Chamber and committees

Keep it short, please.

I think that we will move on from that point, Mr Doris.

That concludes the public part of today’s meeting. We will consider our final agenda item in private. I ask members who are attending virtually to reconvene on Microsoft Teams in a few minutes.

Good morning, and welcome to the 17th meeting in 2022 of the Education, Children and Young People Committee.

The first item on our agenda is to take evidence in our colleges regionalisation inquiry from trade unions representing teaching and support staff at colleges and from an organisation that supports student engagement in the quality of the learning experience, so that we can hear the views of staff and students on the impacts of regionalisation.

I welcome Stuart Brown, national officer from the Educational Institute of Scotland; Eve Lewis, the director of Student Partnership in Quality Scotland—sparqs; and Lorcan Mullen, regional officer and head of higher and further education at Unison Scotland. Good morning to you all.

I have a bit of housekeeping to begin with. Our session is hybrid, with our witnesses and one of our members participating virtually. As those who are attending remotely will not be able to catch my eye, please put a capital letter R in the chat box when you wish to speak. The clerks will monitor the chat box and I will bring you in when I can. I also want to reassure you that it is not necessary for every witness to respond to every question, so, if you do not think that you have anything to add on a particular question, that is fine. The question and answer session will last for approximately one hour, and I thank you all for your time today.

With that, I go to our virtual colleague Oliver Mundell for the first question.

I am pleased to have brought to the chamber my first members’ business debate, which is on such an important topic for Scotland. Cardiovascular health has always interested me, and it becomes more relevant when it relates to us personally.

In my pre-parliamentary career, I worked closely with medical and surgical professionals in university teaching hospitals across the United Kingdom. One of the first surgeries that I observed was open-heart surgery in the Western infirmary in Glasgow. The surgeon was Mr Alan Kirk—he was young and dynamic and was looking to adapt his practice to do beating-heart surgery rather than on-pump bypasses, with their associated risks.

Much has changed surgically since then—not least the closure of the Western infirmary and the establishment of the West of Scotland regional heart and lung centre at the Golden Jubilee hospital. Perhaps the canny among members in the chamber might recognise the surgeon’s name, as Mr Kirk was in Parliament last week. He is now, with his colleague John Butler, a pioneer of robotic thoracic surgery. We need clinicians such as them to adopt new and innovative techniques that benefit patients and improve outcomes.

My dad is one of those who benefited from innovation. When he was told that he needed cardiac surgery, I know that the look on my face told my mum and dad how serious things were. I silently wanted to know that he would get an off-pump bypass; I did not want his heart to stop beating. He did get an off-pump coronary artery bypass graft, which was successful. Nearly 10 years on, he has not looked back, so I thank the team at NHS Lothian.

Before all such work comes years of research and investment and the blood, sweat and tears of those who carry out the research. Funding for clinical research in Scotland through the chief scientist office has remained stagnant for several years. When investment in clinical research is compared between the UK and Scotland, investment in Scotland equates to £12.79 per capita, as opposed to the £20.55 per capita spend in England.

The British Heart Foundation believes that the Scottish Government should increase funding to the chief scientist office in line with the per capita funding of the National Institute for Health and Care Research by the UK Government. If the Scottish Government were to utilise Barnett consequentials and its own budget to match per capita the planned NIHR funding increase to £2 billion, it could transform clinical research in Scotland by securing Scotland again as a world leader in medical research and bringing new and improved treatments and care to Scotland first.

Research could generate as much as £257 million for the economy every year and support 6,000 jobs across Scotland. There are also indirect and direct benefits for the national health service. For example, troponin tests are used on an individual’s admission to accident and emergency to test whether they have had a heart attack. The high-sensitivity troponin in the evaluation of patients with acute coronary syndrome trial—led by Professor Nicholas Mills, who is a British Heart Foundation professor of cardiology at the centre for cardiovascular science at the University of Edinburgh—looked at the use of a higher-sensitivity troponin test than was previously used. The reduction in time in hospital and the 50 per cent increase in discharges as a result of the new sensitive test could create huge cost savings for the NHS and reduce bed demand at a time when the NHS is under significant pressure.

Undertaking such clinical studies in Scotland is crucial to improving patient care and reducing inequalities in care. Investment in such research has the potential to support the Scottish budget through reducing overall costs in the NHS.

Other charities are raising similar concerns, as well as pointing out the benefits of increased investment. Stroke is Scotland’s leading cause of disability. About 10,000 people every year have a stroke, and 128,000 people in Scotland are living with the effects of a stroke. The Stroke Association is the only funder in Scotland of exclusively stroke research, with a current portfolio of £3.5 million. Investing in stroke research can generate savings for health and social care, as well as improving quality of life for stroke survivors and their families. In the UK, research investment per stroke patient is only £48 per year, in comparison with £241 per cancer patient and £118 per dementia patient. Given that stroke generates such a sizeable economic burden in Scotland, it requires greater priority in research funding and support.

Cancer Research UK is the largest independent funder of cancer research in the world. In 2020-21, it spent £421 million on new and on-going research in the UK into prevention, diagnosis and treatment. It has supported research into more than 200 types of cancer, with long-term investment to help to create a thriving network of research in 90 laboratories and institutions across the UK and to support the work of more than 4,000 scientists, doctors and nurses. Cancer Research UK has spent more than £188 million on research funding in Scotland over the past five years across seven universities, and it currently funds 100 PhD students, among other things.

It is not just direct health benefits that come from medical research; there are also benefits to the Scottish economy and to every individual who is impacted by the research. Not every project will result in a miracle cure, a wonder drug or a new approach, but I think that we can all agree that research saves lives.

In the interest of being complete, I state that I was a councillor at the City of Edinburgh Council, but I ceased to be a councillor at the recent election.

The committee must now produce a report on the draft regulations. Is the committee content to delegate to the deputy convener and me the responsibility to agree that report on behalf of the committee?

Members indicated agreement.

I thank the minister and her officials for their attendance.

There will be a short suspension to allow a change of witnesses before we move on to the next agenda item.

Bob Doris, you indicated that you have a short supplementary question.

Thank you very much.