Under changes that were introduced late last year, elderly residents in care settings are seeing the frequency of dental check-ups halved and dentists who see multiple patients on a single visit are being financially punished for their efficiency. Dental practitioners have contacted Scotland’s chief dental officer outlining those concerns and proposing a fair solution. Will this Government embrace that fair solution?

Without question. There is the whole idea of working the lungs. I do not have asthma but, as Emma Harper knows, I do a little bit of singing, and I know how that helps me.

To ask the Scottish Government what steps it is taking to ensure good dental care provision for older people in care settings. (S6O-03403)

I am delighted to make a contribution to this debate, and I thank Emma Harper, who is a fellow member and co-convener of the cross-party group on lung health, for securing it.

Back in February this year, I lodged a parliamentary motion on people with uncontrolled asthma to highlight the issue of severe asthma. Thereafter in February, I was very pleased to sponsor an exhibition in the members lobby entitled “Better lives for people with uncontrolled asthma”, which was specifically for MSPs and staff to find out more about severe asthma. That is a serious public health challenge in Scotland, and it is classified as a disability under the Equality Act 2010.

The adverse implications of severe asthma can put a significant strain on our healthcare system. We already know that asthma, which affects about 17 per cent of adults, is the most common respiratory disease in Scotland. However, severe asthma affects more than 4 per cent of that population, and it is sometimes quite difficult to manage. In the cross-party group, we have learned about all the things that can support people with that.

Asthma and Lung UK has estimated that Scotland has among the highest prevalences of severe asthma in the United Kingdom. Poorly controlled severe asthma challenges people’s mental and physical abilities. We know that the condition leads to an average of four asthma attacks a year. Well over half of people who live with it have depression or anxiety, which leads them on to other problems with their health and wellbeing. About 70 per cent of patients report that the condition severely impacts their work or education.

A key opportunity to improve outcomes for patients with severe asthma is through improving the pathway towards accurate diagnosis. We have talked in the past about diagnosis and delays in referrals to specialist clinics to undertake patient-centred assessments. We need to deal with that.

I welcome the fact that the theme of this year’s world asthma day is “Asthma Education Empowers”. That tells us a lot about what we can do when we talk about accurate diagnosis and how people can be treated. For some patients, that might mean starting on a medicine class known as biologics. Those medicines transform lives, but only one in five people receives such therapies in Scotland. We need to consider how more people can be accessed, because access to treatment will save lives.

I will not sing this evening. Members can come to the choir to hear me some other time.

As I said, we must ensure that we have access to experts and clinicians across Scotland and that the issue of access is looked at. I look forward to hearing what the minister has to say on that, because we know that there needs to be much more equal access to advanced therapies, which can be transformative. We must manage severe asthma.

I hope that the minister will, in her summing up, talk about: where we are when it comes to the progress of the respiratory care action plan; a pledge to address the misdiagnoses and the underdiagnosis that we know are taking place; implementing clear national once-for-Scotland protocols, because we know about the issues of disparity; establishing nationally agreed severe asthma referral pathways that promote collaboration between primary and specialised care; and collaboration across partners, including patient advocacy groups, as well as the third sector.

Good morning. You have all talked about the challenges and opportunities that are appearing because of the framework. Having the Executive back in function will certainly help the process, but when we have had discussions with individuals from different sectors, we have been told about added costs because of wages, staffing, bureaucracy and employing new people.

Stuart Anderson talked about the impact on small companies—the majority of companies are small—and the level of growth, which means that there is a reduced number of opportunities in some ways. We have heard that some businesses have not managed to survive because of the additional burdens. Is that still the case now that the Executive is up and running and doing things, or are there opportunities to negotiate and discuss what can be achieved now that the Executive is trying to support Northern Ireland in this process?

Stephen Kelly, we have heard that extra burdens are being placed on the manufacturing sector. Trying to manage that will be, and already is, a big challenge. You have no doubt seen some companies that have not survived the process and others that have found new opportunities. It would be good if you could give us a flavour of how it all works.

Nichola Mallon, can you give a flavour of what you see? As I said, we need to consider the logistics of putting things together. You have already touched on the potential issue relating to ferries. Do other sectors face the same potential problems coming down the road with visas, staffing and the logistics of moving people and commodities around?

This afternoon’s debate has provided an opportunity to explore this important issue in detail, and I am grateful for the opportunity to close the debate on behalf of the Scottish Conservatives. The petition has been under consideration for much of the parliamentary session and I welcome the debate.

