Drugs Strategy
Good morning. The first item of business today is a statement by Fergus Ewing on the drugs strategy. The minister will take questions at the end of his statement, so there should be no interventions or interruptions.
I am delighted to present to Parliament the first national drugs strategy since 1999. Indeed, "The Road to Recovery: A New Approach to Tackling Scotland's Drug Problem" is the first national drugs strategy since devolution.
There can be few more pressing issues for the second year of this Administration than tackling problem drug use. Scotland has, per head of population, more problem drug users than any other country in these islands, and more than most comparable European countries. We should not accept that as an inescapable fact of life.
Contrary to some perceptions, drug use is not glamorous. It severely damages health and in some cases kills—421 people in Scotland lost their lives to drugs in 2006; it undermines family life and relationships; it can lead people into crime and prostitution; and it can damage children and young people beyond repair.
The wider costs to society, which are estimated to amount to some £2.6 billion—£2,600 million—a year, are enormous and are mirrored by lost opportunities. Drug use is both a symptom and a cause of the health inequalities that afflict Scotland. If we want a more successful Scotland, in which all have opportunities to flourish, tackling problem drug use is not a task that we can avoid or ignore. As a society, together we need to face up to Scotland's drug problem.
I have been greatly encouraged by the highly constructive spirit of the discussions that I have had over the past year with all the parties that are represented in Parliament, which reflects the cross-party support that was expressed in Parliament last September for the development of a fresh approach to tackling drug misuse based on consensus. I hope that, over the next week, we can show that we have achieved that, and thereby send out from Parliament a powerful signal of common purpose.
The strategy's foundations were laid some time ago. As the incoming Minister for Community Safety, I was pleased to learn last May of the imminent publication of a series of wide-ranging expert reports on different aspects of the drugs problem. That consolidation of the evidence base provided an excellent basis for a wide-ranging series of discussions. I would like to place on record my thanks to everyone who contributed to that work, particularly the members of the Scottish Advisory Committee on Drug Misuse, who provided invaluable advice. This is not in the script, but I would also like to thank most sincerely my officials for their advice, support and energy.
Our vision is that recovery must be central to our new strategy and that it must be the guiding purpose of all drug treatment services. Recovery is, above all, about movement and dynamism. It is the principle whereby services should not just reduce risk and harm but support people to move on towards a drug-free life as active and contributing members of society. Recovery involves a person-centred approach that recognises that drug users come in units of one, each of whom has different aspirations and needs, will require different assistance to help them recover and will aim for different milestones along the way. That is entirely consistent with the approach that was set out in the recently reviewed and updated "Drug misuse and dependence: UK guidelines on clinical management", which are sometimes known as the orange guidelines, for obvious reasons.
Saying that more should be done to help people to move on is not a criticism of the dedication of practitioners in recent years to get more people into treatment. Governments should not second-guess clinicians or seek to disparage particular treatments, without which we would expose individuals and society to unwarranted risks. However, in the past there has not been enough focus on achieving positive outcomes for people who have drug problems, so we must make that a priority for the future. We will achieve such outcomes by reforming how drugs services are planned, commissioned and delivered. We are working with partners, including, of course, the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, to ensure that services deliver recovery outcomes in the context of the new single outcome agreements and national health service accountability arrangements. We will establish a new national support capacity to help to support local partners to deliver the recovery approach in drug services and we will embed recovery in training and workforce development.
However, our strategy is not just about treating people who have established drug problems—it takes a broad approach to preventing problem drug use. We believe that the most effective way to prevent future problem drug use is to create a more successful society that has sustainable economic growth, stronger families and communities, and more opportunities for all to flourish.
We are also taking action, through an expert group and by reforming the education system as part of curriculum for excellence, to sharpen up the delivery of substance misuse education in our schools, but the strategy recognises that education extends beyond schools. Parents, in particular, have a key role to play in educating and supporting young people, but that can be difficult if they do not think they know enough about drugs. That is why I am pleased to announce that the Government will provide a copy of the know the score publication "drugs: what every parent should know" to every family in Scotland. As a society, we need a better and more informed dialogue on such issues, and I hope that the provision of that publication will be helpful in that regard.
