've got a good enough product. I actually just don't think the process allows of that and that's why I do actually commend to members that they should reject it at this stage in the hope that in time we can bring something correct back to the chamber. Thank you. Thank you very much. I now call on Jean-Arcourt to be followed by Dr Richard Simpson. Thank you Presiding Officer. This Parliament has never shirked its responsibility in dealing with a number of controversial subjects which have brought about societal change and bringing them to this chamber. It follows that we hear many differing and often strong opinions informing and allowing for the best kind of debate. I thank the many individuals, organisations and groups as others have done who took the time to articulate their reasons for offering their support for or objections to the assisted suicide bill. I will be supporting the motion today and I guess for different reasons I mean it seems listening to the different contributions to this debate that have all been I think really considered and quite powerful many of them that there are two things. First of all my own instinct is to will that there should be a bill of this nature and so my reasons for that I have to kind of set aside but and join with those who are asking for the bill to be passed to today even though their instinct is that it shouldn't be or that it should never come into law and I think that does allow for the greater debate and perhaps even more public involvement in what is for most of us quite an issue about which we feel very strongly so it's not I think it's really not an issue that that we can be uncertain about in the in the end as it were if you'll excuse the pun but my main reasons where we debating the bill is firstly for the want of choice and fairness and as an act of human kindness and compassion and possibly and thirdly for respect for any individual and his or her needs and beliefs and I too spoke to Margot McDonald at some length about her bill and I'm really pleased that to hear her name checked so often today because she is synonymous really with this bill and her desire to see it become law to an extent the bill as is maybe you well still far from perfect and what is clear from the health and sport committee report is that there are still many questions to be answered and detail to be articulated clearly and understood by everyone and in such an important issue of course the devil really will be in the detail but I believe that all of that can and should happen the right of an individual to be released from from life at their own request should be acknowledged as their choice and they should be supported it would appear that the majority of people in Scotland if we can believe recent reports in journals and newspapers of recent times now do broadly agree that it is a matter of choice Scotland does have an aging population many of whom will suffer degenerative conditions and the debate about the quality of life and how we can live and how we can live it will continue for years to come meantime anyone who out of compassion and love wants to help a friend or relative to die will remain open to prosecution and inevitably more and more people who can afford to do so will travel abroad in order to have their wishes met this cannot be right i acknowledge those who are of a religious faith and that i'm not and they do appear certainly in my mailbox to be the largest group opposing this bill have their reasons to do so and i can respect that and they would not ever consider using the permissions that this bill would allow and that is their right but i would ask that they respect those of a different belief it would be very wrong presiding officer if this bill were to fail today on any religious grounds this problem will not go away but rather will increase and therefore this bill is timely there is a strong feeling across the country i believe that recognizes that and supports the generality of the bill every contribution in the chamber today has been interesting thoughtful and considered and this parliament is surely here to allow the debate to continue and not to shut it down prematurely please do not shut down this important debate support the motion this afternoon thank you thank you so much now call on doctor richard simpson to be followed by calling here thank you presiding officer patrick harvey and the proposals of the bill the proposal of the bill has made a very eloquent case for a change in the law and it is absolutely right that this chamber and the members in it should wrestle with this issue but the committee is as the deputy convener bob doros said summarised very well today has an extensive list of concerns the bill has two main principles the patient the person must be diagnosed with an illness or progressive condition that was terminal or a life shortening condition and the second principle was have the legal capacity to make such a decision these two principles behind the bill create for me two immediate problems other bills such as the falcon a bill debated in the house of laws did get as far as stage two and i think this was in part a reflection of a much more tightly drawn set of basic principles that bill still had difficulties in definition but at least it sought to limit the application to those in the terminal stage of an illness this bill by including short life shortening conditions is far too widely drawn let me just give a couple of examples diabetes is a life shortening condition on average and conditions of poorly controlled diabetes the complications are unpleasant amputation even repeated amputations might make someone feel that life was intolerable and yet we know that many amputees enjoy a full life and the improving situation with prosthetics actually is improving the quality of life and that's an important point many of these things are actually about improvement i'm sorry mr hobby i think i know the point you're going to make but i'll maybe let you in later those with a severe and enduring mental illness on average have also got a much shorter lifespan but if their lives are intolerable it is in main because we as a society have still to support them adequately i have particular sympathy for those with neurological conditions because i don't believe that the palliative care we offer is yet good enough my close friend's son was diagnosed with multiple with mnd motor neurone disease at the age of 30 the doctors gave him two years as a likely maximum lifespan 11 years on he is now an event later and