Chamber and committees

I congratulate my colleague Kate Forbes on securing this important debate, which allows us to recognise and promote the importance of the third sector. Kate Forbes outlined very well in opening the debate the third sector’s contribution to the Scottish economy, including the wellbeing economy. I also thank organisations for the briefings that they provided ahead of the debate.

The Royal Society of Edinburgh’s research paper highlights much information, and I recommend that everyone read it. I know that members will have read it, but I encourage others to do so, too.

The third sector is an absolutely crucial lifeline for so many of our fellow citizens, through its support for people’s social needs as well as for their physical and mental health. The social enterprise landscape is, as we have heard, a diverse mix of business models across many industries and rural and urban geographies, which is a key strength. Many social enterprises are registered charities or Scottish charitable incorporated organisations—SCIOs—-and many others are community interest companies, co-operatives or other purposeful business models.

Scotland’s social enterprises contribute £2.63 billion annually in gross value added income to our economy, according to the most recent social enterprise census. The social enterprises that together make up the third sector provide around 90,000 full-time equivalent jobs in Scotland and have a net collective worth of around £7 billion. The third sector and its social enterprises are hugely important to Scotland’s economy and society. It is right that we celebrate and support them.

I will touch on the work of Third Sector Dumfries and Galloway. The team, which is led by Alan Webb, helps voluntary organisations, charities, social enterprises, co-operatives, credit unions, mutual organisations and volunteers to work together to put the sector first. It highlights what the third sector is, how it impacts on the lives of individuals and communities in Dumfries and Galloway and how it impacts on the strength and sustainability of our economy. The organisation represents the interests of the sector by lobbying opinion creators and decision makers in the Scottish Government, Dumfries and Galloway Council and NHS Dumfries and Galloway. It is essential that we value the third sector equitably, as Kate Forbes described.

Third Sector Dumfries and Galloway is part of the third sector interface network, which is funded by the Scottish Government. The TSI provides a single point of access for support and advice for the sector in local areas. That includes tackling social inequalities, fostering community empowerment and inclusive growth, working to increase volunteering and citizenship, and enabling integration of health and social care.

One of the great initiatives that has stemmed from that is increased use of social prescribing in the region. The Health, Social Care and Sport Committee recently recommended increasing the use of social prescribing following our “Social Prescribing: physical activity is an investment, not a cost” inquiry report. It is a great way for people to be supported to access treatment that is in the best interests of their physical and mental health.

Third Sector D and G works in collaboration with many groups and organisations, such as A Listening Ear, the Dumfries and Galloway Hard of Hearing Group, DG Voice, the Dumfries and Galloway Advocacy Service, Food Train and many others. Those organisations all work to support people to become economically active. I volunteered with A Listening Ear during the Covid lockdown to help to address isolation and loneliness that were being caused by the lockdown.

Work is also being done to support people and to promote digital literacy. To that end, Third Sector D and G, under the leadership of former chief executive officer Norma Austin Hart, did a great study to examine the extent of digital inclusion—I am conscious of the time, Presiding Officer—and its findings were stark and led to great initiatives that support digital literacy hubs.

I thank Kate Forbes for securing the debate and I reaffirm the need to include and value the third sector to support our economy.

I am on the committee that is gathering evidence on the National Care Service (Scotland) Bill. We have included the third sector in our evidence sessions. Does Miles Briggs welcome that? As he rightly says, the sector’s involvement is valuable.

It has come up previously that there have been protests for eight years now at the Queen Elizabeth university hospital, and that that specific issue was one of the reasons why 150m was not considered to be adequate and 200m was agreed. At other hospitals, the zone might not need to be 200m, but will depend on the hospital’s periphery.

I am thinking about the ability to extend or reduce a zone or to add a new site. I used the example of a new hospital—a replacement service in another area. One concern was about the Scottish ministers making that decision to extend or reduce the area without going through further parliamentary scrutiny. Sandesh Gulhane spoke about further scrutiny through statutory instruments or making sure that wider consultation was under way. Might we need to consider that as we move forward—or would it potentially incur delays in establishing new, enhanced or reduced zones?

Good morning to my colleague on the other side of the table. You have clarified the issue of 200m zones being established in Scotland, when 150m was part of the original consultation. From my asking the minister about it, I think that the 200m decision was related to the Queen Elizabeth university hospital. Is that correct?

In Scotland, 200m would be established as the safe zone—is that right?

Also related to my previous question to the minister, I would like to ask you about signage in those areas. My understanding is that some people think that that would just draw more attention to a site that provides healthcare services. What are your thoughts on signage?

Good morning. I am interested in the decision to set the safe access zone at 200m, as is proposed in the bill. How did you come to make that choice, given that legislation elsewhere sets out other sizes—for example, 50m or 150m? What evidence led to the proposal to establish 200m zones in Scotland?

What about signage for the zones? When I spoke to NHS Dumfries and Galloway, I was told that signage would shine a beacon of light on the services that are being provided, which would draw attention to them and make the healthcare that is being provided more “in your face”. What are your thoughts on signage around zones?

So, the proposal would be to have a map, or the creation of an area, attached to an NHS facility’s website, without necessarily putting up signage at 200m—or an extra distance—around a facility?