Thank you. Those were very helpful responses.

I picked up that we want to avoid any sense that interventions would appear paternalistic, or any sense that things are being done to people. From what the witnesses have said, it is very much about collaboration between the link worker and the patient.

I will go back to Roseann Logan on her point about the pathway into sport. Is any work being done to look at how people who have had an initial block of training to access sports are subsequently encouraged or supported to join a local club that is free? Very often, a lot of the barriers are about having the confidence to join a club that is free and get involved. I wonder whether there is a sense that link workers could train and support someone initially and then help them to access the free clubs that already exist in our communities. I am keen to understand how common that is.

There has been increased demand for the NHS 24 telephony service; people want contact via the phone. I have raised the issue before in this committee. That has led to pressure, so sometimes calls go unanswered, which none of us wants to happen. What more do we need to do to bolster and support the service? Dr Perry, do you think that it is a question of call handling and clinical staff capacity? What else needs to be done?

Yes. I was referring to the challenges over the winter, when calls have, perhaps, gone unanswered. I was asking how we can ensure that that does not happen and about solutions to deal with the pressures.

A lot of the answers and discussion have been peppered by mention of the barriers that exist to accessing the sorts of pathways and interventions that there are. I am interested in your views about the potential for the exacerbation of inequalities.

Roseann Logan talked about the need for support and for someone to be accompanied to certain activities and have that intervention. In its written evidence, the alliance spoke about some of the challenges in relation to passes for sports and leisure activities. For example, if someone has never had the support to learn to swim and is given a leisure pass that ends after six weeks, would that increase those barriers, because that person would feel like it did not help them? Related to that, is the financial barrier to being able to continue with some of those activities after that six-week period too high? I am sorry—I appreciate that that was a lot. I drew some of that from the alliance’s evidence, so does Roseann want to start?

I want to explore that further. Chris Mackie’s point about who can support and advise is interesting. I am keen on what we can do in libraries in Scotland. I raised that point previously with Citizens Advice Scotland, which talked about some of its services. I am not sure, however, that there is universal coverage by such services. There is an opportunity to do more on that. Do the witnesses have reflections on that? Do the people whom Adam Stachura deals with through Age Scotland, for example, interact with library services?

I thank the minister for advance sight of his statement, and I agree that it is completely unacceptable that people who have learning disabilities and complex needs are still being forced to live far away from home or are stuck in hospital. Indeed, the situation has been described by people who have learning disabilities and their families as a human rights scandal.

Action has been too slow and the situation has worsened. I pay tribute to organisations such as Enable Scotland and the Scottish Commission for People with Learning Disabilities for the campaigning on these issues that they have undertaken for many years, and for recently launching the #MyOwnFrontDoor campaign, which has called for delivery on five key actions.

I note that the minister has announced that the recommendation to deliver a national register, national support panel and specialist peer network will be implemented, but the #MyOwnFrontDoor campaign has also called for the closure of assessment and treatment units, an end to the practice of sending Scottish citizens out of the country, and the immediate implementation of a community-first principle in the support of adults and children in Scotland who have a learning disability, ending the commissioning of multibed units. How does the minister intend to make the swift progress in those areas that the campaign has called for—that is, by next year, rather than the 2024 timescale that he set out?

Specifically on delayed discharge, we know that more than 120,000 bed days were occupied in 2020-21 for code 9 reasons. That works out at 34 per cent of all bed days. Many of those people died while they were in hospital, not in their own community. What direct and swift action will be taken to ensure that people who have learning disabilities can live in their community with those whom they love, where they have every right to be?

It did, convener. Given the remarks that I just made about the importance to us all of the Promise, and given the degree to which the profile of people who have care experience—and, indeed, the care system itself—have been at the forefront in the past few years, I was quite surprised. The group is definitely of its time. It will provide a strong forum in which we, as decision makers, can continue to scrutinise that journey through hearing the voices of care-experienced young people.

I would also like to thank you, convener, for reminding colleagues that STAF is in the Parliament this week. Our stall continues today, and we have an event this evening. I will abuse my position slightly to plug that event, in case colleagues are around at 5.30 this evening.

Thanks, convener.

Thank you, convener, and good morning to colleagues on the committee. I am very pleased to be here this morning to share with you the intentions of the cross-party group on care leavers.

The establishment of the group arose from a sense that there was no dedicated focus for care leavers in the Parliament. We have a number of cross-party groups that cater for children who are currently looked after, and other cross-party groups cross-cut around social work and other issues. However, there was a sense that young people who are leaving the care system and young people who have lived experience of being in the care system do not have a voice in the cross-party group system.

As is summarised in the papers that the committee has received, the purpose of the group is

“to inform MSPs of the many social, emotional wellbeing and financial challenges which care leavers face”

via the forum of the CPG, which will seek to share information and knowledge about the experiences of care leavers and those who support them. We will work in collaboration across the other cross-party groups that I have mentioned, and I think that we will have a particularly strong relationship with the cross-party group on social work.

We intend to have a wide membership, which will be drawn from young people with lived experience and adults who have gone through the care system. We will seek to express their views, opinions and ideas to the Government and Parliament and to share their vision for what Scotland can be.

A core part of what the group will do could arise from the work that we are all committed to on the Promise. There is a sense that the cross-party group would want to contribute to the progress of the Promise and the scrutiny of the Promise, ensuring that we, as decision makers, as well as wider civic society in Scotland, keep the promise that we made to care-experienced young people and those leaving care across Scotland.

A number of other related issues will be discussed in the group, but, in summary, it will be about putting care leaver issues on the map and ensuring that a group that is often underrepresented is represented in our Parliament.

I have been contacted by constituents who work in test and protect in NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde. Following the First Minister’s announcements on Tuesday, the management told staff that they would be made redundant and would have only four weeks’ notice of that. That very evening, staff received a—frankly—tone-deaf letter that provided a web link for redundancy Scotland. I understand that that has not been the case in other boards, which have confirmed continuing employment until September and, indeed, redeployment in the national health service.

After almost two years of working to support people and protect all of us, and in the midst of the worst cost of living crisis in memory, surely those key workers deserve better than a web link and a thank you letter. Can the First Minster provide clarity on whether test and protect staff will be redeployed to other roles across the NHS in which they can continue the vital work that they have been doing so far?