peg fed but fully supported he's been in that situation for over two years now during these last few years when he has been essentially entirely dependent on other people he's funded a neurological research centre at edinburgh infirmary he's developed a voice bank which christianine mcelvie alex salmon and myself have contributed to for those who lose their voices as part of this process and he's established uan's guide for the disabled and looking in from the outside his state looks totally intolerable yet he is like gordon aikman and melanie reid and inspiration and the contributions of these individuals are vital to our society and they are making those contributions in part because of the problems that they are facing but they like all of us all of us have a fear of dying not of death itself we will all have come to our own conclusions about what that means but the process of dying is one that is fearful and that is part of the human condition and that is exacerbated by the fact as many speakers have already said by the quality of our palliative care being wholly inadequate and that's despite the fact that we have a hospice system in scotland i was proud to be one of a group who founded struth garden hospice in the late 1970s but we have still got a huge length of way to go in actually achieving good palliative care it is clear however that this bill colleagues is massively flawed for the failure to define assisted suicide against euthanasia for the failure to define terminal as opposed to lifelong shortening conditions the failure to define what is unacceptable suffering the failure to adequately protect those with undiagnosed depression or indeed to define fully the capacity tests the failure to adequately protect vulnerable adults from being into assisted suicide many with disability will have periods of self-doubt or depression or even despair and i believe this this bill would not be a step forward in supporting them the line between assisted suicide and euthanasia is a fine one and this veil really does fail at that very first step to clarify the bill would not remove the uncertainty of the current laws regards causation nor does it make clear what actions and by whom are to be protected the bill does not protect doctors there are serious issues are young young adults as the children's hospice has reminded us in their briefing the conflict of interest for this community and our chamber between our desire for suicide prevention and assisted suicide is a difficult one i acknowledge the supporters of the bill believe in autonomy as an absolute and that compassion should lead us to support assisted suicide but similar laws in other countries have been expanded gradually over time and i believe that this bill unfortunately will not do and is not capable of amendment and i will vote against but if the chamber decides otherwise i will strive for this to be a court decision and not one that is done in terms of the current bill many thanks now call on call on cure to be followed by murder Fraser thank you Presiding Officer like a number of people here it's incredibly difficult i started off with a speech and i've been scribbling around notes as the afternoon has gone through to which have something slightly different to what i i started with could i still start though thanking my colleagues on the health and sport committee for the way that they handled the deliberations on this bill we all have different views strength of views and i think it was handled very well and i believe that the report came out in a very fair measured manner and i could also thank those who are who came in as witnesses it was very difficult for many of them some of them would rather torture stories of personal relationships and of course you had those i think jeane urquart mentioned from the religious side of life who held very very strong views on this and very much against at this moment in time if this bill as it's written at this moment in time was handed out as a stage three i couldn't possibly support it i believe like others that it is possible that this can be amended and i would really like to commend patrick harvey for a part from a very very good speech that was brought through actually showed how inclusive that this bill is that started off with margo and i would congratulate patrick on that speech margo obviously had her problems with the physical difficulties that she had in having sat down many occasions talking about this bill i believe like mike mckenzie has just actually said earlier on today that we ought to those not just who are suffering but those who actually sent in as a part of the consultation because i think it's absolutely vital that we give this full parliamentary scrutiny because like it or lo that it's going to keep on coming back i would imagine over future sessions and i would just think i can't remember who it was that mentioned that it will come back and if we don't at least take it to the point where we can actually say well it really does need completely rewritten then we're just stacking up more troubles for next time out so as far as the religious beliefs go i fully respect those people who hold those beliefs i it's something i don't personally have but i believe that strength of inner strength that comes with those beliefs obviously brings out these very strong feelings in many ways and it's a very very highly emotional period of time here certainly on a personal note my father had a neurological degenerative disease and from being a very big burly guy i found them at the end to be almost like a photograph of someone in Auschwitz now when you see that and you see someone crying someone who you've looked up to for the your strength in your family and looking you know asking to be helped it is absolutely horrifying now in terms of the palliative care the palliative care that my father received was i have to say excellent in the su rider home green law when it was open the problem was of course at that time in the 90s there was no place really suitable for that particular type of illness here in Edinburgh and it meant a rather long drive down south to green law and back again so all these things everybody here is of an age none of us are teenagers you know we all have stories we all know of people and it hurts and it's hurting not just as i think michael might be michael mic man who said that you know we look at the people who actually look to their families and they see the pain that it causes them and of course that is a point but you know we shouldn't