Seòmar agus comataidhean

We are not asking for much. We are just asking for the Government to live up to its own commitments.

Our population is, on average, becoming older with each passing year. We must come to terms with the increased prevalence of dementia and related illnesses. Dementia can be a harrowing diagnosis and one that many of us dread, but we can do a lot, including providing people with dignity. Currently, unfortunately, we are not near that standard.

An issue such as dementia requires serious attention from the top of Government, yet the headlines that dominate are about the internal war that is going on in the SNP and the flawed national care service plan, which is not worthy of the name. In politics, and as politicians, we must do better. We must seek to discuss the issues that matter to people in their everyday life: health, education, care and communities.

Three national dementia strategies have been published since 2007 and a fourth is planned. If we take a close look at the previous plans, we see that a great deal has never been realised, including effective local delivery plans and key commitments on post-diagnostic support. We can also see the effects of those broken promises in the day-to-day care of patients and the toll that it takes on those who look after them.

To tackle dementia, we need a well-funded care service with well-paid carers. There is no getting away from that. My party repeatedly calls for a decent pay rise for social care workers.

The challenge that we must face up to is to provide care for people where and when they need support in a way that works for them. I am well aware that that is easier said than done, but launching strategy after strategy is not a substitute for serious action. I am very concerned that we are two years into this session of Parliament and there has been little of the latter.

I want to briefly mention the developing international evidence base that highlights the benefits of allied health professionals’ early interventions, supported self-management and rehabilitation as a means of supporting people to live well with dementia for longer.

Despite all the innovative, creative and evidence-based work, it is evident that access to allied health professional services remains inconsistent and challenging. At times, they are simply not available. More must be done to raise the profile of and to improve access to those essential AHP services. In relation to dementia services, access to AHPs is most definitely a postcode lottery.

Since the first dementia strategy was published 13 years ago, delayed discharge has become a huge problem, leaving a lot of dementia patients in a state of distress and prolonged discomfort. In many areas, people are victim to a further postcode lottery, in which their experience of provision might be vastly different from that of someone just a half-hour drive away. Will the new strategy solve the problems, or will it just play lip service to them? The public are perfectly justified in asking those questions.

Many of us will know of a friend, family member or colleague who has been diagnosed with dementia and will have witnessed the intolerable toll that it takes on them and their families. Would it not be some support for them if the Government delivered on its commitment to remove all non-residential care charges? Using the delayed national care service plan as an excuse for inaction on that is just not good enough.

Let us give people something to be positive about. Let us give those who care for people with dementia a wage that they can build a life on. Let us take some of the cost of care away from those who can barely afford it. Let us stop the postcode lottery.

Thank you. I acknowledge the member’s point, but the point that I am trying to make is that it is about the wider role of local government in supporting its communities. There is an acceptance that the current Administration does not value the role of local government as much as we would all like it to. We must do better on that front.

I wish to pay tribute to East Ayrshire Labour councillors, who were able to secure key concessions in this year’s budget for the people of East Ayrshire. They secured increased investment in tackling antisocial behaviour in order to make our town centres safer; they ensured that resources would be given to tidying our streets and removing vandalism in order to make our town centres cleaner; and they worked to keep key amenities, such as public toilets, open, in order to make our town centres more accessible.

The Labour councillors put forward those key amendments because they are areas in which our communities and constituents wish to see better work done, which would help to improve our local communities and town centres. I pay tribute to Labour councillors because it is Labour in local government that is trying to find ways to deliver for our communities, despite the challenges that are laid before it in relation to local government funding.

It is important that I, like my colleague Colin Smyth, speak a bit about town centre housing. We have to make town centre living an attractive prospect. I look to Labour-run North Lanarkshire, where buildings such as unused churches are now being renovated by councils and housing associations to create state-of-the-art modern and accessible homes. The council is using the powers that it has to the best of its ability. Crucially, those homes are being built in close proximity to retail, health services and transport hubs. They are being provided at an affordable rate as council housing, but some key components of the previous use are being kept to ensure that there remains familiarity for local people.

In order to meet our vision for town centres, we have to speak proudly not only about council house living but about town centre council house living, supplemented by key amenities and resources that will bring life back to towns across our country.

We must have a user-centred approach, but we must also look to do all that we can to ensure that that approach acts to the benefit of small businesses, the low-paid worker and the local community. The observations made in the report in that regard are of significant concern, particularly in that many local businesses just do not know where to look for support. We must focus all our efforts on ensuring that there is a diverse range of options available to town centre users, but we must also reaffirm the benefits for small businesses in the future.

I note the importance of the report and thank the committee for bringing the debate to the chamber. We have a long way to go to realise the vision of our town plans. However, in getting there, we must ensure that people, residents and small businesses are at the centre, and that all are supported by strong funding for local councils to deliver on those key areas of work.

I thank members of the committee and all those people who contributed to what is an important and, indeed, timely report.

As we have heard, our town centres should be the beating heart of our communities. However, as the report notes, for too long they “have been in decline” due to a lack of investment, but also to a change in habits, with people becoming more inclined to go to shopping centres and retail parks and to shop from the comfort of their home online. It is not realistic to suggest that we would be able to reverse those trends entirely; indeed, it is not realistic to believe that change is not required because people will, in time, return to town centres.