At the other end of the spectrum, parental drug use can have a serious and damaging effect on children. An estimated 40,000 to 60,000 children are affected by parental drug use, so it is crucial that we tackle the complex problems that children who live in such households face. The strategy builds on the improvements that have already been made under the banners of "Hidden Harm" and "getting it right for every child" but signals a change of emphasis towards support for children and families. It places the child firmly at the centre of agency responses and embeds in practice the principle of early intervention. We are setting in motion a programme of action to improve the identification of children who are at risk, to build the capacity of services, to strengthen the management of immediate risk and to develop an evidence base. We want to build on the extensive good practice on the ground.
Tackling the supply of illegal drugs remains an essential part of our new strategy. We want to strengthen the powers that we already have to recover assets and cash from criminals who benefit from unlawful conduct, including drug dealing, in an effort to make a lifetime of crime open to a lifetime of recovery. We want to continue the practice of channelling those moneys back into communities, so that young people have the choices and chances that they need.
We remain committed to breaking the cycle of drug addiction and crime by providing opportunities for treatment at all stages of the criminal justice system. For every £1 that is spent on treatment, at least £9.50 is saved in health and crime costs. Piloting the extension of drug treatment and testing orders—DTTOs—to lower-tariff offenders will contribute to those savings.
Our strategy sets out a new approach to achieving better quality and more consistent treatment across all prisons. In Her Majesty's prison in Edinburgh, we are piloting a new model of integrated care that aims to give people the best chance of recovery from their drug problems. We will also maximise the continuity of care between prison and release into the community by developing and implementing an information-sharing protocol between the prison and throughcare service.
From the justice portfolio alone, we are making available £94 million over the next three years to tackle drug misuse. I am pleased to announce today that health boards will receive a 3.8 per cent increase in funding for drug treatment services. However, that is not the whole picture, because funds from other general budgets that are allocated by Government to local authorities are also spent on tackling drug use. The report that Audit Scotland is undertaking on the scale and effectiveness of expenditure on drugs, which was announced by the Auditor General last year, will be critical in developing a stronger base to inform future spending.
Our strategy sets out a vision where fewer people start using drugs; where early intervention prevents and reduces the harms caused by drugs; where more people recover to make a positive contribution to society; and where communities are stronger and safer places to live and work. I hope that the strategy will have the whole-hearted support of all members when it is debated in the chamber next Wednesday.
We have around 30 minutes for questions, after which we will move on to the next item of business. It would be helpful, in managing that process, if members who wish to ask a question pressed their request-to-speak buttons now.
I thank the minister for providing a copy of the statement in advance.
Paragraph 31 of the statement says that the strategy
"sets out a vision where fewer people start using drugs; where early intervention prevents and reduces the harms caused by drugs; where more people recover to make a positive contribution to society".
It is difficult to disagree with that, and there may well be a consensus on it, but I am not convinced that it is exactly a new approach. The real test is what investment the Government will put into the strategy, and what responsibility it will take to achieve its goals.
The Government promised in its manifesto a 20 per cent increase in funding for drug treatment and rehabilitation, a national drugs commission and ring fencing for education on drugs misuse. Where are those promises in the strategy?
I have three specific questions to which I want answers. We require clarity on funding, so that we can see whether there is a real commitment. On the £94 million to which the minister referred, is that an increase in the justice budget over previous years or not? Does the 3.8 per cent for health boards represent new money? I also want to know how outcomes will be measured. I hope that there will be national responsibility for outcomes, and that the responsibility will not be solely that of COSLA and the NHS.
I am pleased that the statement recognises the importance of enforcement. Communities in Scotland want to see visible evidence that we are tackling drug dealers. The statement does not say anything about the shop a dealer campaign. Is the Government still committed to it? The enforcement part of the strategy is important.
Communities want to know that we are not just tackling the most notorious drug dealers, and that our legal framework ensures that every drug dealer—from the top to the bottom, the highest to the lowest—will be prosecuted and jailed, where we find them.
First, the Government is working extremely closely in partnership with COSLA on tackling drugs. Later today, I will make a joint statement with Councillor McColl to an audience of those who are directly involved in tackling drugs. We work in partnership, jointly and severally, with local government, and that will continue. We are all in this together. It is a matter not of apportioning blame but of trying to achieve greater success for Scotland.
Secondly, it is clear that the Government has increased the funding that is available to tackle drugs and drug misuse. A total of £94 million has been made available for the next three years in the justice portfolio, which is a substantial increase of 14 per cent. In addition to the funding that the Government provides, local authorities are devoting substantial resources to tackling the problem. Further, the Scottish Crime and Drug Enforcement Agency, the prisons, social work and the third sector are devoting huge resources to tackling it.