be scared some people will never ever take the option of this type of action i know it's gone very quickly i noticed but there are controversial issues here absolutely no two ways about that i'm skipping through most of my notes much to my surprise i find myself really now down on the side of wanting to see this expand into something that we can make it how far can we go with this surely the legal and medical problems of clarification and the actions of facilitators can be overcome and i'll leave it there since the time thank you very much i'll call on more the phraser to be followed by mark mcdonald thank you deputy presiding officer we debate many matters of great importance in the chamber but very seldom do we have to discuss the fundamental issues that we wrestle with this afternoon issues of life and death issues of suffering and of the nature and quality of human existence other members throughout this debate have raised issues in relation to matters of detail in connection with the bill before us but i would rather address the issue as a matter of principle what sort of people are we what sort of society do we want to be what is our response to this bill tell us about the nation that we seek to represent and at the heart of this debate is essentially a philosophical question one acknowledged by allison mckinnis earlier in an excellent speech who owns our life who has the right to take decisions over it and do we have the right to take our own lives the victorian poet william earnest henley in his famous poem in victus wrote these lines it matters not how straight the gate how charged with punishments the scroll i am the master of my fate i am the captain of my soul of anyone who takes an essentially liberal view of the world as i try to do the notion of sovereignty over one's life makes sense as christian graham said truly it should be up to the individual and the individual alone to decide not just how to live but how to die and law should be made that complement and assist that decision now i sense that jackson carlaw is starting to fear a lightning strike again so quickly state that while i find that superficially attractive even for someone with a liberal outlook on life it seems to me too extreme a form of individualism to claim that the action of taking our own lives is one for us entirely alone that cannot have an impact on those around us no man is an island wrote the dean of st paul's john dun nearly four centuries ago any man's death diminishes me because i am involved in mankind we regard suicide as a social ill the Scottish government has a suicide prevention strategy and for good reason suicide can have a devastating effect on those who are left behind and only those who have experienced the loss of someone close in this way can fully appreciate the pain and loss that are generated we may be individuals presiding officer but we cannot pretend that our actions in so serious a matter are decisions we can take unilaterally without considering the effect on wider society the case was made very strongly by the health and sport committee the much more needs to be done to provide palliative care to those in end of life situations and i entirely agree with that conclusion has been echoed many times during this debate but even so i believe that those of us who are opponents of this bill should be gracious enough to accept that palliative care however excellence will not be the entirety of the answer in every case no matter how good it is there will still on occasion be pain distress and suffering and grief but surely that is part of human existence as much a part as peace and joy and happiness and just because there is pain and suffering should not mean that a life is regarded as no longer worth living or without any value in a powerful contribution to this debate the scottish council on human bioethics state that legalising assisted suicide means that that it is the whole of society and not just the person wanting to die which is accepting that a person has lost all value worth and meaning in life this would have a brutalising effect on society and dangerously undermine the legal protection established in the concept of equal and inherent human dignity. Presiding officer it is little wonder that so many disability rights groups are opposed to this legislation as Siobhan McMahon reminded us many human beings have lives which are far from perfect many live daily with disability with pain and with suffering but that does not make them any less human or any less entitled to human dignity and to pass a law saying that those who are suffering should be entitled to assistance to kill themselves suggests that this parliament believes that some lives are worth less than others. I started by saying that how we handle this legislation was a measure of the sort of society we wanted to be and the question we have to ask is this have we really become a society which says the best answer we can provide for those in suffering in end of life situations the best we can do is to help them kill themselves is that really the best we can offer for that sounds to me a desperately cold soulless society and I think that in Scotland today we are better than that so for all these reasons I oppose the bill before us. Many thanks. I call on Mark McDonald to be followed by Paul Martin. Thank you very much Presiding Officer at the time of Mark McDonald's passing one of the things that I said I would remember quite fondly is that whenever she or I were called to speak in the chamber we found ourselves having to exchange a furtive glance to work out if the Presiding Officer had said Mark or Margo McDonald were being called to speak and I couldn't help but think that today of all days I would have quite welcomed the opportunity to have that exchange of glance because I think it is a great testament to the work and dedication of Margo on this legislation that we've got to this stage and I pay tribute also to Patrick Harvey who has taken on the legislation and brought it forward and I also would pay tribute to the members of the health and sport committee who I think have done a very fine job of scrutinising the legislation. I don't necessarily share all of the health and sport committee's concerns but I do think that they have gone through their work diligently and I appreciate the fact that although they had a committee which clearly had a majority of members who did not support the legislation they took what I think was the correct approach of looking at this bill from a dispassionate