Chamber and committees

Thank you, Presiding Officer. It might have been my fault for not having pressed my button.

My question, like Maurice Golden’s, is about school pupils who will be taking part in Christmas events as the holidays approach. In the light of the continued threat that the virus poses to family members at home, what guidance is being provided to schools to ensure that such events can take place safely?

I am pleased to be speaking in the debate, and I thank my colleague Emma Harper for bringing it to the chamber. She has been a champion of lung health and COPD since being elected, and was instrumental in the publication of the “Respiratory Care Action Plan”, as well as starting the lung health cross-party group.

COPD is an umbrella term that is used to describe several lung conditions, including emphysema and chronic bronchitis. As we have heard, world COPD day is tomorrow and its theme is “Healthy Lungs—Never More Important”. The condition affects 140,000 people across Scotland, and an estimated 200,000 people—that is a lot of people—are said to be living with undiagnosed COPD.

Exposure to tobacco smoke and other inhaled toxic particles and gases is the main COPD risk factor. The condition causes the lungs to narrow and harden, making breathing difficult, and sometimes impossible, without oxygen. It affects middle-aged and older people, and it usually gets worse over time. However, like all health conditions, the outlook varies from person to person. The condition cannot be cured or reversed but, for many people, treatment can help to keep it under control so that it does not severely limit their daily activities or affect their quality of life too adversely.

Treatments for COPD include inhalers, tablets and, for a small number of people, surgery or even a lung transplant. As we have heard, the British Lung Foundation and Asthma UK recently published “Failing on the fundamentals”, a report of a survey of more than 8,000 people from across the four nations of the UK who have a diagnosis of COPD. One of the questions that the survey asked those who are living with COPD was whether they felt that they were receiving the five principles of care, which are the offer of smoking cessation support, pneumococcal and flu vaccines, pulmonary rehabilitation, a personalised self-management plan, and optimised treatment for co-morbidities. Worryingly, the majority of respondents conveyed that they were not receiving the five principles.

That is why I welcome the steps that the Scottish Government is taking to improve the outcomes of those living with COPD, including the publication of the “Respiratory Care Action Plan” in March, which sets out the Government’s vision for driving improvements in the care and support received by people living with this lung condition.

As Carol Mochan very well articulated, poverty and poor housing conditions play a large part in the prevalence of COPD, with smoking, damp housing and pollution adding to the likelihood of a person contracting COPD. Housing, of course, is down to Government policies and priorities, which is why the Scottish Government is implementing an ambitious plan to provide 110,000 warm affordable homes by 2032.

Of course, if a person is to avoid the fast deterioration of their lungs and give them a chance to heal, stopping smoking is a must. So, too, is the avoidance of polluted areas where possible, and again our new climate change and carbon emissions reduction targets will help future generations in that regard.

Scotland’s industrial past always features in the causes of COPD. Asbestosis was another form of lung disease that was rife among workers of my parents’ generation in the shipyards or construction. Thankfully, we know much more about health and safety in the workplace and those risks have been minimised, but many generations paid a heavy price just to put food on the table for their families.

I thank Emma Harper again for bringing this important debate to the chamber, and I look forward to progress being made on this vital issue.

Following on from the convener’s questions, I want to ask about the new women’s custodial estate. I believe that there are about 230 places for women in the new estate but, just now, there are approximately 400 women, including remand prisoners, in prison. Will you comment on the capacity of the new estate? I would like to think that it has been made that size because fewer women will be sent to prison—I really hope that that is the case. Has there been any thought or planning on whether there might not be enough space in the new women’s estate?

I think that everyone is agreed that we have to keep children out of prison. I will ask about the current funding model for secure care for children. I am aware that the money does not come from the justice budget. I am also aware that you, cabinet secretary, are meeting the director of a secure care unit in my constituency next month.

Will the funding model be looked at? The committee heard about that issue in last week’s evidence session, and the current situation seems odd, to say the least. The model is not adequate in the view of the people who are delivering secure care, so is that on the agenda?

On alternatives to custody and community justice, the emphasis will be on third sector organisations, whose involvement will be even more crucial than it is now once such disposals are expanded. In the previous parliamentary session, the Justice Committee called for multiyear funding settlements for third sector organisations, as is the case in the health service, for example. The benefits of that are obvious, such as security and forward planning. Is there any chance that the Government will consider multiyear funding for the new policies that are being introduced so that third sector organisations have security?

My question is probably for Gerry O’Donnell. It is about funding for secure care facilities for young people.

