Parliament Workbench
Data: Official Report to 12 Nov 2026

Official Report · Committee

Continued Petitions

Polypropylene Mesh Medical Devices (PE1517)

Tuesday 26 January 2016 Public Petitions Committee About 12:00 Petitions 4 contributions · 3 speakers

Speakers

Choose an MSP to read only their contributions

The record

4 contributions
Michael McMahon Lab The Convener · Uddingston and Bellshill
link

The next petition is PE1517, by Elaine Holmes and Olive McIlroy, on behalf of the Scottish mesh survivors hear our voice campaign, on mesh medical devices. Neil Findlay MSP and John Scott MSP, who have indicated an interest in the petition, cannot be with us this morning but they have indicated that they continue to support the petition.

More evidence about the treatments has been produced, and I think that we need to pursue the matter a lot further. We need to ask the cabinet secretary to ensure that the work of the expert group is made more transparent and to respond to the committee on how that transparency will be delivered. In the light of the findings of the interim report, we also need an update on whether discussions have taken place with those who were involved in the trials.

Given that there is now litigation in America concerning three types of mesh that have been used, a lot more needs to be understood about the situation. The committee has been greatly moved by the evidence that we have heard so far, but more evidence keeps emerging; therefore, we have to keep asking questions. We will continue to do that if members agree.

Jackson Carlaw Con West Scotland
link

I would be interested in the Scottish Government’s reaction to the most recent revelations to emerge that material not fit to be used in humans has potentially been included in mesh implants that may have been used in Scotland. I would like to know whether that evidence might prompt the Scottish Government to enter into further conversations with the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency, which has previously asserted the safety of those devices before the committee. I would also like to ask what further conversations or investigations the MHRA is pursuing in the light of that information.

John Wilson Ind Central Scotland
link

I suggest that, in the light of the concerns that have been raised, we ask for the Scottish Government’s views on the petitioners’ idea of establishing Scotland’s own independent medical watchdog. As Jackson Carlaw rightly says, the committee was not enamoured of some of the evidence that we heard from the MHRA, and it would be useful to flag up to the Scottish Government the call for an independent medical watchdog to be established.

Michael McMahon Lab The Convener · Uddingston and Bellshill
link

We can at least ask the Government whether that is being considered or is considered to be viable. It is definitely worth considering.

There are a few things that we have noted that we want to pursue. Is everyone agreed that we do that?

Members indicated agreement.

  1. 10:00 New Petitions Petitions · 61
  2. 10:30 New Petitions Petitions · 54
  3. 11:15 New Petitions Petitions · 36
  4. 11:45 New Petitions Petitions · 4
  5. 11:45 Continued Petitions Petitions · 3
  6. 12:00 Continued Petitions Petitions · 6
  7. 12:00 Continued Petitions Petitions · 3
  8. 12:00 Continued Petitions Petitions · 1
  9. 12:00 Continued Petitions Petitions · 4
  10. 12:00 Continued Petitions Petitions · 5
  11. 12:00 Continued Petitions Petitions · 1
  12. 12:00 Continued Petitions Petitions · 3
  13. 12:00 Continued Petitions Petitions · 1

The type of each item (debate, statement, questions, members’ business and so on) and the times shown are worked out by this site from headings, the chair’s opening words and the Official Report’s running timestamps. They are not the Parliament’s own classification. Text: the Scottish Parliament Official Report.