I am delighted to close this stage 3 debate on behalf of the Scottish Conservatives. Through each stage of the bill, we have heard thoughtful contributions from members of all parties regarding the importance of unpaid carers. It has been said previously, but it is worth repeating, that unpaid carers are the backbone of our social care system. It is clear that that perspective is shared across the chamber.

While the bill’s progress has been swift, it has provided the opportunity to debate and scrutinise how we can best support unpaid carers, and it has also given us the opportunity to hear that during the pandemic an additional 400,000 carers were involved across Scotland. For example, one challenging topic that has been discussed this afternoon is the area of supporting carers who have more than one person to look after, such as someone who has two elderly parents. The bill had the potential to help to address that issue. Members also spoke about the role of young carers and how we can best support them. The amendments lodged by my colleague Jeremy Balfour would have provided a key opportunity for ministers to review the issue, but unfortunately the Government was not willing to seize that opportunity.

It was also disappointing that an amendment lodged by the Conservatives at stage 2, which would have provided greater financial certainty for unpaid carers by making the double supplement permanent, was also rejected. Representatives from organisations such as Family Fund and National Carer Organisations in Scotland have made it clear that that additional layer of financial certainty would have helped over the winter months. Another example is Lanarkshire Carers, who have spoken about how a permanent doubling of the supplement would give unpaid carers a fixed idea of their income over a longer period of time and would also give them more opportunity to plan ahead. Although the bill as it stands will ensure that ministers have discretionary powers to double future payments on an ad hoc basis, we do not believe that that should be left to ministerial whims.

Those are just some of the issues that arose in the debate and which the bill provided an opportunity to address. The fact that the Government failed to capitalise on the potential has been described as a missed opportunity.

I will move on to some of the comments that we heard this afternoon. The minister himself talked about opportunities; however, as I said, we have seen a missed opportunity to provide greater financial certainty to unpaid carers.

My colleague Miles Briggs spoke about how there has been constructive work across the chamber and across parties; that has been recognised. However, we also need to say how disappointed we are by how the Greens seem to have lost their voice. Miles Briggs also talked about carers and bereavement and mental ill-health, and the opportunity to address those issues has not been seized on either.

Pam Duncan-Glancy spoke about carers giving and going above and beyond and about there being more than 1 million unpaid carers in Scotland. Without anyone noticing, the pandemic has helped to ensure that many unpaid carers have been put under huge pressure. She also spoke about missed opportunities.

Willie Rennie commented on our commitment to recognising the commitment of carers—that is vital. He also talked about how, although the subject of future budget negotiations was talked about, a gap still exists and will continue to exist.

I pay tribute to Jeremy Balfour for his powerful speeches on the amendments that he lodged and for the passion that he has on this topic—nobody in the chamber can deny that. He talked about the commitment of carers and how they go far beyond in doing what they can. Once again, however, he also spoke about the missed opportunities that we see today.

Nothing that I have said should imply that the bill is not welcomed by the Conservatives, because it is. However, although it will provide financial assistance to more than 90,000 carers this winter—which we whole-heartedly support—it is nevertheless disappointing that the bill has failed to reach its full potential.

The debate around the vital contribution that unpaid carers make to our society, and how the social security system should impact them, will be important as we go forward, and will continue to be discussed in the weeks, years and months ahead. Although the bill has failed to address many of the aspects that we hoped it would, the potential is still there.

I have no doubt that supporting the bill—which the Conservatives will do—will provide very welcome support to individuals this December. I support the bill.

There have been long-standing issues with mental health treatment in my region. It is therefore troubling to learn about reports of inappropriate admission of children under the age of 18 into adult psychiatric wards. It is vital that young people, who often have complex needs, get the help that they need and deserve. What action will the Scottish Government take to address those failings?

Minister, you mentioned the role of the health and social care partnerships, but I want to tease out what part the local authorities play. Have you identified any councils that require more support in order to provide these services or in which this is a key area of concern?

Has it been recommended or proposed that autism services be placed with the proposed national care service? If so, where would responsibility for scrutiny and accountability lie?

Obviously, the pandemic has had huge implications for the NHS, with individuals not having the opportunity to have operations. What is the Government doing to ensure that people do not have to seek private treatment? With the mesh situation, individuals had to seek private help. Due to the waiting times and lists, they could not get an opportunity, and they felt that they had no option other than to go private to ensure that they received the care that they required.

I am delighted to join the committee, convener, and I have no interests appropriate to this committee to declare.

I concur with Bill Kidd and David Torrance. I think that the petition raises important questions about trust in statistics and data. It gives us an opportunity to seek more views and opinions from stakeholders so that we can make progress on the matter and take a measured approach to what is a very sensitive and delicate situation. It is important that we engage in that way and try to gain as much information as we can so that a more balanced approach can be taken in the process.

In your opening statement, you acknowledged that individuals have been let down and dismissed, and you talked about the risks that are associated with the complicated situation that many individuals find themselves in. You have talked about lessons being learned, which is vital. What you have said is helping me to think that that is happening as a result of this process.

Where are we with longer-term research on hernia? We have learned from the transvaginal mesh issues and gone through those, but is longer-term research being done when it comes to hernia? If there is no research, how are you taking forward some of the issues that have been raised by individuals who have suffered?

There is a lot of discussion in the programme for government about participation and ensuring that we get democratic participation across the country. What will the Scottish Government do to ensure that it increases the level and the quality of participation in the budget process?

In your statements, you talked about the challenges that you face. Councillor Evison talked about fair funding packages, the idea of involving the community and ring fencing. You see all of that as potential opportunities for your organisations and for individuals.

What are some specific and focused asks that you would like the Scottish Government to look at? Are there budget areas that are real priorities for you? It could be about charging and the revenue that you can obtain, or about how your budgets are processed and the timing of that. You have touched on those issues already.

If I could get a short answer from each witness, that would be helpful.