To pick up on something that Ben Macpherson said, not setting out a full response to each of the Withers recommendations could make it harder to chart progress against his report. Will the Scottish Government map progress against its own outcomes?

Given some of the conversations during Ross Greer’s questioning, about employers and microcredentials, might it be—

It does not seem that long since I hosted the round-table session on the dying in the margins study by Marie Curie and the University of Glasgow. That was back in November, and there was a members’ business debate on that study in the chamber. A few weeks after that, I led a members’ business debate entitled “Charitable Hospice Care to Meet Future Need”.

I see many familiar faces in the chamber. I thank Bob Doris for bringing the subject of hospices back to the chamber at what is perhaps a more poignant time of the year, when it means more to most, and I am delighted to have the opportunity to speak on the subject again.

Marie Curie has done excellent work over the past 75 years, and it continues to provide vital services to those who need palliative and end-of-life care. It supports millions of people who are affected by terminal illness and those who are dealing with dying, death and—importantly—bereavement across the UK.

Marie Curie is the largest charitable funder of palliative care research in the UK and the largest third sector provider of palliative and end-of-life services for adults in Scotland. As Bob Doris has said, there are two Marie Curie hospices in Scotland—in Edinburgh and Glasgow. In 2022-23, Marie Curie supported more than 8,100 people in Scotland; in the same year, around 8,815 people died in the Lothian region, 90 per cent of whom had a palliative care need. Hospices are critical in meeting that need. Indeed, across the region, Marie Curie hospice care-at-home teams made 4,060 visits to 672 terminally ill people.

In November, I visited the Marie Curie hospice in Fairmilehead. When I entered it, I was immediately enveloped by a calmness and serenity that gave me a sense of wellbeing and care. I was given a tour of the facilities and had the chance to speak to members of staff. Early Marie Curie homes were housed in converted buildings that were not ideal for the type of care that they delivered; the hospice at Fairmilehead, which was opened in 1966, was the second purpose-built building that was designed and built by Marie Curie in the UK. It was designed to care for those who were seriously ill with advanced conditions. In the past year, the Marie Curie hospice service in Edinburgh and West Lothian has supported a total of 1,690 patients with in-patient, out-patient and, importantly, community and day therapy services.

I think that many people have preconceived ideas about hospice care. Most of Marie Curie’s work is done in the community, with the majority of hospice care being delivered beyond hospice buildings and walls and out in people’s homes. That gives people the option to die with their friends and family, at home and supported by teams of experts. Marie Curie has a fast-track team that helps people with tasks such as washing, caring and showering as they get close to the end of life. Crucially, it keeps them out of a hospital setting; the team is essential to keeping people in the right place and offers family support to relatives.

It was disappointing that this week’s budget made no mention of the support needed by hospices to address the £16 million deficit that the sector faces. The rapidly growing need for palliative care in Scotland means that the vital contribution made by hospices will become increasingly important, and I hope that the issue will be considered in future.

In closing, I echo what Bob Doris said about Marie Curie’s inspirational work across the country, about how supportive it is to families and those at the end of life and about how innovative it continues to be. I thank Marie Curie for 75 years of care and wish the charity well in the future.

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. Throughout the cabinet secretary’s answers to questions on the statement, she referred to the fact that there were no amendments lodged at stage 3 that would not have resulted in divergence from United Kingdom legislation. There were such amendments, and they were in my name.

I thank the minister for the advance copy of her statement—this one was sent timeously.

Last week, data released by the Scottish Government revealed that drug deaths have risen for the first nine months of 2023 by 13 per cent compared to the same period in 2022. It is unacceptable that an additional 103 lives have been tragically lost to drugs.

The Scottish Government is focused primarily on harm reduction and the destigmatisation of drugs. The 10 MAT standards are its vehicle to achieve that, but they are one that it is failing to deliver, having pushed back their full implementation until April 2025.

The minister mentioned in her statement progress with MAT standards 7, 8 and 9, but perhaps the most important MAT standard is standard 1: same-day access to treatment. The standard is to enable people to access treatment or support on the day that they present to any part of the service. However, national drug and alcohol treatment waiting times that have been published today show that five out of 13 health boards did not meet the standard that 90 per cent of people who are referred for help will wait no longer than three weeks for specialist treatment. If health boards and alcohol and drug partnerships cannot provide treatment within three weeks to 90 per cent of the people, how many are capable of achieving same-day access to treatment—in other words, MAT standard 1?

