As co-convener of the cross-party group on lung health, I congratulate Emma Harper on securing the debate and on all the work that she does for the cause.

World asthma day is organised by the Global Initiative for Asthma and supported by the World Health Organization, and, as we have heard, each May, the day raises awareness of asthma worldwide. For this year’s event, as we have heard, the theme has been asthma care for all, which fits in perfectly not only with the sentiments of the debate, but with the main aims of our cross-party group.

Indeed, only recently, the cross-party group highlighted ground-breaking research into women with asthma and the effects of oestrogen on the condition. Our scientists and secretariat, Asthma and Lung UK Scotland, have also highlighted that women are more likely to suffer asthma and have more severe symptoms. They also experience a significant worsening of symptoms around menstruation and at certain times of the month, which potentially puts them in a very dangerous situation. Research, although still quite patchy, is being undertaken, and I look forward to seeing what comes through when that is established and solutions are found.

The charity also works with additional collaborative organisations such as ASH Scotland to prevent smoking. We have heard today about smoking cessation programmes. Those are important, along with mass media campaigns to achieve the 2034 target of less than 5 per cent of people smoking in Scotland, which has to be achieved. I commend that, and I play my part as the Parliament’s smoking cessation champion.

We have talked about the campaign for a respiratory care action plan—the Government has worked hard to ensure that that happens. Only last month, on 25 April, our cross-party group held a reception in Parliament, attended by patients, guests and fellow members, to look at the respiratory care action plan two years on. At that event, we heard from a number of speakers and entertainers about the situation. We also know, however, that we have yet to see the latest progress report from the Scottish Government on what it is achieving, how the plan is progressing and the areas that require to be looked at.

As the Scottish Government heads to the halfway point of the current five-year session of Parliament, we also heard from the charity’s head of devolved nations, Joseph Carter, who highlighted that, although things were challenging before the pandemic, they have got much worse since.

As we have heard today, only 25 per cent of people with asthma are receiving the three components of basic asthma care: their annual review, the inhaler technique and the asthma action plan. That needs to be looked at, because we already know that in Scotland, we suffer from one of the worst respiratory death rates. Only 14.5 per cent of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients are receiving the five fundamentals of care that they require.

However, I was disappointed, but not surprised, to learn, through the charity’s freedom of information requests to Scotland’s health boards, that in my region, in NHS Forth Valley, patients are still waiting between 12 and 18 months for respiratory treatment. Despite the excellent campaign by the breathe easy Clackmannanshire group in my region, it is still looking for things to happen.

In conclusion, with regard to COPD and all the issues that we are talking about today, I commend Asthma and Lung UK Scotland for the work that it is doing, and I reiterate what Joseph Carter said about the lack of respiratory care for those with lung disease across the country.

It is vitally important that the situation is turned around, urgently, for the sake of all those respiratory patients who are suffering in Scotland, because they deserve nothing less from this Government and this Parliament.

I am delighted to sum up on behalf of the Scottish Conservatives in this debate. The debate has been a really good one, with lots of very interesting comments by members across the chamber. Parliament is at its best when we discuss such issues. We can all become enthusiastic, and we wish to see things improve and get better. I pay tribute to, and commend and congratulate, all those who were involved in the audit.

The Scottish Parliament has always striven to be an institution that is open, welcoming and inclusive. Indeed, when it was created back in 1999, the level of female representation was one of the things that were praised most. Although female representation has continued to improve in the years following that, the gender-sensitive audit has been an opportunity for us to take stock of the progress that we have made, and to identify potential areas for further improvement.

A growing number of countries around the world are actively engaging with the issue of gender equality, and they wish to see their political systems embrace that. We want to see that here, too. Organisations worldwide, such as the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association, the Inter-Parliamentary Union and UN Women, to name a few, are attempting to ensure that gender-sensitive Parliaments exist across the globe.

Given that it is the right time and the right place for us to do that work, I commend and congratulate all those who have talked about inclusiveness and have given instruction to try to make things happen. We have come a long way from where we were; we still have a journey to make, but we are all trying to do so. Each party has made clear that they want to see progress and improvement; we all have that work on our agendas. Some have come later to it—my party probably has—but Meghan Gallacher and Roz McCall have indicated that we as a party have embraced the Women2Win organisation, which has done a lot of work and is trying to identify how we could get more women actively involved in standing for Parliament and council, and at all levels in our party.

We talked about councils earlier. That was where I first became involved in politics, and I think that my colleagues Meghan and Roz did the same. We need to encourage more women to get in at council level, because it is a stepping stone to somewhere such as here, Westminster or other Parliaments. A blockage still exists there because the lifestyle that a councillor needs to live can be very demanding with regards to timetable, salary and so on.

