The next item of business is a cross-committee debate on the people’s panel report on reducing drug harm and deaths in Scotland. I invite members who wish to speak in the debate to press their request-to-speak buttons.
15:19
As convener of the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee, I am pleased to have the opportunity to open today’s important debate on the people’s panel report on reducing drug harm and deaths in Scotland.
First, I offer my sincere thanks to the people’s panel for producing such a comprehensive report on the topic. I also thank all the parliamentary staff and members of the stewarding board who helped ensure that the process ran smoothly. In addition, I place on record my thanks to the various stakeholders who took the time to give evidence.
The collaborative efforts of all those who have been involved in producing the report have been invaluable. For three years, members of the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee have worked jointly with members of the Criminal Justice Committee and members of the Social Justice and Social Security Committee to examine how drug deaths and drug harm could be tackled in Scotland. Throughout that time, we have taken an holistic approach in looking at issues related to drug harm, and I am pleased that the panel’s report has captured how complex and nuanced a subject drug harm is.
The report covers a wide range of issues and highlights multiple areas for the Government to consider, in the immediate term and for the future. I thank the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care for his letter of 10 February to the conveners of the joint committee, in which he outlined the Government’s support for the report’s recommendations.
Although I will be unable to cover all the points that are made in the report in the time allotted, I will highlight areas that are most pertinent to the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee’s remit.
However, before I do so, I believe that it would be remiss of me not to briefly highlight the extensive work of the people’s panel. As is explained in the executive summary of the report, people’s panels help to empower citizens to actively contribute and deliberate on key issues. The provision by individuals of innovative and informed input enhances Parliament’s scrutiny and strengthens inclusive democratic participation.
The people’s panel that we are discussing today consisted of 23 randomly selected individuals aged 16 to 75 from across Scotland. Those who were selected participated in two residential weekends at the Scottish Parliament and two online sessions, in October and November 2024. That work culminated in a collective statement and 19 recommendations. Only recommendations that secured the support of 87 per cent or more participants were included in the final report.
I believe that that approach highlights the benefit of people’s panels, particularly when scrutinising a topic that covers a number of remits. The recommendations reflect a broad consensus, and I again thank the panel for providing a strong foundation for future policy discussion and scrutiny.
I will now focus on specific points made in the report that are most pertinent to the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee’s remit. The panel heard that many people are unwilling to access support, either because of fears of discrimination or criminalisation or because of a general unwillingness to burden services that may not be equipped to respond.
In order to address that, the report recommends the introduction of a well-publicised single point of access for specialised advice and support, or an alternative that would be provided by a third sector organisation. That would allow for service users, as well as families and friends, to have access to immediate support and advice, while simultaneously alleviating the strain on other services.
Similarly, in order to streamline support for people in need, the Scottish Government must act to ensure that all public and third sector services are enabled to share information, with all bodies having a general data protection regulation-compliant information sharing agreement in place that involved service user consent. That would allow for easy sharing of relevant information, which would avoid duplication and remove the need for service users to repeat their stories, which can often be traumatic and affect the consistency of recovery pathways.
It is also important to note that, to further improve consistency across services, the report recommends that medication assisted treatment standards should be extended to cover all drugs that cause harm, to ensure that people have access to the same standards and levels of care.
I also want to take the opportunity to highlight issues around funding and, in particular, the impact that short-term funding is having on access to care and support and its detrimental impact on the workforce. Indeed, the impact of short-term funding was highlighted throughout the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee’s budget scrutiny, in which we called for multiyear packages to be implemented to allow organisations to better plan the provision of services.
Those calls have been echoed in the panel’s report, which states that there needs to be a guaranteed and protected five-year minimum period of funding for community and third sector services. I welcome the launch of the drugs mission fund and the fairer funding pilot, which I hope will provide much-needed assurances to front-line services.
In conclusion, although the recommendations that I have briefly touched on fall mainly within the health remit, it is clear from the panel’s comprehensive report that a multipronged approach to policy making is required if we are to be effective in reducing drug harms in Scotland. Just as the people’s panel embraced the need for collaborative working, so must we in this chamber. Cross-party and cross-remit working will be essential if we are effectively to tackle drug harms in Scotland and ensure that services meet a standard that addresses the needs of those who require them.
On behalf of the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee, I look forward to continuing the work with my joint committee colleagues and with members from across the chamber to effectively scrutinise and help to tailor forthcoming policies to reduce, and ultimately to end, drug harms to people in Scotland.
I remind members of my entry in the register of members’ interests, which says that I hold a bank nursing contract with NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde.
I take the opportunity to advise members that we have some time in hand at this point.
I call Collette Stevenson to open on behalf of the Social Justice and Social Security Committee.
15:25
I am delighted to speak on behalf of the Social Justice and Social Security Committee on the people’s panel report on reducing drug harm and drug deaths in Scotland.
I begin by placing on record the committee’s thanks to the people’s panel members for undertaking that challenging and complex task and for their considered report. I also thank the members of the stewarding board for the invaluable support that they provided to the panel. Members of the Social Justice and Social Security Committee have worked jointly for more than three years with members of the Criminal Justice Committee and the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee to look at how to tackle drug deaths and drug harm. I also place on record our huge thanks to the clerking teams for all their on-going support.
That work has enabled us to take an holistic approach to looking at all the issues related to drug use and drug harm. We tasked the people’s panel with answering the following question: what does Scotland need to do differently to reduce drug-related harms? The panel’s report covers a wide range of issues and I will focus on its recommendations about lived experience and tackling stigma.
It is clear from the panel’s report that trusting and consistent relationships are essential to helping people who use drugs access the advice, support and treatment that they need. The panel heard that having services delivered by employees with lived and living experience led to consistently better outcomes. The panel found that involving people with lived and living experience within the statutory workforce would reduce stigma because service users would feel more comfortable seeking support from people who have had the same experiences and can be seen as role models. Panel members recommended that more people with lived experience should provide on-going support and aftercare in the statutory workforce and that pay and fair working conditions for people with lived experience should be equal to those of equivalent public sector workers in the drug and alcohol field.
I welcome the Scottish Government’s commitment to publishing guiding principles for employers that will aim to address stigmatising practice and to allow people recovering from substance misuse to flourish in the workplace. The Scottish Government is also to publish employability support toolkits that will aim to support people with lived and living experience to enter and pursue careers in the substance use sector, including in statutory services. It is essential that the implementation and impact of those measures are evaluated.
The panel’s report highlights the high success rate of community hubs and I have seen how impactful such hubs can be. The Beacons community recovery hubs in my constituency of East Kilbride employ peers with lived experience and embed treatment and recovery in the local community. The hubs also run projects for family members who may be impacted by substance or alcohol use.
Those vital support services improve the health, wellbeing and quality of life of individuals and their families.
An issue that runs throughout the panel’s report is the stigma and discrimination that are experienced by people who use drugs, as well as by their family members. The report identifies some of the ways in which stigma negatively impacts on the recovery of people who use drugs. They include not being able to access support and advice, not being able to access treatment, not being provided with a consistent standard of service and not being able to gain secure employment. It is clear that stigma and discrimination remain barriers to people accessing the help that they need, and tackling that unacceptable stigma and discrimination is central to bringing about the culture change that the panel recommends.
People who use drugs and their families should feel able to seek out and access advice, support and treatment without fear of judgment or criminalisation.
I am really interested in tackling stigma as well. As a former healthcare professional, I think that it would be valuable to also provide stigma education to healthcare professionals who do not work in drug and alcohol services. Does the member agree?
I whole-heartedly agree with that. I will say more about stigma and trauma training in my speech.
The panel recommends that there should be appropriate anti-stigma training for staff across all public bodies and not just those who work in alcohol and drug partnerships, and that that training should be led and delivered by those with lived and living experience. As I touched on, I and members of the Social Justice and Social Security Committee received training last week on how to take a trauma-informed and responsive approach when speaking with vulnerable people. I think that all those who work in the public sector would benefit from being trained in trauma-informed practice.
The Scottish Government has confirmed that it will publish a drugs and alcohol workforce knowledge and skills framework, and I am pleased that it will be accompanied by training and learning resources that are aimed at reducing stigma. Again, it is essential that the implementation and impact are evaluated.
I thank the people’s panel members for their report. I hope that their recommendations will result in more people with lived and living experience being included in helping people with their recovery and will bring an end to the unacceptable stigma and discrimination that are experienced by people who use drugs and their family members.
15:33
I welcome the opportunity to speak on behalf of the Criminal Justice Committee in this debate on the people’s panel report on reducing drug harm and deaths in Scotland. I extend our sincere gratitude to the people’s panel members for their commitment to this complex issue and for producing a thoughtful and comprehensive report. Their insights are invaluable as we strive to address the multifaceted challenges of drug-related harm in our communities.
I commend the participation and communities team and members of the stewarding board for their excellent work in making the people’s panel happen. I also thank all the committee clerks, the Scottish Parliament information centre and other colleagues for their support in assisting the Social Justice and Social Security Committee, the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee and the Criminal Justice Committee to work together in support of efforts to tackle drug use and its associated harms.
As we have heard, the people’s panel made a range of recommendations, and I will discuss in further detail those that are pertinent to the Criminal Justice Committee. The panel emphasises the necessity of sustained support for individuals who are transitioning from environments such as prisons in order to prevent the cliff edge effect whereby support diminishes and external pressures resurface, increasing the risk of relapse.
We know how important prison release plans can be, as we hear a lot of anecdotal evidence from prison mentoring groups about what can go wrong and how easy it is for someone to relapse unless proper plans are in place. I am pleased that the Scottish Government has accepted that recommendation. I know that the cabinet secretary is aware of the importance of pre-release planning.
