Chamber and committees

It is just a quick question. What has been learned from the Sturrock review, which has been taken forward in other NHS boards?

How are women advised about waiting times, for instance, or what they should expect? Do you have feedback around the processes? Is the communication done electronically or by letter or telephone call? How do we ensure that each individual feels that their preferred way of communicating is what is used?

I am interested in going right back to the beginning, knowing what we now know about complications caused by mesh implanted for stress urinary incontinence. As a nurse who worked in the operating theatre, I participated in anterior and posterior pelvic floor repair operations. However, before we even go there, is there work being done to encourage continence nurses, physios, midwives, and so on, to talk about things such as pelvic floor exercises? That advice would be free. Are we measuring whether that work, which might mitigate the need for any surgical intervention in the first place, is happening?

One of my former colleagues teaches Pilates, and she also does pelvic floor exercises as part of that, to destigmatise the issue. She sees young women in schools and is breaking down the barriers of conversation. Do you support taking education out to schools before young women start having experiences that might lead to urinary incontinence?

Professor Archibald, you talked about prevention and keeping folk out of hospital. I am the convener of the cross-party group in the Scottish Parliament on lung health. We talk about keeping fit, healthy and out of hospital people who have chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. It is the same for asthma. Are you undertaking such work as well?

I, too, thank Beatrice Wishart for securing the debate. I will start by supporting some of what she has said in her motion.

We all know, and we all agree, that fishing is hugely important to Scotland’s coastal communities, including those across Dumfries and Galloway and the Scottish Borders. I also agree that any decision should be taken on the basis of robust evidence and an assessment of its impact, and that stakeholders must be fully involved in the process.

In March, after nearly 20 years of discussion, 193 countries agreed to a new high seas treaty, which will protect 30 per cent of the ocean by 2030. The UK Government also recently announced the creation of three highly protected marine areas in English waters, one of which is on the English side of the Solway Firth.

It is internationally accepted that the world needs to do more to look after the marine environment, and there is cross-party support for HPMAs across the UK. However, the process by which they are achieved must be carefully managed and people’s livelihoods—and, indeed, the way of life in many of our coastal communities—must be considered and even protected. Any change must be made with full consultation with those communities.

A vast amount of work needs to be done before any location is decided on. Acceptable socioeconomic impact should be a key indicator of whether a successful outcome can be achieved. As things stand—and based on the feedback that has been provided to me—the policy agreement seems a bit unclear about the degree to which designations in the Scottish inshore region would contribute towards the overall 10 per cent target that applies to inshore and offshore regions.

Galloway is home to many inshore fishers, who fish in the Solway and the Irish Sea and beyond. Scotland’s inshore waters extend from the coast out to 12 nautical miles, and fishing activity is concentrated within 6 nautical miles of the coast. There are more than 2,000 active Scottish fishing vessels, three quarters of which fish primarily in inshore waters. That inshore fleet is diverse and includes trawlers, creelers, netters, dredgers and divers, and we should absolutely thank them all for putting food on our tables. The sector contributes £284 million to Scotland’s economy and provides employment for many people in our rural communities. I also appreciate Karen Adam’s point about the importance of the blue economy.

The Galloway Static Gear Inshore Fishermen’s Association, the Clyde Fishermen’s Association and other bodies that represent fishing interests have contacted me as an MSP for South Scotland, a region that has coastal waters on both sides, and have asked me to convey their concerns. On behalf of my constituents, I want to ask whether the 10 per cent target for HPMAs, which is perceived as being arbitrary, can be removed and, instead, a focus on acceptable socioeconomic impact can be considered.

They also want to know whether the exclusion from HPMAs of current inshore waters, such as those in the Solway and the Irish Sea, can be considered, and whether clarity can be provided on the evidence base for restricting water sports, including swimming and kayaking, in HPMAs. That is an important issue for folk in the Loch Ryan area. I also ask the cabinet secretary for a commitment that, before any HPMA is established, our static and mobile gear fishing communities will be properly consulted and their concerns addressed.

The purpose of HPMAs, in so far as they align with Scotland’s nature conservation strategy, is reasonable, and the principle of taking a whole-site approach in targeted areas would, we hope, achieve positive biodiversity outcomes. [Interruption.] I cannot give way to members—I think that I am in the final 10 seconds of my speech. With the implementation of such a programme of work, there must be appropriate recognition of the drastic step change that it will represent for designations in the marine space and the existing users and coastal communities that will be affected.

Positive biodiversity aspirations are important, as are actions to support them. I know that any actions that are taken will be well considered by the cabinet secretary, to ensure that outcomes are successful and just.

I will conclude there, as I am conscious of the time. The target for protecting these areas must consider all waters, not just those for which the Scottish Government currently has delegated authority. The integration of critical socioeconomic considerations and thorough community engagement must be embedded at an early point in the process.

Paul O’Kane is talking about how we address social isolation. Does he think that there should be specific consideration for rural versus urban areas, which might mean that we do stuff differently?

I welcome the opportunity to speak in the debate. I thank all the organisations that have provided briefings and that work each day to address social isolation and loneliness. I, too, welcome the minister to her role. I am sure that she will be braw.

