Chamber and committees

I welcome the opportunity to speak in this debate and I thank Alex Cole-Hamilton for securing it.

As the Covid-19 pandemic continues, the need to understand and respond to long Covid is increasingly pressing. We have heard from members about the reported symptoms, such as persistent fatigue, breathlessness and depression, which can be debilitating for many people, and there are many other physical and psychological side effects.

The term “long Covid” is commonly used to describe signs and symptoms that continue or develop after Covid-19. Most evidence is limited and based on small cohorts with short follow-up. I read about research that was published in The Lancet by Dr Lixue Huang and colleagues, who reported 12-month outcomes from the largest cohort of hospitalised adult survivors of Covid-19 so far. They reported that, at one year, Covid-19 survivors

“had more mobility problems, pain or discomfort, and anxiety or depression than control participants ... Fatigue or muscle weakness was the most frequently reported symptom at both 6 months and 12 months, while almost half of patients reported having at least one symptom, such as sleep difficulties, palpitations, joint pain, or chest pain, at 12 months. The study shows that for many patients, full recovery from COVID-19 will take more than 1 year, and raises important issues for health services and research.”

I agree with the contention in the motion that long Covid is a condition of concern.

I was interested to hear about the impact of paediatric long Covid and the work of Dr Binita Kane and Elisa Perego in that regard. There is emerging scientific evidence that a not-insignificant percentage of children develop long-term symptoms following exposure to the SARS-CoV-2 virus. I was going to go into more detail about the paediatric research. It is interesting that acute kidney disease, immune dysfunction, lung perfusion defects and on-going inflammatory lung conditions have been reported up to 60 days into the post viral-infection period.

More than 1.1 million people are suffering from long Covid. This morning, I received an email from a constituent, who does not want me to give his name. He said that he is thankful that there is emerging research that will improve understanding of the illness, and he thought that it would be helpful to provide some explanation so that, in this debate, I could talk about the emerging evidence base. He said that cardiopulmonary exercise testing has demonstrated that patients with long Covid suffer from impaired systemic oxygen extraction. Basically, he said that long Covid is not a psychological illness; patients with long Covid cannot get oxygen from their blood to their cells. That results in multi-organ oxygen starvation, which explains their widespread symptoms.

A summary of acute Covid-19 effects includes blood clots and micro blood clots. There is laboratory equipment in Scotland that can test for the thrombogenic coagulation disorders that seem to be appearing in patients who are suffering from long Covid.

I support the approach that Scottish Government is putting in place. Research is still in its initial stages, but we need to take action as soon as possible.

Will the minister take one final intervention?

I appreciate your taking many interventions, minister. I know that we already have diagnostic tests that use fluorescence microscopy and thromboelastography platelet mapping. Is that part of the Government’s work on taking forward management of long Covid?

The member says that no support has been offered and that young people are doing this on their own. However, I have read that Dumfries and Galloway College, with support from the Scottish Government, is actively supporting young people to engage in digital courses. Is that not something that we should recognise?

I welcome the opportunity to speak in the debate. I welcome the speeches that we have heard so far, and I thank Michael Marra for taking my intervention, which I forgot to say at the time.

The financial, social, physical and mental health challenges that people across Scotland have faced during the Covid-19 pandemic have been extremely difficult. Scotland’s young people have felt the effects of the pandemic particularly hard. The pandemic has had a negative impact on people in sectors such as hospitality and tourism, which are hugely important in Dumfries and Galloway and the Scottish Borders.

To alleviate the pandemic’s impact, the Scottish Government has benefited young people looking to enter the workforce across Scotland through its investment of £70 million in the young persons guarantee, which offers every 16 to 24-year-old in Scotland the opportunity of a job or apprenticeship, further or higher education, or a training programme or volunteering opportunity. Since it was officially launched in November 2020, funding has been committed to create up to 18,000 training, job and apprenticeship opportunities for young people.

The funding includes £45 million for local partnerships to provide training and employer recruitment incentives, and £13.5 million for colleges, universities and the Scottish Funding Council to provide industry-focused courses, supporting up to 5,000 young people and providing employment support for 500 recent graduates.

The funding has allowed employers in Dumfries and Galloway such as Jas P Wilson, BSW Timber, Alpha Solway and DuPont Teijin Films to increase their numbers of modern apprenticeship places. I have visited all those employers, and I thank them for all the work that they do and for supporting our next generation workforce.

However, I have been contacted by local manufacturers, including Alpha Solway, which I visited two weeks ago, who feel that more work could be carried out to promote manufacturing as a positive career destination. Therefore, I ask the minister to ensure that Skills Development Scotland and Scottish Government officials work with manufacturing firms to ensure that young people are aware of the benefits of a career in Scottish manufacturing. That would also help to improve the resilience of our local manufacturing supply chains.

I welcome the £25 million national transition training fund, which has already helped 10,000 people, including 312 young folks across Dumfries and Galloway, to develop the skills that are required to move into sectors with the greatest potential for future growth.

I have recently been contacted by NFU Scotland, which has highlighted the need for rural skills to be a focus of the fund, as well as for agriculture and rural skills to be highlighted as positive destinations for people of all ages and, in particular, our young people. NFU Scotland believes that schools and career advisers do not promote the farming and food production sectors, which are often perceived as a last resort for less able or academic young people.

The farming sector requires an efficient, effective and user-friendly education and skills system that is responsive to the sector’s current and future needs. That is particularly important because agriculture will play a huge part in tackling the climate emergency. I therefore support all initiatives to ensure that we have a professional rural workforce that is equipped with the necessary skills and knowledge.

Previously, I met George Jamieson, who is a policy manager for NFU Scotland, to talk about NFUS’s report and its recommendations on how to improve the rural workforce, which, increasingly, is an ageing workforce. I have written to the Cabinet Secretary for Rural Affairs and Islands about how those recommendations could be taken forward, but I would be grateful if the minister would agree to meet George Jamieson and me to discuss the matter further.

Again, I welcome the debate and the steps that the Scottish Government has taken to support those who have suffered most during the pandemic. I highlight my asks for manufacturing and rural skills.

Good morning, everybody. I am interested in how the fact that the specialist mesh removal service exists has been communicated to the health boards. How do they know that it exists?

I have a couple of wee follow-up questions. Last week, we heard that some general practitioners might need help to diagnose mesh complications. What help is being provided to primary care to enable GPs to know that the service exists? What help and support will be given to GPs so that they are better able to refer?

Cabinet secretary, in your opening comments, you talked about Polish Scots and Pakistani Scots. What work will be done to help to engage women whose first language is not English and who might have experienced complications from mesh implants?

The bill is about reimbursement for women who have already paid for surgery. You represent the specialist mesh centre in Greater Glasgow. I read that 20,000 women had mesh implants in Scotland in the past 20 years and that some 600 have suffered agonising or debilitating complications. Can you assure the women watching this meeting that the specialist mesh centre will take a clear, person-centred approach? That would address some of the issues. Jackie Baillie mentioned one woman whose appointment will not be until July 2022. Is there a way to expedite that, so that there will be a truly person-centred approach?

Good morning, cabinet secretary, and thank you for giving us your time this morning. Given that the bill is on cost reimbursement for mesh removal, I am interested in women who have been affected and have already paid for surgery. Would women who raised the money through a crowdfunding platform still qualify for reimbursement?