Chamber and committees

Welcome back. The next item on our agenda is an evidence session with representatives of Food Standards Scotland. I welcome to the committee Heather Kelman, the chair of FSS; Ian McWatt, its deputy chief executive; and Dr Gillian Purdon, the head of healthy diet and nutrition. We will move straight to questions.

We are straying into the questions that David Torrance is about to ask.

I put on the record my entry in the register of members’ interests. I am employed as a bank nurse by NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde.

Earlier this year, I underlined my commitment as convener of the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee to ensuring that substantial further scrutiny of the Care Reform (Scotland) Bill would take place. I express my thanks to all those who contributed to that process and to all the stakeholders, members of the public and MSPs who shared their views.

We know that the social care system in Scotland needs to change. Partners across the public sector, including across local government and our national health service, agree. We have also heard repeatedly from people with lived experience that the current adult social care system must change to drive up standards in a consistent manner and ensure that there is access to high-quality social care across Scotland whenever it is needed.

The status quo is not an option. Change must be sustainable, our social care workforce must be allowed to flourish, and the sector must be future proofed. The Scottish Government has a long-standing commitment to the principles of fair work for the social care sector that is underlined by a total investment of £950 million to improve pay. That commitment sits alongside a clear focus on both local and national workforce planning, leadership and learning and development support for the sector. Irrespective of the bill, the Scottish Government has been committed to taking immediate action to improve outcomes for people who access care and support.

Throughout the bill’s progress, the Government was committed to listening and engaging, and it revisited its approach to further engage with people who have lived experience, COSLA and the NHS, among others. The new non-statutory advisory board is allowing vital reform to be driven forward at pace, bringing key partners together. We are already seeing progress across Scotland in reducing delayed discharges thanks to a focus on supporting the local areas that are experiencing the most challenges.

The changes that are before us today will improve the lives of those who have been calling for reform. People have told us about their frustration and trauma when they have had to share their stories repeatedly. That is why a key component of the bill is enhanced information sharing to improve co-ordination, ensure consistent information standards and lay the foundations for integrated digital approaches that will make it easier for people to access and manage information about their care.

The bill recognises the incredible contribution that is made by unpaid carers in our communities. It introduces a right to breaks to support people to protect their wellbeing and sustain caring relationships. This year’s budget provides £13 million for voluntary sector short breaks, which represents an uplift of £5 million, and a working group has been established to bring together carers and third and statutory sector representatives to make sure that their voices are central to on-going discussions on the matter.

The implementation of Anne’s law will give adult care home residents a legal right to see their loved ones, formally recognising the role of their family and friends in providing care, support and companionship. It is a formal recognition that family and friends are not simply visitors; they are an integral and essential part of the care team for their loved ones. The core elements of Anne’s law are already in place through guidance and strengthened health and social care standards on visiting for care homes, but the Government is committed to enshrining that in legislation.

Ultimately, all of us in the Parliament share a common goal. We all want everyone to have access to consistently high-quality social care support across Scotland, whenever and wherever they might need it, and we want our social care workforce to flourish. That goal is also shared by the social care sector, the public, families, their loved ones and, most importantly, those whose lives and wellbeing depend on us getting this right. So, let us get on with it.

On a point of order, I understand that amendment 79 in this group, lodged by Jackie Baillie, contains provisions that are outwith the legislative competence of the Scottish Parliament, as they relate to employment rights and duties and industrial relations, which are, of course, reserved matters under schedule 5 of the Scotland Act 1998.

In line with rule 9.10.5 of the standing orders, which establishes four criteria for the admissibility of amendments—proper form, relevance, consistency with general principles and consistency with decisions already taken—can the Deputy Presiding Officer please confirm that legislative competence is not included in those criteria and that neither the assistance of parliamentary clerks in drafting an amendment nor the selection of an amendment for debate is an indication that an amendment is within the legislative competence of this Parliament?

I absolutely get that, but the Mental Welfare Commission did not seem to pick up on the malpractice that was occurring in the unit, despite the numerous visits and despite other issues being raised that might have rung alarm bells. You say that you make recommendations. Do you think that the Mental Welfare Commission needs more teeth?

No—I am asking whether the MWC is involved in developing and sharing best practice.

Mr Sweeney, could you repeat your question? We lost a part of it.

Thank you. We are over an hour into our session and we have reached only the halfway point of our questions, so I ask members to be concise with their questions and witnesses to try and be more precise with their answers. I will go to Stephanie Callaghan.

Ms Callaghan is not online—oh, she is there.

Your camera must be off, Ms Callaghan.

The fourth item on our agenda is further consideration of a negative instrument. The purpose of the instrument is to create a duty for relevant clinicians to notify the Human Tissue Authority if they are made aware that their patient has received a transplant outside the United Kingdom or if they have a reasonable suspicion that specified offences under human tissue or modern slavery legislation may have been committed. The Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee considered the instrument at its meeting on 13 May 2025 and made no recommendations in relation to the instrument. No motion to annul has been received in relation to the instrument.

The committee considered the instrument at its meeting on 20 May and decided to write to the Minister for Public Health and Women’s Health to request additional information on it. The committee received a response from the minister on 27 May, which has been published on the committee’s web pages.

As members have no comments to make, I propose that the committee does not make any recommendations in relation to the negative instrument. Are we agreed?

Members indicated agreement.