One of the things that I have done as Minister for Community Safety is to ask Audit Scotland to examine the whole area and to answer two fundamental questions that I believe have not been conclusively or clearly answered over the years. First, how much money is being devoted by all arms of government to addressing the drugs problem? Secondly, how effectively are the existing substantial resources being used and can we use them more effectively than we have done in the past? I am pleased to say that the Auditor General agreed to carry out a substantial piece of work on the issue. It is expected that his report will be available next spring. I welcome that, and I think that the Parliament will be able to learn a substantial amount from that corpus of work.
I, too, thank the minister for the advance copy of his statement. I also thank him for the constructive meetings in which he has engaged with my party in the past year.
Today should—indeed, must—be the start of a new chapter in Scotland and the beginning of a new fight in the battle against drugs abuse. I congratulate the Scottish Government on coming to terms with the failures of recent years, which have been characterised by an attempt merely to manage the problem rather than attack it head on. Too many addicts have been parked on methadone, and not enough has been done to move them to recovery.
The new national drugs strategy is years overdue, but it is very welcome. It marks a sea change in attitude and political will. When coupled with the essential—and it is essential—continuing audit of drugs services and spending, we will at last be able to chart the way forward to a new approach based on recovery and abstinence.
Scotland has found the political will to fight back. For too long we have left those who have surrendered their lives to drugs devastated and in despair. Let today be the day when we offered, from the Parliament, new hope and real help.
We need a question, Miss Goldie.
Turning to the statement, when the minister spoke of early intervention, he seemed to imply the prospect of more children being taken into care even earlier. Is that what he intends? In dealing with drug dealers, will the Scottish Government examine the Proceeds of Crime (Scotland) Act 1995 with a view to putting the onus of proof on criminals to prove that their assets were acquired legally, and not requiring the Crown to prove the propriety of that ownership? Will the minister consider extending DTTOs to all Scottish courts and to our children's hearings system?
I very much welcome the constructive approach of Annabel Goldie and the Conservatives towards the strategy, and that of the Lib Dems and the Greens. I hope that there was a shred of support for the principle of the strategy from the Labour Party as well—I am an optimist.
It was a great pleasure when Annabel Goldie joined me on a visit to the fv-tox project in Alloa in October. It was a double act in which both of us were entirely sincere in the lines that we took. I think that we are both committed to making a success of the new strategy and the new recovery approach that it sets out. I believe that the recovery approach has widespread support from all those who are involved in tackling drugs.
Annabel Goldie mentioned DTTOs. We believe that they have had a record of success. The evidence shows that those who are subject to DTTOs and the disciplined approach that they entail have a high success rate in achieving recovery. That is why we are piloting the extension of DTTOs to lower-tariff offenders in Lothian and Borders. We chose Lothian and Borders because DTTOs have been remarkably successful there, so if the pilot can succeed there, it should be possible to make it succeed in other parts of Scotland. Conversely, if it does not succeed in Lothian and Borders, that would provide lessons. We very much support the proposals that I acknowledge have come from the Conservatives on the extension of DTTOs. We have sought not to bring partisan politics to our approach in that regard, and I intend to keep it that way.
Annabel Goldie mentioned the importance of continuing work on enforcement. I have worked closely with Gordon Meldrum of the SCDEA and I applaud the agency's many successes in bringing drug dealers to boot and recovering their cash and confiscating their drugs. I am sure that all members support the successful work that the agency and the police do throughout Scotland. We are absolutely behind those efforts.
Annabel Goldie asked about the legal issue of the recovery of assets from criminals. I said in my statement and we state clearly in our strategy that it is essential that the state is able to recover assets from convicted criminals who have engaged in a lifetime of organised crime, particularly drug dealing. After a person has been convicted of a drug dealing offence, and if they have no obvious visible income, they will be asked to explain where the Ferrari, the yacht, the many houses and the bank accounts came from. It is common sense that in such circumstances there is a strong case for shifting the onus of proof.
The plight of children is at the heart of the strategy, as I think every member acknowledges. The 40,000 to 60,000 children who have a parent who abuses substances—drugs or alcohol—are extremely vulnerable. I have been working closely with my colleague Adam Ingram to tackle the issue, and I recently met leading organisations in the third sector that do a terrific job to help Scotland's most vulnerable children. We look forward to continuing to work with Annabel Goldie and her party and with all other members, to add to the excellent work that local authorities and the voluntary sector are doing.
I thank the minister for the advance copy of his statement and for the constructive manner in which he has engaged in discussions with me and my party's health spokesperson, Ross Finnie.
