Seòmar agus comataidhean

I refer members to my entry in the register of members’ interests, where I have registered that I own property for rent.

Tackling the homelessness crisis, which has been severe and persistent, must be an absolute priority in this parliamentary session. Homelessness is one of the biggest challenges that our country faces today, and we must tackle it with purpose to protect those who are at risk of experiencing homelessness in the future.

To give context to the seriousness of the situation that we face, I note that, as has been mentioned previously, Shelter Scotland’s reports highlight that, between April 2020 and March 2021, a household in Scotland became homeless every 19 minutes. In that same timeframe, 11,804 children were in households that were assessed as homeless, and more and more people are finding themselves with nowhere to stay as the numbers rise again today.

Those figures are devastating, and we must make policy interventions to address them. However, they cannot just be treated as numbers on a sheet. They represent a traumatic experience for individuals and families that has left them without a permanent home, and they must act as a prompt for MSPs across the chamber to seriously consider the issue of homelessness and what we can do to address it. The fact that around one in 12 Scots has experienced homelessness is disgraceful and is the result of a lack of serious action over many years.

However, not acting is no longer an option—we have no choice now but to be radical in our response, with transformative policies to eradicate homelessness. Policies that are linked to early intervention and prevention play a significant role in this.

As Scottish Labour fully supports early prevention methods to tackle homelessness, it welcomes the consultation as an initial step, albeit with questions over the delivery of its commitments and how they will be financed.

Transformative change is long overdue. We have known for long enough that homelessness is preventable; that cases in our recent history could have been avoided; that more families could have had better lives; and that more children could have had greater opportunities. We have to get this right for those reasons among so many more.

The consultation allows us to go further, to be bolder and to make the changes that we need to see. However, it is critical that the financial decision making of the Scottish Government does not put at risk the implementation of any of the prevention of homelessness objectives that are set out.

I must raise concerns at this stage. I hope that I can be forgiven for having little confidence in the Government’s ability to take appropriate preventative measures to reduce and eventually eradicate homelessness. Scotland’s councils have seen their budgets stretched to their very limits by the SNP Government. Cut after cut and year after year, the SNP has shown total disregard for local authorities that are desperate for investment to deliver more council housing and prevent homelessness.

I hope that the Government can make huge commitments to local authorities, which desperately need it.

A clear difference exists between what the SNP promises to deliver and what it actually delivers. The Scottish Government must commit to ensuring that adequate and appropriate funding will be offered to our councils. That commitment cannot be more empty words from the SNP. The Government has to back up its words with actions and we will hold it to account in doing so.

Where there is the political will to address issues, steps can be taken to address them. However, investment, political will, support and resources are needed—all from the Government, which must support local authorities. The Scottish Government must match their words with actions. People need, expect, and deserve better, and the Scottish Government must act now to deliver.

To ask the Scottish Government what additional financial assistance it plans to provide to help local authorities meet their net zero targets. (S6O-00706)

Everything seems to have been put in place—quite rightly—to make things work as smoothly as they can. However, if there was a suggestion that any of the Governments wished to dispute anything or withdraw from the agreement, how would that work? How would the Scottish Government bring that to us, as parliamentarians?

Good morning. Maree Todd spoke about the fact that things are much more difficult for people in more deprived areas. We need to be honest with ourselves about what happens in those communities. Less funding is going to local government. In local communities, people are able to access more affordable and more local activity rather than just sport. If we are absolutely honest about wanting to get people more active, is it important for us to send the message that we have to resource local communities, particularly in more deprived areas?

Another thing that some of the professionals talked to us about in evidence, and which we hear about time and again, is the move towards prevention and how we are trying to improve that area of our work, particularly for people in deprived communities. Do you think that we are doing enough in Scotland to move the model of prevention for these health difficulties that are causing such inequality?

I am interested in how we address the inequalities that we see. We have talked a wee bit about sport, but I am thinking about access to services across the board. Does either of the ministers have a view on how we could improve that?

I thank my fellow Scottish Labour colleague, Jackie Baillie, for bringing her members’ business debate to the chamber. I could not be here today and not speak in it.

The theme of world cancer day 2022 is “close the care gap” and it is about understanding and recognising the inequalities in cancer care around the world. I am sure that members will agree that I am not shy about raising in the chamber the inequalities in prevention, care and access to treatments.

Health inequalities in Scotland and across the globe are very real. For many of the most marginalised in our society, the chances of getting cancer and the experience of the outcomes of cancer are worse because of factors and circumstances that are beyond their control. Acknowledging and dealing with the root causes that blight many of our communities is key to reducing cancer and cancer inequalities.

Across Scotland, we know that the most deprived populations have worse experiences and outcomes than those in the least deprived areas. Recently, of course, the Covid-19 pandemic has shone a light on health inequalities and their devastating impacts. The pandemic has impacted our lives in so many ways, and one of the most concerning impacts has been the reduction in cancer diagnosis at an early stage. Staff shortages, pressures on the NHS and long GP waiting times are among a whole host of factors that have contributed to figures that Cancer Research UK recently called “devastating”. In Scotland, we have to act with purpose to reverse those concerning factors, resume early detection and give those who have cancer the best chance of life.

