Good morning to you—and I see that we also have online engagement this morning.

I declare an interest: I am a registered nurse, and I am the co-convener of the cross-party group on lung health in the Parliament.

I am interested in the data. If you are suggesting that vaping is how people quit smoking, I would comment that I know people who have been vaping for 10 years. Is there a tail-off in some of your data? My understanding is that vaping is not good for the lungs. It causes asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Nicotine is addictive—it is bad for you and it can cause hardening of the arteries. There are some issues around blood pressure increase and so on. I would be interested to hear about data on how long people vape for once they stop smoking cigarettes.

Good morning to you both—actually, it is almost good afternoon. Earlier you probably heard me asking John Dunne about the exclusion of the submissions of 307 respondents to the UK-wide consultation. I am interested in your thoughts on the rationale behind those exclusions. You probably heard me asking about conflicts of interests, for instance.

Can I ask another wee quick question? John Dunne said that he supports the introduction of a licensing scheme, but that will not go ahead under the bill. What is the problem with having such a scheme?

The notes in front of me say that

“The UK-wide consultation on the legislation excluded 307 respondents”.

What are your thoughts on that? A conflict of interests is what comes to my mind, but what are your thoughts about the exclusion of 307 respondents?

We hear feedback about young people vaping before they ever have a cigarette. For young people it is not about quitting smoking. We are seeing pink, blue and green Puff Candy, candyfloss flavour and all that. That seems to be direct targeting of young people so that they start taking nicotine into their lungs.

With digital connectivity, the resilience of the network, cyberresilience and cybersecurity come to mind. There have been recent issues with NHS Dumfries and Galloway experiencing a cyberattack. Is that more of a challenge in remote and rural areas, or is that the same no matter which health board we are thinking about?

I welcome what the First Minister is describing as the Scottish Government’s determination to ensure that lessons are learned from the infected blood scandal. Will the First Minister say a wee bit more about the make-up of the oversight group that the Scottish Government has established to consider the inquiry’s recommendations for Scotland?

I did not intend to speak, but on listening to the contributions—and having read the epilepsy briefing that was sent to us by Andrew Lindsay ahead of the debate—I thought that I would jump to my feet. I thank Marie McNair for bringing the debate to the chamber.

On reading the briefing, I was surprised by the additional items on depression, anxiety, obsessive-compulsive disorder and post-traumatic stress disorder; Pam Gosal mentioned depression and anxiety. It is an important issue. Briefing papers to us in the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee also included something about raising awareness on anxiety and depression in persons with epilepsy.

I am a type 1 diabetic. As part of my care, about once a year, when I go to my doctor’s appointment they give me a self-assessment tool for depression and anxiety, because those are higher in type 1 diabetics. The self-assessment that is used is the hospital anxiety and depression scale—the HADS scale—which uses the scale 3, 2, 1 and zero to assess the level of anxiety and depression.

I am also co-convener of the lung health cross-party group and the diabetes cross-party group, where we have had discussions on the assessment of anxiety and depression in people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, as well as persons with diabetes.

I just want to raise awareness of assessment tools such as the HADS, and I seek to make sure that people who self-assess know that they can access a healthcare professional if they score highly on a scale that might indicate that they need to do so. I would be interested to hear from the minister any comments on self-assessment—including, crucially, the need for people who act on any self-assessment scale to know when they should seek assistance and support.

On the point about high quality, I am interested in the work of Henry Dimbleby and Chris van Tulleken on the links between the safety of food and obesity related to ultra-high-processed food. I know that a Government consultation on high fat levels, sugar and salt in food is currently under way. Will the cabinet secretary continue to engage in looking at the evidence on ultra-high-processed food and how it impacts on health in Scotland?

Given what the cabinet secretary has said about co-design and working with us, I will not move amendment 88.

Amendment 88 not moved.

Amendment 196 moved—[Edward Mountain].