The committee welcomes the implementation of medication assisted treatment standard 5, which ensures that people receive support to remain in treatment for as long as they desire during critical transition periods. In addition, more than £3 million is allocated to third sector partnerships, which provide voluntary throughcare services. A new national third sector throughcare service is set to launch in April this year, which will extend support to those who are leaving remand for the first time. Unplanned release from remand is a significant issue. I am delighted that that provision is being introduced, and I seek reassurance on the longer-term sustainability of the funding.
The proliferation of illicit substances—especially potent synthetic drugs—in our prison system poses significant challenges. The panel recommends that our cross-committee collaboration intensifies efforts to curb drug supply in prisons, aiming to create a safer environment for prisoners and staff. In response, the Scottish Prison Service has established an incident management team in collaboration with Public Health Scotland, the Scottish Ambulance Service, Police Scotland and national health service partners. The team has problem assessment groups to provide rapid responses to emerging issues in correctional facilities. The Scottish Prison Service is also partnering with the University of Dundee to gain deeper insight into the nature and extent of drug use in prisons. Innovative technological solutions are also being explored to detect and prevent contraband entry.
However, we must ensure that we are striking the right balance between enforcement and ensuring that prisoners who are living with drug harm receive the support that they need. The Criminal Justice Committee has scheduled a formal meeting on 23 April to deliberate on the matter, and I hope that that may initiate a further inquiry based on the panel’s recommendations. The panel advocates for an expanded public awareness campaign regarding naloxone, a life-saving medication that can reverse opioid overdoses. The goal is to empower individuals to administer naloxone confidently, knowing that there will be no legal repercussions. My constituency team and I have undergone training to administer naloxone, and I—like my colleague Collette Stevenson—would encourage anyone to consider doing likewise as it could save a life.
The Scottish Government supports that recommendation in principle, too, and it is engaging with partners to broaden the reach of naloxone distribution. Efforts have led to a substantial increase in naloxone availability, with 70 per cent of at-risk individuals now equipped with kits. Although the increased availability of naloxone is positive, I am aware that there is still room for greater awareness and for use to broaden out even further. I know that the Government is fully behind widening access to and use of naloxone, and I would welcome reassurance that that will remain a key area of delivery.
At the joint committee meeting on 20 February, the cabinet secretary committed to providing an update on several fronts. First, there is progress on the single shared assessment. Efforts are under way to streamline assessments between the NHS and third sector organisations, ensuring cohesive support for individuals. I am interested in what timelines the Government might be looking at for full implementation of that.
On naloxone campaign developments, plans are being formulated for a comprehensive naloxone awareness campaign, as we have already referenced, which aims to educate the public and reduce overdose fatalities. I would like to know whether that will be a sustained campaign.
Finally, on general practitioner engagement with MAT standards, initiatives are in place to ensure that GPs have access to and are utilising MAT standards information and training that are available online, but how many GPs are actually engaging? Will there be an evaluation to ensure that that translates into better patient outcomes? Although I understand that the issue sits more in the health space, access to primary care services for people who are living with drug harm can often be an important protective factor that prevents them from entering the justice system.
I thank the people’s panel again for this really important piece of work. The Criminal Justice Committee remains steadfast in its commitment to addressing drug-related harm through our scrutiny work, in collaboration with our colleagues on the Social Justice and Social Security Committee and the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee. The insight from the people’s panel provide a clear road map, and we are committed to translating those recommendations into tangible actions that will save lives and foster healthier communities across Scotland.
15:40
As I continue to take on Christina McKelvie’s ministerial responsibilities, I hope that I do so with members’ love and best wishes for her during her on-going treatment. [Applause.]
Following the recent publication of the people’s panel report, I welcome this opportunity to update Parliament on actions that we are taking as part of the national mission to reduce harm and to improve the lives of those affected by drug and alcohol use.
Like the committee conveners, I extend my sincere thanks to the people’s panel, the stewarding board and all those involved in giving evidence for their dedication and diligent work in producing the report. As Clare Haughey said, the people’s panel is a true example of deliberative democracy, which is evident in action, and I am sure that members have found the report helpful and insightful, as I have. I also take the opportunity to thank all those across the joint committee, including the staff and clerks, for their work.
I begin with a reminder of the stark reality that we face. In 2023, we lost 1,172 lives to drugs and 1,277 lives to alcohol. Those are not just numbers—they represent individuals, families and communities affected by grief. Every life lost is a tragedy, and we must never become numb to the impacts of those statistics—having met too many bereaved families, I certainly have not.
The people’s panel report outlines some of the persistent challenges that we face in tackling the crisis. I am pleased to confirm to Parliament that the Scottish Government supports all the recommendations, many of which align to work that is already under way. We should reflect on the successes that are highlighted in the panel’s report. I remind members that Scotland was the first country in the world to introduce a naloxone programme nationally. The latest figures show that an estimated 79 per cent of those at risk of opioid overdose now have access to a life-saving kit. I pay tribute to Audrey Nicoll and others who have taken up the opportunity for training.
The establishment of Scotland’s first safer drug consumption facility in Glasgow marks another milestone. Although it is still in its early days, research and evaluation from similar facilities around the world have found consistent evidence that they can help to save and improve lives and reduce harm. Early anecdotal feedback from the Thistle has been positive, which reinforces the need for a harm reduction and public health-based approach.
As members will be aware, we have continued to put those with lived and living experience at the heart of our approach. That is reflected in the charter of rights, which was published in December. The charter supports people who are affected by substance use to know and understand their rights in accessing support services, which I think addresses a point that was well made by Clare Haughey, around people self-denying support due to stigma, a lack of information or, more worryingly, a lack of self-worth.
I know that more needs to be done. The people’s panel report calls for further and faster action on cultural change, stigma and prevention.
There is a recognition pretty much across the chamber that we must work collaboratively on the issue. I have asked this question before in previous years but I have yet to get an answer. If we are really to tackle the issue, we must understand why Scotland is such an outlier. Is any work being done to find out why that is the case?
Brian Whittle and I have engaged on that point. Strong evidence points to a direct correlation between levels of poverty, deprivation and deindustrialisation and levels of drug and alcohol harm and deaths. Beyond that, it is difficult to ascertain exactly why Scotland has had such a problem. However, I am focused on the areas that can provide us with salvation and a solution. In the evidence from the people’s panel report, we see an acknowledgement—as I was about to come on to—that creating a national mission with a broad scope, rather than picking a silver bullet or one area that will resolve all those issues, is the right approach to take. That is what the Government is committed to, as am I. I will come on to explain why that is the case.
I want to assure the chamber that the priorities that we have set out and that are at the heart of the people panel’s report remain at the core of our national mission and cross-Government support. A key part of our response—and something that was a focus of the joint committee’s work and evidence session in which I participated—is ensuring that we have a trauma-informed and resilient workforce to support people with drug and alcohol dependencies.
In the coming months, the Scottish Government will launch several resources to support the sector’s workforce, which have been developed with our expert advisory group and will set out the knowledge and skills that are expected of those working to support people who use substances. Emma Harper raised an important point about that in her intervention. The suite of resources will support learning and training and, crucially, support people with lived and living experience to pursue and sustain careers in drug and alcohol services and beyond, which is something that Collette Stevenson rightly focused on in her speech.
Scotland is blessed with some of the hardest-working and most passionate drugs workers in the world, and I welcome the cabinet secretary’s commitment to supporting them through knowledge and training. Does he recognise that they have a massive battle ahead of them, as we see an ever-increasing uptake of nitazenes and other synthetic opioids on our streets?
Alex Cole-Hamilton rightly points to the challenge that we face because of the diversification, toxicity and layering of drug availability across Scotland. I join him in paying tribute to those who work in our alcohol and drug partnerships, who are, as he said, remarkable. Those workers whom I was able to meet in the Thistle—who were picked having gone through an interview with a panel of people with lived and living experience—are absolutely committed to responding to the challenges that we face.
In my recent statement on the progress of the medication assisted treatment standards, I stated that change is happening and I stand by that. Over the past few months, I have met individuals and organisations driving that progress, and their dedication is clear. Access to treatment and support is improving and we will continue to work to ensure that services are responsive to the needs of those people who rely on them.
As we approach the conclusion of the national mission in 2026, we are already looking ahead. Our work has not concluded. We have started consulting with stakeholders to shape the next phase—one that builds on our progress, remains rooted in evidence and is flexible enough to address emerging challenges. That plan will be shaped by those with lived and living experience to ensure that it reflects the realities on the ground. I will also seek to have cross-party discussions on that work so that we continue to lead the boldest possible response for the remainder of the mission and beyond.
We are working in a challenging landscape. Alex Cole-Hamilton referenced one of the reasons for that. Indeed, the latest rapid action drug alerts and response surveillance report, in January, warns that the drug supply in Scotland remains
“highly toxic and unpredictable, requiring ongoing vigilance and a heightened response”.
Audrey Nicoll raised that concern, too. That situation demands continuous vigilance and an enhanced response, and we are working closely with our counterparts across the UK to address evolving drug trends. We cannot afford complacency.
I recognise that delivering change requires sustained investment, which is why the proposed funding for alcohol and drugs has been increased by £2.5 million, bringing our total proposed funding, including health board baseline funding, to more than £160 million. The increase in funding will support work on alcohol and drugs, and will allow us to go further and build on the national mission. The budget will provide more than £112 million for alcohol and drug partnerships, £13 million for grass-roots organisations funded through the Corra Foundation, and continued investment in residential rehabilitation. We are also allocating £2.3 million to support the Thistle centre safer consumption facility. That adds to the significant investment over the past four years, giving me confidence that we will meet the national mission commitment of £250 million of additional funding over five years.
