Seòmar agus comataidhean

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?

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?

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—

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.

I thank David Torrance for bringing the debate to the chamber and allowing us to again talk about the very important issue of changing cancer outcomes. It is right that we use much of our members’ business debate time to discuss cancer, cancer treatment and the research that is needed to ensure that we fight and beat this devastating disease.

When we speak the figures for cancer diagnosis out loud, we know why we, as parliamentarians, spend so much time discussing, debating and analysing treatment paths. There were 35,379 new cancers registered in Scotland in 2021. That is an increase of 5.5 per cent compared with 2019, and it is in line with a long-term trend of an increasing number of cancer diagnoses over time.

When thinking of those numbers, the most important thing is to think of the person and families behind them. Behind every number is a person who will be unsure of what is ahead of them in the days, weeks and months ahead. We know that cancer can affect people physically, emotionally and financially, and it is also a huge emotional challenge for families and friends.

That is why volunteering and participating in communal events are so appealing for people. While fundraising, one gets the opportunity to participate in a group event and space to share experiences and stories, and perhaps to find some common ground. The lovely thing about race for life is that people at all fitness levels are encouraged to do what they can to contribute to the common goal of raising money for cancer research.

We need research into cancer now more than ever. Research has moved the goalposts and tipped the dial in the correct direction. During the past 40 years, cancer survival rates in the UK have doubled. In the 1970s, just one in four people survived the disease for 10 years or more. Today, two in four survive. Cancer Research UK has a clear goal of accelerating progress and seeing three in four patients survive the disease by 2034.

We are, of course, lucky to have excellent research facilities in our education departments, and I understand that Cancer Research UK leads research in areas such as cancer biology, cancer drugs, cancer trials, early diagnosis, immunotherapy, new technologies, personalised medication, prevention and radiotherapy. However, it would be wrong not to take this opportunity to note that Cancer Research UK made a decision to end core funding at the Beatson in the west of Scotland, which is one of the largest clinical trial units in Scotland. We need to continue to invest in those areas, so it is important that we recognise that Scotland can hold those trials, and it is welcome when research funding is placed in Scotland.

My final point, which I have raised repeatedly, is about the inequalities in prevention, care and access to cancer care treatments. For many of the most marginalised in our society, the chances of getting cancer, their experiences of cancer and the outcomes are worse due to factors and circumstances that are beyond their control. Key to reducing cancers and cancer inequalities is acknowledging and dealing with the root causes that blight many of our communities. Across Scotland, we know that the most deprived populations have worse experiences and outcomes than those in the least deprived areas do.

We must act with purpose to reverse those concerns. Early detection gives those who have cancer the best chance of life. We must use events such as race for life not only to raise awareness of the disease and to focus on the importance of research but as a reminder of the long way that we have to go to address health inequalities.

I really appreciate all the contributions in the chamber this evening, and I wish everyone who is taking part in race for life the very best.

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?