Chamber and committees

I have written notes based on what we have received in evidence, and I reiterate the intention behind the minimum unit pricing policy. I will restate some of the content of the correspondence that the committee received from the Association of Directors of Public Health north-east on 20 March. ADPH north-east said:

“As partners based in the North East of England—the region which suffers from the worst alcohol harms in England”,

the public health directors there

“have watched the positive impact of MUP in Scotland with huge interest and admiration. At a time when alcohol deaths in England and especially here in the North East are at an all-time high,”

ADPH north-east is asking for

“similarly proactive and enlightened public health policies to reduce alcohol harm and protect the most vulnerable in our communities.”

The directors of public health in the north-east of England

“are hugely supportive of Scottish Ministers’ proposal to continue and uprate MUP and agree with the level of at least 65 pence per unit.”

According to ADPH north-east,

“The evidence is clear that the policy has achieved its aim of reducing alcohol-related harm by both reducing population consumption and by targeting the consumption of people drinking at higher levels. It has also contributed to reducing alcohol-related health inequalities.”

It also says that

“The evidence from Scotland is clear—MUP works by targeting the cheapest, most harmful alcohol and we hope that the Scottish Government will see fit to continue and uprate MUP, as part of its enlightened evidence-based approach to public health.”

In addition, we received a letter that has been signed by more than 80 medical faith organisations and charities, calling for cross-party support to continue MUP. As I flicked through the letter, I noted their comment that the policy has meant that

“an estimated 156 families each year ... have been spared the loss of a loved one. Alcohol can have a serious impact at every stage of life, with the impact in pregnancy having a lifelong effect on the child. Hospital admissions are down by an estimated 4.1%, reducing the pressure on our NHS.”

I will read the final sentence from that letter, which I will tweak a wee bit to highlight that I agree with it. It says that

“Now that it has been seen to work,”

those organisations—and I—support

“the continuation of this policy ... to uprate MUP to save more lives.”

Thank you for being here this morning. I am interested in how the pandemic impacted alcohol consumption. I have a wee brief in front of me from Alcohol Focus Scotland, which talks about 156 lives being saved and 499 hospital admissions being averted per year, on average. Did the pandemic impact on the data that was being measured by Public Health Scotland?

I forgot to remind everybody that I am a registered nurse and a former liver transplant nurse.

As co-convener of the cross-party group on lung health, I recently heard from a mother about how her school-aged daughter has experienced anxiety, agitation, aggression, depression and a shortage of breath since starting to vape. She has also missed school. What further steps can be taken to minimise the health impacts of youth vaping?

I welcome the opportunity to speak in the stage 3 debate, not least because I am member of the Rural Affairs and Islands Committee and because I lodged a number of amendments to the bill at both stage 2 and stage 3. I very much appreciate the minister’s help with that.

It has been interesting to be part of the scrutiny process for the bill, which supports wildlife management and muirburn. I will focus my comments mostly on birds of prey. Fundamentally, we know that—as members from all parties have stated—the illegal killing of Scotland’s magnificent birds of prey cannot be tolerated. It is right, therefore, that the bill seeks to tackle the destructive minority who continue to commit those wildlife crimes.

As a representative of a large rural area in the South Scotland region, I think that it is important to put on record that the Scottish Government recognises the economic contribution of grouse shooting to Scotland’s economy. Wildlife crime is abhorrent, reprehensible and unacceptable, and the persecution of birds of prey has no place in a modern Scotland. It is also completely at odds with work to address the biodiversity crisis, which is supported by many people and organisations across Scotland.

I thank all of Scotland’s GPs for the invaluable work that they do to support the health and wellbeing needs of people across the country. I worked as a nurse for more than 30 years and know how valuable, essential and important our GPs and the multidisciplinary teams in GP practices are.

I am really sorry that I will not be able to stay for the whole debate, and I thank the Presiding Officer for agreeing to let me leave for a meeting that I had already arranged.

I pay tribute to Douglas Ross and also, as he did, to the save our surgeries group. I welcome some of its members, who are in the public gallery. It is clear that the group—like many community action groups, such as the Galloway community hospital action group in my South Scotland region—is crucial in advocating service improvements and enhancements and advances in healthcare delivery, which should be delivered at a local level.

I have said that I am not taking any interventions.

It is worth repeating that the Scottish Government recognises that grouse shooting contributes immensely to the rural economy. For many years, conservation groups have reported the number of raptors over grouse moors to be lower than expected.

I will touch on one other issue, because I realise that we are short of time. The introduction of muirburn licensing—one of the subjects to which my amendments to the bill related—will ensure that muirburn is undertaken in a safe, environmentally sustainable manner in line with best practice. The licensing scheme will allow muirburn for a number of purposes, including preventing and reducing the risk of wildfires.

I know that time is really short, so I will conclude. The bill is important in ensuring that the balance between conservation, muirburn and wildlife management is supported and sustained. Finally, I thank the committee clerks, all the witnesses and colleagues for their input to the bill.

Can the cabinet secretary further detail how the record funding provided by local government—which was provided to it by the Scottish Government—is improving outcomes for young people with additional support needs, including in Dumfries and Galloway?

I will not, because I have only four minutes. I am sorry, but I also have to shoot out of here to meet the George Washington University students.

The statistics that Douglas Ross mentioned really highlight the challenges that older people in rural areas face with travel to different areas. He mentioned a four-hour bus journey to get to Lossiemouth, which would be quite a challenge for older people.

Turning to Douglas Ross’s motion, having looked into the case, I agree that the closure of the Hopeman and Burghead surgeries has had an impact on the local communities. The surgeries were a feature of Hopeman and Burghead for many years. That was recognised by the local integration joint board, which carried out a consultation in 2022 to ensure that the voices of the community were heard. However, from my casework, I am all too aware of how disappointing some approaches to IJB consultations can be, so I can understand the residents’ concerns that are noted in the motion. I urge the IJB and NHS Grampian to ensure that the healthcare needs and, indeed, the voices of the people in smaller rural communities are met appropriately. That can be achieved only through engagement with local campaigners, residents and members of the communities, and I would expect all partners to work to that end.

Unfortunately, challenges with the delivery of GP and associated services are not confined to the Highlands. I note that Mr Carson is in the chamber, and the issue is also important for us in Dumfries and Galloway. It is a very large rural region, and we hear daily from the NHS board that it continues to struggle to recruit GPs to staff the region’s rural surgeries. According to the Information Services Division, the available data shows that 100 per cent of GP practices in Dumfries and Galloway are reliant on locum GPs due to recruitment challenges.

However, some welcome improvements have been made recently. The Scottish graduate entry medicine programme offers people who are graduates in subjects such as pharmacy, nursing and science the opportunity to obtain a medical degree in a four-year graduate programme, and it has a particular focus on preparing doctors to work in rural areas of Scotland. The course launched in 2018 and, after the students’ initial year of university, NHS Dumfries and Galloway welcomed its first intake in 2019. The ScotGEM programme is working well. So far, the region has supported 54 graduates, which is pretty good news. However, we want to see the continuation of ScotGEM. I ask the cabinet secretary, in responding to the debate, to tell us a little about the success of ScotGEM and the commitment to continue with it so that recruitment can be made for our rural areas.

I will stop there. I acknowledge the progress that has been made and I apologise again that I am unable to stay for the whole debate.

Presiding Officer, I do not know how much time there is for interventions.