However, transforming services and embedding new practices and approaches to tackling drug deaths requires not just increased investment or even structural changes, but a fundamental shift in culture across the whole of society, including through the justice system, as Audrey Nicoll mentioned in her speech. It is an area where the participative approach of the people’s panel has added a unique, valuable contribution, and we are committed to addressing its recommendations over this period.
Although we recognise the scale of the challenge that is before us, we remain determined. The commitment from members across the chamber in addressing the challenge is clear, and we will continue to act decisively, compassionately and with a clear focus on delivering real change.
15:51
Across nearly a decade in the Parliament representing Scotland’s largest city, I have spoken to many people with a harmful relationship with drugs, and to their families, and almost every time, the message is the same—they just want to stop. They want to end their harmful relationship with drugs, rebuild their lives, contribute positively to society and have a meaningful life once again.
Those people want that more than anything, but much of Scottish Government policy seems to go against that ambition. Everything is geared to making it easier to take drugs, lessen the consequences for those who do and strip away resources from the people who are there to help them, which means fewer opportunities for rehabilitation. That is eating away at the justice system, not least Police Scotland, which is tasked with keeping drugs off our streets and out of our communities.
It is therefore little wonder that the people’s panel on reducing drug harm and deaths was so critical of the Scottish Government and its record on the topic. The panel, which was representative of Scottish society and featured participants of varying ages and backgrounds, was shocked at the Scottish National Party’s lack of urgency in dealing with the drug deaths crisis. It said that the SNP Government, which, let us not forget, has been in charge for the best part of 18 years, has not acted despite being well aware of the evidence.
The most powerful evidence of all is the figure of 1,172 drug deaths—all of those people a loved one—in Scotland in 2023, which reaffirmed our shameful position at the top of the international league table of drug deaths. Scotland has sat at the top of that table since 2018. Since the SNP came to power in 2007, the annual drug deaths total has increased by 158 per cent, and it seems that nothing is getting better. The panel stated:
“the same conversations keep happening, with the same actions being agreed but not enough has been implemented.”
It also stated:
“There is no stability for service providers and users and no consistency of approach.”
The panel was severely critical of the Scottish Government for failing to keep up with the speed with which drug trends are evolving and changing. One theme running through the panel’s report is that people who have a harmful relationship with drugs should be listened to, that they should help to guide future policy and that they should be involved in new projects and support schemes. I gather that the Scottish Government agrees that that is a worthy objective.
The panel made it clear that those people should be involved in designing new projects and support systems, yet I am approached by former drug users all the time who all tell me that more needs to be invested in drug rehabilitation. There is too much pressure on people to remain on methadone instead of being supported towards true recovery, and far too little effort is being put into tackling root causes in the environments where drugs take hold, including areas such as Springburn, where I come from, and the streets in poverty-stricken communities across Scotland. People do not just need treatment; they need opportunities, hope and a real way out.
The families that I speak to who have lost loved ones to drugs or who are supporting loved ones through drug dependency want support to allow them to help the people who mean so much to them. Families and communities across Scotland feel let down by the Government and feel that they are not being listened to. Will the Scottish Government start listening to those people, their families and the communities that they come from?
The scourge of drug use throughout our society runs deep. Understandably, we focus much of our attention on drug deaths and those who are in the most desperate of circumstances socially, financially and emotionally. However, in a report in The Scottish Sun this week, we learned that drugs are infiltrating other areas, too. Last year, the police found that more than 3,000 drivers had drugs in their system. The most astonishing part of that was that the police tested only 6,000 people. More than half of those who were suspected of drug driving were committing that selfish and dangerous crime. They need help and support, too.
For context, the positive rate of those who were breathalysed for drink driving was closer to one in 20, and drug driving eclipses drink driving by three to one in Scotland. Given how high profile and correctly reviled drink driving is, that shows the extent to which Scotland’s drug problems run right through society. I was pleased that, during First Minister’s question time today, the First Minister committed to look at how we can ensure that we focus more on drug driving, as we did with drink driving many years ago.
One action that the Scottish Government could take right now is to back the Scottish Conservatives’ Right to Addiction Recovery (Scotland) Bill. The bill would achieve a number of things but, crucially, it would enshrine in law an individual’s right to access the treatment and care that they need. It would immediately put a vulnerable individual whose life has been wrecked by drugs on to a positive path. It would allow them to hope—possibly for the first time—that they can have a future without drugs. In contrast, the Scottish Government’s policies are designed to take away hope and to regard those individuals as people who are, and always will be, caught in the scourge of addiction.
The panel was clear in its verdict: the Scottish Government simply has not done enough. It seems that SNP ministers will not listen to Opposition politicians; they will not listen to the very best campaigners in the field; and they will not listen to vulnerable users. That being the case, I urge the Government at least to listen to the damning verdicts of the people’s panel report.
15:57
I welcome the opportunity to open the debate on behalf of Scottish Labour. The people’s panel on reducing drug harm and deaths has produced some excellent work that analyses the current action to tackle drugs and what more can be done to reduce drug deaths and tackle problem drug use, which we all agree are prominent public health issues.
The people’s panel was set up to make recommendations and to answer the question,
“What does Scotland need to do differently to reduce drug related harms?”
That is an important question, because Scotland remains in the grip of a drug deaths health emergency, with lives being lost needlessly.
The tragic rise in drug-related deaths is a clear sign that the Government’s plan to tackle the crisis is not working. Voices of those beyond just those in the Parliament must scrutinise and push the Government on the issues, and the people’s panel is a robust way to do that. I know that every member in the Parliament believes that every individual who has lost their life through drug dependency has been lost before their time. It must always be remembered that behind every statistic is a friend or family member who has lost a loved one. I pay tribute to all the friends and families who campaign across Scotland on the issue.
Despite that work, and despite the national mission, Scotland remains in the grip of a drug deaths health emergency, with figures remaining stubbornly high. I recognise that that is not due to the Government’s lack of will to tackle the issue. I believe that it wants the situation to change but, unfortunately, it has lacked the ability to deliver. It is fair to say that the report from the people’s panel confirms that.
Society’s approach to drug addiction must be evidence based and should be one that shows compassion and kindness, and any solution must include the voices of those with lived experience. Therefore, my party and I support the engagement with the people’s panel and the recommendations to fully include those with lived and living experience in further work that is done.
To move Government to a position of action, I think that we in Opposition have a responsibility to be clear and honest. I will repeat the figures that the cabinet secretary raised—an act that showed his commitment to that approach, too.
If we are to understand the situation that we are in, we must acknowledge that Scotland continues to have the worst rate of drug-related deaths in Europe, with 1,172 people dying of drug misuse in 2023. That is a stark reminder of the public health challenge that we are facing, and a stark reminder to the Government that it is currently failing Scotland on the issue. As the report puts simply, Scotland faces a significant drug and alcohol problem, and it is important that addiction services, for both drugs and alcohol, are adequately funded and supported.
The report also highlights important points on funding and accountability, which were raised by the previous speaker. At the moment, there is no stability for service providers and no consistency of approach. The Scottish Government must acknowledge that and give assurances that the recommendations in that regard will be met urgently.
We cannot discuss this topic without acknowledging the fundamental truths behind the figures. We see vast inequalities in drug deaths, with people in Scotland’s most deprived communities 15 times more likely to die from drug misuse than those in the least deprived areas. Drug misuse disproportionately affects those who are already experiencing disadvantages in the underlying social determinants of health, including poverty, homelessness, trauma and stigma. The panel recognised that all those issues have an impact, but it also recognised that those issues are wider than its remit.
I recognise that there is no simple solution, but I welcome the panel’s report, which offers a fresh perspective on this complex issue. The report contains a collective statement and 19 recommendations across five themes. The conveners have spoken about many of those themes already. In the interests of time, I will not go over them, but I hope that other members might pick out some specific points. For my part, I will discuss some feedback from participants and make some general comments.
Feedback from participants highlighted the benefits and effectiveness of deliberative engagement, and it was welcome to hear that, overall, people felt that the experience was informative and allowed for collaborative discussion.
The report acknowledges the frustration of those on the ground with the fact that the problem is not about recognising the issue. It is not that the Government does not recognise the issue; rather, the problem is with the Government’s implementation of effective action. The Government’s response to the report indicates that it understands that there is a problem, but it is not moving to action. The report notes that that is the case. It is clear from the report that there is a lack of urgency when it comes to delivery on the part of the Government.
Due to pressures of time, I will stop there.
16:03
I express my thanks to the committees, clerks and, especially, the members of the people’s panel and all those who facilitated and supported their work. The panel’s report and the evidence that was given to the recent joint committee meeting were thoughtful, sensitive and wise.
Grass-roots democracy is central to the Scottish Greens’ vision of a fairer, safer and more sustainable future. Democracy is not just about voting every four or five years for a representative and then letting them get on with it; it is about trusting people with decisions about their lives, their communities and their environments. Panel members spoke about the value of their deliberative discussions and about the ways in which they were able to reach consensus, contrasting that in a way that should give us all pause for thought in relation to the adversarial, sometimes antagonistic, forms of debate towards which parliamentary politics impels us.
The question that the panel was asked to consider—what does Scotland need to do differently to reduce drug-related harms?—is a painfully salient one, especially with the rise of new synthetic drugs, such as nitazines, which carry an increased risk of overdose and death. However, as panel members pointed out, the question had really been answered before their deliberations began. The problem is not with finding solutions but with finding the political will to implement those solutions and prioritising them. It is not a matter of not knowing enough but one of not caring enough.
Legal and illegal drugs are used by people across society—the rich at least as much as the poor—but it is overwhelmingly the poor who are harmed by them, who are further impoverished and are criminalised, disabled, killed and bereaved. Poverty, inequality and destitution were not within the remit of the people’s panel, but its members returned time and again to their reality.