Drug abuse is a problem on a tragic scale, and not only is it a criminal justice matter, it fundamentally affects the health of our nation. We can ask only a few questions today, but we will pursue a number of issues in next week's debate and in the coming weeks, such as the need to tackle drug dealers and the need for proper investment in rehabilitation.
Given the need for early intervention to assist the families of drug users, how will services improve their ability to identify and target children who are not just at risk of immediate harm but are at greater risk of misusing drugs in the years to come?
The minister knows that we suggested a further roll-out of DTTOs, so we welcome the pilot for lower-tariff offenders. We are also keen for drugs courts to be extended beyond Glasgow and Fife. Has consideration been given to such a measure?
Will the minister confirm that in the range of options that are available to drug users, there is still a place for methadone prescription, when that is the right treatment for the individual? Are there plans to review how people on the methadone programme are dealt with and how their progress is monitored? How will the current approach change as a result of the strategy?
I thank Margaret Smith and her colleagues for engaging during the past year in building around the strategy a consensus that is free from partisan party politics. I welcome her party's approach.
I visited the Glasgow drugs court and discussed its work with sheriffs. I pay tribute to the sheriffs and everyone who supports them. They are committed to taking a fundamentally different approach on the bench, in which they become involved in seeing through sentences. I think that the approach has worked, but we need to evaluate it thoroughly. If it is demonstrated that the approach should be extended, we will give most careful consideration to the matter. Another issue is to do with educating sheriffs and giving them the proper training that they need. What we need might be not drugs courts but sheriffs who are fully trained and versed in the complex issues around helping individuals to recover.
Margaret Smith mentioned support for families. I had great pleasure in speaking at the annual general meeting of the Scottish Network for Families Affected by Drugs. I hope that we will continue to support SNFAD's excellent work at community level to support families. In many cases, the family provides the most direct support to people who are trying to tackle a drug addiction. That is why the publication "drugs: what every parent should know" is being sent to every family in Scotland. Although adults over a certain age might know quite a lot about the dangers of alcohol, they might know little about drugs. By providing the guide to every family, we will equip families and parents with the facts about drugs, educate them about the risks and empower them by setting out where help can be obtained. That is an excellent initiative.
I think that all members who have been involved in the debate about methadone would acknowledge that it has a key role to play in treatment. It was introduced in response to the serious threat of AIDS and other health problems. However, although we have been fairly good at getting people onto methadone treatment programmes, we have been less good at getting them off methadone and into full recovery.
I stress that recovery is not just an end point; it is a journey that is different for every person. That is why our approach is informed by the publication "Essential Care: a report on the approach required to maximise opportunity for recovery from problem substance use in Scotland", which was produced by Brian Kidd and his team. The report points out that individuals have different needs if they are to achieve recovery and that everyone is entitled to be treated individually.
We come to questions from back benchers—I emphasise "questions", as I did in yesterday's meeting. We do not have time for speeches or lengthy preambles. A number of members want to ask questions, and I can take no time out of the next debate, which is already oversubscribed.
I welcome the statement. Does the minister acknowledge that, in the north-east, the lack of access to treatment has been a significant problem? Does he welcome the recent reduction in the number of people waiting for treatment from 780 to 640? Will he encourage the development in the north-east of a wider range of services to tackle the wide range of problems that he identified?
Brian Adam and I attended a meeting in Aberdeen to discuss the serious problem that has existed in the area for a long time. I welcome his support and his advocacy of his constituents' interests and I acknowledge that there has been a particular problem in the area. That is why I visited the area and why more resources have been made available to tackle the problem. We are closely monitoring continuing efforts in that regard. I hope and am confident that the new approach in our strategy will involve a focus on people's need for extra help to get off methadone and become drug free.
Of course members of all parties seek consensus, but we must also hold the Government to account. In its manifesto, the Scottish National Party made a commitment to
"a 20 per cent increase in funding for drug treatment and rehabilitation programmes."
In the current spirit of consensus, I ask the minister to say whether that manifesto commitment will be met.
I have made it clear that the Government is allocating substantial additional resources—an increase of 14 per cent over the next three years. However, as I have already pointed out, that is not the whole picture. Local government and the third sector are also contributing resources to deal with the problem. If it were as simple as signing a cheque and all would be well, we would sign a cheque, but it is not that simple. That is why we have asked the Auditor General to investigate not only the totality of funding from all Government departments and agencies but the effectiveness of spending.