There is increasing recognition of social isolation and loneliness as major public health issues. Many members across the chamber have discussed that already. We know that social isolation and loneliness can have a significant impact on a person’s physical and mental wellbeing. That is why the £3.8 million social isolation and loneliness fund aims to reduce inequality by bringing together people from communities across Scotland. However, as the minister described, we are in the midst of a cost of living crisis, which has been made worse by the Tory Government’s economic mismanagement and Brexit.

I will make a further point about that. It is no coincidence that the International Monetary Fund predicts that the UK is set to be the worst-performing economy in the G20. The disastrous UK Government’s September mini-budget created unnecessary additional financial hardship for households and businesses across the country. Brexit is forecast to deal a 4 per cent hit to the UK gross domestic product, with UK imports and exports expected to be 15 per cent lower than if the country had remained in the European Union with continued access to the single market and the customs union.

People across Scotland are paying a steep price for that economic incompetence, the forced austerity and Brexit. The current high level of inflation—it is at 10.4 per cent—is hurting the most vulnerable people and heaping more pressure on to our public services. The UK is expected to suffer the biggest fall in living standards since records began in the 1950s, with real household disposable income expected to fall by 5.7 per cent over 2022-23 and 2023-24. The Resolution Foundation found that 15 years of stagnating wages have left UK workers £11,000 worse off per year.

Members might be asking what that has to do with social isolation and loneliness. The evidence is clear: the Tory cost of living crisis means that the poorest and most vulnerable in our society are more likely to experience poorer mental and physical wellbeing, lower life satisfaction and feelings of loneliness. Without a doubt, that will have an impact on people’s ability to make and maintain connections, take up opportunities to interact with one another and stay physically and mentally healthy.

Paul O’Kane mentioned the Red Cross research. Results of an online opinion poll for the British Red Cross that were released in December 2022 show that 81 per cent of Scottish people agreed that the increased cost of living will make more people lonely, while 43 per cent of respondents said that they would restrict how much they socialise because the cost of living is going up.

More than a quarter of adults in Scotland have accessed the NHS due to the impact of the cost of living crisis on their mental and physical health according to new research by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation. Social isolation and loneliness are public health issues that have been exacerbated by the pandemic and will continue to affect people. Obviously, the cost crisis is the paramount issue that needs to be dealt with.

Support for community groups that bring people and communities together to tackle isolation was launched in March. The £3.8 million social isolation and loneliness fund is part of the “Recovering our Connections 2023-2026” plan, which aims to reduce inequality by bringing together people from communities across Scotland. It will provide vital long-term support for organisations and projects working on the ground to bring people together and build connections in communities throughout the country.

There are a number of organisations working across Dumfries and Galloway and the Scottish Borders that meet those aims. Change Mental Health—formerly Support in Mind Scotland—has bases in Stranraer, Dumfries and Castle Douglas. I have visited two of them already with former MSP Jim Hume, who is a Change Mental Health director. We witnessed the incredible work that the staff and volunteers do as they bring people together for various activities that tackle isolation.

Eildon Housing Association in Hawick is a social registered landlord and does specific work to tackle social isolation.

Another fantastic organisation is Dumfries and Galloway LGBT Plus on Newall Terrace in the toun of Dumfries and in Stranraer. The team, led by Iain Campbell, works together with LGBT+ people of all ages to provide support, to bring people together and to tackle loneliness. It also works to promote LGBT+ acceptance and, specifically, to reduce and tackle stigma across Dumfries and Galloway.

D and G is a rural area and it is a challenge for people at times to address their social needs and their isolation. Dumfries and Galloway LGBT Plus has drop-in sessions, attends the agricultural shows, delivers training and education and has a great online presence. I have met the team on a number of occasions and I have heard how many LGBT+ people, particularly in rural D and G, rarely get the chance to interact with one another due to the rurality and the challenges around acceptance, so its work is vital. I invite the minister to come and meet the team when her diary allows.

I welcome the work that has been done by the Scottish Government. I applaud the fantastic organisations across Scotland, including across Dumfries and Galloway and the Scottish Borders, to tackle isolation, and I welcome a positive outcome for the “Recovering our Connections 2023-2026” plan. Finally, we cannae keep mitigating Tory policies without full fiscal ability. We can do so much better as a normal independent country.

The debate was pretty consensual until what we heard from the previous speaker.

I thank Shelter Scotland, Homes for Scotland and all the other organisations that provided briefings for this debate. I also thank them for all the work that they do to support the needs of people who are experiencing homelessness. I welcome the minister to his new role, as well.

The housing supply and tackling homelessness are crucial issues if we are to become a fairer nation that is focused on advancing the wellbeing economy. In the UK, Scotland has led the way in delivering affordable and social housing. More than 118,124 homes, to be accurate—as the minister said in his opening speech—have been delivered under the SNP since 2007, compared with six, I think, under the previous Labour Administration. If Labour is serious about tackling homelessness, it must recognise that the Scottish Government is working to tackle poverty with one hand tied behind its back.

I didnae really want to interrupt the minister’s speech, but I am thinking about a place in Dumfries that is good at supporting people with autism into employment. The Usual Place does a great job in supporting people into work and long-term employment. Does the minister agree that that is a good example of something that we should support? She might want to come and visit Dumfries some time down the line.