There are, of course, places in Scotland in which those situations are especially acute. One of those is Glasgow, where the Thistle safer drug consumption facility was opened last year. It was visited more than 1,000 times during its first seven weeks of operation. It is saving lives directly, by reducing immediate risks and responding quickly and effectively to overdoses, and indirectly, by enabling greater engagement with sources of support. I am proud of our Scottish Green councillors in Glasgow, who campaigned for the facility for so long and with such dedication.
Another such city is Dundee, where I have my regional office. The challenges that we face in Dundee are acute. They are closely entwined with experiences of poverty, inequality and multiple deprivation and with people and communities being let down by those who should have protected them. However, at the same time, we have deep resources of fierce compassion, care and solidarity.
There is much quiet work going on—work that is transforming lives. The Steeple church’s parish nursing project began in 2008 with only one part-time nurse. Over the years, its nurses and volunteers have provided holistic support, especially for people who might have good reason to be wary of statutory agencies. The Reconnection Project offers skills-based training workshops across Dundee city and Arbroath, including work with RSPB Scotland that explores and uses the benefits of nature in growing and strengthening recovery. I will return to the work and recommendations of the Dundee drugs commission in my closing remarks.
All the recommendations of the people’s panel are vital. They are set out in each section of the report in order of how many participants approved them. The first recommendation in the section on participation, rights and lived experience, which has 96 per cent support, is:
“The Human Rights Bill needs to be passed by Parliament before the Parliamentary session ends”.
We now know that that will not happen and our disappointment is still bitter, so I echo the question that my Scottish Greens colleague Gillian Mackay asked: in the absence of that bill, how is the charter of rights for people affected by substance abuse adequately to be realised?
Human rights are universal, but they are closer to fulfilment for some of us than for others. We know from panel members’ testimonies the stifling effects of stigma and silence. My constituents who are struggling with substance issues—struggling through poverty, exclusion and indifference—know that stigma and silence all too well. The panel has reminded us of much, not least the point that drug harm is a matter not only of public health but, centrally and crucially, of human rights.
16:08
It has been a great debate so far. It is rare that the Parliament speaks with such consensus, but we all want to strive for success in the matter.
As we all know, Scotland has the invidious claim to have by far the highest drug-related death rate in Europe. We have heard the statistics: 1,172 people died in 2023 alone. Each of them was a son, a daughter, a brother or a sister, and each death was a tragedy.
That is why Liberal Democrats are committed to treating Scotland’s drug deaths crisis as the public health emergency that it is and, if needs be, appealing to Westminster to devolve to the Scottish Parliament the powers that are necessary for tailored, Scotland-specific solutions for what is clearly a particularly Scottish problem.
The member says that we need specifically tailored responses to a Scottish problem. Does he agree that, in order to provide those, we need to understand what the problem is? We still do not seem to understand why Scotland is such an outlier.
That is certainly part of it, but we know—through the work of the task force and of the drugs agencies and charities—that the problem is linked to poverty and unresolved childhood trauma; in some communities, drug use is a rite of passage. Work is still needed to better understand the problem. Nevertheless, there are particularly Scottish solutions to this particular Scottish problem.
The member will be aware that, as a result of Liberal Democrat research—this is why the impact of drugs has been such a key focus for the Liberal Democrats in this year’s budget negotiations—we also know that, since 2017, at least 1,500 babies have been born with neonatal abstinence syndrome. They have been born addicted to drugs, showing signs of addiction through uncontrolled distress, crying, blotchy skin and uncontrollable shaking, because their mothers were taking legally or illegally prescribed drugs during their pregnancy.
Investment totalling £2.6 million will now go towards helping and comforting those babies once they are born. This is personal for me—it is why I am in politics. When I was a youth worker, I saw just how important such interventions are and how effective they can be. I am in this place to support them. My party also continues to be committed to measures that will improve public safety and save lives. Those include the roll-out of naloxone; like Audrey Nicoll, I am one of the MSPs who attended the training session on naloxone delivery, and I carry it in my briefcase and in my car. Those measures also include drug-checking facilities, heroin assisted treatment and diverting people who are caught in possession of drugs for personal use away from prison and towards help.
I now turn to the people’s panel’s report on reducing drug deaths and drug harm. I echo others’ thanks to the panel. It is an innovative approach. We have used it before, but we do not use it enough in this Parliament, so I am glad to see it. I have long been a supporter of citizens assemblies, which would operate in a similar fashion to the people’s panel, so I would like to see more of this good practice.
The report includes some sensible recommendations, which I support. The panel made an important point about the need for fair pay for those with lived experience who are working in the drug and alcohol field. Their pay and conditions are not equivalent to those of other public sector workers. That is a critical oversight, and we will see people burn out as a result of that. It is vital that their significant and invaluable contribution is recognised in their remuneration and that they are given security of employment. Many people with lived experience are expected to work on a voluntary basis, despite the reported high level of success that they are having in helping people. That situation often leads to burnout. These people, whose knowledge and understanding of the issues cannot be replaced, are highly motivated to make a difference in the lives of others. It speaks to their character, and we lose them from the sector at our peril.
In the battle against drug deaths, we need to empower all those who are battling to save lives. That includes many voluntary organisations that do such vital work. Life-saving services are constantly under threat or worry that their funding might be cut. Funding is often guaranteed for only a matter of months, and that lack of stability has an impact on staff, recruitment and service users. Drug services have raised that problem with me, too. It is right that the people’s panel is pushing for progress, because the level of funding certainty has a direct impact—there is a correlation with the quality and experience of the practitioners who staff our services.
It is also right that the panel has added weight to the calls to divert those who are caught in possession of drugs for personal use—people who are struggling with personal drug use—away from the criminal justice system, and away from prisons, which are awash with substances. I thank the panel members for their time and their contribution.
We move to the open debate.
16:14
I, too, thank the cross committee and the people’s panel for their work in this area. As Alex Cole-Hamilton said, we need to do more of that type of thing.
The people’s panel was tasked with answering a pivotal and crucial question: what does Scotland need to do differently to reduce drug-related harms? I thought about that question night and day during my time as Minister for Drugs and Alcohol Policy.
I came into that role two years into the Scottish Government’s national mission to save and improve lives. Coming from a background in which I worked directly with people who use drugs—and being an affected family member—I had already been able to see and tangibly feel the paradigm shift from treating drug issues as a criminal justice matter to seeing them through a public health lens, with an understanding of the underlying social determinants of health that are all too pernicious in our country.
I recognised the transformational power that lay in the full implementation of the medication assisted treatment standards, whereby people were to be empowered by immediate access to treatment, including by being offered a range of options and the right to make their own informed choices. That was a shift away from the all too often stigmatising nature of addiction services, where stigma and lack of autonomy had felt stubbornly baked in and intractable over many decades. I encountered that time and again when trying to help people to access vital services.
Although great strides have been made in culture change, access to same-day treatment and increasing capacity in residential rehab—we exceeded our target to provide 1,600 placements last year—I recognise that we need to do more. We need an increase in stabilisation provision, as well. We have seen flourishing recovery communities across the country, and we cannot understate the positive impact that recovery hubs have at the heart of our communities.
I did not have time to touch on the point that Elena Whitham is making about rural communities. How might we bring more such services to those communities? That is perhaps a bit more difficult.
In my constituency, we have several recovery hubs, which are instrumental in allowing communities to come together. We should help to roll them out across the country as much as we can.
We have heard about the roll-out of naloxone provision and the opening of the Thistle, Glasgow’s second—but its first official—safer consumption facility, which has already been having positive impacts. Since it opened, there have been more than 1,000 visits to the facility, although we have heard that, over the past few weeks, emergency services have been called out on several occasions. That tells me that the facility is helping to save lives, especially now, when there is a highly toxic drug supply in circulation. It is incumbent on all of us to make sure that people across the country realise that there is a really potent supply out there at the minute. If that safer consumption facility had not been there, I am sure that some individuals would have lost their lives.
I remain convinced of the need for more radical pilots, including more drug testing and different models of safer consumption facilities. The people’s panel recognised that in its recommendations and in its thoughts. As we have heard, it made 19 recommendations that provide a strong foundation for future policy discussions.
I will focus on a couple of the recommendations that chime with my thinking. The panel strongly supports the passage of the proposed human rights bill for Scotland and the incorporation of the charter of rights for people affected by substance use. That would ensure equal access to health and quality services. I whole-heartedly believe in the charter of rights that was drawn together by the national collaborative over many months. It should enable people to make their rights real, but, in order for it to do so, we need to have the underpinning of the human rights bill, which must be taken forward as soon as possible.
It is also imperative that we continue to scrutinise the Right to Addiction Recovery (Scotland) Bill. All ideas must be considered.
It is critical that more individuals with lived experience form a large part of the workforce. When I was the minister, I was privileged to attend graduation ceremonies for those who had completed their training, and they are now working on the front lines. That brings a depth of empathy and understanding that no policy can replicate. Empowering those individuals helps to reduce the stigma surrounding addiction and makes recovery journeys more accessible and sustainable.
I briefly highlight that there are dual frustrations that I have felt for ever: an implementation gap and an accountability issue. That can be heard loud and clear in the panel’s report. We have brilliant policies, brilliant ideas and consensus, but we need a framework to assess how policies are being implemented on the ground, because it does not always feel like they are to the people who access the services. There is still much more work to do in that area.
I advise members that the time that we had in hand has now been pretty much exhausted, so members will now need to stick to their time allocations. I am sure that there is no one better to do that than Sue Webber.
16:19
That does not feel fair at all.
I am pleased to have the chance to speak in this afternoon’s debate. I was lucky enough to attend one of the people’s panel sessions last year.
