Chamber and committees

As I indicated in my earlier answer, there are three elements to the approach that the Government is taking. Great importance is attached to education programmes on the danger and the unacceptability of carrying a knife and being involved in violence.

The mentors in violence prevention programme, which is directed through Education Scotland, is delivered in all 32 local authority areas, and young people are involved in that work. We support the work of the Scottish Violence Reduction Unit in proactively engaging with young people to avoid incidents of violence. That is in addition to the work that we do to support Medics Against Violence to engage young people in the work that YouthLink Scotland does to deliver the no knives, better lives training to hundreds of practitioners and young people around the country.

Proactive work is being done to ensure that the issues that Russell Findlay has raised are addressed, but there is also firmness in the justice system when incidents take place. It remains open to prosecutors to prosecute a young person if they have committed a serious offence. Our sustained focus on prevention and early intervention is a core part of our strategy, but steps can also be taken in the criminal justice system to bring people to justice. I expect the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service and the judicial system to consider all those issues in addressing any cases that emerge.

Let us look at the Government’s commitment to ferry services. When the Government came to office in 2007, the budget for ferry services was £90 million. In the current financial year, it is five times that. [Interruption.]

This Government will keep true to its commitments to island communities. That is principally delivered through the fact that ferry travel to our island communities is significantly cheaper than it would have been—[Interruption.]

I will explore that point. However, it might be difficult to provide a complete picture other than in an individual case. I understand that, in the case that Jackie Baillie raises, that would undoubtedly be possible. I stress that I am not a clinician, but, from what Jackie Baillie said about that case, it sounds like a call that should have gone directly to the Scottish Ambulance Service, because, if someone has difficulty breathing, that raises some pretty acute issues. I simply offer that as an observation, and I am very sorry to hear the circumstances that Jackie Baillie puts to me.

We could consider Jackie Baillie’s suggestion in relation to individual cases, as there would be merit in exploring the journey that individuals have to go through, and it would be possible to do so. Many of us will have had the experience of having to tell our story multiple times. If that process can be made smoother, we should absolutely aim to do so. However, at a systemic level, it would be difficult to collect or assemble the kind of data that Jackie Baillie is asking for.

I repeat a point that I made earlier, which is that calls can be abandoned for a variety of reasons, not all of which are related to waiting times. The message menu that members of the public hear includes a range of signposting options that encourage people to seek advice elsewhere, particularly when the service is under pressure. Dr Gulhane will be familiar with those options from his professional background. He will also know that not all callers need to get through to NHS 24, as some might be able to get advice from NHS Inform that addresses their concerns.

Having spent time with NHS call handlers, as the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care has done, and having listened to the professional advice that they give, I would say two things. First, I commend the quality and strength of the advice available through the telephone service, which is of a high clinical level. Secondly, I believe that the signposting to face-to-face services is undertaken very effectively.

I am concerned about the data that Dr Gulhane refers to, because I cannot quite understand how a call could be waiting for four hours to be answered. I will interrogate that data further, as the extremity of that situation causes me concern, and I will look more closely at the long waits that Dr Gulhane raises.

On the whole, I believe that NHS 24 serves us well. However, I acknowledge that, during periods of high demand, people might wait longer than they would wish.

The Scottish Government has intervened on several of those issues. We have taken steps to restore winter fuel payments to pensioners in Scotland. We have made provision for that in our budget, which takes direct account of the cuts that the incoming Labour UK Government made as one of its first acts. We have also invested in providing the Scottish child payment, which is keeping thousands of children here out of poverty. Our budget also included provision for steps to remove the two-child cap, which I would have expected the Labour UK Government to remove, but it has not done so. I assure my colleague Collette Stevenson that the Scottish Government will do all that we can to eradicate poverty, but our challenge is all the greater because of the actions of the Labour UK Government.

I agree with Mr Balfour on that point. The structure of that payment is designed to support people to make as much of a contribution to wider society, particularly through employment, as they can. However, if the proposals that Mr Balfour mentions are enacted, the practical issues that he legitimately raises will impede individuals’ doing that. Not only is such an approach damaging and short sighted; it will undermine individuals’ ability to make an economic contribution in the long term. That is but one of the many aspects of its folly. I am very happy to endorse the points that Mr Balfour makes.

I recognise and sympathise with the point that Mr Harvie has made. As I have said consistently since the Supreme Court judgment, I am concerned by how individuals, particularly those in the trans community, are feeling as a consequence of the climate that we are in. I am very struck by the fact that the climate of the discourse on this issue is absolutely unacceptable.

Let me, from this podium, make it clear—as I made it clear in the programme for government announcement—that my Government is absolutely resolute in our support for the LGBTQI+ community, and that we will take actions that will be aimed at protecting the rights of all, because the rights of all must be protected in our society. That is the solemn commitment that I give to the community and to the Parliament today.

The issues that Michelle Thomson raises are absolutely material to consideration of the UK-USA trade deal. It is a source of enormous disappointment and frustration to the Scottish Government, because of the effect that the trade deal will have on Scottish business, that we were not engaged in its formulation prior to its agreement by the United Kingdom Government. Indeed, I personally found the process deeply unsatisfactory—the Deputy First Minister has communicated that to the UK Government. That view is held not just by me but by my counterparts in Wales and Northern Ireland. There is a lot yet to be done on the trade deal to ensure that key industries such as salmon and whisky are protected.

As Michelle Thomson will know, the Scottish Government has taken steps to intervene to support the Scottish company base, with the explanation in the programme for government last week of further support for exporters, on which the Government will follow through.

At col 15, para 4, line 1—

Original text—

The level of delayed discharges is falling—it has come down from its peak by just short of 200 places.

Corrected text—

The level of delayed discharges is falling—it has come down from its peak by just short of 105 places.