Chamber and committees

Do you feel that the engagement of the third sector as a valued partner is working well in terms of the services having parity of esteem and those important professional conversations happening?

Okay. If I can briefly—

Yes, of course. Thank you, convener.

I welcome this debate, and I take the opportunity to join colleagues in saying to the First Minister that I wish him well after the past week. Indeed, it is nice to debate with him again. It is possible that we last did so when he was the health secretary and I was a shadow health minister. Perhaps we will have more time in the future to debate issues across the chamber.

I note what he said in his speech about this being a gendered issue. I also note what Douglas Ross said about the timetabling of the debate being quite rushed. I hope that we will soon have time to debate toxic masculinity, which was intended to happen in this slot. Those issues are important to women and girls, and they are important to men across the country, who can reflect on their responsibilities.

As I often do in debates, I will begin by pointing to the consensus in the chamber. We have already heard about the experiences of our constituents who are WASPI women. Scottish Labour welcomes the publication of the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman’s report. The PHSO has produced an incredibly detailed and serious piece of work. It fully merits and must be given thoughtful and purposeful consideration, and action is required.

The report lays out clearly that there were failings in communications about changes to the state pension age. Labour opposed it when George Osborne took the decision to accelerate increases in the state pension age without giving sufficient notice to the women who were affected—an action that has, rightly, angered them.

On behalf of my party, I say to all WASPI women, including those who are in the gallery today and whom we represent, that we thank them for their efforts and congratulate them, as the Government’s motion does, on the work that they have done to bring the report to this point. Indeed, I have had the opportunity to talk to many impacted constituents and WASPI campaigners, including recently at the drop-in event that the First Minister referred to, which I thank Clare Haughey for arranging.

The PHSO has been clear that it is now for Government to respond, and that it must do so at pace. WASPI women have been waiting long enough, so the current UK Government must set out how it will take forward the recommendations and next steps. I have to say that the current UK Government has been slow to act on a range of injustices, whether that be the Post Office scandal or the infected blood scandal, which members will know are serious concerns of injustice at this time.

Although we appreciate that there is a process to be gone through and detailed work to be done, it is clear that the work and pensions secretary and the Government must respond with speed, because people have waited too long. Very often, on other issues, as I have mentioned, that slowness to act can cross the line into what feels like apathy and a lack of feeling towards those who are victims of those injustices.

It is crucial that we listen to the experience of those women who have fought and campaigned over many years and who have been seriously impacted by these issues. The Government needs to take the responsibility to engage with them and other stakeholders on how it will address the findings.

Let me be absolutely clear—[Interruption.] Labour supports the delivery of justice for WASPI women, but we have also been absolutely clear—[Interruption.]

The First Minister’s photo has appeared on the screens in the chamber. I assume that that means that he wishes to intervene. I am not sure when that photo was taken, but he certainly does not look like that at the end of the week that he has had—he may in the future. [Laughter.] I will give way.

Good morning to the panel. The committee has been interested in the progress of the MAT standards and has sought to scrutinise and track them. It is fair to say that the most recent benchmarking data that we have from Public Health Scotland found implementation to be patchy, and there has been slippage in the timescales for full delivery in community and justice settings, with 66 per cent of standards 1 to 5 being fully implemented and 88 per cent of standards 6 to 10 being partially implemented.

We are keen to get a sense of where the barriers are. We have read in written submissions about the challenges around what has been described as “a postcode lottery” and around some infrastructure not being in place. Does Dr Fletcher want to reflect on progress and on her views on the barriers to full implementation?

My final question in the context of the MAT standards is about the timescale that the minister has offered, which is April 2025 for full implementation. Given the challenges and opportunities that you outlined, are we essentially on track to have meaningful delivery by that date? I know that it is hard to say, but it would be good to get a view, because we have the minister before the committee in the next session.

Minister, you might have heard the evidence on MAT standards. I am keen to know your position on the implementation of the MAT standards to the timescales that have been set out. They should be implemented by 2025 and embedded by 2026. We heard quite a bit of evidence this morning about what is happening on the ground when it comes to the challenges that exist, particularly as regards needing a more holistic approach, perhaps, and going beyond opioids and looking at wider issues. Will you comment on that?

Dr Knighton, do you want to add anything about the third sector?

We have already touched on this. We need a sense of what is working within the strategy that goes beyond any overall reduction in the number of deaths by suicide to look at some of the other aspects that were outlined in evidence today and that would work. What should the Government measure and how should the Government report on spending, which is also of interest to us?

Let us move on to talk about what is working in the strategy and measuring success. Professor O’Connor touched on this. A reduction in the overall number of suicide deaths is not sufficient in terms of the measurements that we are trying to make. What further reporting do we need on that? On the financial element, is it important that the Government is willing to put down in black and white exactly where and how money is spent and to report that to Parliament and those who are invested in the strategy?