When Nicola Murray first submitted her petition, I helped to scrutinise the proposals as a member of the Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee. I thank the committee clerks for their assistance with the process, as well as those who gave written and oral evidence. I also—of course—thank Nicola Murray herself. As we have heard, she has had the courage and tenacity to lodge the petition, with the support of organisations such as Scottish Women’s Aid and Victim Support Scotland.

It is vitally important that we are discussing the issue in the chamber, because it shines a light on the matter. We have already heard that a loss of this kind can impact other family members, as it can mean the loss of a sibling or a grandchild. We also know that the current justice system can leave victims feeling as though the perpetrator has not been brought to justice. Many members have highlighted a leniency around the information and what happens to individuals in cases like this. That needs to change. The petition that was lodged by Nicola Murray has highlighted several issues around the effects of domestic abuse and coercive control, which need to be exposed as problems in how they are dealt with in the Scottish system.

Since the Domestic Abuse (Scotland) Act 2018, Police Scotland’s approach to domestic abuse has improved—it needed to improve—but there are still gaps in the system around showing that coercive control has taken place. Nicola Murray has spoken about how much more needs to be done to support victims throughout the current process and how victims can sometimes struggle to be taken seriously when reporting this type of domestic abuse. We have heard today about groups such as Brodie’s Trust, which are there to support victims. It is fantastic that we have organisations, charities and trusts to support victims, but they need to be supported by our judicial system and our police force.

During scrutiny of the petition, the committee raised the possibility of a new requirement that could be introduced, which would ensure that the fact that violence has led to the loss of an unborn child will always be mentioned when the perpetrators of those crimes are charged. That could be a possible alternative to the creation of a completely new criminal offence for actions that lead to the loss of an unborn child. The Scottish Sentencing Council has stated that there is nothing in the current sentencing guidelines to prevent that requirement from becoming a reality. However, as Nicola herself highlighted, there are very few examples of cases in which that type of reference has been included in a charge. So, although that part of the legal framework may already exist, it is clear that it is not effective enough and that more should be done.

We have heard some excellent contributions in the debate. As I said, it shows the strength of the Parliament when we can have a debate of this nature in the chamber. As the convener, Jackson Carlaw, said in his impressive, excellent and emotive speech, the committee has an important role to play in the Parliament and it should be praised for the role that it has taken. There is no doubt that this type of process is a real asset to the Scottish Parliament, when a petition of this calibre can come forward and we can ensure that a review takes place.

The cabinet secretary spoke about her approach of co-operation and collaboration, as well as the challenges with the petition. She also acknowledged that more needs to be done. I look forward to hearing, in her summing up, where we can take this.

My colleague Pam Gosal spoke about the loss, fear, shame and silence that women experience in these circumstances. The fact that four pregnant women are abused every day in Scotland shows the harrowing situation that we find ourselves in.

Pauline McNeill spoke about the fear that victims experience and the loss that they deal with. She said that women should not be put in that position by men and that it is the men we need to manage. That is important, so we need to be tough with their sentencing.

Maurice Golden spoke about the women’s harrowing experience of being badly let down and the pathetic compensation of £300 that Nicola Murray received, which is insulting to say the least.

Sharon Dowey spoke about this evil crime and the lack of justice.

John Swinney spoke very eloquently about the effectiveness of the committee. He shone a light on the committee being a prime example of what the Parliament has the ability to do when an individual raises such an important issue. The matter can be given the respect and support that are required, and the Government can make some changes. I look forward to seeing that happen.

Clare Haughey, Maggie Chapman, Fulton MacGregor and Foysol Choudhury all made very passionate speeches about the issues.

As I have said, the petition has shone a light on many issues, but it is not possible to cover everything in the debate. I hope that the debate will ensure that the Scottish Government looks at the issues highlighted by support groups and campaigners such as Nicola Murray, who have led the charge.

In conclusion, it is vitally important that the appalling crimes of domestic abuse and coercive control are dealt with, to ensure that our justice system is proper and fit for purpose. I look forward to seeing the debate progress and the issues continue to be discussed. I join colleagues in hoping to see a real change and an improvement in the situation, because it is clearly long overdue. With all of us working together, we will ensure that a solution can be found—because solutions need to be found for people like Nicola Murray.

To ask the Scottish Government what impact it anticipates its recent announcement on changes to its net zero targets will have on the development of a green economy. (S6O-03362)