perspective and saying what would be required from our perspective for this to be a workable piece of legislation and I pay tribute to them for being able to take that approach. Now many of us have spoken in this debate from a range of experiences that have shaped our views on this legislation and that is only natural as human beings we our views are the the accumulation of absorbed experience whether that is professional experience such as our medical professionals who are in the chamber with us today whether that is through personal experience through looking at the situation as it affects ourselves our family our loved ones whether that is through our beliefs as they are shaped by our faith or our lack of faith all of that is playing a role in today's debate and I think given that it is a debate on which we will vote in relation to individual conscience that is as it should be. I've been open for a number of months that I am in favour of this legislation and will vote in favour of this legislation at stage one that is not to say that I believe that the bill that sits before us today is the finished article or is perfect there are elements of this bill which I believe do require amendment and if it passes today I will look at whether I myself will table amendments for in particular one of the areas I have concerns in is around the inclusion of life shortening as a definition I believe that that as members have pointed out leaves too wide a scope for potential application of the legislation but I don't believe that that in itself and the existence of that term within the bill at stage one in and of itself justifies rejecting the bill at stage one I believe that this bill is amendable I don't share the view that some are subscribing to that it is beyond amendment or beyond salvation now my my my good friend and colleague Dennis Robertson spoke of his own personal experience in relation to his mother who was given a diagnosis of I think weeks to live but it lasted significantly longer than that my own grandfather was diagnosed with lung cancer when I was 16 years old and was given a diagnosis of six months to live he lived far shorter than that he died long before the prognosis was was that was offered to him we can never be 100 sure that a person will live to the length of time that doctors state and that is why I think we have to look at this from the best judgment of medical practitioners and I believe that that is what the legislation seeks to do it's what other forms of legislation seek to do as well but above all else this is about empowerment of the individual and it we've had much literary quotation in the debate today and I always come back to a quote from my great literary hero Atticus Finch into Cullum Walkingbird that you never really understand a person until you consider things from his point of view until you climb inside his skin and walk around in it and with the greatest due respect that is impossible in this situation we cannot for one second fathom the situation and the circumstances in which an individual who has reached an intolerable stage at the end of their life find themselves in until we ourselves may at one stage hopefully not but may at one stage find ourselves in that situation and when that time comes if that time comes we I think must look at ourselves and say did we at the time that we had the opportunity to put in place a system which would give effect to the wishes of those individuals did we do the right thing this is the second great moral question that this parliament has faced in this term parliamentary term presiding officer the last time I voted in favour of same sex marriage because I said to myself what would my message be to a family member who wanted to take the opportunity to get married if I had voted against their right to do it for the same reasons today because I could not look a family member in the eye if they said at the end of their life that they would wish to take this option and I had voted to deny them the right to do it I will vote in favour of this legislation and seek to amend it at stage 2 thank you and I call on Paul Martin to be followed by Jim Eadie Presiding Officer Margo Mcdonald sometime ago advised me that her method of seeking public opinion was a visit to her local hairdressers now it's not a particular method I've followed but I would say that in seeking local public opinion on this issue I take issue with the point that Patrick Harvie and others have made is that the public opinion is in favour of changes in the law all of the representations I've received in respect to this I think have fallen in favour of well over 70 per cent of those have been opposed to changes in the law for a number of reasons and I would commend the work of the health and sport committee and their diligence and indeed an excellent presentation by Bob Doris in what I'm coming forward with which I think was a considerable report and recognise that there are a number of flaws in what has been presented before us today and that has been as a result of a comprehensive consultation exercise evidence received from experts across the world I'm not the first time that this parliament has received such evidence and can I draw the parliament's attention to paragraph 71 of the report report that says there is a need for a thorough investigation and scrutiny of the country provision and future plans for part of care in Scotland is it not a poor reflection of the Parliament that after 15 years we continue to have this very debate in connection with part of care there's a cross party group that's been in existence led by Michael McMahon since the early years of the Parliament there have been many reports in respect of how we deliver part of care and we still can't get this right and it's not a partisan point that I make today but surely it is a point that has to be taken up by the current Government that it is unacceptable that organisations such as the Marie Curie which was formally in my constituency when I represented Glasgow Springburn to do some excellent work along with other organisations who provide such services and I think they are to be commended for their good work over the years in supporting patients at the end of life in the work that they've been doing but surely this is now the time and I know this is not the debate necessarily to be focused on today but surely we should take this opportunity today to make that very point that the necessary resources should be put in place and I would welcome a response from the