Will the member take an intervention?

I agree. It is a disaster, and it is shocking that we have council chambers that do not have any female representation. The job itself needs to change and can no longer be a role for someone who has another occupation or for a retired individual—we have to encourage younger people. I had 18 years as a councillor and I know the challenges of trying to balance the lifestyle, which can be a real barrier for younger people. Those points are vital.

Our current pilot of proxy voting is a really good example of what we are trying to do to accommodate people and to be more equal in this place. It is clear that there is still work to do when it comes to gender equality. There are 34 separate recommendations in the report, some of which will be easier to achieve than others. Each one has a role to play, however, and it is particularly important that we look at recommendations that apply to the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee, of which I am a member.

We have already discussed single-sex committees. The Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee is one, but I need to mention to Monica Lennon, who observed that it was all male and all white, that we have Foysol Choudhury in the group, too, so we have some representation of an ethnic minority.

Will the member take an intervention?

I acknowledge what Karen is saying today. She makes a valid point about the respect that women should be given when they come into a role in Parliament. That respect has not always been shown. As she says, it is up to all of us to do our bit and for the men in Parliament to stand up and be counted because it is they who are, at times, not treating women with the respect that they deserve.

I am happy to make that clarification and to support Monica Lennon on that point.

Given the gender balance of the current Parliament and Scottish Government, it could prove difficult to implement some of the recommendations in this parliamentary session, although there is of course an intention to continue to develop recommendations for future parliamentary sessions.

Recommendation 20 proposes that a party’s membership of a committee “must be mixed” when it appoints more than one member. Although that recommendation will ensure more balanced committees in the future, it is important that such a rule does not prevent party groups from appointing the members whom they feel are best suited to that committee, because that is vital in itself.

I would like to mention one or two of the many contributions that have been made. Karen Adam spoke about the frustration and the rules as well as the participation and respect that are required. That is all vitally important. As Karen Adam and many others talked about, we cannot get away from the abuse that women receive, which is absolutely appalling.

The minister talked about accessibility and being family friendly and accessible to individuals, supporting people and ensuring that we have that balance. There is much more work to do on that.

My colleague Meghan Gallacher talked about her journey as a young woman coming into the political fray and how difficult it can be to deal with some of the challenges. Once again, the issues of social media and abuse featured heavily in Meghan’s interventions and involvement in the debate. It is a real shame that young women come here and are subjected to abuse from individuals within and outwith this organisation. That must be called out at every opportunity, and we must stamp it out as much as we can.

Rhoda Grant talked about the flexibility of what happened during Covid and the ideas that we could develop. That is vital. We must learn from the experiences that we have had.

Alex Cole-Hamilton talked about the level of representation, practices and being life friendly, what we can do with the crèche and other facilities. Those are all vital issues, too.

My colleague Roz McCall is a new member. In her nine months of being a member, she has experienced and seen things and looked with fresh eyes at this environment. She has identified areas of concern and areas that she would like to see changed.

There is also the whole issue of interventions and how we play within this room. How we are perceived in this chamber is vitally important with regard to how we move forward.

In conclusion, it is clear that all parties in the Parliament are united in their aim to achieve a Parliament that is truly gender neutral. As such, the debate has shown that we have real goals and ambitions that we want to achieve.

As a member of the SPPA Committee, I look forward to the role that I will play in the process to ensure that the workings of this chamber and Parliament can remove many of the barriers that we know still remain. As was said earlier, we need a kinder and happier environment because, in that way, we will encourage and we will also inspire, which is vitally important.

As usual, the SNP has tried its best to shift the blame to the UK Government for the financial mess that has been made in Scotland by the Government of Scotland. It has failed to point out the tremendous investment that the UK Government has made in Scotland over the past year, including £177 million in levelling up communities and £52 million for the establishment of free ports, which will generate billions of pounds of investment for Scotland.

Will the minister acknowledge that investment as a positive benefit of the union and an example of why working together across nations enhances all our communities?

I embrace what Martin Whitfield is saying. Although we may have an aspiration to achieve the 40 per cent target, it is difficult and it will be up to individual parties and their management to make sure that things happen. There has sometimes been a reluctance for that to happen. If we are to truly embrace that recommendation, there needs to be greater demarcation when it comes to parties’ selection proposals.

I acknowledge that. However, given the strong case that has been made in communities the length of the A9, which has been called the “spine of the country”, I think that doing something of that nature would go a long way to managing community involvement. I look forward to hearing how that might progress, depending on how things move forward.