Chamber and committees

I suppose that the witnesses—[Inaudible.]—very upsetting—[Inaudible.]—many of us. We heard of quite varying—[Inaudible.]—in terms of how the services are set up for people who, I am sad to say, know that they are going to give birth to a stillborn baby, and for the important moment when they have to have that conversation with healthcare professionals. What improvements are being made to ensure that parents are consistently treated with compassion across the country and in every health board, and that they are not being retraumatised when they access services later on? They are a very vulnerable group of people, so I would like to know what we are doing to drill down into those issues and to help them consistently, irrespective of where they live.

You spoke a lot about women there, but there are also fathers to consider. Another message that has come out in the evidence is that it should be ensured that fathers are included.

All sorts of trauma can happen during pregnancy that can make women reticent on subsequent visits to the unit. Such trauma does not always result in the sad loss of a baby. What are we doing to ensure that the mental health of women who have experienced significant trauma is taken into account in the perinatal period?

I draw members’ attention to my entry in the register of members’ interests: I am a member of Edinburgh Alcohol and Drug Partnership.

Six months ago, when Scotland’s shocking drug death statistics for 2020 were first released, Nicola Sturgeon promised to get a grip on the crisis and pledged an additional £250 million to tackle the drug deaths emergency over the next five years. Last week’s budget announced that there would be £147.6 million to address the twin public health emergencies of drug deaths and the harms from alcohol. That included £61 million specifically to address the national tragedy of drug deaths, as part of a commitment to invest £250 million over the lifetime of this Parliament. The figure for the same thing in the budget for 2021-22 was £145.3 million. If we adjust the budget for inflation, that means that services are facing a real-terms cut of about £2.5 million. The First Minister pledged to get it right and to provide funding. Where is the additional £250 million that was promised?

A 21-year-old constituent has contacted me about something that, I hope, the First Minister can clarify. She asked:

“Am I being stupid? Pubs and restaurants have to socially distance and you can’t order at the bar, but you can still go to a nightclub.”

What are the recommendations for the already hard-hit hospitality sector, given the on-going and specific pressures on nightclubs?

The shocking review reveals the completely inadequate level of care that is given to youngsters with hearing difficulties in NHS Lothian. The families deserve an explanation of how the scandal happened. Sadly, the critical failings have a lifelong and significant impact on the young people and their families. I am pleased that NHS Lothian has accepted all the recommendations from the BAA report, but I am concerned that the problem could happen elsewhere.

As has been mentioned, the National Deaf Children’s Society is calling for an independent review of children’s audiology services across Scotland, which is more than the cabinet secretary has stated today he will do. There is a real danger that many more deaf children will not get good-quality care unless the review is carried out across all our services in Scotland. When will such a review take place?

Like Ms Whitham, I am a sitting councillor, but with City of Edinburgh Council. That is recorded in my entry in the register of members’ interests.

I will speak in support of Douglas Ross’s amendment but, before I do so, I draw attention to my entry in the register of members’ interests.

I reaffirm my support for the principles that are outlined in the Labour motion. However, issues with patient safety in the Queen Elizabeth university hospital go beyond some of the heartbreaking tragedies that Labour members have outlined. I want to speak further about the burdens that front-line staff face, which may contribute significantly to the on-going problems with the UK’s second-largest acute hospital.

Behind the scenes, unnecessary pressures are often placed on staff. I say to Ms Mackay that no one in the chamber blames clinicians. I want to talk about the staff who are directly involved in delivering patient care in a fast-paced clinical environment. Through unyielding, arduous, management-driven controls and processes or unbalanced procurement and budget control processes, those staff find themselves in distressing situations that distract their attention from delivering safe patient care. Those processes mean that staff are too often challenged by frustrated senior colleagues because equipment is not available for them to use.

The outcome of that may be that the patient’s procedure is cancelled. Why? Because loan paperwork has not been completed days in advance of the planned procedure. Why? Because the one and only device in the department had been opened, sometimes in error, for a previous planned procedure. Scheduled procedures have clashed because there is only one piece of equipment for the entire department, or it has not been returned in time from sterile services due to tight turnarounds from cases the day before.

Perioperative staff and those in theatre are at the front line and face such hellish but completely unavoidable challenges daily, and sometimes even multiple times a day. I assure members that the frustration that is felt by the entire multidisciplinary team when that happens is palpable. I know that that such issues are not unique to NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde. Staff should not have to face those issues when balanced, sensible and cost economic solutions are available to managers to approve.

We say with one breath and in one debate that we want to support staff’s health and wellbeing and then go on to thank them profusely for their heroic efforts. However, as I have said before, we need to do more than offer them our thanks and gratitude. Why do we not look to remove some of the completely unnecessary pressures in their day-to-day jobs and allow them to focus on their patients?

We are calling for a second independent public inquiry into the ministerial response to avoidable deaths at the Queen Elizabeth university hospital. A comprehensive independent inquiry would identify all the areas that cause risk to patients in the hospital and would accelerate the implementation of preventative and mitigating actions. The SNP planned, delivered and ran the hospital and today we have heard that percentages are more important to it than patients. It must take full responsibility for this disgraceful situation.

I have questions on funding.

Thank you.

My first question is for Steve Walsh, who mentioned scrambling around for little pockets of money. Kim Atkinson mentioned that 90 per cent of funding is cascaded through local authorities—I should declare that I am a councillor in the City of Edinburgh Council. We all know the pressure that local authorities are under.

We have a letter here from Maree Todd that states that

“the investment in sport and active living”

is being doubled

“to £100 million a year by the end of”

the current session of Parliament, which might not be enough, given some of your comments today. I want to ask about that level of investment specifically, and about what confidence you have that the investment is reaching the intended recipients, given that local authorities control its distribution.

My question follows on quite nicely, I think. It is about eco-ableism, and is mainly directed to Gavin Macleod. We have heard about a number of environmental policies on active travel and redesigning streets, which might make it more difficult and challenging for those with a disability to access them. What are your thoughts on that? Do you feel included in those discussions?