Government I don't want to hear any more about frameworks I don't think we want to hear any more about working groups we want to hear from real action from the Government as to how we're moving forward in this issue Presiding Officer protecting those who are vulnerable I have absolutely no doubt is a vision for every single member of this Parliament I have no doubt that what Patrick Harvey is proposing today he's doing in the context that he would like to support those in some context that are vulnerable but I do not accept that his proposal here before us would protect those who are vulnerable and I think could potentially subject him to being vulnerable in respect of what he's proposing can also air caution in what has been proposed by members today that somehow we could amend this legislation at stage 2 I think it sets a quite a significant precedent by members of this Parliament are we seriously suggesting that every member's bill that's placed before us and air caution to the members of the government parties who have represented here in the chamber that every member's bill proposal that's put before us where we don't accept the principle that's put before us and there's a particular group of recommendations that recommend that there's a number of flaws in what has been put before us that we should continue to pursue with that legislation I think we would be setting a very dangerous precedent in respect to that and I think it would be wrong for the Parliament to continue in that process quickly and I see the conclusion Presiding Officer there's nothing I've heard unfortunately from Patrick Harvey and others I think there's been constructive and robust points that have been made today there's nothing here in what's been proposed that would convince me to vote for Patrick Harvey's bill and I would urge members to vote against what's proposed today thank you very much I now call on Jim Edie to be followed by Stuart Stevenson thank you Presiding Officer it is a privilege to follow the many fine speeches which there have been this afternoon on both sides of the debate but I agree with Patrick Harvey that there is a need for legal clarity and that the law as it stands is unfit for purpose it is my view sincerely held that the status quo is no longer an option I believe that the people are ahead of the politicians in their consideration of this issue and in their growing support for assisted dying no one in this debate on either side of the argument has come to a view lightly I didn't I was a signatory to Margo's bill to allow the debate to continue but I was not then minded to support it but I have now changed my mind I'd like to pay tribute to all of my constituents who have contacted me on this issue I have received profound personal testimony and I've received sound rational reason and evidenced arguments from constituents who are in favour of the bill and equally from constituents who are opposed to the bill and I wish to thank each and every one of them supporters of the bill wish first to end suffering and pain and the palpable distress it causes to the individual and their family supporters of the bill also passionately believe in good palliative care and end of life care which allows people to die with dignity and is properly resourced across the country no one who believes in the principle of assisted dying believes that vulnerable people should be pressured or coerced into ending their lives prematurely no one I remember the excellent care which my own mother received and my sister and I will forever be grateful to the staff of st Margaret's hospice and Clyde bank for the way in which they cared for our mum in her dying days but there is no evidence that assisted dying will lead to the erosion of palliative care on the contrary the european association for palliative care has found that palliative provision has improved in Luxembourg the Netherlands and Belgium Belgium has actually introduced a universal right to palliative care alongside the right to die in Oregon the hospice association had opposed the dignity in dying act but after eight years experience of it they stated that absolutely none of the dire consequences that had been predicted had occurred indeed the percentage of terminally ill people in Oregon receiving palliative care had risen from 22 per cent to 51 per cent however I do accept that there are questions serious questions searching questions for the proponents of the bill and the first of these is why has life shortening condition as well as terminal illness being placed at the heart of the bill and that was a point that was well made this afternoon by Elaine Murray and by Nigel Dawn a further question is of course what further steps are necessary particularly in terms of legislation to ensure that there is a conscience clause which would allow for and enshrine the right of doctors and nurses to opt out if they did not wish to carry out tasks pertaining to assisted dying and here I'm mindful of the fact that the regulation of our health professions is currently reserved to Westminster and that that would require legislation under section 104 of the Scotland Act 1998 and how do we ensure that the legal safeguards are stringent and robust such that no one is subject to undue pressure how do we ensure that in allowing for the autonomy of the individual to take their own life in specific and regulated circumstances we do not erode the autonomy of vulnerable people and finally can we strengthen the legal protection so that there are appropriate penalties for contravention of the bill psychiatric assessment of capacity and the day the day the 14 day window are also issues that have been raised which I believe need to be explored further but none of these questions and none of these issues are in themselves a reason to oppose this bill today each of them are reasons for further legislative scrutiny of the bill and further investigation and discussion of its contents at stages 2 and 3 and anyone who has sat at the bedside of a loved one knows what a deeply personal and profoundly moving experience that can be I had that experience with my own father and I remember spending the last night of his life in his hospital room with me sleeping in a camp bed beside him during the early hours of the morning the alarm went off and the nurses came to change his drip and to change him and I remember lying there sobbing and begging for his release and I do not know if my father was in pain or how much pain he was in as he was heavily sedated and I do not know if