The minister stated that she is

“absolutely steadfast and determined to turn the tide on drug deaths.”

If that is true, every avenue must be explored. Will the minister finally get behind the proposed right to recovery bill?

Will the member take an intervention?

It does not come as any surprise to see so many Lothian MSPs here today. We have the best bus service, I think, which is the envy of many across the country, but there are serious issues.

To address Mr Macpherson’s point quickly, I, too, get the bus regularly and, on Tuesday night, I was subject to what I would call antisocial behaviour targeted at me by an elderly man, who started harassing me by blowing kisses towards me and making all sorts of noises. Frankly, I did not quite know what to do, so I put my headphones on and just kept my head down. There needs to be something that all of us can do when such things happen. I thank my colleague Graham Simpson for bringing the debate to Parliament.

I spoke about what I was subjected to this week but, a number of years ago, I got on a bus on Princes Street where, quite reasonably, there were a number of youths, but they made me feel intimidated. This was on the first floor of a double decker—or the ground floor; I do not know what you call it. They were vaping quite publicly in front of people, and the bus was packed, because it was Christmas time. I asked them to stop and they proceeded to make a big show of inhaling the vapour, puffing it in my face and saying that I was exactly the sort of person who is a Karen.

Drivers and passengers on Lothian Buses should not have to endure abuse from disrespectful and intimidating youths, and we can see how such incidents could easily turn into something more serious. I was concerned about making sure that those youths got off the bus before I did, because I did not want to get off the bus and have them follow me. It was a very scary incident.

We have heard that teenagers from other parts of Scotland are using their free bus passes to come to Edinburgh to cause trouble. Police officers have recently attended a meeting with retailers in the south-west of Edinburgh to discuss a spate of antisocial behaviour in the area, and they have said that individuals are coming to the capital from Motherwell, Glasgow and Inverness, as Mr Simpson said, causing problems, criminality and antisocial behaviour. They are using their bus passes, whereas that did not happen before, because they did not have the means to get here. Unfortunately, the police said that there was nothing more that they could do to stop them.

I have heard similar concerns from two of my council colleagues in Edinburgh, who have raised concerns about youths coming to the Craigleith retail park and to Stockbridge from across the city and further afield to cause trouble. Those incidents are often organised on social media apps such as Snapchat, and the parents do not know where their children have been or where they are going.

We also heard from Graham Simpson about the situation in West Lothian, where youths were using their bus passes to go from Edinburgh and Fife to Livingston town centre. Ultimately, the centre there was closed on Friday afternoons to anyone under the age of 18, if I recall correctly. That is not where we want to be, because there are so many young people who are not abusing their bus passes. That sort of blanket ban is not helpful for anyone.

In Edinburgh, in October, several buses were forced to divert from a very busy neighbourhood. The buses were unable to serve Niddrie Mains Road and Peffermill Road for nearly two hours on a Saturday night. Imagine the impact across the entire community, on people of all ages, including those who are vulnerable and who rely on public transport in Edinburgh, which is critical to how we all get around the city. Lothian Buses has said that it has

“a zero tolerance approach to antisocial behaviour”

and that it

“will not hesitate to remove services from particular areas for a period of time if necessary to keep our colleagues and customers safe”,

but customers are then not able to use the services. There needs to be another way to tackle the issue.

I am conscious of time, so I will cut to the end. I am a bit of a believer in a curfew. We have young people who use the buses—in Edinburgh, they are Lothian Buses—to get to school, jobs and colleges, and I think that a curfew is the answer, rather than a cull or a ban, because we need those young people to get to school and take part in education and employment.

That is a great link as we move on to ask about a more positive approach to AI.

That might come out later in our discussion. Chris Ranson, as someone who is actively working as a teacher right now, what are your thoughts on unsupervised study and the outputs from that?

Good morning, and welcome to the 31st meeting in 2023 of the Education, Children and Young People Committee. Our first agenda item is an evidence session on artificial intelligence and education. I welcome Ollie Bray, strategic director, Education Scotland; Helena Good, director, Daydream Believers; Chris Ranson, physics teacher and lead for AI integration, Dunblane high school; and Professor Judy Robertson, chair in digital learning, University of Edinburgh. This is our first evidence session on the subject. Although the topic of AI has been raised in other sessions on education reform, we were keen to hear a bit more about this fast-moving area.

I invite Ollie Bray to make some opening remarks, after which we will move to questions from members.