You will be aware that there is a Scottish Government policy move, which I thoroughly endorse, that all children under 18 will be held in secure care rather than go to a young offenders institution such as Polmont. The funding model has been causing problems for some time, and the submission from HM Inspectorate of Prisons for Scotland refers to the importance of adequately resourcing secure care to receive children under the age of 18. It says that a “different funding model” will be required.

The inspectorate says that, at the moment, the model requires the facilities

“to maintain full capacity and spaces are routinely taken by children from England to meet the financial imperatives.”

I know that to be true, because there is a secure care facility in my constituency.

What is your view on that point? I do not know whether you feel that you are in a position to comment, but are you aware of it?

Thank you, convener. I will try to keep this brief.

I will ask some questions about violence against women and girls. I thank you, Lord Advocate, for speaking so passionately about the subject and its unique nature. I whole-heartedly agree with everything that you said on that. You also said in your opening statement that funding was adequate for the normal level of cases based on pre-pandemic levels. Given that the number of solemn cases of domestic abuse has gone up by 20 per cent since 2019 and given the huge backlogs about which we have spoken, is this the time for something radical? Would you be in favour of a specialist court? Will you have enough funding to cope with the extreme figures that you mentioned?

That is fine. I just wanted to put on record that there is a sea change happening, and that the funding could possibly change.

Following on from the previous question, what measures are in place to support vulnerable defendants and witnesses during Covid-19 and the current action of legal aid solicitors?

I am pleased to be speaking in the debate, and I thank my colleague Collette Stevenson for bringing it to the chamber. I echo her comments about the great work that has been done by our colleagues, Christina McKelvie and Gillian Martin.

Thankfully, the days of the menopause being viewed as a bit of a joke are coming to an end, and not before time. Around 400,000 women in Scotland are of menopausal age, and more than half suffer a variety of distressing symptoms, such as memory loss, insomnia, anxiety, palpitations, hot flushes, joint pain and much more. Therefore, mugs, napkins, aprons, car stickers and other rubbish, all emblazoned with so-called slogans about the change are not really funny at all. That is why I welcome the Scottish Government’s women’s health plan, which aims to reduce stigma, raise awareness and get people talking about an issue that affects more than half of our population and is perfectly normal.

Sadly, women’s health issues have been taboo subjects in society for as long as I can remember. When it comes to talking and being open about such issues, subjects such as menstruation, endometriosis, thyroid conditions and in vitro fertilisation treatment are often swept under the carpet, particularly in the workplace.

The menopause exacerbates gender inequality in the workplace. We know that there are increasing numbers of older women in employment and that many more women than previously will experience the menopause while at work. Some will sail through it, but others will not. That is why I am glad to see that we are at last making some headway. I welcome the Scottish Government’s women’s health plan, which aims to alleviate women’s health inequalities and ensure that women have access to specialist menopause services.

Praise should go to South Lanarkshire Council, which is the first local authority to implement a menopause policy to support women in the workplace. Other employers, both public and private, must have buy-in, too. A menopause policy will give women peace of mind and reassurance that they will be understood, their symptoms recognised, and support and flexibility will be offered if they need it. That is really not too much to ask in a civilised society. It is not acceptable for employers to jeopardise a woman’s career by showing a lack of understanding and respect around this perfectly natural process.

In the summer of 2019, the excellent feminist charity Engender undertook a survey as part of a research project seeking to understand how current Scottish policy meets the needs of women going through the menopause. It found that most women still felt inadequately supported and that many women simply did not know where to go for information: 40 per cent reported not feeling informed about the menopause, an additional 10 per cent reported that they were unsure whether they were informed and only 15 per cent reported being aware of the existence of specialist menopause services.

We must do better. In response to the question, “What would help you manage your menopause symptoms while you are at work?”, the most common responses included access to fans and temperature control, breaks in work days, flexible working, and greater mental health and wellbeing support generally.

The good news is that not all women felt negative about the menopause. Several indicated that they perceived it as either a neutral or a positive transition. For example, one respondent used these words to describe the menopause:

“Liberation, fun, wellbeing, joy, happy”.

Let us get rid of the stigma, increase support, collect and utilise further data—especially from underrepresented groups—do more medical research, raise awareness, and scale up specialist services and make them equally available across health boards for women needing support.

Women of future generations must not endure the same stigma, misinformation and, frankly, indifference to this perfectly natural process in women’s lives. Let us ensure that, with the correct support, women can embrace their newfound freedom to enrich their lives.