he would have wanted to end his own life at that point I do know that his last days and hours were as comfortable as the doctors and nurses were able to make them but what I also know is that his quality of life had deteriorated to the extent that he could not eat he could no longer speak and he could not go to the toilet is that the dignified death that we would choose for ourselves if we had that choice of course the right to die should never become a duty to die but the issue surely is one of dignity and autonomy for the individual presiding officer the conclusion that I have come to is that in denying people who are terminally ill and of sound mind the choice to end their life after meeting strict legal safeguards what do we as a society are doing albeit in a small number of cases is to extend human suffering I cannot and do not believe that that is any longer acceptable and it is for that reason while respecting at all times the views of others that I will vote for this bill tonight many thanks I know Colin Stewart Stevenson after which we'll call on Patrick Harvie for the closing speech let me start by congratulating me presiding officers team I find myself the 32nd speaker in this debate a well balanced well organised debate and the presiding officers deserve congratulations let me also recognise the integrity of those on the other side of the argument from me it's a genuine issue growing greater with time as medical science and practice changes of how we support our fellow citizens as their faculties decline with age infirmity or disease now while I agree with Patrick Harvie's sentiments if not all these words when he criticised the present arrangements as the most open and ill-defined legislative framework we could possibly have I've come to a different answer to this contundrum from him now is the last speaker before Patrick Harvie I will try and very briefly sum up some of my responses to what's happened in the debate in particular I picked up on Richard Simpson's really fascinating description of the contribution of a profoundly disabled individual who was dying and he emphasised how significant the contribution of that person could be and there would be fears in my part and I think in others in the debate that this kind of measure might deprive us of all benefiting from that kind of opportunity. Alison McKinnis what I took from what she said not her words was that she was concerned about the normalisation of suicide and I think that was again many of us now George Adam on the other side of the argument for me powerfully said the potentially bereaved should not oblige the terminu ill to live on and I think that's an absolutely fair point Liam McArthur expressed it slightly differently the right to live is not a duty the right to life is not a duty to live and Michael McMahon I think powerfully in quoting Professor Bohr journey from support to examining the practical effects moving to opposing I think it's very much informed the debate that we're having today now from the start my instinctive reaction in any event was to be opposed to the proposal I was brought up in a doctor's household steeped in support for life compassion and assistance for the dying it probably could hardly be otherwise my father was proud to work and live under the strictures of the Hippocratic oath he took as a medical student and not all medical students did or do and yet the origins of that oath in a great cult focusing on excluding patients from doctors decisions about the future and in keeping secret the details of medicines used in their treatment is hardly an encouraging basis for decision making but with the time my father took the oath it was seen more simply and discarded its primary objective of protecting the physicians monopoly and preserving the secrecy of his or her methods it used to say I will neither give a deadly drug to anybody if asked for it nor will I make a suggestion to this effect and the physicians who continue to wrestle with this issue he are here confronted with a choice between helping people who can have a quality of life before them and assisting people who wish to leave life a bit early in the past it was simple enough doctors did not need to struggle to maintain life when life itself would not do so those without perception of the world in which we live those without prospect of resuming a meaningful quality of life need not be treated nature could follow its course now Nanette Milne referred to the relationship between doctors and patients and certainly our relationship with doctors at critical times in our life is a very asymmetric one we throw ourselves into their hands and we may be insensible of their life sustaining life threatening actions which are taken by them to promote what they understand to be our best interests I congratulate those who've wrestled with this issue in committee they've risen to the challenge and the report is a model of clarity with integrity of reasoning it informs us it makes clear as many contributions to the debate today have that the bill at best leaves unanswered questions and and others have described it is fatally flawed and I share that analysis but ultimately this is not a whip debate it is one where we all individually have to engage with bodies before us and we have to make our individual decisions and be accountable for them we're talking about people's lives for my part I have talked with the dying about their end I've agreed actions and inaction with relatives and with friends about them and about my future I've sat at the bedside of death I have laid out the debt for me death is no passing stranger and I will not be alone in this chamber in saying that at the end of what essentially has been a discussion with myself I found it boiled down to the simplest of questions how would I feel when I knew that the doctor approaching me to provide treatment in my extremity had assisted another to an early exit from life when I so eagerly wished to stay even the slightest appearance of their bias towards death would damage my relationship with that professional and for that reason I will follow my instincts and vote against this measure later today thank you mr Stevenson and can I now call on Patrick Harvie to wind up the debate mr harvie you can go to six o'clock I'm very grateful for the many thoughtful and considered contributions which have been made on both sides of this debate by members across the chamber I want to highlight in particular Alison McInnes and Mordo Fraser both of whom made speeches against