On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I do not know whether my vote registered. I would have voted yes.

To ask the First Minister what assessment the Scottish Government has made of reports that incidents of bullying in NHS Scotland have risen by nearly 50 per cent in five years. (S6F-01255)

Presiding Officer and minister, I apologise for my lateness today.

Will the minister outline what urgent action the Scottish Government is taking to address workforce shortages among ADPs?

The picture is particularly alarming in the north-east, with reported cases having tripled in NHS Tayside and doubled in NHS Grampian. Those cases will have had a deeply damaging effect on the mental health of staff at a time when recruitment and retention are endemic issues in our NHS.

The First Minister mentioned the Sturrock review. What assessment has been made of whether lessons from the Sturrock review of bullying in NHS Highland have been implemented by health boards? What urgent steps is the Scottish Government taking to ensure that health boards foster an open and tolerant workplace culture in the future?

The reality is that many of us will have care needs at some point in our lifetimes. At other points, we might need to deliver care to a loved one. However, it is clear that the status quo in social care cannot continue. We have seen several initiatives from this SNP Government to address the worsening situation, but social care has suffered from a gap between what was promised and what has been delivered.

Just this week, a GP from Laurencekirk healthcare centre in my region reported that social care shortages mean that

“things are becoming potentially unsafe.”

A general manager from NHS Grampian added:

“the biggest challenge we have is access to care packages ... That gap of unavailability of care packages for these patients slows down the whole of the system.”

Figures show that in Aberdeen city, 38 per cent of care services are reporting vacancies. In Aberdeenshire, the figure is 34 per cent; in Dundee, it is 37 per cent; and in Angus, it is 21 per cent. The main reason why services find it hard to fill vacancies is that there are too few applicants with experience.

The social care system is under immense strain from a pandemic, but, as the Feeley review emphasised,

“the vast majority of the challenges we are addressing ... pre-dated Covid-19 and will outlive the pandemic”.

That has happened not just under the SNP’s stewardship; but under Scottish Labour’s.

Scottish Labour’s proposals and the SNP-Green Government’s National Care Service (Scotland) Bill failed to measure up to the significant social care challenges that face us, from an ageing population that is putting more pressure on supply to poor workforce planning. The income from non-residential social care charges is invested in high-quality social care services.

Meanwhile, the SNP-Green Government’s National Care Service (Scotland) Bill will pave the way for a centralising, bloated bureaucracy that will be established by the end of the current session of Parliament, years from now. At an estimated cost of £1.3 billion, the creation of such a bureaucracy will divert precious resources away from the front line. Hundreds of back-office staff will be employed to oversee a top-down system that scraps local accountability. [Interruption.] The minister might not be interested in what I have got to say, but it is respectful to at least listen to contributions.

Why should care in Aberdeenshire, Angus, Aberdeen and Dundee be dictated from St Andrew’s house in Edinburgh?

Earlier this year, Audit Scotland stated firmly and unequivocally that

“A clear plan is needed now to address the significant challenges facing social care in Scotland based on what can be taken forward without legislation”.

The Scottish Conservatives have published commonsense policy recommendations for how care can be improved now, without top-down reform, which include a local care guarantee to make sure that no individual has to access care miles away from their community. It is important that individuals have access to care that is not miles away from their community, family and support networks. At the very least, I hope that there is consensus on that point in the chamber this afternoon.

In its guidance, the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities cautions that eliminating charges will “restrict” the quality of support that is provided to the general population who rely on such services. Simply put, Labour’s plan risks taking money away from the front line.

It is reassuring to hear the cabinet secretary state that active consideration is being given to the best model for ensuring ready access to ligature cutters, which are a hugely important preventative piece of equipment that can save lives. In Scotland, SPS staff have to collect ligature cutters from a communal area; in England and Wales, they have been introduced for all front-line staff. The cabinet secretary likes to use the phrase “at pace”, so when will that vital tool be made accessible?

No, that was very thorough. Thank you.

I have found this morning’s session really interesting and I have learned a lot, so I thank the panellists for their evidence.

Dr Cawston talked about creating systems—I am summarising—that are a step on to the pavement. A general theme has been the importance of local assets and infrastructure. Dr McDaid mentioned the impact of the loss of local libraries, while Professor Marmot talked about a state of helplessness.

I realise that this is a really complex subject, but in developing resilience and the reasonable prices that Professor Meier talked about, is there a single practical action that would have a dramatic impact? At our previous meeting, we talked about sport, and there was a theme of opening up school estates to communities to improve local health equality. What are the panel members’ thoughts on taking a single action such as opening up school estates to communities so that those assets are available? Can each of you think of something better?