Chamber and committees

My question is for Philip Whyte. I have some bits of paper in front of me about preventative approaches. Henry Dimbleby has written a lot about ultra-processed foods, and Professor Pekka Puska has done work in Finland on reducing the mortality of people through a whole-system approach by getting restaurants, cafes and supermarkets involved in providing healthier choices that are affordable for people. I am thinking about having preventative spend rather than secondary care constantly fighting fires. Something has to shift in the way that we invest, in order to stop folk getting into the hospital in the first place and to stop people being sick.

I am also looking at our paper on non-communicable disease prevention. My colleagues Gillian Mackay, Carol Mochan, Sandesh Gulhane and Foysol Choudhury and I have been part of a cross-party approach to look at non-communicable diseases, which contributed around 53,000 deaths in 2022 in Scotland. Something needs to be done differently. What do you suggest that we cut in order to move funding to preventative spend? There is only one pot of money, and it is a real challenge to figure out what we need to do differently.

Thank you.

I want to come in on the back of other questions that have been asked. In chapter 2 of its “Tipping the Scales” report, IPPR Scotland says:

“Important action has been taken within devolved powers ... demonstrating what can be achieved with political will and investment.”

The report talks about the devolution of new welfare powers and the establishment of Social Security Scotland. More than £1 billion has been spent on 12 new benefits, which include council tax reduction, the Scottish child payment and the best start grant.

A lot of those benefits are outside the health portfolio. Ministers in the Scottish Government such as the Minister for Housing and the Minister for Social Care, Mental Wellbeing and Sport have their own portfolios, but everything crosses over in relation to health improvement, so I am interested in how we consider the budget.

We should value what has been set up by Social Security Scotland—it focuses on fairness, dignity and respect rather than taking the punitive approach that the Department for Work and Pensions takes. Should anything else be picked up in relation to which form of welfare support would help to improve Scotland’s safety net?

Okay, thank you.

I suppose that it is an NHS board’s responsibility to deliver. The Government has a plan but the NHS board would be the one to deliver the women’s health plan in NHS Lothian, for instance. NHS Lothian would propose how it would monitor the delivery of its plans and the outcomes that it has achieved.

I am asking because I am the co-convener of the wellbeing economy cross-party group and we have had lots of interesting discussion about how it is good to support wellbeing as a nation and not just to measure productivity on GDP.

We will probably come back to tackling poverty, but I have a question on that issue. Certain things are reserved to the UK Government and some items, such as health, are devolved, but the money is not. What role do food producers and retailers have in engaging with Government to look at how we support diets that are healthier and ensure that people can afford healthier food? Some of the food that is marketed right now, such as processed food, is jam-packed full of calories and does not tell your brain that you are satiated, so you keep eating. There is emerging research on that, which I find pretty fascinating. Is there a role for supermarkets, restaurants and cafes to work with Government to help to deliver a less obesogenic environment?

I, too, congratulate my colleague Gillian Mackay on securing what is obviously a hugely important debate, given the number of MSPs who are speaking in it.

I also thank Asthma + Lung UK Scotland, the British Lung Foundation and ASH Scotland for their engagement and very helpful briefings ahead of the debate.

I also need to give a shout out to a couple of people in the youth work department of Dumfries and Galloway Council—Kelly Ross and Mark Molloy. We have met and are starting to work together to highlight and tackle vaping among our young people across Dumfries and Galloway.

As co-convener of the cross-party group on lung health and a registered nurse, I am really interested in the impact of vaping on lung health, especially in the light of the very serious health concerns that medical experts have expressed, but I am also interested in the issue that is raised in Gillian Mackay’s motion—the environmental impact of single-use vapes and the safety of the devices.

I know that we are a bit challenged for time today, so I will just pick up on a couple of points. The materials that are used in disposable vapes make them a potential hazard to humans, wildlife and the environment when they are thrown away, and the lithium that is used for the batteries is a precious metal of which we are already facing a global shortage. In the past year in the UK, more than 10 tonnes of lithium has been thrown out with disposable vapes—enough to make batteries for 1,200 electric cars. If we are to address the climate emergency and enable a green transition, we need to make the best use of scarce materials such as lithium. If disposable vapes were rechargeable, for example, they could be reused up to 300 times, which would drastically reduce the number of vapes that end up in landfill every day.

Vaping can reduce lung function, due to gas-exchange disturbance and inflammation of tissue. In my career as a nurse in the operating room, I have worked laparoscopically on people’s lungs, and I have seen directly the lung damage that is caused by cigarette smoking. We are, however, now starting to see e-cigarette or vaping-associated lung injury—or EVALI. A public health investigation in Illinois and Wisconsin in the United States found that the median age of patients suffering from EVALI was 21—21 years old, Presiding Officer. Despite what the industry might say, nicotine has a detrimental health effect, adolescents are more vulnerable to nicotine dependency than adults are and chronic nicotine exposure can impact on brain development.

At Gillian Mackay’s round-table event on Monday, we heard from Dr Jonathan Coutts, who also presented at a lung health cross-party group meeting that my colleague Alexander Stewart and I attended a few months ago. He presented the facts on the harm that vaping does to young people’s brains. We know that it has an impact on brain development; it can contribute to cognitive and attention-deficit conditions and worsen mood disorders, including depression and suicidal thoughts.

It is a huge issue and it is clear that something needs to be done. For example, one of the statistics that I found is that using one vape is like smoking 52 cigarettes, so clearly we need to be concerned about the matter.

I would like to know from the minister whether the United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020 will need to be considered if we are proposing changes to regulation, and I would be interested to find out whether there will need to be some kind of exclusion from that act to allow regulations to be taken forward.

In closing—

I am on my last sentence, Presiding Officer. I was just going to thank Gillian Mackay again.

In the programme for government, there was an announcement about the reopening of the independent living fund. Are you able to speak a wee bit about that?