I am delighted to bring this vital topic to the chamber for a members’ business debate. I thank colleagues from across the chamber for supporting the motion, and I look forward to hearing their contributions.

In the Scottish Parliament, we often debate Scotland’s ageing population and the various ramifications of that for health services, communities, families and quality of life. Of course, the fact that people are living longer is a good thing, and it should be celebrated—nothing could be better than being able to spend more years with our loved ones. However, as parliamentarians, we cannot afford to ignore the challenges that it presents, too.

Like almost all western countries, Scotland has a declining birth rate and, on top of that, the number of those who are aged over 60 is projected to increase by 50 per cent by 2033. That is especially true for the area that I live in and represent. South Ayrshire is the fastest-ageing local authority area in Scotland, and, by 2043, one fifth of its population will be over the age of 75. I will speak later about the significant impact that that is having on the local population and on providers.

We have heard many times about the various pressures that that will place on the healthcare system, including the number of staff who are needed and the resources that are required. We have also heard about the imbalance that exists, with a smaller working-age population paying taxes to support an increasing number of people who have served their time at the coalface and now deserve to enjoy retirement knowing that there is a stable and reliable healthcare system behind them.

Today, I will talk specifically about audiology services. As my motion states, it is estimated that more than 900,000 people in Scotland are living with age-related hearing loss. As a result of that increasing number, services across the country appear to be struggling to keep up. I appreciate that the Scottish Government has identified that area as a key priority for improvement, and I hope that today’s debate will go some way towards helping with that improvement.

We know from research that waiting times for various audiology appointments are too long, and some people can be left for several months without getting the help that they need. We know that, as with almost every other service in the national health service, provision is under so much strain, and hard-working staff are struggling to keep up with an ever-growing workload.

However, there is more to it than that. Hearing loss is different from many other ailments that are frequently debated in the chamber. It can be hard for an elderly person to come to terms with the fact that their hearing is worsening. It can often be years before someone can be persuaded to seek help, and, by that point, significant damage will have been done. Social isolation, depression and loneliness are all exacerbated by hearing loss and, worst of all, it has been identified as the single largest avoidable risk factor for dementia.

Therefore, improving services must also take account of what we can do to encourage elderly people and their families to step forward, and, when they do, we must ensure that the NHS is ready for them, and not just at the first appointment. The aftercare system is equally crucial, especially as research suggests that people can abandon things such as hearing aids if they do not get comfortable with them quickly. We also need to ensure that services such as those that provide maintenance and battery replacements for hearing aids are up to scratch, especially in rural areas.

A number of private providers step up, too, such as Specsavers, and we should not be afraid to listen to those organisations when it comes to creating the very best services. Last year, I met members of the Specsavers team in Ayr to learn about the work that they are doing to support people with hearing difficulties. Thomas Allison, the audiology director, and Linda Fulton, the retail director, spoke at length about the challenges that people in the area face. They are aware of the demographic challenges in NHS Ayrshire and Arran, where they estimate that nearly a quarter of the population have some form of hearing loss.

About 4,000 adults in the health board area are waiting for their first appointment for hearing issues, and the average waiting time is anywhere between 18 months and two years. Specsavers staff in Ayr hear horror stories every day from locals, many of whom have come to Specsavers because they have given up on the NHS.

I also heard about how things are different in England, where an any qualified person scheme is in operation. That means that some of the care that is usually provided in hospitals can be provided on the high street as long as those who are providing it are qualified. Given that Specsavers has a proven infrastructure for providing such services elsewhere in the United Kingdom, it would surely be of use to Scotland, including Ayrshire, too. The team told me about the importance of creating a positive environment for people to come in for follow-up care and about how many returning customers enjoyed chatting with the staff while getting their hearing aids cleaned.

Working alongside our NHS, companies such as Specsavers can contribute to building an audiology landscape that is ready for the demographic evolution that we face. I know that there have, in the past, been tensions between official audiology services and what is offered on the high street, and we must all work together to ensure that those two strands work with each other, rather than in opposition. We might even get to the point at which more patients could have their hearing loss managed in the community, which would take the pressure off hospitals and could even save money.

The Scottish Government has, in the past, stated that it would like audiology care to be on a par with what is offered in eye care services, and I fully agree with that aspiration. We do not always find consensus in the chamber, but I hope that, on this issue, we can come up with a plan to help the hundreds of thousands of elderly people struggling with their hearing who need exactly that.

As I mentioned, there are professionals in Ayr who deal with this kind of thing every day. They know better than anyone the challenges that we face, but they have some solutions, too, and MSPs would benefit very much from listening to them.

I finish by mentioning something that a doctor told me last week. We had actually met to discuss women’s healthcare, and she had great ideas about how to improve the service that we currently give, but she said one thing that could apply to all areas, which is that we can choose to deliver the service differently. That is what we need to do.

The minister needs to take responsibility for the cuts that his Government has made to youth work at the same time as serious assaults by teenagers have increased by 600 per cent. YouthLink Scotland’s chief executive officer says that there is a direct link between the number of council youth workers in Scotland falling by 50 per cent in eight years on the Scottish National Party’s watch and the increase in youth crime. Does the minister agree with him?

The Scottish National Party promised to abolish NHS dental charges. However, patients in Ayrshire cannot register with NHS practices and are being forced to go private. I contacted 24 dental practices in the area, and not a single one is currently accepting new NHS patients.

What is the point of having free dental care if people cannot access it? What is the minister doing to fix that? Has the Government increased the number of funded university places for dentistry? What concrete steps is the Government taking to ensure that patients can access the free, high-quality NHS dentistry that they were promised?

To ask the Scottish Government what steps it is taking to support dental practices. (S6O-04694)

You are saying that such a law would have a huge impact in increasing public awareness, but—

However, the one thing that we do not want is to decrease prosecutions.

I have a question for Liliana Torres Jiménez. Unlike the other two submissions that we have mentioned, yours says:

“We have a neutral view on the creation of a standalone offence of NFS.”

However, further on, it says:

“the allocation of appropriate resources is critical to ensure the enforcement of new provisions.”

Will you tell us a bit more about that? Is that comment made in the same vein as those that say that it will be harder to prove such an offence, which means that you will need a lot more resources—not just on the legal side but on the police side—to get a prosecution?

In this morning’s evidence, we have heard how serious non-fatal strangulation is. However, in the submissions from Police Scotland and COPFS, we see a lot of concerns about the possible detrimental impacts and unintended consequences of bringing in a stand-alone offence of NFS. If the Scottish Government decided not to introduce a stand-alone offence, are other options available that could ensure that the behaviour is adequately addressed by the criminal justice system? Police Scotland’s submission mentions it being as an aggravating factor. What are your thoughts on adding an aggravating factor for existing offences?

You can answer first if you would like to.

Given your concerns about bringing in a stand-alone offence, is there something else that we should be doing legislatively, or do you think that the current legislation is fit for purpose and that, as everybody else has mentioned, we just need to improve public awareness or look at the training on domestic abuse that is given to police? Is there anything else that we can do?