Seòmar agus comataidhean

To conclude, I support this reinvestment in our communities.

It is right that consensus has been found in the chamber today, in so far as it has been recognised that the cashback for communities programme has been beneficial to our communities and that it must be continued in years to come to allow that impact to be felt and seen in our communities.

The Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, which was delivered by a Labour Government, paved the way for the introduction of initiatives such as the cashback for communities programme, and it is heartening to hear from members about the impacts that it has had. Those funds are aimed at delivering positive futures for our young people, which is a legacy of a Labour Government. It is appropriate that the scheme continues to deliver for young people and seeks to ensure positive destinations for young people.

However, it is important that we note the role of restorative justice in the debate. Although the funds that have been collected are reinvested in initiatives that tackle antisocial behaviour, sporting activities and other positive programmes that we have heard about, it should be highlighted that access to restorative justice practices can prevent crime and antisocial behaviour as well as reducing reoffending. I hope that the Scottish Government will support Labour’s amendment at decision time, because it makes an important addition to a motion that rightly recognises the success of the programme.

Communities tell us of their fear that young people turn to crime if investment, opportunity and activity are lacking. I am sure that many members who are in the chamber have discussed that worry with parents, carers and the wider community. I have attended countless community councils and surgeries with local councillors where that issue has been brought to my attention.

The programme has had success and, as other members have said, we should dig deeper into it, because anything additional that we could do with the fund would be helpful. We need further investment in our communities in order to act on the real and serious concerns of those in our communities in the south of Scotland and beyond.

In preparing for the debate, like others, I noted several initiatives in my region that provide support to locally established groups such as the scouts and the girl guides, helping with digital work, badges and general sport and culture activities. Those things can seem small, but, as other members have said, those resources are scarce for some families. Those trips, away days and activities can be very impactful. For our small Ayrshire communities, which can be isolated, those small steps can be a big help in encouraging young people to participate in groups and clubs and engaging with the wider community.

We are all aware that communities, particularly rural and isolated communities, talk about the lack of activities and facilities for young people in villages and how that is linked to antisocial behaviour. Strengthening already existing groups in those communities can be helpful. Members across the chamber mentioned such community groups, and perhaps we could look at how they could be supported. I am sure that the minister would be able to comment on that. I note with interest that organisations such as Aberlour have received some of the funding. Those groups work at grass-roots level and will receive funds in phase 6, which I am pleased about.

There is local interest in supporting our young people and preventing crime. The benefits of the programme are clear, but it needs to be matched with strong funding for local services to ensure that our communities work for those who are most at risk of being caught up in the criminal justice system, which others have mentioned.

More needs to be done on organised crime. People involved in organised crime can take millions of pounds in cash and assets, and we need to ensure that that cash can be seized and moved. Other members have spoken clearly about that.

I have been advised that reduced access to community health facilities and the increased pressure on and workload for community midwifery teams have led, in relation to in-person appointments in Ayrshire and Arran, to a situation in which

“many women do not ‘meet’ their named midwife until 22 weeks of pregnancy”.

That wait is far too long and is of significant concern.

Will the cabinet secretary outline how the Government is working with health boards to eliminate long waits for pregnant women who are looking to meet their named midwife in person? Has the Government explored asking health boards to formally record the length of those waits per case?

Is it helpful to think and talk about minimum unit pricing as part of a package of public health measures that aim to change the direction in this country away from alcohol harm?

Thank you very much.

I am interested in the right of the child to a family life, because we can all imagine this subordinate legislation having an effect on that. How can we ensure that young people who are in that situation have that right? Does the legislation comply with the provisions in the European Convention on Human Rights and the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child regarding the right to a family life and support for legal agency?

Thank you very much for the evidence. I am interested in the various income groups. Early on, there were concerns about MUP disproportionately affecting low-income groups and, on the other side, whether it would have an impact on people in more affluent areas.

I am interested to get clarity on the current pricing. For MUP to work, do we need to increase the price? Will it continue to have the same broad effects on those groups or do we have any concerns about it disproportionately affecting lower-income groups because of the other crises in income that people face?

Given the complexities of the young people and the amount of support that would be required to maintain family contact, does it seem realistic that that could be maintained?

Why is there little detail in the minister’s statement on how we can retain existing staff? Staff turnover is as great a problem as lack of recruitment. Last week, the Royal College of Psychiatrists produced a report that states that 42 per cent of existing consultants are over 50 and that half of them are considering early retirement. Can the minister give details on what strategy is in place to retain those hard-working staff?

This is a members’ business debate, and I am entitled to put forward my view on the idea that we should have a nuclear weapons-free world.

During a time when horrendous war and inhumanity are on our screens day after day, it has really felt appropriate that we strive to work on the issue that we are discussing today. I thank Bill Kidd for his continuing work on this vital issue, and I am clear in my support for the aims that are addressed and recognised in the motion. We need more activity in the Parliament that is dedicated to peace and more parliamentarians speaking boldly in favour of that.

The motion notes that 60 per cent of the world’s countries are now nuclear weapons-free zones, which is promising. Although the pace is gradual, we are slowly decreasing the threat of nuclear weapons globally. However, it remains the case that a small concentration of countries continue to put the entire globe at risk, and I am ashamed to say that our own is included in that number.

Striving to make Europe a nuclear weapons-free zone is a noble and worthwhile pursuit that this Parliament can contribute to constructively with partners across the continent, many of whom will have a clear interest in Scotland, due to its significance as one of the few areas in Europe to house nuclear weapons. Adding our voice to that orchestra has a definite impact, and it is wise of us to do so. People want to hear from Scotland on this issue, so let us speak to the world about it. Speaking to the world on this issue is something that we perhaps do not do often enough.

Although there are differences of opinion on this issue across the chamber, and even within parties, Scotland and the UK more widely have played an important role in the anti-nuclear weapons movement for decades by being proactive and constructive and having our communities speak out about the issue. There is no reason for us to slow that down.

I understand that there is no quick fix to the mistakes of the past that brought these horrible weapons into reality, but I am confident that, in time, the idea that we once had nuclear warheads capable of mass death and destruction on our doorstep will seem completely ridiculous. That might not be in my lifetime, but I hope that it is in my children’s lifetime. Here today, in this building, we can come together and make a difference. We can have a nuclear weapons-free Europe. I do not want generations to suffer because of the mistakes that we made and because we did not speak out. That is a key responsibility for all elected representatives. Let us work together in the knowledge that we can make Europe a beacon to the rest of the world and have a nuclear weapons-free Europe.