Chamber and committees

There are no further questions, so we move to the formal debate on the affirmative instrument on which we have just taken evidence from the cabinet secretary. I remind the committee that members should not put questions to the cabinet secretary during the formal debate and officials may not speak in the debate.

Cabinet secretary, do you wish to say anything further on the motion?

Thank you. That concludes consideration of the instrument. I thank the cabinet secretary for his time and his officials for attending.

At our next meeting, we will take evidence from Cricket Scotland and sportscotland to get an update on their response to the independent review of racism in Scottish cricket. We will then take evidence from representatives of Food Standards Scotland. That concludes the public part of our meeting today.

We have a number of supplementary questions and we will start with one from Tess White.

Thank you. I am very grateful to the cabinet secretary for his opening statement, which has helped to set the scene for our questions. I will begin with broad questions before we move to questions from colleagues.

The petitioners have outlined the various challenges with regard to geography, access to services and availability of staff, and you have touched on much of that, cabinet secretary. Given the wider structural challenges in relation to the way that the NHS is set up and operates in many of the relevant communities, has any thinking been done about structures and how the NHS operates at board level in those communities? Do we need to look at how boards operate? Do we need to consider devolving more power to local communities? Have there been conversations about that? A great deal of what the petitioners have asked for is about decision making being more localised. Do you want to comment on that?

I will move to a question on something that you have referenced—the work that is being done on a national centre for remote and rural healthcare. As a committee, we are keen to understand how success will be measured in that innovation. It would be useful to have an update on the progress on developing that centre. Sir Lewis Ritchie might want to comment, but I will come to the cabinet secretary first.

I said in my response to Jamie Greene that I am cognisant of that third sector funding. The minister and I have discussed, in particular, the third sector providers that I mentioned. There is an issue, however, about baseline funding, which ensures that third sector providers can meet their core obligations and remain financially viable, over and above the additional funding that is levered in, so further discussion is needed in that space.

We need to ensure, too, that ADPs are front and centre of our response and that they continue to receive support so that they can move forward in communities. I stress that this is not about scoring partisan political points; it is a genuine belief and offer from me in my role. We have to acknowledge some of the discussion that has been had with Audit Scotland, for example, in relation to overarching plans for the drug and alcohol problem. The Parliament’s own Public Audit Committee considered that the scale of the drug and alcohol problem that Scotland faces is perhaps not always fully understood because of a lack of available data.

We have to look at things such as medication-assisted treatment standards and the Government’s commitment on them. The goal posts have been shifted. Full implementation of the standards was originally planned for April 2022, but as we have heard already, that has shifted. We want decisive action to ensure that the date is not delayed further, because the MAT standards will be crucial in moving forward and dealing with the issues.

I am very conscious of the time, Presiding Officer.

Families and communities need the Scottish Government to meet the magnitude of the moment. The focus must now shift to a relentless programme of delivery and implementation of meaningful steps to properly address this public health emergency. It has to start immediately with the MAT standards and full publication of a workforce plan for alcohol and drug partnerships.

I move amendment S6M-07469.2, to insert at end:

“; regrets that over 12,000 people in Scotland have tragically lost their lives to drugs since 2007; notes that it is three and a half years since the Scottish Government established its Drug Deaths Taskforce, but that the most recent figures show the second highest number of drug-related fatalities on record; is concerned by the slow progress with implementing the Medication Assisted Treatment standards, in addition to concerns that the proposed National Care Service could distract from Alcohol and Drug Partnerships (ADP) in delivering these standards, and calls on the Scottish Government to urgently publish a workforce action plan for ADPs.”

I am not sure. Is there time in hand?

Okay.

In opening the debate for Scottish Labour, I would like first to take the opportunity to commend the work that was done previously on the issue by my colleague, Claire Baker. She has been a strong advocate for people who are affected by addiction, their families and communities, and has had a relentless and forensic evidence-based focus on the Scottish Government’s work and on what more we can do in terms of finding new solutions that have been proved to have an impact in other parts of the world. That is certainly the vein in which we intend to continue to approach the issues.

We are debating the subject early in this new year. In doing so, we reflect once again on the tragic costs of drugs deaths in Scotland in the year past. As always, I seek to put at the heart of our debate those who are bereaved and, indeed, all those who continue to live in pain.

I know that members across the chamber want to see tangible progress being made on drug deaths and are supportive of action that serves to meet that objective. Scottish Labour supports the objective of the national drugs mission, which is to tackle the public health emergency of drug deaths.

We acknowledge the Government’s having provided its response to the “Changing Lives” report today, and the list of 80 actions that have been taken across Government. I recognise some of what Sue Webber said about availability of that information, but I am grateful to the minister for provision of that response. There is much in the document. Of course, we support concerted Government action across all portfolios. However, we must ensure that we do not lose ourselves in the detail and that we are making the right progress on the actions that can make the most difference.

There has been a myriad of reports—10 in two years. We must ensure that the reports and action plans do not just sit on shelves, but are backed by delivery and support for people in their lived experience. That means that we, in Scottish Labour, must be honest and call out areas where we feel that still not enough is being done, as well as issues on which the Government is still falling short, even by its own standards. It has been three and a half years since the Government established the Scottish Drugs Deaths Taskforce but, tragically, the most recent figures show the second-highest number of drug-related fatalities on record in Scotland, and bring the total number of drugs-related deaths since 2007 to over 12,000.

It has been almost two years since the First Minister announced a national mission to tackle the drug deaths crisis. However, progress has often been slow—indeed, it has often been painfully slow for so many people.

Jamie Greene has made an excellent point about areas where there are substantial challenges. My colleague Michael Marra will, no doubt, speak about Dundee and the experience there.

Having met service providers in Inverclyde, I think that it is clear that there has to be more resource. That is needed just to keep the lights on and the doors open in many of the third sector services. I have had correspondence with the minister on that issue and am keen to work on supporting those organisations, as well. We need a relentless focus on areas where the issues stubbornly persist. I am sure that we will hear much about that from around the country, in the debate.

I am concerned that, to date, Scotland has no drug-checking facilities, and that we have not yet got a single overdose prevention centre. The latest estimate of the number of people who are living with substance dependence in Scotland is over seven years old, having been published for 2015-16. In addition, the Government has not yet provided a workforce plan to overcome the workforce challenges that are experienced across our health and social care services, and which are particularly acute in addiction and rehabilitation services.

I am also concerned about cuts to alcohol and drug partnerships and to third sector providers and others, which have been exacerbated, as I have just mentioned, by the cuts to local government funding. Indeed, we should all be concerned about the role that ADPs will have and about the associated discussions around them, as the Government presses forward with the national care service.