Is there a member in the chamber today who can put their hand on their heart and say that every £1 million that is spent on the problem is well spent? I cannot say that, which is why we have asked the Auditor General to examine the matter. It is not about throwing money at a problem. If there has ever been a more complex, ingrained problem as that of tackling the grip of drug addiction, I do not know what it is. Tackling it requires the continued devotion of many people, who help users with problems and do a job that few of us would like to do. In more than 50 visits around Scotland, I have seen at first hand the results of the work that people do on the ground. We want to praise that work and reinvigorate and energise those people, rather than argue about percentage points and cash and throw money at the problem.
I warmly welcome Mr Ewing's statement, and I congratulate him on his energetic and enthusiastic contribution to tackling Scotland's drug problem.
What impact does he believe that booklets such as "drugs: what every parent should know" will have on future drug use? Does he believe that parents will be in a better position to address drugs issues within their families?
The information that we are providing to parents will have a significant impact. Of course, it is always difficult to measure the precise impact of prevention efforts, education and information campaigns—it is not really possible to do so in a scientific sense—but I will give one example. The cost to society of one drug addict in Scotland with a problematic habit is £50,000 per year. Over 10 years, that person will cost Scotland £0.5 million. That costs more than the exercise of providing every family in Scotland with the "drugs: what every parent should know", which provides information to parents that I believe they would not otherwise have. If that helps 10 or 100 parents to address earlier the problems that they see in their son or daughter, and to identify earlier the problems of a young teenager who is starting to get into the grip of addiction, the cost will be repaid many times over. That is why I am proud and delighted that we are taking this initiative.
I will save my detailed comments for the debate on the drugs strategy next week, but I have a couple of specific questions. Has the minister dropped the previous Administration's target of getting an additional 10 per cent of people with drug problems into treatment? When will the delivery reform group that is working on an outcomes-based framework produce a report? There was no mention of alcohol and drug action teams in the minister's statement. How does cutting the funding to data-sharing partnerships—from £150,000 per year to £50,000 per year in the Lothians—help to deliver on the information sharing that the minister believes is fundamental to the delivery of the part of his strategy that relates to children?
I thank Richard Simpson for his input in relation to the drugs strategy. I know that he played a significant role in his ministerial career, not least in establishing the 218 service in Glasgow, which I have visited and which does an excellent job.
It is no secret that the key to the strategy is delivery and implementation. That is the next step, to which Shona Robison, Adam Ingram and I are devoted. We accept that the evidence base is poor, particularly in relation to the unacceptably high level of drug-related deaths in Scotland. One death is too many; 421 deaths is, frankly, a disgraceful figure. That is why we are establishing a database to record more accurately the circumstances and facts surrounding the deaths of those individuals. It is, I think, admitted that we do not have a sufficient information base.
On evidence gathering, I have been disappointed by the lack of up-to-date evidence. Even the evidence on the number of methadone users and problematic drug users is somewhat out of date. We will therefore devote considerable time and effort to improving how we garner and record data.
On targets, we are working closely with COSLA and the third sector to develop single outcome agreements. The way in which the Government can assist by providing national support capacity will be key. That is the main task that SACDM will undertake over the next six months. I look forward to working closely with Richard Simpson in fulfilling that task, because it will be key to the strategy's success.
In autumn last year, Shona Robison and I brought together the leaders of the ADATs from all over Scotland. It was the first time that they had met for some years. They recognise that there is a lack of clarity in the teams' function and a lack of clear lines of accountability. It is early days yet, but SACDM is addressing that as its key priority over the coming months. That work is necessary in order to achieve the success for which we aim.
How will the drugs strategy be integrated across Government departments and local agencies, not only to ensure that people break their addiction, but to enable them to get back into education, training and employment and to help them with housing? Housing is an enormous problem for those who come through the system in Inverness.
Many people with a drug problem also have an underlying mental health problem. How will the minister ensure that people are treated for their mental health issues at the same time as they receive treatment for their drug addiction?
Mary Scanlon is right: there is a close connection between those who have a mental health problem and those who have an addiction problem. The authorities are very often dealing with the same cohort of people. There are clear links between drug addiction and homelessness and a lack of housing. That has been a particular problem in Inverness, and I know that Mary Scanlon has pursued that issue energetically.