Let us remember that, as Annie Wells outlined in her opening remarks, under the SNP, Scotland has had the worst drug deaths rate in Europe for the sixth year in a row. Our country’s drug death rate is 2.7 times higher than the rate in England and Northern Ireland, and it is 2.1 times higher than the rate in Wales. The number of drug deaths has increased by 158 per cent since the SNP came to power—there were 455 drug deaths in 2007, compared with 1,172 in 2023. Every life lost is a tragedy, and those figures are truly unacceptable.
Despite that, the SNP Government has cut the alcohol and drugs policy budget for 2025-26 by almost £1 million in real terms. It is little wonder that alcohol and drugs partnerships, which tackle drug misuse at the local level, say that they are underfunded and have no confidence in the SNP Government’s leadership. Seventy-two per cent of ADPs say that the amount of funding that they receive is not enough to deliver the national mission.
The SNP must listen to the people’s panel. It must take responsibility and finally act with urgency to stop Scotland’s national shame. The panel was clear that the Government has not acted, despite being aware of the evidence. It said that the same conversations keep happening without any change in results.
Having attended one of the panel’s sessions, I agree with two things in particular that it said in its report. The panel was
“shocked to learn about the lack of urgency and implementation, given the scale of the crisis”,
and it said that
“the same conversations keep happening, with the same actions being agreed but not ... implemented”.
The panel was concerned that
“the evidence they have heard has been previously presented by experts yet has not been acted upon by the Government. There is no stability for service providers and users and no consistency of approach.”
Carol Mochan also made those points in her opening speech.
As I listened during the panel’s session, one of my main concerns was that the people who stood up and presented were the same voices as usual, but no action was being taken on those issues. We need to hear new voices—those who are involved directly and who have lived experience of the recovery community.
That was clearly reflected in the people’s panel’s findings. There was very little talk of doing something more, different or innovative, despite a culture change and the requirement for “brave and bold” action to tackle the “public health emergency” that has been created by drug use in Scotland.
As a Conservative MSP, I say that that action should include passing the Right to Addiction Recovery (Scotland) Bill, which has been backed by front-line experts and would enshrine in law the right to receive life-saving drug addiction treatment.
We do not support the decriminalisation of drugs, and none of the report’s recommendations advocates that. Decriminalising class A drugs will not help to tackle Scotland’s drug deaths and could make it more difficult for the police to stop the supply of drugs getting to our streets. Instead of investing in recovery, the SNP continues to advocate decriminalisation, which will only flood our communities with more drugs.
The SNP Government’s priority continues to be harm reduction, but let us remember that harm reduction alone does not reduce addiction. Relapse rates remain high, and interventions such as supervised consumption rooms aim to prevent immediate harm but do not provide a pathway to recovery.
Will the member give way?
It is too late. The member is just about to conclude.
I am afraid that I cannot take the intervention—I am in my dying seconds.
If the Scottish Government is serious about improving the statistics and the lives of those who are affected by drugs, it needs to be bold and innovative and to act on every one of the people’s panel’s recommendations.
16:23
I remind members that I chair the Moving On Inverclyde local recovery service.
I welcome the joint work that has been undertaken by three of the Parliament’s committees, and I express my appreciation to all those who took part in the people’s panel events for doing so and for producing this important report.
Scotland loses too many people to drug deaths. We can all agree on that. The 1,172 drug deaths in 2023 were 1,172 too many, but that was the second-lowest number of deaths since 2017, with there being the lowest number in 2022.
The Scottish Government is working hard, within its powers, to reduce the number of drug deaths, and a public health approach is the correct way to do that. I believe that the adoption of a public health approach instead of a judicial approach has helped to change some societal views regarding the challenge that society faces in helping people with drug addiction. However, there is clearly still a lot more to do.
The 19 recommendations and the level of support for each of them clearly highlight the engagement of the panel members. Before I get to some of the recommendations, I want to touch on the funding section, on page 31 of the report. The phrase
“lack of urgency and implementation, given the scale of the crisis”
was stark reading. The Scottish Government’s national mission on drugs involves £250 million of funding over this parliamentary session. That is not an insubstantial amount of money, and it incorporates the investment in the safer drug consumption facility pilot in Glasgow. There is evidence that such facilities are helping to save lives.
A key aspect of the national mission that I welcome is the investment in more than 300 grass-roots projects to help our constituents and communities. The public sector cannot do this alone, so a partnership approach between public and third sector organisations is crucial in order to help people, save lives and help our communities.
The second half of that funding section chimes with my own views:
“There should be more care provided by the Third Sector; funding should be allocated accordingly and based on need; funding should be ring fenced and prevention should be prioritised.”
Finally on that issue, I highlight that the Scottish Government’s budget for next year, which some of us in the chamber voted for last week, included £150 million of funding.
I will give further consideration to the recommendations, but I whole-heartedly welcome the following ones. Recommendation 2 is about
“ongoing support and aftercare in the statutory workforce.”
Recommendation 3 is on “anti-stigma training”. Recommendation 4 says:
“There needs to be consistent financial support and training for the workforce, especially for support workers and people with lived and living experiences.”
Recommendation 6 is on
“continuation and consistency of de-penalising minor drug offences and not imprisoning people for short periods.”
Recommendation 9 says:
“All bodies must have an information sharing agreement in place which is GDPR compliant.”
Clare Haughey touched on that in her opening comments.
Recommendation 10 asks for a protected “five year minimum” of funding. The challenge with that is that the funding for this Parliament is not always consistent, as Audit Scotland highlighted in its “Fiscal sustainability and reform in Scotland” report, which the Public Audit Committee discussed yesterday.
Recommendation 17 is on
“continued support for people in recovery, such as supported temporary accommodation and key workers”.
Recommendation 19 is on
“an additional public awareness campaign”
on naloxone, which has been touched on. Some of my staff, like Audrey Nicoll’s, have already undergone such training.
Our country has still got a long way to go to save the lives of our constituents who need assistance. I welcome the findings of the people’s panel and the work that it has undertaken to produce its report. I thank the three committees for their work, which will help to shape future delivery and actions.
16:27
I begin by thanking those who took part in the people’s panel on drug deaths and the cross-committee work on the issue. With a problem as complex and wide ranging as this, it is key that there is cross-portfolio collaboration.
The first sentence of the people’s panel collective statement is a damning assessment of the current situation. It reads:
“The panel strongly believe that the same conversations keep happening, with the same actions being agreed but not enough has been implemented.”
That is right; indeed, some of the panel’s recommendations were made in 2022 by the national task force. The time for talk should be over.
Regardless of that, some of the recommendations are welcome, and I want to discuss two of them. First, on recommendation 17, which is on giving
“continued support for people in recovery ... following referral to services”,
I want to highlight the Midlothian aftercare group as a positive example. It supports graduates from the Lothians and Edinburgh abstinence programme for as long as they need it.
The Scottish Government’s response to the report states that continued support is part of medication assisted treatment—or MAT—standard 5. Although the standard has been implemented in most alcohol and drug partnerships, we need to ensure that its spirit is being followed. The Public Health Scotland review of MAT standard 5 uses the retention of cases for more than six months as a benchmark. Given that we know that addiction can be a lifelong battle and that crisis can derail recovery, we should consider how to ensure that graduates of rehabilitation receive support over a longer timeframe.
I also welcome recommendation 15, which recommends a move away from a zero-tolerance approach. When I met people from the North Edinburgh Drug and Alcohol Centre, I heard about the impact of its high-tolerance, holistic approach not only in treating addiction and improving wellbeing, but in saving money for other public services.
Individuals with complex needs can sometimes be labelled as “non-compliant” or “treatment resistant”. Services must meet the needs of individuals so that they can retain them in the long term, and moving away from a zero-tolerance approach is a step towards that.
I know that the minister will talk about funding, but members will have seen the news about the £450 million gap in funding for integration joint boards, and they will also be aware of the financial situation that councils face. Those organisations will be looking to make savings in their funding for alcohol and drug partnerships and services, and we must be clear that there should be no cuts to drug and alcohol services by proxy.
I repeat the people’s panel’s remarks on the actions that need to be implemented. Much has been done and much has been said, but it will be meaningless if the level of deaths remains high and the organisations that prevent drug deaths are not properly supported.
16:31
I welcome the work of the people’s panel and its excellent report. Ahead of the debate, I received a briefing from Professor O’Gorman and Gillian McElroy at the University of the West of Scotland—and I should, at this point, thank everyone for their briefings.
I and other members of the joint committee are grateful to the members of the people’s panel for their diligence in taking the time to put together a thoughtful and direct series of recommendations on drug misuse and what we as a society could do better to help save and change lives. I cannot do the full report justice in the few minutes that I have, but I want to highlight a few of the issues that the people’s panel addressed and a few of the effects of drug misuse that we are seeing in our communities right now.
First, I want to pick up on what Elena Whitham said about the interesting effects of some of the new drugs that we are seeing. Just last week, NHS Dumfries and Galloway issued an alert in which it warned of sudden onset overdoses as a result of the almost instantaneous effects of heroin contaminated with synthetic opioids. Street heroin is now being cut with nitazenes, a more potent and powerful form of synthetic opioid that is around 600 times stronger than street heroin. The consequences are tragically predictable. Overdoses are massively more likely; the effect of naloxone is sharply reduced, which means that multiple doses of it are needed to counteract the effects of an overdose; and the additional doses take more time to administer in a situation in which seconds are vital.
Last October, my office team was trained in the use of naloxone nasally or in injectable form by Ruth McCall, a specialist addictions nurse who works for NHS Dumfries and Galloway. We were happy to receive that training.
