Chamber and committees

I am grateful to my colleague Clare Adamson for securing this incredibly important debate during pancreatic cancer awareness month and ahead of world pancreatic cancer day. Since being elected in 2021, I have spoken in three debates brought to the chamber by my colleagues Clare Adamson and Willie Coffey during pancreatic cancer awareness month, and I will always feel that it is incredibly important to speak on the issue. I also extend my sincere thanks to wonderful charities such as Pancreatic Cancer Action Scotland and Pancreatic Cancer UK and to the other dedicated organisations that are at the forefront of raising awareness and fighting for better outcomes for those with pancreatic cancer.

Unfortunately, pancreatic cancer is a silent killer, because its early symptoms are difficult to spot, and only one in four people who is diagnosed with pancreatic cancer survives for more than a year. That is why raising awareness is so crucial to early detection and to improving patient experience and overall outcomes. It is therefore important to reiterate the common symptoms, which are: a yellow tinge to the skin or eyes; darker urine; paler poo; itchy skin; loss of appetite or losing weight without trying to; feeling tired or having no energy; a high temperature; and feeling hot or shivery.

Education is a powerful tool in the fight against pancreatic cancer and, although our understanding of the disease is somewhat limited, we know that factors such as smoking, obesity or a family history of the disease can increase the risk of getting it.

According to Pancreatic Cancer UK, about 900 people are diagnosed with pancreatic cancer in Scotland each year and more than 10,500 are diagnosed across the UK. They are our loved ones, friends and community members. Those figures are bleak, but it is important to highlight them so that we can call more urgently for greater action, because we need to do more.

Despite those challenges, there are glimmers of hope. We in Scotland are fortunate to have some of the best researchers and medical institutions working tirelessly to fight the disease. It was good to read about the University of Glasgow and NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde’s recent pancreatic cancer research programme, which will evaluate a new drug combination as a first-line treatment for patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer. That is a really important step in the pursuit of new treatments to improve the outcomes for individuals who are diagnosed with pancreatic cancer, and I really hope that it will prove to be successful.

The Scottish Government is committed to making progress through the Scottish HepatoPancreatoBiliary Network, which has been awarded £653,000 over two years to redesign the pancreatic and liver cancer treatment pathways. It is the first service in the United Kingdom to deliver a national approach to improving the pathways of both pancreatic and hepatocellular cancer patients. The project has resulted in significant improvements in patient care, across all 14 health boards, in the majority of performance indicators that are measured. It is welcome that consideration is being given to exploring the options for sustained delivery of its positive outcomes after March 2025.

I conclude by paying tribute to my constituents who have sadly lost their lives because of pancreatic cancer: Helen, Donald, Billy and Christine will be forever missed by family, friends and loved ones, but they will never be forgotten. We must work together in their memory, and in the memory of others, to do everything that we can to raise awareness of this disease and to push for better survival rates.

I am sure that they appreciate that. Receipt of a council tax reduction can in some cases be a good indication that a pension credit claim should be made. Are you aware of examples of council tax reduction records being used to help to target pensioners who may be entitled to pension credit?

I will come in on the back of Paul O’Kane’s comments. Cabinet secretary, in September, you wrote to the UK Government because you were concerned about the amount of mitigation that you are providing. You say that you cannot continue to mitigate the effects of UK policies, but we have been told:

“Read my lips: no austerity under Labour.”

What response did you get to that letter?

Good morning. It is welcome that the First Minister wrote to councils to seek assistance in the drive to increase the take-up of pension credits. I am aware of the good work that has been done in that regard in my constituency and across Scotland. Will the cabinet secretary put on record her appreciation of the work that local authorities are doing to increase pension credit take-up?

Great work has been done by the Movement for an Adoption Apology group, and it was a welcome development to see victims receive a formal apology from the Scottish Government.

However, a constituent of mine has expressed concern that, given the passage of time, the truth about the experiences of those who have been impacted will be lost. Has the Scottish Government given any consideration to working with mothers to enable their oral histories to be recorded and archived?

I was going to cover collaborative working, which has already been spoken about. I think that Dr Hosie covered that, so I am okay.

Thank you. I totally appreciate your comments. Certainly, when we compile our report, we will take that back to the Scottish Government.

Good morning. Lewis, you mentioned in your submission the need to strengthen the role of the national outcomes in policy and spending decision making. You have touched on this already, but is there anything that you want to add to that on any missed opportunities that there may be?

Good morning. The committee really appreciates the witnesses taking the time to be with us this morning.

Karin Earl, in your written submission, you say that you do not make payment of the real living wage a condition for your grant holders. Will you expand on why that is the case, and can you give examples of why funded projects might struggle to do so?

Neil Ritch, your position is similar. You ranked the issue at 1—as quite a low priority. Will you expand on why you did that?