We need town centres that are adaptable, vibrant, diverse and modern. We need town centres that meet the needs of individuals and families in 2023; that are consistently underpinned by community and togetherness; and that are supported by a determination, as the report mentions, to rebalance

“the cost of doing business in town centres”

compared with

“out of town”.

I cannot contribute to the debate without mentioning a vital relationship that is highlighted in the report, which is the important role of local government in improving our town centres. Across Scotland, we have a vision for what our town centres ought to, and could, look like to meet the needs of a modern Scottish population. However, for those dreams and visions to become a reality, they need funding—local government and local councils need funding.

It is therefore beyond belief that, year after year and budget after budget, the SNP cuts the budgets of those who provide the local services on which so many rely.

To ask the Scottish Government what assessment it has made of the potential impact on its on-going targets to tackle child poverty of any reduction in local government funding. (S6O-01921)

How can the Government justify leaving Midlothian Council—the council area in Scotland with the fastest-growing population of people, many of whom are families who are struggling with the serious increases in the cost of living—with a budget shortfall of nearly £14 million? How does the cabinet secretary imagine that, with that burden, that council and many others like it will be able to meet wider anti-poverty targets?

I begin by expressing my sincere condolences to, and solidarity with, the families of all those who have died or have been gravely injured in this senseless war. Most of us in the chamber are fortunate enough to have never had to experience such brutality and horror, so anything that I describe can come only from a position of utmost respect for what those people have been through.

No one should have to witness those atrocities or lose loved ones in the prime of their life, many of whom, I am afraid to say, are children. I cannot imagine the horrors of being a parent or grandparent when the bombs are raining down from above. It is truly despicable and we must find a resolution that ends the conflict as soon as possible.

Like many others, I had hoped that the days of all-out war in Europe were behind us. That was a naive hope, perhaps, and one that we now might not realise for generations to come. However, my hopes are not reality, and people who are in desperate need are asking for our help. I cannot cower from that responsibility and turn my back. After all, the freedom of our country was in part secured due to the assistance of others, many of whom laid down their lives to protect us. Ukraine is simply asking for resources and assistance. We have the moral duty to respond.

We must not forget that there were far too many who were complacent about the threat presented by Russia’s invasion of the Crimean peninsula back in 2014, believing that it would be limited and contained, that it would never cause us any problems and that, perhaps most hopefully, it would not lead to further bloodshed. Sadly, and perhaps inevitably, that has not been the case, and we cannot imagine that Russia will stop now. That would go against the most common sense.

We have learned a lot since 2014 about the intentions of Putin and those who support him. Unfortunately, at times, the UK and its allies have allowed themselves to be outmanoeuvred by him, perhaps as a consequence of our having a Prime Minister too often obsessed with goings-on at Downing Street or in their own party. The point is that we cannot allow that to happen again.

I have long opposed foreign intervention and the march to war. Whether it be in Iraq or Afghanistan, illegal and knee-jerk wars must be opposed when launched from home or elsewhere. It is clear that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine meets that criterion, and that is why I stand with the Ukrainians in their fight against tyranny.

Trade unionists and charities across Ukraine are often the best sources of reasoned opinion in any debate. They have called for us to assist those fighting Russia on the front line, and I believe that we must commit ourselves to doing so. I cannot pretend to be a military expert by any means, but if those on the ground are so clearly telling us that they need particular equipment in order to protect towns, villages, and cities from attack, we must take that seriously and heed their call.

We must also continue to offer asylum and assistance to those fleeing from the war and offer a stable and nourishing home for those who are already here. There are many Ukrainian refugees in my region and across Scotland who could not have imagined only a year ago that they would end up somewhere such as Dalmellington or Kilmarnock. But they are here, and they have been welcomed, and I hope that they can build a life here for as long as they wish to.

I can barely begin to imagine what it must have been like for them or the worries that they must have had day after day. They must continue to be a primary focus for the Scottish Parliament during a time when far too many other issues are dominating the headlines that, frankly, if we think about it, are of little importance in comparison.

I commend the motion and thank Neil Gray for bringing it to the Parliament. I offer my full support and am committed to supporting the people of Ukraine. Their fight is our fight. We must strive for peace, and we cannot achieve that by allowing Ukraine to fall into the hands of a dictator such as Putin.

I have been approached by people who, although they acknowledge that there has been some movement, consider that there is no great urgency to see the issue as a key priority. I have been asked to raise with the committee that having an islander on HIAL’s board should be a priority. Beatrice Wishart from Shetland has spoken to me about how the community there feels that it is imperative that that happens. I want to share that with the committee.

You spoke about the responsibility of local government to provide water for young people. I am interested to know to what extent that is monitored. Do we have any evidence that water is freely available and how well young people can access it?

Similarly, my point is that it is very disappointing that we do not have a timeframe. There is a growing body of evidence that that is an important policy to progress. Commitments have been made on school meals but nothing has come forward. We should send a strongly worded letter to the minister asking that the Government please sets out an exact timeframe for the measure.