In the short time that I have in the chamber, I want to mention cervical cancer. Yesterday, I met a nurse from Kilmarnock who has many years of experience supporting women with health screening and family planning. She talked me through aspects of women’s health and factors that may hamper people from coming forward for screening. Cervical cancer is one of the most preventable and successfully treated forms of cancer if it is detected and diagnosed early and managed effectively. It is essential that we in this chamber battle to ensure that screening services are accessed and accessible. In my discussions last night with Nurse Kenyon, it was clear that encouraging women and explaining the procedures to them is important. If they understand their bodies and what is happening, they are more likely to attend. We should encourage everyone who meets the criteria for screening to ask questions. Our wonderful NHS staff are more than happy to walk people through what will be happening to them and the associated benefits.

Once again, I bring to members’ attention the health inequalities that underpin survival rates for cancer. According to Public Health Scotland, there are links between increasing deprivation and poorer survival rates for cancer, as we have heard in the debate. It is unjust and unfair that that remains the case in 2022. Much more work needs to be done to address the clear health, social and economic inequalities that mean that a person’s postcode can result in a stronger or weaker chance of survival from deadly diseases.

I know that everyone in the chamber wants to see improvements in the awareness of and outcomes for cancer. I thank members for their contributions and for their work. I thank Jackie Baillie again for bringing the debate to the chamber and I applaud world cancer day and the work of Cancer Research UK. I hope that we go on to work as hard as we can to eliminate cancer from society.

I thank Rona Mackay for bringing the debate to the chamber.

The impact of adverse childhood experiences on individuals’ lives can be scarring, devastating and long lasting. Memories of childhood often stay with us, but, for many, those memories are not ones to look back on fondly.

As we have heard from others in the debate, poverty, abuse, neglect and other ACEs cause significant mental and physical difficulty for people in our country and they can also impact on an individual’s personal development.

However, in understanding more about ACEs, it is important to note that research conducted across the UK tells us that adverse childhood experiences are more likely to be experienced in areas of high deprivation. That highlights yet another devastating health inequality in our country, which needs to be addressed with purpose.

Moreover, as outlined by Public Health Scotland, an ACE survey of adults in Wales found that, compared to people with no ACEs, those with four or more ACEs—as has been mentioned—are more likely to have been in prison, develop heart disease, frequently visit their general practitioner, develop type 2 diabetes, have committed violence in the past 12 months or have other health-harming behaviours.

That is deeply concerning to us all, and I consider it important that the Scottish Government conducts a similar ACE survey with adults in Scotland to ascertain whether the impacts are similar, given that Public Health Scotland has advised that there could be a similar prevalence in the Scottish population.

However, we have to be absolutely clear that ACEs should not define an individual’s life or stop them from being successful or content. It is crucial that support is in place for children, young adults and adults to come forward and talk about their experiences. There can be no room for stigma in those discussions, and it is important that such support is accessible, free and comfortable for those who come forward.

The fact that adverse childhood experiences occur for children during a period of innocence and the unknown makes the impact that bit more significant. That is why I fully support calls from the 70/30 campaign to reduce incidence of adverse childhood experiences by at least 70 per cent by 2030, as we have all agreed in the chamber tonight.

That is not only an achievable target but a necessary one. It is one that we must meet if we are to be proactive and deliver for those who have experienced such events. We must invest more in early years. We must place more focus on addressing health inequalities. We must conduct research and analyse data to ensure that there is the most up-to-date information, where it does not exist already, to allow us to take actions that are underpinned by solid evidence.

In this chamber, I regularly call on the Scottish Government to do more to eradicate poverty. I do so because failure to act equates to a failure to stand up for those who, for whatever reason, struggle in life and need us to stand up for them in modern society. Adverse childhood experiences link closely to poverty and inequality. Therefore, to be effective in our endeavours, we must address the root causes. Doing so allows us to support those who are growing up in the most deprived areas today, and it allows us to hope that we can reduce the number of people who have an adverse childhood experience in the future.

The debate is important because it reaffirms the view of us all in the chamber—I have heard this from every speaker, and it is a matter that we all care about—that we must discuss this issue and address it. By working together, we can progress. My hope for the future is that no child will suffer adverse childhood experiences and that they will all grow up happy and content in their lives. We, as parliamentarians, can help that to happen.

I have found the evidence really useful, but I am particularly interested in finding out how we can encourage young people from poorer backgrounds to take part in sport and other activities that use green spaces. Some of the earlier comments about local services and local government funding were therefore music to my ears.

What are the barriers for young people both in and outwith schools with regard to accessing sport and other activities? What do we as parliamentarians need to do to break down those barriers and give people, particularly those from poorer backgrounds, the opportunity to take part?