Seòmar agus comataidhean

Scottish Labour’s amendment sets out what we can do. I urge members to support it.

The member knows that I strongly object to some of the policies of the current Government at Westminster, and I recognise how difficult the situation is for people, but we must do all that we can here, in Scotland. We, on the Labour benches, want to do the things that we can do now. That is where we differ in our approach—we want to talk about what we can do and actually get it done.

I will take a short intervention.

The member will recognise that we need to spend longer discussing all the ins and outs. If the member believes that the SNP is doing everything that it can, I say to her that it is not. There are alternatives, and it is about political priorities. That is what being a politician is about.

As my colleagues have highlighted, Scottish Labour supports the focus on building and enhancing virtual capacity to support a sustainable future, but the pressures on primary care services and the aforementioned impacts of such pressures cannot and must not be ignored, as was recognised. It is not too late to bring care closer to our communities. Nor is it too late to invest adequately in the services that we know will reduce reliance on hospitals, such as local government family-based services and link workers. Those will improve health outcomes across Scotland, but we are running out of time, so we call on the Scottish Government to act radically and with purpose.

On a number of occasions during the debate, we have heard about the pressures that our social care workforce faces. Like our primary care workforce, our social care workers are the very best of our country, they have exceeded all expectations during the pandemic and they have protected the most vulnerable in our communities at a most serious time. It is a disgrace that so many of them have been made to feel so overworked, underpaid and undervalued. That is the reality, and we need to hear more honesty about it. Sarah Boyack described well how that situation is presenting in Edinburgh.

I believe that the reforms that a national care service could bring should be welcomed and could address significant failings that we currently see because there is too much involvement of and reliance on the private sector. However, reforms cannot wait for the national care service; we need them to happen now. Therefore, I echo the calls of my colleagues, and those highlighted in the Labour amendment, in saying that non-residential care fees must be removed immediately, the recent narrowing of eligibility for care packages must be reversed and the independent living fund must be reopened. Moreover, to ensure that social care is both available and accessible in our communities, we must seek to improve pay in the sector.

The self-congratulatory nature of the Scottish Government’s motion does not sit well with Scottish Labour. We cannot accept that people cannot access GPs, that care packages are not available for people who need them or that carers feel unsupported. We can—we must—do more. That is the point—

Unison has contacted me to say that the workplace pressures in NHS Borders have led staff to report to their union issues including staffing levels that are dangerous for patients and staff; staff not receiving proper rest breaks; staff not being given opportunities to report serious incidents on Datix, which is the NHS electronic incident reporting system; and serious breaches of health and safety regulations. Those issues undoubtedly impact on the mental health and wellbeing of the NHS workforce. Will the First Minister intervene to support those people? Will that support include the full implementation of the Health and Care (Staffing) (Scotland) Act 2019 and working closely with trade unions to ensure the safety and wellbeing of staff?

I welcome this opportunity to close the debate on behalf of Scottish Labour. I start by thanking all the people who have allowed us to share their stories, and those who have made the journey to the Scottish Parliament and are sitting in the gallery. I hope the Government will listen and react to the debate with some speed.

As other members have said, we have had to drag the Government to this point. After far too many delays, and despite long Covid being at the forefront of public debate, we have finally brought this crucial issue to the chamber. A debate on the topic was cancelled last month for, seemingly, no reason. All the while, the Parliament has been coming and going, yet the issue of long Covid has never been given the attention that it deserves. Let us hope that that ends today.

As we have heard from the debate so far, there is broad cross-party support for getting the situation sorted. Scottish Labour whole-heartedly welcomes that and hopes that we can get the next step in place.

For some people in Scotland, the Covid threat is dwindling, but for others its lasting consequences are part of their everyday lives. We must not forget that many of our families and friends are still suffering from the consequences of the past two years. In some cases, those consequences are drastic and life altering. Alex Cole-Hamilton put it vividly: it is a horrible disease. As Jackie Baillie and Alex Cole-Hamilton both said, children are suffering.

As many as 151,000 Scots are living with long Covid in one form or another, but their needs and concerns are rarely taken into account. The Government seems to avoid communicating with sufferers and support groups, and to avoid taking on board the points that they make. As many colleagues have noted, there have been a number of serious issues with the Government’s response to the emergence of long Covid; it only makes it worse for support groups and sufferers that they do not feel fully involved in decision making.

The £10 million long Covid support fund that was announced in September 2021 has yet to be fully delivered, which is a disservice to our hard-working NHS staff. Unlike other parts of the UK, we do not have a network of specialist clinics for people who are dealing with the symptoms of long Covid. There seems to be a reluctance even to consider the suggestion that we might learn good practice by looking at that.

There seems to be little or no occupational support for people who are suffering from long Covid to help them back into the workplace. I thank my colleague Mark Griffin for his comments on the importance of considering long Covid as an industrial injury—in particular, for our valued key workers. I look forward to the cabinet secretary responding to Mark’s comments.

We need answers as to why funds could not have been allocated directly to health boards in order to treat people who were already in pain much more quickly. We know that the money has not been allocated. Why were people who are suffering from long Covid not asked to play a much more active part in the design and implementation of plans? Why are we not properly considering the financial impact that the condition has on people who fall victim to it? I hope that the cabinet secretary can answer some of those questions, and I hope that he will respond to Emma Harper’s points about gender.

Those are serious considerations, yet most of the commitments that the cabinet secretary has made today are about the future and a vague long-term Covid plan. There is far too little detail about how we will help patients now. How will we help them? If we do not ensure that adequate measures are in place, there will be serious implications for our NHS, and the distress and discomfort of people who have long Covid will be extended.

