Seòmar agus comataidhean

We have run out of time. I thank the four witnesses for their time. If there is anything that they want to follow up on, perhaps because there was not an opportunity to discuss it—90 minutes goes past incredibly fast—they can write to us and we will include their responses in our report.

We will stop for 10 minutes before our next panel of witnesses.

Welcome back. We now move to our second evidence session on the National Care Service (Scotland) Bill. I am delighted that everyone is here in person—it is a treat not to have to look at both the screen and the faces of people in the room. I welcome Alison Leitch and Cathie Russell, from care home relatives Scotland; Dr Kainde Manji, head of dementia for Age Scotland’s “About Dementia” project; Henry Simmons, who is the chief executive of Alzheimer Scotland; and Adam Stachura, who is head of policy and communications for Age Scotland.

It has become my tradition in our scrutiny sessions to ask witnesses for their views on the bill as it stands and about their hopes for how the national care service might address the unmet need that people have experienced. I will go round everyone. As always, I note that although I have a round-robin question for everyone, other members will not have that luxury or we would quickly run out of time. Members will direct their questions to specific witnesses.

I turn first to Alison Leitch.

Paul O’Kane, can I bring Emma Harper in before I come back to you?

Well, do what you will with your five minutes. [Laughter.]

I thank all of you for your time this morning. It will be very helpful and valuable to us as we move on to thinking about the questions that we want to put to the minister next week.

Agenda item 3 is consideration of a notification from the Scottish ministers for consent to a statutory instrument. The purpose of the statutory instrument is to make provisions for minor technical amendments to units and forms of nutrients in various pieces of nutrition legislation in order to ensure uniform and coherent interpretation of regulations, as well as alignment with the European Union, of which Northern Ireland remains a part.

Under the protocol between the Scottish Parliament and the Scottish Government, the consent notification has been categorised as type 1, which means that the Scottish Parliament’s agreement is sought before the Scottish Government gives consent to the United Kingdom Government to make secondary legislation in an area of devolved competence.

Do members have any comments on the instrument?

As members have no further comments, is the committee content that the provisions that are set out in the notification should be included in the proposed UK SI?

Members indicated agreement.

The next item on our agenda is further consideration of the National Care Service (Scotland) Bill. We will have two evidence sessions. The first panel will focus on certain services relating to social care, including mental health and drug and alcohol services, as well as public protection; the second panel will focus on older people and on Anne’s law.

I welcome Elinor Jayne, who is the director of Scottish Health Action on Alcohol Problems; Kira McDiarmid, who is senior policy and public affairs officer at Change Mental Health; and Susan Webster, who is head of policy and campaigns for MND Scotland. Thank you for coming.

I apologise—joining us online we have Mark Hazelwood, who is the chief executive of the Scottish Partnership for Palliative Care. Many apologies, Mark; I did not forget you—well, I kind of did. I am sorry; I just did not read below the line on my papers.

I have been asking most people who come to our sessions about their hopes for the national care service. What do you hope that it will address? Relating to that, there is an opportunity to review those aspects of integration that have not been working, but which you hope will work in a national care service, because that is essentially why it is being created.

I will go round everyone. Not every committee member will be able to do that—they will probably direct their questions—but I tend to do this to hear witnesses’ general thoughts. Perhaps we could start with Susan Webster.

Before I hand over to my colleagues, I want to pick up on something that has been put to us—not just around palliative care, but I will concentrate on that. We have heard from quite a lot of people in our informal sessions that, often, the only consideration is the person who is receiving palliative care—not the wider family. The systems that are out there do not take into account other family circumstances. An elderly person, who might have their own health needs, might be looking after somebody who is receiving palliative care, but they are considered completely separately rather than as a family. Has that been your experience, Mark?

I call Tess White, who has questions on palliative care and long-term conditions.