Seòmar agus comataidhean

Will the member take an intervention?

I will make my intervention very quick. We have not spent a great deal of time on further education, but, in some of the aspects that we have spoken about, it is quite key going forward. Can we have a commitment around that?

I am particularly interested in discussing women’s and girls’ activity at community level, which witnesses have talked a wee bit about. It is so important that people can exercise and take part in activity in their communities. Do models exist out there that work well, in particular for women and girls? Are there examples either from this country or further afield?

Convener, can I just—

Thanks for that feedback. How do you see the sports governing bodies feeding in to community sports? Is that something that we do well or that we need to do better?

The importance of getting this right cannot be overstated. Delivering positive and tangible actions to improve diet and tackle obesity is crucial to improving the health of the nation and eradicating health inequalities.

However, we have yet another ministerial statement that shows little to no progress. The Government is no stranger to a strategy, but it has a terrible relationship with delivery. The minister should be here to explain why the SNP Scottish Government has made so little progress in the area since the plan was established five years ago. Please explain why so little progress has been made.

I am happy to be speaking in this evening’s debate. I reiterate my party’s support for hospital at home services, which we know to be vital for delivering the healthcare of the future by bringing hospital-standard care into the home using technology.

Although we agree with the benefits of the hospital at home programme, recognise its usefulness thus far and want its success to continue, it is disingenuous to suggest that investment here is anywhere near enough—we need widespread resource for our NHS, which is struggling on many fronts. We need the Government to explain its long-term investment plan for the hospital at home service.

It was right for my Labour colleague Paul Sweeney to set out the reality in our health service, which is the backdrop to today’s debate. One in seven Scots are on waiting lists, delayed discharge is alarmingly high and NHS staff, despite their great efforts, are being let down by a Government that—no matter how often it tries to argue to the contrary—has undervalued and underresourced that critical workforce. Our patients are being failed by the lack of support for the staff. Initiatives and programmes such as hospital at home are welcome, but the wider picture cannot be ignored.

It is also correct that we ask the Scottish Government to set out its plan for delivering hospital at home services for the longer term as an alternative to acute hospital care, so that that is understood, rather than such services being seen as a quick fix or a tokenistic gesture, which just allows pressure to be put back on acute services when funding falls short.

At this juncture, I wish to recognise the multidisciplinary nature of the service and the importance of various workforces within our NHS and social care services in its delivery. It is right that we commend Healthcare Improvement Scotland and NHS Education for Scotland for their work in this regard so far. I pay tribute to our allied health professionals, who make up the third-largest workforce in our NHS, who go above and beyond to deliver specialised care services for our most vulnerable people in the most challenging of times. We are all aware that, without doctors, nurses, carers and unpaid carers, and allied health professionals working together to meet the individual needs of every patient, hospital at home does not work, so it is right that we do all that we can to support them.

Therefore, it would be appropriate for the Scottish Government to listen to the concerns of, for example, the Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh. In its comments ahead of today’s debate, the college highlights concerns about a potential overreliance on unpaid carers, who are already under serious and significant pressure to look after those in their care, to provide support during periods of increased patient need. Indeed, the RCPE argues that the provision of hospital at home must be in addition to existing services, rather than a replacement for them, in order to ensure that the hard-won rights of older people to receive care in acute hospital settings—should that be most appropriate to their needs—are not lost. It would be useful for the minister to outline the long-term future of hospital at home and to address some of those important points in her concluding remarks.

Christine Grahame, who spoke before me, mentioned that she was unaware of the hospital at home service. If MSPs are unaware of the service, that gives us a sense of the extent to which people out in the communities understand the service. I see that the minister and the cabinet secretary are looking surprised—I know that they feel that the service is very embedded, but it does not feel that way to many people, and it would be useful to address that.

We need to consider the staffing challenges that we face: one in 10 GPs have formally closed new patient lists, the Royal College of Nursing Scotland confirms that community nursing teams are under extreme pressure, and AHP vacancies are causing stress, too.

That is all underpinned by a failure thus far to fully implement the safe staffing legislation that the Parliament passed years ago to protect an overworked workforce. We know that such services need to be met with strong protections for NHS staff. We should look back at that legislation to ensure that it is implemented appropriately in our wards and in services such as hospital at home.

We have touched on social care. All community services are undermined by the crisis in social care. The Government cannot avoid that. Carers are not being paid the fair wage that they deserve, and there are serious concerns across Scotland about the provision of well-funded and locally available social care.

It is clear, as Scottish Labour’s amendment sets out, that we will be able to deliver the standard of social care that is required and a strong hospital at home programme only by immediately uplifting social care pay. I mention the recommendation in the Feeley review to remove non-residential care charges. Those important issues have not been addressed by the Government.

I reiterate my party’s support for the intentions and aims of hospital at home and recognise that it is an important step in encouraging the use of alternative care options. A close friend of mine who has many years of community nursing experience tells me that patients seem less anxious, which must be a good thing for care. However, it is clear that there are issues in relation to support and resources for the NHS and social care workforce, and I hope that the minister addresses that in closing the debate.

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. My device did not seem to connect. I would have voted yes.

To ask the Scottish Government how much it has allocated in its budget 2023-24 for the roll-out of free school meals to all primary school pupils. (S6O-02273)

When I asked the then Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills, Shirley-Anne Somerville, about this in March, she recognised that

“a number of local authorities are facing challenges in planning for that substantial expansion of free school meals.”—[Official Report, 23 March 2023; c 66.]

Will the cabinet secretary outline what direct support is going where in the provision to councils to overcome such challenges? Has she given consideration to calls by organisations such as Aberlour, which asks Government to increase the eligibility threshold beyond the already promised extension to P6s and P7s in order to support low-income families?