Chamber and committees

I thank the witnesses for attending and for their evidence. I suspend the meeting to allow for a short break and the changeover of witnesses.

10:48

Meeting suspended.

10:59

On resuming—

I thank the minister and her officials for attending the meeting this morning.

As is currently planned, this will be the final meeting of the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee in this parliamentary session. I take this opportunity to thank all those who have engaged with the committee and contributed to its work programme over the course of session 6. I also thank my fellow committee members for their constructive and collaborative contributions over the course of the session.

11:14

Meeting continued in private until 11:33.

I place on record my entry in the register of members’ interests, which says that I hold a bank nurse contract with NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde and that I am a registered mental health nurse.

We move to questions from Elena Whitham.

Do you recognise that there is a difference between mental wellbeing and mental ill health?

Good morning, and welcome to the 11th meeting in 2026 of the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee. I have received apologies for today’s meeting from Paul Sweeney.

Our first agenda item is to decide whether to take agenda items 4, 5 and 6 in private. Do members agree to take those items in private?

Members indicated agreement.

Thanks for the opportunity to contribute to the debate on behalf of the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee. First, I offer my sincere thanks to all the stakeholders who engaged with the committee throughout its scrutiny of the draft climate change plan. As it is likely that this will be the last time that I speak in the chamber as convener of that committee in this session, I want to put on record my thanks to the committee clerks.

Given the scope of the plan and its cross-cutting nature as it relates to health outcomes, what was paramount was our ability to draw on a solid evidence base. I am pleased to say that the level of oral and written evidence that we received allowed us to produce what I believe to be a comprehensive report in relation to the health remit.

I thank the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee for its innovative approach to scrutiny, in particular, which has enabled contributions to be made from across portfolios. The need for greater cross-committee working is something that we have talked about at length in this chamber, and I am grateful to all the committees that have taken the time to contribute to the plan’s overall scrutiny. I look forward to more scrutiny work being done on the same basis, and I commend the example that has been set across the chamber and in the committees.

Turning to the health committee’s report, I begin by saying that, as part of its scrutiny, the committee held three evidence-taking sessions with a focus on the potential co-benefits of emissions reductions for health, and on the draft plan’s potential impact on health and social care services. The draft plan is presented as being necessitated by, and having the purpose of addressing, the health risks associated with climate change. Under the Climate Change (Scotland) Act 2009, as amended, the plan must set out policies and proposals for reducing greenhouse gas emissions across all major sectors of the economy. Although health and social care is not one of the sectors that the plan is required to cover, some elements of health and social care emissions will be nested within the residential and public buildings sector and the transport sector, which the legislation requires to be covered.

I also remind members that the population health framework, which was published in June 2025, states that

“a just transition to net zero”

is among Public Health Scotland’s commitments to support health and wellbeing. In that context, the committee welcomes evidence that a growing number of health boards are implementing sustainable travel schemes for patients and staff, and encourages further sharing of best practice in that area. The committee also notes that

“health boards should maintain momentum in collaborating with other authorities and providers to ensure that large hospitals are treated as sustainable, connected transport hubs for people attending appointments as well as visitors.”

The draft CCP identifies several health benefits from policies and proposals to reduce emissions in other sectors, including those in relation to cleaner air, warmer homes, healthier food, health-promoting natural and built environments, high-quality public services and fair work. One of the core themes of both the oral and the written evidence that we received was the significant health impact associated with emissions and the scale of potential co-benefits from mitigating them. However, the committee also heard from witnesses and respondents that health and inequality outcomes should be made explicit in the plan and that those co-benefits should be integral to policy appraisal and budget decisions, instead of being treated as secondary considerations.

The CCP cuts across the building blocks of health and the measures in the plan should be more explicitly treated as a public health intervention. The committee echoes calls from Public Health Scotland for a “health in all policies” approach, in which climate measures are designed and delivered to reduce emissions while maximising health gains, thereby contributing to improved life expectancy and reducing health inequalities.

The disproportionate effects of climate change on disabled people, those with long-term conditions, unpaid carers and lower-income households have long been established. In that context, the committee highlights the importance of designing mitigation measures to avoid widening existing health inequalities. It is also vital that the role of social care is recognised within that wider prevention agenda.

The issue of air quality and the impact on it of certain pollutants was raised extensively in evidence, and the committee echoes calls from witnesses for improved monitoring frameworks and action in those areas. Any changes to monitoring should track indoor and outdoor air quality outcomes to ensure that improvements in buildings and transport deliver improvements for, and do not risk undermining, health and wellbeing.

More specifically, the committee notes a lack of quantifiable metrics in that area, which could lead to difficulties in tracking delivery and outcomes. We therefore call for clear indicators of health, wellbeing and equity impacts, alongside the metrics on emissions outcomes. Those indicators should reflect place-based variation, and public health expertise should be embedded in their design and interpretation, so that co-benefits and risks are properly captured and used to inform appraisal and budget decisions.

Finally, the committee notes the complex role of food in meeting climate and health objectives. Although I am conscious of the fact that that issue is not explicitly explored in the plan, the committee highlights the concerns that it raised in its report on the proposed national good food nation plan about the risks of taking a siloed approach, and it reiterates its call for the Scottish Government to set out more clearly how it will work to foster improved cross-sectoral and cross-portfolio collaboration to further strengthen the NHS, as well as wider approaches to sustainable procurement and minimisation of food waste.

It is clear that the draft climate change plan is incredibly broad in scope. The committee commends the plan, in so far as it recognises the health benefits associated with policies that reduce climate emissions across sectors. However, more can be done to make those links more explicit, and I hope that members in future sessions will continue to pursue the same level of cross-portfolio working throughout the scrutiny process to ensure that the final plan delivers on all its intended outcomes.

15:06

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I respectfully ask for your ruling on some of the language that Mr Lumsden has used which, personally, I find offensive. It is not becoming of a member of the chamber.

Yet another bank in my Rutherglen constituency is under threat of closure. By my count, nine bank branches have closed in recent years, which has left Blantyre and Cambuslang as banking deserts.

Many individuals, businesses, churches and organisations need access to cash banking, and online or digital banking does not suit everyone. I am also deeply concerned about the impact that further bank closures will have on our local high streets. Will the minister join me in condemning the decimation of face-to-face banking across Scotland and join my calls for better access to banking facilities for all?

I remind members of my entry in the register of members’ interests.

This week, new figures have shown a 6.1 per cent increase in the number of NHS operations performed in the past year. Meanwhile, child and adolescent mental health service waiting times of more than 18 weeks are now at their lowest level since June 2013, with CAMHS targets having been met consistently for more than a year. That follows last week’s news that waiting lists in Scotland are continuing to fall, with waits of more than a year having decreased for eight consecutive months. Does the First Minister expect continuous improvements to delivery across our national health service?

To ask the Scottish Government what engagement it has had with the banking industry about maintaining access to face-to-face banking services on high streets. (S6O-05595)