Seòmar agus comataidhean

I thank the Liberal Democrats for bringing the debate to the chamber. I agree with Ariane Burgess that it has allowed us to have a good look at an important matter. It was good to hear the minister acknowledge that things need to improve—that was very helpful. Elena Whitham’s call for cross-party focus was also helpful.

However, reflecting on what we have heard today, it is clear that the current provision for neurodevelopmental conditions does not match rising need and demand. Those in the system and their families feel that they are being let down, and they are. My colleague Paul Sweeney laid that out well in his speech, and Willie Rennie’s contribution brought out some strong points that we perhaps do not always consider.

We heard from Dr Gulhane and others that many are waiting months, and sometimes years, for treatment, and we are yet to see a dedicated pathway for diagnosis.

The Government promised to improve access and reduce waiting times for CAMHS, but we see in our inboxes that some children and young people are still waiting years for treatment. We know that delays threaten the effectiveness of treatment—Ariane Burgess and others mentioned that—and we need to help people to make a change in their life.

Mental health services face unprecedented pressure. All members have spoken about that, and we accept it, but NHS spending on mental health services falls short of the Government’s 10 per cent commitment, as a number of members mentioned. Perhaps the minister will speak about that in her closing speech.

That failure falls against a backdrop of increased reporting of mental health conditions, which links very well to the Labour amendment. We need to understand the figures and what is happening, and I hope that the Government recognises that.

The removal of patients from CAMHS waiting lists means that people who have been waiting for years now have to wait even longer. That has been brought up with me on many occasions. Families, parents and the people who are waiting do not understand what has happened, and we in this chamber all have a responsibility—although the Government is ultimately responsible, of course—to understand the long-term pattern of what is happening. That is why Scottish Labour seeks to strengthen whatever is agreed to today, by saying that the Government should get that data into the public domain, so that we can understand the number of patients with neurodevelopmental conditions and how that relates to CAMHS waiting lists.

In his opening speech, Alex Cole-Hamilton raised the failure of the shared care system and the work that needs to be done with GPs on that. We all agree that patients and their families who cannot afford to go private are doing so because they feel that it is so important for their loved ones to get treatment. That is another hurdle that people face, so we need to get on top of that issue.

We all agree that the workforce is absolutely crucial. We need to see what is needed in the workstreams. My colleague Claire Baker mentioned the disappointment around the proposed learning disabilities, autism and neurodivergence bill. That has also been mentioned to me. Something needs to be done for parents and families who are heartbroken by what has happened to that promise.

In fairness, for too long the SNP has been asleep at the wheel on the mental health crisis. We need investment in mental health services, more mental health workers and improvements to CAMHS. Patients, parents and clinicians deserve better than what the Government is currently delivering. That is why Scottish Labour supports the motion, which I hope that our amendment will strengthen.

Is some of the specific training that might be required available at the moment, or do additional things need to be put in place to make it happen for healthcare professionals?

You have possibly touched on some of the things that I was going to say about the workforce and the importance of supporting the workforce. We have heard some concerns that workforce constraints could limit the bill’s implementation. Do you have any thoughts on that? Does anything additional need to happen so that the workforce can ensure that the bill’s provisions are realised?

Is that information publicly available?

On the options appraisal of the models that will apply after the UK bill comes into force, do you veer towards a voluntary model?

You have answered quite a lot of the questions that I was going to ask, so I will have a wee look at the scope of the proposals and the funding. Can you clarify why the proposed negotiating body will exclude children’s social care staff? Is there a particular reason for that?

That is a helpful clarification—thank you.

On funding, have you done any cost analysis of sectoral bargaining and fair work arrangements? Could we look at anything on that?

To ask the Scottish Government what recent action it has taken to improve the prevention and monitoring of malnutrition and dehydration. (S6O-04692)

Malnutrition is believed to be on the increase across Scotland, particularly in our vulnerable communities. As well as that being totally unacceptable, it places significant pressures and costs on our healthcare system. Many families, including in my South Scotland region, face high costs, poor food availability and significant inequalities, all of which limit their access to nutritious foods.

The cabinet secretary referred to the malnutrition short-life working group. It was commissioned to recommend a framework for the prevention of malnutrition and dehydration more than two years ago, but we have had no detail to date. When will the framework be published?

Is the First Minister aware that Stagecoach west Scotland’s drivers are the lowest paid of any Stagecoach bus drivers across the United Kingdom? The drivers have simply tried to stand up for themselves, but the company has tried to reduce their leave and cancelled all existing leave over a planned strike period, which has caused much distress to everyone. That is just one of the many tactics that Stagecoach is using to prevent ordinary workers from having any say in their conditions. Does the First Minister agree that those drivers deserve a fair pay deal?