Seòmar agus comataidhean

I thank Emma Harper for bringing this important debate to the chamber. I recognise the knowledge and skills that she has in this area and I praise the on-going work that she is committed to doing in the Parliament and beyond. I have heard her speak about this subject many times, and it is much appreciated.

Scottish Labour welcomes, as my colleague Jackie Baillie does, world asthma day 2024, which is supported by the World Health Organization and took place yesterday. We recognise this year’s theme of “Asthma Education Empowers”.

As far as prevalence is concerned, asthma in Scotland affects, as we have heard, around 368,000, 71,000 of whom are children. An important point that has been raised by Asthma and Lung UK as well as by members relates to the collection and recording of information. Currently we do not have an accurate collection method or an agreed reporting system across health boards and the Scottish Government, and given that, according to the Royal College of Physicians report, two thirds of asthma-related deaths could be preventable, I ask the minister whether the Scottish Government is looking at that issue. Perhaps she will say something about that in her closing remarks.

As other members have said, medical advisers and professionals who work in the field have identified key risk factors in managing the condition, including the overuse of relief inhalers, the underuse of preventer inhalers and recent emergency hospital visits with no follow-up. Such factors give great insight into the reasons for this year’s theme of education empowering people; it makes it clear that it is important to teach people with asthma about their condition and that, by learning about it, they can manage their symptoms better. That helps the patient, the doctors and the NHS.

When I did some research for the debate, it became clear that we need strong will and a strong commitment from the Government to prioritise this lifelong condition. According to recent Asthma and Lung UK research, many Scots with asthma are falling short on the basic care guidelines. We know that there is pressure on NHS staff, so I ask the minister to tell us how she believes that the Government can help to reverse that pressure on staff and offer asthma sufferers some hope that the outcomes from that condition can be changed.

We have heard about three things: an annual review, an inhaler technique check and a written action plan. The research shows that only 24 per cent of Scots received all three; 25 per cent received one; and 17 per cent reported receiving none. This is an important matter, and I know that the minister will consider it to be so. We would, I think, all agree that every person with an asthma diagnosis should be offered all three elements; they should know that that is their basic treatment plan and entitlement.

In my final minute, I ask the minister, as others have done, to update us on the care action plan and to point to some specific points of action that the Government has undertaken, so that people with asthma can feel that moves are being made and improvements for their care are being put in place.

Again, I thank Emma Harper for securing the debate and all the members who have contributed to it.

Thank you. That is one of the issues that we need to get right for both clinicians and young people.

I wonder if you could you give us a little information. One thing that has interested us is people presenting at the clinics who are same-sex attracted and how we make sure that there is that space for those young people. You mentioned a case earlier in which a person reflected on what had happened to them in that regard. If I put that issue in the context of a conversion therapy bill, do you think that we need to take that apart and look at having a bill that deals with conversion therapy in relation to same-sex attraction and trans identity? Should we consider doing that?

That is really helpful. Thank you very much.

Dr Cass, I want to explore the approaches to gender care for young people and the move to what you have described as the gender-affirmative model, which is the dominant model of care. You have talked about clinicians feeling pressure to simply affirm children and that that could lead to diagnostic overshadowing; for example, you have spoken about mental health issues that have been missed. How would a conversion therapy ban affect that situation? Could you advise how we might go forward with a ban to ensure that we give children protected time to consider things?

My final question is on a point that was raised with the committee, which was about including someone with trans identity in the review team. Did you consider doing that?

Why were no trans people included in the review team?

There is talk about labelling or not labelling foods, particularly on menus when people eat out. I am interested in that, as well. Where are you on that?

That is really helpful. Thank you.

You have covered a lot of what I was going to ask about. I am interested in the notion that, if we want to meet more targets, particularly on childhood obesity, we need to move away from talking about things to taking action. I believe that Governments must take responsibility for their part of the picture: it is not all about individual choice, because we know that communities are not set up that way, especially in areas that have high levels of health inequality. If you were going to give us homework, on what three areas could the committee achievably push the Government to take action?

I thank my colleague Richard Leonard for bringing this important debate to the chamber and pay tribute to members of EIS-FELA, who are fighting passionately for pay and conditions that reflect the work that they do in the further education sector.

Further education lecturers make up a skilled and dedicated workforce and they have my full support and solidarity as we continue to stand with them on the picket lines and stand up for them in the Parliament. It is the responsibility of Opposition and back-bench members to make the point to the minister that it is a fair fight and we should bring it to the Parliament.

I have stood side by side with further education lecturers and other staff at Ayrshire College, and the overwhelming feeling that they expressed is of being undervalued. We can talk about valuing those staff, but the sector needs action. It needs members on these benches and the Government’s back-bench members to talk about the action that the Government can take.

Our further education workforce teaches key skills and sets up people for a life in skilled employment. The members of that workforce are experts in their individual fields and choose to dedicate their lives to improving others’ outcomes. However, Colleges Scotland and the Scottish Government still cannot bring themselves to recognise that value. As the motion states, the offer that is on the table represents a real-terms pay reduction. That means that, while the Scottish Government is underfunding colleges, as we have heard, and cuts are felt across the country, Colleges Scotland is doubling down and making an insulting offer to lecturers.

Further education lecturers have been forced into industrial action. Action short of a strike was not met with an acceptable response. In some cases, the actions of management in colleges have fallen well short of the expectations that are set out in the fair work framework. The minister’s response should reference those matters. It is nothing short of appalling that our lecturers are being treated in this way. They do not deserve to have to go through such a gruelling battle simply to see their pay and conditions reflect the valuable work that they do. They deserve so much better and they will continue to have the support of members on these benches.

I turn briefly to students. I put on the record my thanks to all the students who have come out in support of the action that is being taken by their lecturers. When attempts have been made to pit students against lecturers, it has been truly heartening to see so many students standing with their lecturers, recognising their importance and the importance of the action that they are taking. The sector is so important to ordinary working people, and the students recognise that.

The minister will not like to hear this, but my colleague mentioned that he is often described as the missing man, and he must do better. I can say to him today that these workers will not stop their fight for better pay and conditions and the trade union movement will not be deterred by a lack of co-operation from the Scottish Government. That will merely intensify efforts, and I urge the minister to get key stakeholders around the table and intervene.

The reality is that the further education lecturers’ ask is not unreasonable. The work that they do is invaluable and the impact that their efforts have on improving skills, supporting employment opportunities, growing the economy and delivering positive outcomes for those in areas that need it most cannot go unnoticed and unrewarded. The minister must act.