Chamber and committees

We should keep the petition open and write to the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care to highlight the evidence that the committee has received, and seek an update on any discussions that the cabinet secretary has had with the chief scientific officer about commissioning or supporting research into the impact of diseases that lead to sudden cardiac death in Scotland.

We could also ask what consideration the Scottish Government has given to commissioning a pilot study on voluntary screening, including details of any engagement that it has had with organisations such as the British Heart Foundation, Cardiac Risk in the Young, and Chest Heart & Stroke Scotland on that particular ask of the petition.

Given what the petitioner highlighted in their submission about the Italian screening programme, I wonder whether the Italian consulate would be able provide a briefing or some research on that programme, which has reduced SCD by almost 90 per cent.

Can we also write to NHS Scotland and ask how it is treating Covid-19? I had a round-table meeting in which I was told that people with Covid-19 are not being treated as patients or given priority, even though they have reservations about their illness.

I have a lot to get through.

I repeat my remark that, if we want to have growth, we need investment in infrastructure, and the Scottish Government should show ambition and use the power that it has in those areas.

Regardless of recent news in England, we also have to be clear that the Labour Government in Westminster values Scotland and has invested in Scotland, and it has made it clear that it intends to continue to do so. To secure the future of the site and retrain workers, £200 million has been invested in Grangemouth. There has also been more than £125 million for GB Energy, creating jobs with offices in Glasgow, Edinburgh and Aberdeen, and the national wealth fund, which meets our strategic goal by de-risking private investment, has just made its first investment in Scotland. Both the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology and the Prime Minister, Sir Keir Starmer, have said that Glasgow could be an AI growth zone. On a smaller scale, North Edinburgh Arts is receiving money from the community ownership fund, creating a community hub that will contain council services, spaces for artists and cafes. Today, of course, ministers rejected an English bid to change the definition of single malt whisky. Those are not the actions of a Government that considers Scotland to be “an afterthought”. When that investment in Scotland was put to a vote in the UK budget, the SNP voted against it.

However, Government investment alone is not enough to deliver economic growth. Our planning system must be reformed to expedite the progress of applications and get businesses building, not waiting. The Scottish Government’s investor panel was clear that unacceptable delays in the planning system are making investment more uncertain and increasing costs, contributing to the perception that Scotland is simply not open for business. Issues with planning contribute to the housing emergency, which is eating away at the disposable income of the public, who are spending more and more of their salary renting or saving rather than boosting other areas of our economy.

Finally, I will touch on another issue that was raised by the investor panel. The current landscape for attracting private investors is cluttered with various Government agencies that have different roles and funds. Our investment agencies should be easy to access and involve businesses in strategy and decision making, with a pipeline of projects ready for private investment.

Ultimately, members will repeat Scotland’s strengths, and we are right to be proud of our advantages, but we need to see those strengths put to work and deliver economic growth because, regardless of any recent UK Government moves, Scotland has lagged behind the rest of the UK in growth for 10 years.

The Scottish Government should be focusing on tackling the issues that we face rather than bickering with a UK Labour Government that is interested in investing in and collaborating with Scotland.

To ask the Scottish Government what resources it has allocated to projects in the Edinburgh and south-east Scotland city region deal, including transport projects. (S6O-04384)

One of the key interventions to drive inclusive growth in the city region deal is improving connectivity. A train station at Winchburgh in West Lothian could unlock millions in decongestion benefits and strengthen the millions that have already been invested in the area by developers. Councils planned to apply for funding from the city region deal. Does the minister agree that that is exactly the type of project that should be funded?

I am disappointed that the Scottish Government chose to lodge the motion, which is based on a selection of recent UK Government announcements, and to play a blame game, rather than working collaboratively with the Labour Government in Westminster to deliver positive changes for Scotland.

I do not disagree with the premise that, for too long, wealth and investment have been concentrated in the south-east of England. We should ensure that all areas of the UK benefit from growth, especially Scotland. Devolution is a key mechanism to achieve that. In last week’s debate on investment, members, including me, discussed the importance of investment in infrastructure, including housing and transport, as a catalyst for growth. Many of the announcements made by the UK Government were in those very areas, such as transport and housing. The Scottish Government’s motion is confusing, given that it has control of those areas.

I repeat—

I join members in congratulating my friend Carol Mochan on bringing this issue to the chamber.

Members are well aware of the horrific consequences of addiction and the national shame of drug and alcohol deaths. Alcohol-related brain damage, or ARBD, is caused by long-term heavy drinking. It can damage the frontal lobe and cause symptoms similar to dementia, such as someone struggling to make decisions, having poor impulse control or experiencing personality change.

Those with ARBD often do not know that they have the condition, or are dismissed as “problem drinkers.” As with so many other issues, it is people who live in the most deprived areas, some of which fall in my region, who are most at risk.

Many people with ARBD have complex cases with multiple issues, including addiction to other drugs, poor mental health, and social isolation. Approaches that take that into account should be supported.

