It is good to see the witnesses in front of us this morning. I will kick off with a question that follows on from the evidence that we took last week. In his written evidence, John McVay from PACT mentioned the potential privatisation of Channel 4, which you say could potentially

“have drastic implications for the UK’s independent film and TV sector”.

We got some very good evidence from the BBC about the importance of production in Scotland. Would you like to talk about how we avoid the risk to the recovery of the indy sector, which you have described in your submission?

I, too, start by thanking Stuart McMillan for his work, and I congratulate him on securing tonight’s excellent debate. I agree with the praise that he has rightly given to RNIB Scotland and Optometry Scotland, and I, too, thank Sight Scotland for the fantastic work that it is doing across the country.

I am very keen to support eye health for my constituents in the Lothians, whether at a very local level or in getting access to emergency services. Over the past year, as Miles Briggs has said, the situation has been brought to the forefront, first by the cancellation of the new eye pavilion and then by the very welcome U-turn, with a commitment that we will get that new eye pavilion. As Miles Briggs has said, however, it is five years off, even though a huge amount of work has been done on it by NHS Lothian.

Stuart McMillan’s motion rightly highlights how vital it is for people to book their eye check every two years—and it is free. The impact of the pandemic has made many people not do that, and it is understandable that people are nervous about going back to clinical settings. The briefing that we received from RNIB Scotland outlined just some of the fantastic steps that clinicians are taking to ensure that the service is safe, so that people do not need to be worried and can get their eyes checked.

Emma Harper and Miles Briggs highlighted the work that is being done by optometrists, which was very important during the pandemic and will be crucial going forward. I hope, therefore, that the minister will tell us what her response will be to Optometry Scotland’s request not only for a fee increase this year, but for an agreement on reviewing fees so that optometrists can plan ahead.

As Miles Briggs has said, the announcement of the new eye pavilion in Edinburgh really lifted people’s spirits. It was a welcome U-turn, although it took a lot of campaigning to get there, and the issue certainly came up at a lot of hustings before the election. I was also struck by the series of Edinburgh Evening News articles about people’s real-life experiences, highlighting the importance of all our eye services. In that respect, I am talking not just about services at community level and at the eye pavilion, but the clinical expertise and excellence that is needed in those emergency situations when there is only a matter of minutes to save someone’s eyes. I know from personal experience the very long hours that those clinical staff work and the 24-hour service that they provide and, indeed, have provided even through the pandemic. They have been fantastic, and we need to thank them.

I hope that progress on the new eye hospital will be rapid. As has been said, NHS Lothian has already done a lot of work on the project. We also need to think about the community services that should sit alongside that kind of emergency treatment to ensure not only that people get their eyes checked but that any diagnosis is followed up. I want to thank the NHS and third sector organisations for the awareness-raising work that they are carrying out to improve eye health outcomes for people across Scotland. Indeed, that is what this debate is all about.

I urge everyone to book an eye health check—and then book another two years from now, because it should not be a one-off. The service is accessible and free, and it is vital to everyone’s health and wellbeing, so let us get on with it.

I thank the Presiding Officer for her understanding about the fact that I will not be able to stay for the whole debate, but it has been great to be present and to see everyone’s energy and enthusiasm for this service. It is certainly important that we agree on this issue.

That was a really good discussion about wellbeing, but I want to pick up the issue of employment. The importance of keeping people in employment in the live music and cultural sectors came across very strongly in some of the written evidence that you have submitted. The Music Venue Trust talks about how one in 11 jobs are in the creative industries, which might surprise a lot of people.

Last week, the Musicians Union gave evidence that about a third of musicians were thinking of leaving the sector. In the context of this year and now, our job is looking at what the budget should look like. What short-term measures do you think will help to keep people employed in the sector, but also make it resilient, as we are not quite through the pandemic yet? Could I start off with Clara Cullen from the Music Venue Trust, because that issue came out in your evidence. I will move then to Matt Baker from the Stove Network, because you were talking about the importance of retaining culture staff, and the others can come in afterwards. Over to you first, Clara Cullen: what can we ask for directly now that would keep the sector going and keep people in jobs?

It is very helpful to get the evidence and comments there, because I was looking for comments about the short term. Mike Jones made a comment about the importance of the JRS, given that we are not yet out of Covid, and Matt Baker’s idea about linking into communities, ticked all the boxes for me, because it is about employment retention, it links into wellbeing and communities, and it is potentially about the next generation coming through and retaining the skill set, so we are very keen to see that issue resolved. There is keeping people in employment and venues open. Is there anything else in terms of structural support you think we need to look at? I do not know if any of the witnesses want to come back in again, having heard the others’ comments. Matt Baker or Clara Cullen, is there anything else you want to come in with before we move on to the next question?

Matt Baker, you made a point about Dumfries and moving into the town centre. Could that model be applied elsewhere as we try to regenerate our town centres and link culture in?

On a point of order, Presiding Officer, my machine would not connect in time. I would have abstained. Thank you.

I previously received a response that said that a record number of people are registered with an NHS dentist, but constituents are writing to me with their concern that they are still unable to find an NHS dentist with whom they can register, and that delays in appointments are not getting shorter. I am also aware of NHS dentists who have gone private. Is the minister not concerned about that state of affairs, and what action is the Scottish Government taking to fix it?

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on how it will address the backlog in national health service dentistry. (S6O-00162)

It is very welcome to hear from the cabinet secretary that the decision should not impact access to vaccines. Does that include the possibility of 12 to 15-year-olds being given vaccinations and older people getting boosters? Will it impact the surplus that the cabinet secretary referred to and the possibility of the Scottish Government supporting people from low-income countries who are coming to the 26th UN climate change conference of the parties—COP26—to access vaccinations?

It is good to have you both with us. I want to follow up on the point about people losing their jobs over the past year when live performances had to stop entirely. Do you have a sense of how many people we have lost from the arts and culture sector? There have been press articles about freelancers not getting support and having to go and get other employment.