Seòmar agus comataidhean

The link between health and education is vital. That is why it is so important, in taking forward the action that is set out in the implementation review, that the task force that has been established has representation and co-chairing from both health and education. That very much recognises the absolute importance of having a joined-up approach in that area specifically, notwithstanding my exchange of comments with Mr Whittle about the need for broader engagement. We cannot have a siloed approach.

That speaks to the point about consideration of data, which is not just specifically about health boards but about understanding the position in local government and posing the challenge to ourselves collectively about how we can more effectively utilise the data that is there and is being generated. The challenge is how we can more effectively utilise that data to ensure that we are meeting people’s needs.

The need for collaboration across sectors is a really important point. It is particularly important for children and young people with regards to educational settings and the responsibilities that are placed on local authorities as education authorities.

My clear expectation is that there will be joined-up and comprehensive working that takes account of people’s neurodivergent needs. That should be part of the fully integrated response that we would expect in meeting anyone’s needs, whether they are in an educational setting or interacting with the criminal justice system. The key principle has to be meeting needs and responding proportionately in doing so.

Thank you for your question. You have summarised a lot of the issues and the complexity. One particular issue that has been raised with the committee, which has probably been raised by our constituents with all of us in our capacity as MSPs, concerns what is described as shared care, whereby someone obtains a diagnosis in the private sector and then finds that they are unable to obtain their prescription via the NHS. The committee will be familiar with the range of reasons for that and with some of the concerns that have been raised around assurance, quality and confidence. If I recall correctly, the committee took evidence on the potential for online assessments by providers outwith Scotland. I appreciate that the committee is familiar with the range of concerns that have been raised, and I recognise the point that is being made about why individuals are seeking diagnoses from the private sector, which was touched on at the outset in response to a question from the convener regarding the current length of waits in certain parts of Scotland.

We are focusing on rethinking the system and moving away from the paradigm of an NHS waiting list approach to one that is ultimately based on needs, recognising not only the importance that is placed on assessment and diagnosis but the fact that significant help can and, indeed, should be provided. In many cases, needs can be addressed without a diagnosis. If we can achieve that shift, it is potentially a way of helping to ensure that people receive support. They may find that that initial support meets their needs and that, consequently, there is no requirement for a diagnosis—which can have an impact on demand overall.

I want to caveat that by being absolutely explicit that I recognise the importance that is placed on diagnosis and that what I am saying should in no way be misconstrued as meaning that I do not. However, ultimately, there is a need to focus on meeting needs, because, as you touched on, Mr Harvie, a diagnosis is, in many cases, not necessarily going to lead to any other interventions. I appreciate the points around certainty, identity and validation. However, in many circumstances, diagnosis does not, outwith the question of medication, lead to any additional service or support being provided that cannot be provided without a diagnosis. That is part of it.

The points around shared care have been raised with me on more than one occasion in the chamber. We have been engaging with the Royal College of General Practitioners Scotland to gain more of an understanding of the issue, and we are doing a bit of work on it. I want to ensure that every individual who requires the support of our national health service in any way can receive the support, help and care that they require from that service without the need to go private. That is what I want to see.

My focus is on ensuring that our system is responding to the needs of individuals. Recognising the unprecedented increase in demand, I want those needs to be met within our existing health and social care system and in our educational settings. To respond to your question directly, Mr Harvie, I am not here to advocate for an expansive and increased role for the independent sector. However, recognising that individuals are able to exercise their right to use that sector, and recognising the challenges that have emerged around shared care, we are having that engagement.

Of course I want to ensure that every individual who requires diagnosis and treatment through the NHS is able to access that. That is the founding principle of our national health service—

It is in specific cases, consistent with clinical guidelines. For many people with a neurodivergent condition, support can be provided through very minor and straightforward environmental adjustments and peer support.

On those particular points, the role that the third sector plays is vital, and it does tremendous work. I recognise some of the challenges that have been articulated to the committee and in relation to some of the decisions—

The role of the third sector is hugely important. I know that the committee had an evidence session with many of the organisations that have worked and engaged with the Government over the years. Whether it is the funding that we provide to Scottish Autism for the autism advice line, the autistic adult support fund or the additional resource that we are providing this year—

What should happen is what is set out in the national specification. Stephen McLeod made some points about how we can work effectively to utilise the data that is gathered from the innumerable interactions that are already taking place in the system, such as in educational settings. How we more effectively utilise data is a challenge to public bodies and to Government, which is why we have had the engagement with health boards and local authorities and why we are working to consider not just the data that is available but how it can be more effectively applied.

The cross-sector task force is working on improving the implementation of the national specification. The work has been committed to and is under way, specifically to respond to the circumstances that you have articulated, where a young person is not necessarily receiving the support in their local area that they should be receiving.

We are working to respond in a way that recognises the complexity and is also consistent with much of what the Royal College of Psychiatrists has said, while recognising that there is no one particular model and that there will be a multitude of different approaches, as well as the different circumstances that people find themselves in, the different settings and the particular needs of the individual. That is where we are at: the policy and the framework are there, but there is a question about implementation, hence the joint review on implementation, the subsequent establishment of the task force and the additional investment. Stephen McLeod might have something to add.

That gets to the heart of the challenges that we have been discussing this morning. The process of developing a national specification is a collaborative endeavour. In the case of the national specification for children and young people, we recognised that there were challenges around implementation and consistency—hence the joint review and the establishment of the task force. That work will go forward with the aim of ensuring that the experience of individuals engaging with services is consistent with what is set out in the national specification.

That is beyond the engagement that regularly takes place between Government and local partners. The task force is doing specific, dedicated work and had its first meeting earlier this month.

It is really important to recognise that that resource is available. I add that it is available at three levels, so there is an opportunity to develop knowledge and expertise further. On the uptake and utilisation of the training, I do not have any data or statistics to hand, but I am happy to take the question away.

I mentioned data, which is very much focused on the number of individuals who are seeking assessment. However, the point about the uptake of that training resource is useful. I appreciate that the committee might think about that when considering its recommendations but, as an output from this meeting, I am happy to take that away and discuss it with officials, because it is an important point.