Many folk still see drug misuse as being purely about heroin addiction, but the huge growth of synthetic opioids, which I have mentioned, and the speed at which the use of illicit benzodiazepines has spread show that that is not the case. As others have mentioned, there is the issue of polydrug use, but polymethod drug use is a factor, too. The people’s panel highlighted the rapid changes in drug supply, along with the need to ensure that people with direct or indirect lived experience of drug misuse are at the heart of decision making on policy and practicalities.
Another thing that comes through consistently in the panel’s recommendations is the importance of tackling stigma. I mentioned that issue in my intervention on Collette Stevenson, which I thank her for accepting. We have spoken here about stigma on numerous occasions. If we agree that drug misuse is a public health issue, as I hope we all do, it must be treated as exactly that. People should not be put off going into treatment, or even taking a first step towards treatment, because they fear judgment, stigmatisation or discrimination when they first pick up the phone or arrive for an appointment.
Judgment sometimes occurs when users encounter other health services outside of those for drugs and alcohol. I have repeatedly raised that issue here and have had meetings with ministers on it. I was recently pleased to find out about a brand-new e-learning programme on the NHS Turas platform that has been created and developed in collaboration with people from the Scottish recovery consortium who have lived experience. The programme, which is free to any healthcare professional, covers stigma, among other subjects. It is so important to involve and include people with lived experience as we proceed.
Will the member accept an intervention?
I will take an intervention.
Ms Harper, you are just about to conclude.
My apologies. I say to the member that I would have let her in—no problem.
Finally, destigmatisation is an absolutely key measure in helping people on the first steps towards treatment. Once again, I welcome the report and all the work of the committee members, clerks and panel participants.
16:36
I am glad to be able to take part in this debate to examine the findings of the people’s panel. We find ourselves in the relatively unique position of debating the views of members of the public, as opposed to the those of the usual experts and professionals, or even of each other.
We all know about the desperate drug deaths situation in Scotland. The people’s panel does not shy away from the severity and impact of the situation, but its report also provides a useful and productive take on many areas, which I will examine as part of today’s debate.
The panel is clear that the time for talking is over and that action is required, and it provides helpful details about funding structure, reducing stigma and the role of people with lived experience in the process of reducing drug-related harms.
Will the member accept an intervention? I will be brief.
I would like to make some progress first.
Some of that work is already under way in Scotland. In the region that I represent, we have River Garden Auchincruive. Those involved say that it is not only the people being rehabilitated who benefit; the facility has a positive impact on their families and friends, too. We know that when someone with addiction issues has a strong network of supportive friends and family around them, with the care and stability that that brings, their chances of long-term recovery are far better.
There is much talk of the cost of rehabilitation in its own right, but we should be thinking about the preventative costs too. When someone successfully rehabilitates, it can save money further down the line by reducing crime and cutting down attendance at accident and emergency—and it can potentially even save the cost of a prison space. Of course, the most valuable saving of all is that of a life, not only in preventing a drug-related fatality but in ensuring that someone’s life can be positive, productive, enjoyable and worthwhile. That is what most drug users ultimately want—to be free of their addiction and to integrate back into society.
However, we must also ensure that the money spent achieves the best possible outcomes. Audit Scotland has highlighted the importance of assessing where funds are going and whether they are delivering results. We need robust methods to evaluate the effectiveness of our spending and to ensure that resources are being directed to the most successful initiatives.
That is why facilities such as River Garden Auchincruive in my region are so vital. Its model of recovery is refreshingly different, giving residents not only the time to reflect and rebuild but the skills and support to reintegrate into society. I take this opportunity to invite the cabinet secretary to visit River Garden Auchincruive to see the great work that is being done there and the support that it gets from the local community.
The people’s panel also discussed other initiatives across Ayrshire, including community hubs that have been running successfully in Kilmarnock for almost two decades. The real value of such places is that service users can speak to people who have had similar experiences and have come out the other side. In many ways, that is preferable to units that, as the panel says, treat such matters as more of a tick-box exercise.
It is important to note the good work that is going on to reduce drug-related harm. Of course, the issue is emotive and can be politically charged. We might disagree about the best way forward, but we all share the same ambition of reducing the number of drug deaths in Scotland. Bringing in the views of the wider public is helpful, as it allows us to gain perspective and learn more about what people really think.
Undoubtedly there are lessons for everyone in the report. I hope that we will use the best of it to ensure that drug users across the country receive the support that they need and that Scotland’s regrettable position in terms of fatalities is finally addressed.
The final speaker in the open debate is Bob Doris, who has up to four minutes.
16:40
I am pleased to be the final speaker in the open debate on the people’s panel report on reducing drug harm and deaths in Scotland. The panel was commissioned by the Criminal Justice Committee, the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee, and the Social Justice and Social Security Committee, on which I sit.
The panel has done us a clear public service by considering and reporting on the question,
“What does Scotland need to do differently to reduce drug-related harms?”
By and large, it looked for consensus and it set a very high bar for accepting recommendations. At least 87 per cent of the panel had to agree to a recommendation, which meant that 20 of the 23 members had to be in agreement. If only we had that level of consensus in the Parliament.
It was also a representative panel, and not just demographically or in terms of income groups and so on. Significantly, the recruitment process aimed to ensure that the views of the people who made up the panel had a similar distribution to broader public opinion. Quite frankly, if they could get together outside the Parliament and get a consensus, we can get a consensus in here without the party politicking.
I will now discuss some of the recommendations. Recommendation 2 states:
“More people with lived experience should provide ongoing support and aftercare in the statutory workforce.”
I absolutely agree. The panel said that that would reduce stigma and offer role models in statutory services. We all know from our work in our constituencies the credibility that lived and living experience can bring.
I also welcome the Scottish Government’s response to that recommendation, which notes that
“the Drugs Deaths Taskforce Action 129”
spoke about
“pathways for people with lived and living experience to enter the workforce.”
It also mentions the imminent publication of
“a ‘Guiding Principles’ document for employers”
on employment support, as well as a toolkit and a £480,000 fund.
Although the response is welcome, I am not left with total clarity on how it will all be taken forward, and I also wonder how it will be monitored. I want an assurance that a pathway into the statutory workforce would not stagnate but would be a real progression pathway. I note that recommendation 4 mentions that, as well. I am keen to understand what cultural benefits could arise from refreshing the statutory workforce in that way. I also want to make sure that increasing the number of statutory staff with lived and living experience would not undermine such provision in the third sector.
Recommendation 10 states that
“There needs to be a guaranteed and protected five year minimum period of funding for community and third sector services ... so that organisations can better plan provisions”,
retain staff and reduce uncertainty in provision. I absolutely agree. I note that there has been some progress in relation to that, and I give Shirley-Anne Somerville a special mention for the work that she has done in partnership with the Social Justice and Social Security Committee. There are now 45 organisations in a pilot scheme in relation to getting longer-term funding. I say to the cabinet secretary that it would be good to see that working on a cross-sector basis in order to make sure that more organisations in the field get longer-term funding.
I was hoping to squeeze in a comment on recommendation 17, which identifies the need to support people in relation to key aspects of their lives, such as
“release from prison, completion of rehab, hospital discharge”
and
“isolation in supported temporary accommodation.”
However, as I have only 30 seconds left, I will talk only about temporary accommodation.
We have to ask how we can prevent people who are living with addiction from being in temporary accommodation in the first place, given that 19 per cent of the 435,000 people who were assessed as being homeless in the 15 years up to 2016 showed evidence of substance abuse. The Housing (Scotland) Bill, which is going through the Scottish Parliament, contains ask and act provisions. If we think that someone is at risk of becoming homeless, we should act to prevent that. Perhaps we can do something in the live legislation that is going through the Parliament to meet some of the aspirations of the people’s panel, which in my final few seconds I commend.
We move to closing speeches. I note that Alex Cole-Hamilton, who participated in the debate, is not here. I will expect an explanation as well as an apology.
16:45
I thank all those who have participated in the debate. It is clear that there is consensus across the chamber that we need to act. That consensus is welcome.
When I was on the Smith commission representing the Scottish Greens, we were the only party calling for drugs policy to be devolved to the Scottish Parliament. During the past decade, the need for that devolution has grown horribly evident. In its absence, for now we must do what we can, and I thank the people’s panel again for illuminating the path ahead.
During the debate, members have spoken of the report’s recommendations and their urgency in relation to particular issues and places, and of the ways in which those recommendations can and must be made a reality.
It is heartening to hear the clear agreement from across the chamber that the panel’s report must be a catalyst for action, because as the panel made clear, we have been here before. In 2019, the Dundee drugs commission published its first report, “Responding to Drug Use with Kindness, Compassion and Hope”. That report focused on key areas including the need for strong leadership and accountability; cultural change that eliminates stigma; inclusion of people with lived and living experiences in decision making and service design; comprehensive holistic models of care; prevention; gender-sensitive and trauma-informed support; and measures that tackle poverty.
The panel is right to be frustrated. Why has there been so little progress on the recommendations, which were developed six years ago? Many of the panel’s recommendations echo those that we have received before. We know what needs to be done: we need a public health approach to tackling drug-related deaths and drug harms. The so-called war on drugs has failed, comprehensively.
We need evidence-based measures, safer consumption rooms—such as the one in Glasgow—drug-checking facilities, holistic support and a well-publicised single point of access for specialised advice and support.
We need universal provision and policies, not postcode lotteries that govern services, support and prescribing practices in different parts of Scotland.
We need to ensure equitable pay, fair working conditions and employment support for people with lived and living experience of drug-related harms.
We need adequate and long-term funding, especially for third sector organisations, which can reach so many people whose needs are unmet by statutory services.