Mary Scanlon asked how Government directorates are working together. I have worked closely at all times with Shona Robison and Adam Ingram, and I have had several meetings during the development of the strategy with interested parties across the board. It is equally important that those who are involved at the local level work closely together. It is encouraging that we have seen excellent examples of that. For example, throughcare services in Edinburgh are leading the way by providing housing to those who have come out of prison and thereby offering them some chance that they will not relapse. There are many more examples of such provision throughout Scotland, but if Mary Scanlon has specific examples of where more needs to be done, I will be happy to examine them.
The minister is specific on funding in saying that health boards will receive a 3.8 per cent increase. Under the present funding settlement for local authorities, Highland Council has to achieve savings. Is the spend to which the minister refers in the final part of paragraph 29 in my copy of his statement within the local government settlement or in addition to it?
The Government will release the funding that I mentioned to health boards over the next three years to fund drug treatment and rehabilitation services. As I said, the increase will be 14 per cent over three years, and 3.8 per cent this year. Health boards will receive £24.6 million in 2008-09 to provide services, which is a 3.8 per cent increase on the 2007-08 allocation of £23.7 million. In addition, money is going to the health boards to support alcohol and drug action teams.
Jamie Stone mentions local government, which is a topic that has been well canvassed in the chamber. Local authorities have received a fair settlement from the Government. Our removing the shackles of more than 60 ring-fenced funds will allow local authorities to tackle local priorities more effectively—without 60 little piggy banks to administer, to do bookkeeping for, to make journal entries for and to account for. Local authorities can now devote their efforts to tackling problems directly. Of course, they will have tough choices to make and, like this Government, they will not always be Mr Popular. However, we are working closely with local government, which is why Ronnie McColl and I will make a statement on these topics at a press conference later today.
Time is getting tight. If I am to call everybody who has requested to speak, I must ask for strictly one question per member. Brevity is the key word, and I am afraid that that must apply to the answers as well.
We surely all agree with the minister that helping people to come completely off drugs is the gold standard and a worthy aim of treatments. However, in my experience, the main problem for people is not coming off drugs but staying off drugs when continuing to live in the circumstances that caused the drug misuse in the first instance. Will the minister elaborate on how the problem can be tackled, bearing in mind that extra-favourable treatment of drug misusers might cause resentment among non-drug-users?
We must emphasise that treatment for drug misuse can be effective. It is not all doom and gloom. I have seen many examples of young people in particular who have succeeded in achieving abstinence. In my statement I mentioned the orange guidelines, which set out expert advice to clinicians who deal with drugs management in Scotland. The guidelines make it clear that a significant proportion of people who enter treatment—between a quarter and a third of them—achieve long-term, sustained abstinence.
However, we believe that a new approach is required—a new approach of recovery, of encouraging abstinence and of finding ways of helping people to get off methadone. Those people may have been on methadone for many years.
Drugs ruin lives. For people to recover their self-respect, their self-esteem and their confidence so that they can obtain a job or a house, they may need many different types of intervention. That is why we are absolutely committed to the task. If we can achieve success, I do not think that there will be resentment of the type that the member mentions.
I welcome the minister's statement and his objective of setting in motion a programme of action to improve the identification of children at risk and to build capacity in services. In his meeting later today with COSLA, will he discuss the funding of core children's services—where the gap between the grant-aided expenditure funding allocation and actual local government spending is massive, to the detriment of children? How will the action programme ensure that information will indeed be shared to the benefit of children at risk? That has so far been difficult to achieve. Will the—
Briefly please, Mr McNeil.
Will the action programme include legislation, if necessary, to ensure that information is shared?
If it can be demonstrated that legislation is necessary, that route will always be considered. Much progress has been made, with agencies working together, in identifying children at risk. Duncan McNeil has raised the topic consistently in the Parliament for many years, as have many others.
Just last week, Adam Ingram and I met a number of charities involved in providing intervention assistance to the most vulnerable children in Scotland. We have adopted the approach of the getting it right for every child agenda. The needs of children are at the heart of the issue. General practitioners must share information about children if they believe that they are at risk. That is in the orange guidelines; the Hippocratic oath is overridden where the interests of children at risk are concerned.
However, I must sound a cautionary note. When Adam Ingram and I met the children's charities last week, some of them said that placing too much focus on identification can detract from the work that those charities have to do every day to provide help and support services for children who have already been identified as being at risk.
We need to consider information sharing in the round. This Government has taken the step of providing a line that people in communities can call if they believe that a child is at risk. We hope that, with that additional mechanism, we will be able to tackle the problems that Duncan McNeil correctly raises.
I am afraid that we will have to move on to the next item of business. I apologise to those whom we were not able to call.