In 2024, I met with the North Edinburgh Drug and Alcohol Centre, where I was told about its holistic approach, which focuses on long-term positive outcomes for people with complex needs, including ARBD. With flexible care and harm reduction practices, and by building relationships, it has been able to improve outcomes for people with long-term alcohol and drug addictions and save public money in the long term. One client who required over £26,000-worth of services in the three months prior to her referral, such as police call-outs or A and E visits, needed only £3,000-worth of services in the following months with support from NEDAC.

The NHS Lothian Penumbra Milestone service, which specifically treats ARBD, also uses a multidisciplinary approach, with six different elements to recovery including social health and addiction. It has seen great success in recovery and cognition and has produced a significant saving to the NHS with 2,000 fewer hospital bed days.

However, despite clear positive outcomes, Penumbra Milestone is in the dark about its future funding, and the North Edinburgh Drug and Alcohol Centre has lost funding in recent years. Those services provide proven preventative care. Underfunding them not only worsens outcomes for people with ARBD or addiction; it costs the national health service more in the long term.

The consequences of addiction for those who are suffering and their families are terrible. However, when discussing alcohol-related brain damage, it is key to remember that some recovery is possible. We know that the approach that is taken by services such as Penumbra Milestone and the North Edinburgh Drug and Alcohol Centre can deliver results in the long term and save public money while doing so. For that to happen, they need to have funding and support.

Many of the strategic challenges that we face—reaching net zero, tackling poverty and funding our public services—depend on driving investment for growth. In our globalised economy, in which competition for investment is fiercer than ever, we must ensure that Scotland remains an attractive prospect for business.

I welcome Edinburgh being named one of the UK’s top cities to invest in outside London. We have great strengths in finance, technology and life sciences. In a report on FDI attractiveness from law firms Wright, Johnston & Mackenzie and Irwin Mitchell, Edinburgh’s infrastructure and public transport were named as key factors in attracting investment. That includes Edinburgh airport, which has undergone massive expansion in recent years, and a publicly owned tram network, which has just had a record year for passenger numbers. If we want to drive investment in our economy, there has to be investment in infrastructure.

We also have strengths in our tourism and culture sector. Edinburgh’s festival season attracts more people each year than the football world cup does every four years.

Those areas are key to our economy and support hundreds of thousands of jobs, and they need to be more integrated into our economic strategy in order to attract investment. Collaboration between the private and public sectors can play a huge role in that regard.

We can learn a lot from Greater Manchester, which has the Media City creative cluster and has recently developed six growth locations to attract billions of pounds in business investment. A cluster that meets the needs of Scotland’s creative industry could be transformational in bringing private sector investment to an area of the economy that is often defined by Government support, increasing growth in the film and TV sectors, broadcasting Scotland worldwide and further developing brand Scotland. We should not discount Manchester’s combined authority system, which allows for a long-term regional strategy, and its great mayor, Andy Burnham, who can represent the city on the biggest of stages.

Lastly, I will touch on private equity investment, because 2024 was a record year for such investment in Scotland. Although those companies can create economic growth and reinvigorate business, they have faced criticism for unsustainable business practices and even asset stripping. We must be sure that foreign investment leads to jobs and sustainable growth.

We have many pull factors to attract investment, but the Scottish Government must not squander those by not investing sufficiently in our cities and infrastructure or by failing to partner with the private sector to deliver in our growth areas. If that happens, we will fall short in the race for global investment.

I join other members in congratulating Murdo Fraser on securing a debate on the protection of park home residents, and I welcome the opportunity to discuss the issue, as it is not one that has been raised frequently.

According to the most recent estimate from the Scottish Confederation of Park Home Residents Associations, there are around 8,500 people living in park homes, and 100 parks, in Scotland. Park homes can be used as temporary holiday homes or as permanent residences. In recent years, the use of park homes as permanent residences seems to have grown as an option for older people.

The regulation of park home sites sits between permanent and temporary residency. The different system of rents, ownership and licences is outlined in the motion. The fact that residents own the home but not the land can cause issues. People who go on to SCOPHRA’s website will find tips for living in park homes, information about membership costs and a big warning notice, in red font, that is followed by a disclaimer telling those who want to buy a holiday home to seek professional advice.

That is because of the issue of residents being missold park homes on the false pretence that they were permanent dwellings when, for licensing purposes, they were designated as holiday homes. As a result, members of the public—often, people who were newly retired—are facing homelessness, despite the fact that their park home was advertised as a home for life.

The holes in regulation extend to energy. For example, in 2022, park home residents were initially left out of the arrangements for Government support for energy bills, and a separate scheme had to be established. In recent years, following storms, residents have been left without power for days on end; indeed, some have said that they felt as though they had been forgotten about by energy companies.

I note the motion’s call for park home residents to be given access to support for housing adaptations. I am often contacted by constituents who struggle to get adaptations made to regular homes, and I hear how worrying long waits are for them. I cannot imagine how it must feel to be getting older and frailer and not be able to make adaptations because of regulatory issues. Given that such homes are being used as permanent residences, in a similar way to rental properties, consideration should be given to how adaptations can be made.

I again congratulate Murdo Fraser on bringing the issue to the chamber. I understand that the Scottish Government is considering reviewing the licensing regime for park homes, and I look forward to hearing what the minister has to say.

To ask the Scottish Government how it is working to increase the number of film and television productions created in Scotland. (S6O-04347)