We need justice reforms, including substantial decriminalisation, and an end to the tragic spirals of incarceration and intensified drug use in prisons, and we need education and effective data sharing that does not require already traumatised people to tell their stories over and over again.
I believe that we need most of all to recognise and fulfil the human rights of all, including rights to a decent standard of living, and to freedom from the poverty and destitution that kill so many, including with the weapon of illegal drugs.
The people’s panel has done phenomenal work, but perhaps not quite the work that it or we expected. It has not so much opened a window to a view that had not been seen before as it has held up a mirror to our political systems, institutions and agencies, and shown us our shortcomings.
In his closing speech, I ask the cabinet secretary to provide clear assurances on and timescales for when we will see action on the panel’s recommendations, because we cannot be here again in one, two or three years’ time, asking for—calling for—the same things.
We need many more people’s panels, as well as other forms of deliberative democracy, to shine a light on our shortcomings, our institutions and our agencies’ failures. We need them to address the most acute issues that challenge us, but also, and more important, we need them to challenge our assumptions, our exclusions and our spoken or unspoken prejudices, because then, with people who have lived and living experience, we can create a better and more equal world that works for everyone.
16:49
I am pleased to close the debate on behalf of Scottish Labour. I am grateful to the people’s panel for its time and engagement in considering this national emergency, and to the committees for commissioning the work.
As Bob Doris said, the panel was asked to come to a consensus on an issue that has been identified as a national emergency for a number of years, and on proposals that have been discussed in the chamber on a number of occasions. The report is very interesting in showing us what a group of that nature made of the issue.
Although the issue has been identified as a national emergency for a number of years, the latest figures show a 12 per cent increase in drug deaths from the previous year. As the cabinet secretary said, we lost 1,172 people to drug-related deaths in 2023, and we all know that those deaths were preventable. We owe it to the loved ones of those people who have died to take immediate and radical action. That is what members expects from the Scottish Government.
As a number of members have said, Scotland remains the worst nation in Europe for drug deaths. An emergency of such severity is the result not only of underfunding of drug prevention and rehabilitation services, the criminal legal framework and our health services, but of a far wider societal crisis.
The cabinet secretary accepted the link to deprivation. Carol Mochan spoke about the range of factors involved and the complex nature of the challenges. It will come as no surprise to anyone in the chamber that the mortality rate of people who live in the poorest areas is more than double the Scottish average. The council areas that are bearing the brunt of the crisis are the urban centres and the post-industrial heartlands that have also suffered the sharpest decline in their public services following years of austerity.
It is political choices that cause communities to crumble. People in desperate situations sometimes see no other option than to turn to drugs, and that is where Governments have let them down. The cabinet secretary and Elena Whitham spoke of the highly toxic drug supply that is in circulation, particularly in Scotland. I welcome the opening of Thistle, the United Kingdom’s first safer drug consumption facility, which I hope will prevent further deaths and create a rise in the number of people who choose to move towards rehabilitation. However, we must recognise that the facility is in Glasgow and it will do little to help those outside Glasgow city who suffer from addiction. As Annie Wells pointed out, the Thistle is a small part of the solution, and the real challenge is how we address the root causes.
I am pleased that the people’s panel made 19 recommendations and that the Scottish Government and the cabinet secretary have indicated acceptance of them all. However, I agree with Maggie Chapman that the problem is not that we do not know what needs to be done but that we need political will.
Alex Cole-Hamilton spoke of the consensus, and I think that there is a consensus across the chamber about what needs to be done. Clare Haughey made an important point about the need for multiyear packages. It is impossible for organisations to plan if they do not know what their funding is. Collette Stevenson spoke about trusted relationships and the importance of lived experience, and that point was also made by Sue Webber. Members have previously discussed the significant issue of stigma.
Audrey Nicoll spoke specifically about the criminal justice aspect. As a member of the Criminal Justice Committee, I am aware of the massive challenge that drugs pose in our justice system.
This is a complex debate. However, we cannot say that we accept what the Scottish Government is doing on the issue. The reality is that the number of deaths continues to get higher, and urgent action needs to be taken to address that.
16:55
I rise on behalf of the Scottish Conservatives to close the debate. I am grateful, as others are, to the people’s panel and the committees for producing such a comprehensive report. It has been a really good debate, and it has been consensual, in that we all agree on the direction of travel.
I remember very well that the last debate in the previous session of Parliament was on drug deaths. We voted with the Government, as did the whole chamber, on a motion that included safe consumption rooms, even though I still have great reservations about that. I remember saying at the time that we cannot keep having the same debate over and over. This is a crisis, and we are prepared to try whatever is needed. I look forward to the report on the safe consumption room—
Will the member give way?
Of course.
Your microphone is not on, Mr Cole-Hamilton.
Mr Whittle, can you just continue, please?
Sorry, Mr Cole-Hamilton.
With regard to the things that were said today, I was pleased to hear Clare Haughey mention the importance of the third sector as an access point to services. I hope that I can go back to that point if I have time.
Collette Stevenson talked about the significance of lived experience to the provision of support and aftercare. That is absolutely critical. She also talked about the impact of stigma on those who are potentially seeking recovery and treatment, and about the stigma that prevents people from getting into employment.
Audrey Nicoll talked about the transition from prisons and pre-release planning, which I have worked on. In fact, I was once again let out of Kilmarnock prison on Monday—it always surprises me when they let me back out—where I had been talking with others about that exact topic. In that pre-planning interface, it is often the third sector that is so important.
I was not trying to catch the cabinet secretary out when I again asked him the question that I asked. My concern with the cabinet secretary’s response is that it fails to answer why Scotland is such an outlier. As Alex Cole-Hamilton talked about, we know that the reason for drug abuse is, often, childhood trauma, and we know the impact that poverty and deindustrialisation have. However, although those things are no worse here than in any other part of the UK, we are seeing a much worse outcome.
Will the member take an intervention?
Yes, I will.
Does Brian Whittle recognise that this is, as such, a particularly Scottish problem and that we probably need a particularly Scottish solution? To that end, does his party support the further devolution of some aspects of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971?
It is a particularly Scottish problem, but my point is that we do not know why. If we do not understand why, how can we come up with a solution?
Will the member take an intervention?
Let me finish this point.
If we do not identify that, how can we prevent others from taking the place of those who are in treatment? I very much believe in community interaction, which is declining in Scotland—I do not think that that is a coincidence. We need to tackle prevention along with treatment.
Annie Wells, in a very powerful speech—she always speaks powerfully on this topic—talked about people who she had met who just want to stop their relationship with drugs and alcohol. When those people ask for help, they must get it. That is why Douglas Ross’s Right to Addiction Recovery (Scotland) Bill, which is going through the committee at the moment, will, I hope, be a help. It is not a panacea, but it is a significant step towards a system that gives hope—which is the word that Annie Wells used—to those people who are looking for treatment for addiction and lets them know that there is support for them. When they are brave enough to ask for that help, it is so important that they get it then and there—it is not enough to say, “Yes, we will help you somewhere down the line,” because if we do that, we will lose them.
I was pleased to hear about the impact of River Garden Auchincruive, which was mentioned by my colleague Sharon Dowey. She highlighted the impact not just on people who are seeking treatment but the impact on family and friends who are in that important support network.
In my view, intervention and prevention must begin as early as possible, and they should begin with the community. I agree that a drugs and alcohol prevention curriculum is needed, but that is only one piece of a much larger puzzle. Along with the recommendations in the report, we need to make sure that our children develop healthy lifestyle habits early. I have always said that investment in education is an investment in health and wellbeing.
I am sure that we all know about community programmes in our constituencies, and I am sure that we all know that some have a constant struggle to secure year-on-year funding, especially those that address mental health and recovery, as was highlighted by Sue Webber. That is why I whole-heartedly welcome the recommendation in the report for a protected five-year minimum period for funding for community and third service sectors.
I understand the extreme financial pressures that councils are under, but when decisions on funding are made, all too often the instinct of councils is to bring services in-house rather than supporting services in the third sector, which unfortunately often fail to achieve the same level of benefit in the community.
During my time in Parliament, I have been able to engage with incredible organisations that are able to reach people in the community who need them the most, such as the Ochiltree Community Hub, CentreStage Communities, Recovery Enterprises Scotland and Morven day services, to name but a few. However, each financial year, their contracts and services are at risk.
In closing, I will relate a point that was made to me recently by a founder of a community organisation in Kilmarnock.
Briefly.
We often refer to such groups as “the third sector”, but she argued that that does them a disservice. To call them the third sector suggests that they are lower priority or somehow less important than the others. Instead, she suggests that “the community sector” would be a more appropriate title. I am inclined to agree, because if we want our communities to flourish and we want to deal with the corrosive impact of drug addiction and other issues, we cannot afford for them to come third any more.
17:02
I very much welcome the tenor of the debate. It has been almost universally consensual, which is highlighted by the fact that we all support the recommendations of the people’s panel—in that, the Parliament is united.
Members’ contributions have been thoughtful, and I think that everybody has come to the chamber seeking to answer the question that we are all posing ourselves: how can we overcome the situation that our communities face? I am also heartened by the fact that we have not had a policy debate but a debate about how quickly and how universally we can deliver the services that are part of the national mission. That is of fundamental importance.
Because of the tenor of the debate, I will do my best to respond to as much as possible of what members have contributed. First, in response to Audrey Nicoll’s asks and those of the other committee conveners, I hope that they will have received further correspondence from me this morning. In particular, in response to Audrey Nicoll’s question about single shared assessments, MAT standards 6 and 9 require mental health and drug services to be joined up, and those standards are in the process of being implemented. We are taking forward the joint mental health and substance use protocol, which was published in September.