the bill speeches clearly disagreeing with the position that I've taken but doing so in a particularly thoughtful and nuanced manner Jackson Carlaw did so as well but trust him to make the chamber laugh even in the middle of a debate on such difficult topics but he did so without ever undermining the seriousness of the subject there are some shared concerns as I said in the opening speech some shared concepts which I think are equally important to those who support and those who oppose the bill the place of compassion the need to ensure that compassion is shown in a meaningful way which relates to people's needs and the value of life the need to ensure that all of our lives have equal value why why do all of our lives have equal value it can be difficult sometimes given the subjective nature of these issues to put that into words for many people for many people it is because we are thoughtful intelligent feeling and yes relational beings capable of exercising agency in our lives for many of us that is precisely why our lives have value and should be valued equally for many people denying that agency is what represents a denial of the true value of our lives and the equal value that should be afforded to us all there are those who've cited very serious concerns concerns which I place on a very high level of importance around the social attitudes the cultural attitudes the practical physical and economic circumstances that people live in which can imply the devalued status of some people's lives I think that's something which supporters and opponents of this bill share as a concern passing this bill is not an alternative to reinforcing our commitment to the social economic cultural and physical conditions which allow people to live as one member put it full and independent lives for as long as possible for as long as possible that prompts the question then what because the discomfort in this debate is a recognition that many of us will face difficult circumstances at the end of life and even with the highest level of social provision even with the best level of medical and palliative care there will come a point at which we're no longer able to live that full independent life at that point do we have the right to make a decision there are also those I think Siobhan McMahon, Rhoda Grant and others who've questioned whether the bill is too broad particularly in terms of life shortening conditions one member I think cited type 2 diabetes it's very clear that there is a debate to be had about the scope and eligibility of the bill but as it is drafted as it is drafted it is not a simple tick box exercise life shortening condition therefore eligible this is a test which requires a medical to medical practitioners to certify that a person's quality of life is unacceptable to them that that is consistent with what is known about the condition they suffer from and that they see no prospect of improvement this is about someone who has reached the end of the the life that is of an acceptable quality to them I give way I'm selling my like thank you very much I like many other members in this chamber have been debating this very same issue long and hard and that's exactly the point that I get stuck at when you say where practitioners make a decision whether their life's level is unacceptable or not it's not there's choice and that and I'm not actually finished you want me to stand down or you want me okay thank you and I think there are there are a lot of issues where in terms of people making that decision I think what's a lot of fear in a lot of people's hearts and minds is those decisions decisions are likely to be made by others and that's the that's the fear that people have thank you I understand the point the member makes but he is quite wrong in his reading of the bell he's quite wrong in his reading of the bell the judgment about the acceptability of a person's quality of life is for the person themselves that is abundantly clear the medical practitioner has to certify that that judgment is consistent with the fact of the condition as known to the to the medical practitioner there are many personal stories as I think bob doris initially and various others have talked about personal stories in our own lives and in the correspondence we've had with constituents about this which can be taken as support or opposition to this bill and we will all have constituents who are on on both sides of this one story cited by Elaine Murray related to a patient with a life shortening condition the the point of this debate we may discuss if the the bill passes at stage one whether to restrict that to terminal conditions only but the the person that Elaine Murray was talking about very clearly would not have been able to secure a statement from medical practitioners saying that they had no prospect of improvement in their condition there are others who've who've cited a range of objections I won't have time to address every single one of them shona robison talked about the need to improve palliative care and again I said nothing nothing in this bill prevents us from doing just that in fact as Jim Eadie and Mary Fee argued there is no contradiction at all between providing a system of assisted suicide and investing in high quality palliative care and as we've seen from the organ from the Netherlands from Belgium increased investment in palliative care and increased uptake of palliative care are quite consistent with passing legislation in this area Doris Mr Doris's microphone can I have Mr Doris's microphone on please yeah thank you yeah thank you I thank Mr Harvey for giving way just in terms of clarity for the committee report we heard evidence both for and against the this piece of legislation here this afternoon based in Oregon which were directly contradictory towards each other and just for the Parliament's information the committee agreed that whilst information from other jurisdictions was informative it provided a limited basis for reflection and the committee acknowledged that experience in other jurisdictions cannot be read across automatically to the Scottish context and I think it's important to stress that to the chamber this afternoon Mr Harvey I thank the member and in my response to the committee's report I acknowledged that conclusion I acknowledged that paragraph but it is also clear that if we're seeking evidence of the impact of assisted suicide provisions either on palliative care provision or on the alleged normalisation of suicide more generally there is no such evidence