Despite the under-50s being at lower risk of dying from Covid, there are high rates of complications from Covid across all age groups, including children. Long Covid is just one part of that.

Long Covid is a problem that we do not have a full grasp of yet, which is why it is so important that we develop expertise and ensure that health services and the scientific community work together in a co-ordinated manner. Although there is a broad willingness to do that, there is a serious lack of commitment and progress on it.

The reality of what Covid can do to a person—beyond the worst fate of all—is not discussed clearly in public life. The Government does not want it to be discussed openly. If the public were better informed about the potential consequences that arise from catching Covid, that would go a long way towards improving our ability to limit the virus.

Well-funded long-term research will improve our understanding of the lasting effects of Covid and help to identify effective treatments for all who suffer from it. Committing to such funding now will put Scotland at the forefront of that vital discussion, but it will not happen if we are seen as being behind the rest of Europe and unwilling to commit serious investment. Any future planning from the Government must respond to the immediate and long-term impacts of long Covid in Scotland, and not merely pay a measure of lip service.

To conclude, I say that positive steps are being considered here today, but is the cabinet secretary listening? Does the cabinet secretary really think that the long Covid support fund, which—as was mentioned by my colleague Jackie Baillie—equates to around £33 per person per year, is sufficient to tackle the problem? We all know that it is not, and that the issue is not being taken seriously enough by the Government.

The cost of living crisis has impacted, and continues to impact, on communities up and down the country. At this moment, in this debate, we all need to focus on that fact. Just this week, it was reported that,

“one in five people in Scotland”

—many of whom, we understand, will be unpaid carers and care workers—

“are struggling to pay for their weekly food shop”.

That figure should shame us all.

Behind the numbers are stories of family members and key workers struggling to get by, and of people who provide care to the most vulnerable in our society being unable to make ends meet. That should be a reminder to members of all parties that inaction is not acceptable; sitting on their hands will not put money in people’s pockets.

I need to send a message to the minister that, by definition, a crisis ought to be responded to with purpose and with maximum strength, using all available resources. It is not a surprise that the Tories have shown such a lack of political will to assist those most in need, but it is truly shameful that the SNP and the Greens here in this Parliament have not stepped up and supported measures that would offer immediate assistance to people in dire need. Today, however, they have another chance. Today, Scottish Labour heard from carers: the very best of society, caring for loved ones. Now we need to ensure that the Parliament hears them and responds by supporting the motion.

It is fair to say that the SNP Government has failed to recognise that the crisis can be tackled properly only through the implementation of radical policy here in Scotland. In failing to hear that, it has failed our carers, paid and unpaid.

In the short time that I have, I want to emphasise that Scottish Labour’s motion has, importantly, highlighted the increased fuel prices that are making it more difficult for care workers to visit the people they support. I have heard that many times, so I want the Scottish Government to listen. If the Government wants to join us in reducing the burden that is placed on care workers, it will support our proposal to increase mileage reimbursement for care workers by five pence per mile, as was agreed for NHS workers.

We ought not to be surprised by the lack of action thus far. Many of the issues facing social care workers that have been exacerbated by the pandemic, such as low pay and poor working conditions, among others, long pre-date both the pandemic and the current cost of living crisis, as we have heard. Our social care workforce is demoralised and people understandably feel as though they have been undervalued, underpaid and overworked for far too long. Scottish Labour’s call to immediately end non-residential care charges is an achievable one—we know that—yet, yesterday in committee, the minister seemed unable to detail any progress on those issues. He told us that his department is very busy, but he seemed able only to outline the poor pay offer from the Government: an insulting 48 pence increase.

Ultimately, the minister and the Government are bereft of ideas on how to support our unpaid carers and social care staff. It is clear that action is needed and needed urgently. Far too often, carers and care workers appear to be forgotten about by the Government. Families who use social care are often burdened by high costs, and those in care suffer the consequences of poor decision making.

For far too long, the social care workforce has been overworked. I call on other parties—I look to the SNP back benches and the Green benches—to support the motion, which values our unpaid carers and the social care workforce.

Good morning, minister. Thank you for the introductory statement. I am keen to push you on timetabling and dates. I have two questions. I would like to hear a clear commitment with some dates for or an idea of when things will progress with the overall change to a national care service through the bill.

On implementation, I listened this morning to the evidence that we took in September, when people said that we need some actions now, which you have talked about. It is great that you have allocated funding and it was good to hear that your department is very busy—that is excellent. However, it is important for people to know what actions will be taken and what the timeframe is for that. What concrete things are you working on that will enable people to see a difference in the next year of the parliamentary session?

The First Minister will be aware that this week is mental health awareness week, with a focus on loneliness. Findings from the Mental Health Foundation show that 25 per cent of people who were surveyed had felt lonely some or all of the time over the previous month, and it is concerning that 31 per cent of people who were surveyed said that feelings of loneliness had negatively impacted on their mental health. Action is needed.

Despite having 15 years in office, the Scottish Government has failed to deliver an effective mental health strategy that supports the wellbeing of the Scottish population. Why has the First Minister failed so badly in that regard, and what steps can she set out today on prevention and intervention to address the crisis in our mental health services?

The mental wellbeing of pupils with neurodiverse conditions should be of paramount importance. How does the Scottish Government support that in the classroom setting and—this is important—in extracurricular activities to ensure that our schools are as inclusive as they can be and that they provide much-needed support and opportunity?