I will address Annie Wells’s and Sue Webber’s remarks together, because they focused on similar areas. Annie Wells asked us to involve people with lived experience. We are doing that, and the interactions with the likes of the Thistle centre are testament to that and to the asks with regard to people coming through to employment.
Annie Wells also asked us to do more around residential rehab. We had committed to having 1,000 publicly funded residential rehab places by 2026, and Public Health Scotland figures show that, in 2022-23, we supported 1,033 publicly funded residential rehab places and that an additional 637 were privately funded—so, progress is being made there. There has also been a dramatic increase in bed capacity from 425 beds in 2021 to a maximum of 513 in 2024—that is a 21 per cent increase, which I think we all welcome.
I appreciate everything that is being done, but we need to move faster. You have referred to figures for 2022-23, but we are not seeing the evidence of people moving through the system. I would like your reassurance that we are monitoring the situation and looking at how many individuals we are supporting and helping through the process.
Members should always speak through the chair.
We are, indeed, which is why I am able to highlight the figures on the number of publicly funded places.
Whether it is residential rehab, harm reduction or the support of our community and voluntary organisations through our funding of the Corra Foundation, which I will come to, there is no single area that we need to point to. I am not sure whether Annie Wells or Sue Webber has been to the Thistle, but I encourage them to visit if they have not, so that they can see the value of it and understand why the Lord Advocate was able to give her statement on prosecution policy. It is a means to attract to statutory or community support services people who have never interacted with them before, and the early evidence is clear that that is starting to happen.
Carol Mochan asked about multiyear funding. We have baselined an additional £19 million this year for ADPs, to provide greater certainty. Carol Mochan and Bob Doris also raised a point about funding for community and voluntary organisations. The Corra Foundation funding is a five-year £65 million fund, and more than 300 projects have been provided with multiyear funding since 2021. Although the terms of the grants vary, three-year grant funding is often available.
The report calls for an expansion of services, which are telling us that, without more support, they will not exist. How do we follow the money and ensure that the investment reaches the services that the money is intended for and those that need it?
Carrying out an assessment such as that is a necessity for all public funding. Public Health Scotland assesses the national mission on an on-going basis in order to provide the assurance that Mr Whittle is looking for.
Maggie Chapman reflected on the tenor of our discussion and the fact that the people’s panel provided the space to take the heat out of an incredibly sensitive issue. She reflected on the need for political will, and I think that there has been substantial political will from the Government and the Parliament in delivering the £250 million national mission. We have taken bold action in delivering the UK’s first safer consumption facility, we have worked with the Home Office to deliver drug checking facilities, and we have delivered the first national naloxone programme roll-out. I do not think that we can take those successes for granted, but I am also not complacent about the need to do more. Of course, I understand the desire for more to be done, and I will absolutely commit us to doing more as we continue to assess the efficacy of the national mission and consider what comes next.
I welcome the Liberal Democrats’ intervention on and collaboration with the budget. I look forward to visiting Aberlour’s services in due course, and I welcome Alex Cole-Hamilton’s acknowledgement that this is a public health issue.
I pay tribute to Elena Whitham for her time in the role as Minister for Drugs and Alcohol Policy and for her on-going interest in and commitment to the area. She recognised the social determinants of ill health and drug dependency, and I echo the need for the recovery hubs that she spoke about and note the excellent facilities that they provide. The Airdrie recovery cafe in my constituency does such good work and gives value and agency to those with lived and living experience, so that they can be involved in supporting others.
Similarly, Stuart McMillan spoke about community and voluntary interaction. Again, I point to the Corra Foundation investment.
Foysol Choudhury spoke of the need for cross-portfolio collaboration, and I assure him that that is happening. I would go one step further and say that we need cross-society action and all of us to reflect on how, in all aspects of life, we are contributing to stigma with the narrative on drug dependency, especially for those who have lost their lives.
Will the member take an intervention?
I am sorry, but I am struggling for time—indeed, I think that I am probably beyond my allocation.
On the point that Emma Harper made, it helps to focus on one of the successes of the national mission that has been relayed to me as such by some of the families I have been able to speak to, which is the reduction in stigma. That means that people are now more willing to come forward and access services.
I recognise the work of River Garden and thank the charity for doing it. I will see what I can do about being able to take up Sharon Dowey’s offer of a visit.
Finally, I thank Bob Doris for his suggestion that there is a need for better consensus building.
To conclude, there is absolutely more work to do. I recognise that we are not at the end of the mission. We have to keep working hard to reduce the harm that is associated with drug dependency, and we must continue to do everything possible to save lives. That is absolutely at the heart of the work that this Government is committed to.
17:10
As I begin to wind up on behalf of the three committees, I echo the cabinet secretary’s sentiment and send the love and best wishes of the chamber to Christina McKelvie.
I am pleased to have the opportunity to close this important debate on behalf of the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee, the Criminal Justice Committee and the Social Justice and Social Security Committee. As we have heard, the three committees have undertaken joint scrutiny of the issue of tackling drug deaths and drug harm, and I thank all members of the committees for their diligent work thus far. I also thank all members from across the chamber who have taken the time to contribute to today’s debate, and I echo much of the sentiments that have been expressed.
I also want to thank everyone who contributed to the people’s panel report, which provides a comprehensive overview of the current landscape of drug services and the issues facing service users and their families across Scotland. The report has highlighted the crucial role that individuals with lived experience play in driving change across Scotland, and I am pleased that the recommendations in the report have mostly been welcomed and agreed by the Scottish Government. I hope that that work will provide a strong foundation for change, and I look forward to scrutinising forthcoming policy actions on the back of that important and comprehensive set of recommendations.
On that point, I take the opportunity, on behalf of the joint committee, to offer my sincere condolences to anyone who has lost a loved one to drugs. I also commend the bravery of all those with lived experience who have taken the time to share their ideas and experience with the committee throughout the process, in particular the participants in the people’s panel, whose testimonies and commitment to collaborative working have set an excellent example and helped to highlight the benefits of participative democracy.
The issue of drug harm and drug deaths has blighted Scotland for far too long, and it is incumbent on all of us in the Parliament to work together to mitigate the damage done to individuals and families, with the ultimate goal of saving lives.
This debate and the work of the people’s panel are strong examples of cross-committee collaboration, which I hope will be emulated in the future. For such a complex and nuanced issue, working collaboratively is essential if we are to make progress, and the cross-sectoral nature of the significant challenges that we face in tackling drug deaths and drug harm necessitate such collaboration.
It is clear that there is no quick or easy fix when it comes to tackling drug harm and drug deaths in Scotland. However, what is clear is that progress needs to be measured, and the Parliament will play a key role in ensuring swift Government delivery on the many points that have been raised in the report and in the chamber today.
In her intervention on Collette Stevenson, Emma Harper mentioned anti-stigma training for those who work outside of drug and alcohol services. That is hugely important and reflects some of what we have heard in informal sessions of the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee. Many of those who spoke to us noted that it was not always drug services that they first got help from. Ensuring that all services are trauma informed is hugely important.
Audrey Nicoll, Stuart McMillan, Carol Mochan and Alex Cole-Hamilton mentioned awareness raising around naloxone and increasing the number of people who are trained to use it. I hope that, in addition to increasing the number of people who are trained, the Government is looking at how to train as diverse a group as possible to ensure that everyone who might interact with those who use drugs has the confidence to be able to use naloxone.
Maggie Chapman and the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care, as well as others, referenced the work that is going on at the Thistle in Glasgow. We should collectively pay a huge tribute to the staff there, who, contrary to some of the coverage of the site, are doing a phenomenal job.
Alex Cole-Hamilton and others mentioned nitazenes, and Emma Harper mentioned the current warnings in Dumfries and Galloway. I hope that we can see progress on drug checking soon. Elena Whitham was entirely correct about the need to roll out more safe drug consumption facilities across Scotland.
From my perspective as a member of the Health and Sport Committee, the debate and report have been useful in highlighting the importance of ensuring that everyone is able to access the services that they require. I echo the points that the convener raised in her opening speech. It is essential that a collaborative approach among all relevant public bodies is in place to tackle the crisis. A single point of access to specialised services would go a long way to reducing the stigma that is associated with accessing assistance for service users and their families, as would ensuring that GDPR-compliant information sharing agreements are in place to allow more streamlined assistance for service users.
It is vital that front-line services and third sector organisations that play a crucial role in tackling drug harm have certainty about funding to allow for long-term planning. I, too, am grateful for the Scottish Government’s commitment to strengthen that and I look forward to ensuring that initiatives such as the drugs mission funds and the fairer funding pilot have the intended effect of providing those services with the assurances that they need.
As Turning Point Scotland highlighted in its response to the people’s panel report, there has been a notable shift in public opinion and growing support for a health-based approach to drug use. That is most welcome, and I share Turning Point’s hope that that shift in attitude will be the impetus that is needed to create a system that is focused on support rather than punishment when it comes to tackling the drugs crisis in Scotland.
I thank the conveners of the Criminal Justice Committee and the Social Justice and Social Security Committee for their opening speeches and for highlighting the recommendations that come under their committees’ remits. I share the sentiment that they expressed about, and the commitment to continue, our collaborative approach to scrutinising future policy, which, by necessity, will cross into various remits.
As evidenced by the people’s panel, which has provided an excellent road map for progress with the report, it is essential that we all work together to tackle the crisis. Only through cross-party and cross-remit working can we ensure that services are to the standards that are required for service users.
I again thank everyone who contributed to today’s debate. It has been an open, honest and frank discussion. I share the commitment made by members across the chamber to ensure that promises made by Government in the wake of this important report are delivered swiftly and efficiently for the people of Scotland.
That concludes the debate on the people’s panel report on reducing drug harm and deaths in Scotland.
Air ais
Portfolio Question TimeAir adhart
Decision Time