there is no such evidence Nanette Milne I think talked about the issue of the question of undermining trust in doctors in the medical profession a question which I think Kevin Stewart answered very well there is no substantial evidence from other countries to show a negative impact on that doctor patient relationship some members talked about the the requirement for a psychiatric assessment to be mandatory this is one of the things which was included in margo mcdonald's previous bill this was one of the subjects of criticism of margo mcdonald's previous bill it was argued at the time that there should be a facility which is always available but not mandatory now we may discuss in future whether there are particular circumstances where it should be a normal expectation but I think it's it's difficult to accept that one bill is criticized for making it mandatory and the other bill is criticized for not doing so Liam McArthur I think mentioned I think that this is posthumously synonymous as the as margo is bell and I acknowledge that that's the case I think probably it always will be but he talked about the balance of views which exist in favour of the legislation not just in the in the public at large but among religious communities and among health professions and disabled people as well there may be a great many organisations representing those interest groups who are opposed but the balance of views in the public is very clear we've had consistent opinion polling over many many years showing a strong degree of public support for this legislation as well as the social attitudes survey and I believe that research by disabled activists for assisted dying shows strong support amongst disabled people as well it's also worth noting that the bulk of the case law which has developed this argument both north and south of the border has been prompted by disabled people in proposing this bill Presiding Officer I'm not asking anybody to approve of suicide and I'm not asking anyone to welcome the thought that any person in any circumstance would take that choice but we have seen gradually over decades over generations a change in culture of patient care away from the doctor knows best paternalistic model toward one which empowers people to make informed decisions about their own lives and their own care autonomy is not an absolute and dr Simpson knows very well that the proponents of this bill have not claimed that autonomy is an absolute it never has been we are social creatures we are relational we live our lives in context but not because we're forced to not because we're forced to it's because of who we are widen the choices that people have before us and we will still be social relational human beings making our choices in the in the context of the love and care of those around us if we're fortunate enough to have it of course autonomy is not an absolute but it is a factor and it is any factor which has been increasingly important as we move away from that paternalistic model of care when when could it possibly be more important than when we face the end of what we define for ourselves as a tolerable quality of life with no prospect of improvement should only the wealthy have the right to assert their own wishes and have them respected albeit in unfamiliar surroundings since Switzerland say far from the warmth of their own home Neil Findlay and Mardo Fraser both acknowledged the most profound issues that this bill raises it's about life and death in recognising that this bill asks us to engage with difficult and uncomfortable issues those difficult and uncomfortable issues do not go away if we fail to pass this bill this bill may represent only one way of engaging positively with them but i appeal to members whether you intend to support amendments in one direction or another whether you intend to support or oppose the bill at stage three if it is amended let it pass stage one let us see a strong show of support for the principle that this bill embodies in the end we will have sent a very clear signal that even if this bill was to fall at stage three the laws it stands should not last it must change and i appeal to members who see the basic argument in favour to give us your support at stage one thank you that concludes the debate on stage one of the sister suicide scotland bill we now move to the next item of business which is consideration of business motion one three two six five in the name of joffords partrick on behalf of the parliamentary bureau setting out a business programme any member who wishes to speak against the motion should press request speak button now and i call on joffords partrick to move motion number one three two six five formally moved the members asked to speak against the motion therefore i now put the question to the chamber the question is that motion number one three two six five in the name of joffords partrick be agreed to are we all agreed the motion is therefore agreed to the next item of business is consideration of three parliamentary bureau motions i'd asked of its partrick to move motions number one three two six six on approval of an ssi motion number one three two six eight on designation of a lead committee and motion number one three two six nine on the remit of a committee moved on block the questions on these motions will put a decision time to which we now come there are four questions to be put as a result of today's business the first question is that motion number one three two five eight in the name of partrick harvey on stage one of the assisted suicide scotland bill be agreed to are we all agreed the parliament is not agreed we move to vote members cast their votes now the result of the vote on motion number one three two five eight in the name of partrick harvey is as follows yes 36 no 82 there were no abstentions the motion is therefore not agreed to the next question is that motion number one three two six six in the name of joffords partrick on approval of an ssi be agreed to are we all agreed the motion is therefore agreed to the next question is that motion number one three two six eight in the name of joffords partrick on the designation of a lead committee be agreed to A dogfyn yn ddim drus i ddod? The next question is at motion number 13269, in the name of Dolfet's Patrick on the Ream of a committee, be agreed to? Are we all agreed? The motion is there for agreed to. That concludes decision time. We're now moved to members' business. Members are in the chamber who are leaving, please do so quickly and quietly.