Seòmar agus comataidhean

I thank Michelle Thomson for bringing the debate to the chamber; I am pleased to speak in it. I acknowledge the work of the cross-party group on St Andrew’s day and the people who continue to run that group, as others have mentioned.

The motion highlights the on-going work of the former MP and MSP Dennis Canavan to ensure that St Andrew’s day continues to be an important day that recognises our patron saint. He took forward the campaign to make it a bank holiday to be enjoyed by everyone.

As a proud Scot, I believe that it is really nice, and important, that we—like many countries around the world—celebrate our patron saint as part of celebrating our history, our culture and our country. When I was young, I had family who lived abroad for many years, and they enjoyed St Andrew’s day and saw it as a great opportunity to invite international friends over to enjoy and celebrate Scotland. The real wonder was in people from cultures from around the world enjoying one another’s culture; that was so important to them.

St Andrew is both Scotland’s patron saint and our national symbol, officially recognised—as others have said—in the 1320 declaration of Arbroath. The relationship is represented by the saltire flag, with the blue-and-white X-shaped cross symbolising the way in which St Andrew was martyred. In addition, as the motion states, we need to acknowledge

“the economic benefits that global recognition brings to Scotland through the culture, business, education, tourism and retail sectors, supported by the use of the Saltire as both the national flag and the ‘Brand Scotland’ identifier of Scottish produce and marketing”.

We see that in Scotland, and I am sure that others will often see it when they are abroad. People will notice our flag in shops and retail outlets, wherever they go. We have great relationships around the world.

St Andrew’s day is recognised and celebrated around the world by people who believe that they have a connection to Scotland. They are known as the Scottish diaspora. The diaspora consists of Scottish people who emigrated—as we know, we were a great nation for emigrating around the world—and now their descendants, whose number is estimated to be anything between 30 million and 40 million people.

I know that, in my South Scotland region, there is plenty going on this week to celebrate St Andrew’s day. That includes traditional events such as ceilidhs, and a mixture of others involving important history and institutions. In my area, the local Burns club is having an evening event to celebrate the day, and there is even karaoke. I am sure that those who are attending are very pleased that I will be dealing with amendments later tonight, so I will not be singing in Ayrshire.

In a world where there is such division as there is today, I hope, as we celebrate St Andrew’s day, that—as others have said—we can look beyond the division to a message of hope and unity that we in this country and around the world so desperately need. We know that St Andrew would have hoped for that also.

I thank Michelle Thomson again for bringing the debate to the chamber, and I thank members for their contributions.

Good morning. A key argument for the inclusion in the bill of a definition of the term “sustainable development” is that there is no statutory definition of it, but, as we have heard, there are multiple references to the term in law. How would a new definition simplify the landscape?

You might have answered this question in your opening remarks, but, to be clear, what is behind the decision to align the definition of sustainable development with the concept of wellbeing? Do you have a few words to describe that?

I get the need for the term to be understandable. The committee has heard evidence that the definition could be strengthened—in particular, by referring explicitly to environmental limits and planetary boundaries. Do you have a view on that?

The Deputy First Minister has said that we have had only a brief opportunity to read the report. However, I have no doubt, from my brief reading of it, that public confidence in the Scottish Government’s decision making will be significantly affected.

Important decisions were made through informal structures, which reduced transparency and, ultimately, accountability. A number of witnesses who were involved in the UK Government’s response to Covid-19 told the inquiry that, in their view, part of the reason for the divergence in approach between the UK Government and the Scottish Government was a desire on the part of the Scottish Government on a number of occasions, for political rather than policy reasons, to adopt measures and language that were different from those adopted by the UK Government.

How does the SNP plan to rebuild the public’s trust in Government after such findings? Can the Deputy First Minister indicate when another statement will be made so that we can scrutinise the issue? Does she accept that that must happen well before the end of the parliamentary session?

I, too, thank Clare Adamson for bringing the debate to the chamber, and for all the work that she has done on pancreatic cancer over this session of Parliament.

I am glad that the Parliament is once again marking pancreatic cancer awareness month and highlighting the importance of greater awareness and timely diagnosis. I welcome the opportunity to contribute—I think that I have contributed in each of the previous annual debates.

It is important to take a moment to reflect on the scale of the illness and the profound impact that it has on many families. Others have mentioned the statistics, so I will not go back over them, but I will say that we must always remember that catching the cancer early dramatically improves the chances of treatment and recovery. We know from the statistics that eight in 10 people are diagnosed at a late stage, which means that they are often diagnosed too late for treatment. That is a tragedy. More than 50 per cent are diagnosed in emergency settings, such as accident and emergency, despite the vast majority of patients visiting their general practitioner multiple times before being diagnosed.

For patients, recognising the symptoms of pancreatic cancer represents a first step in diagnosis, especially in the absence of the early detection tests that others have mentioned. Symptoms can be vague, which can make the cancer really difficult to spot, so the public awareness campaigns that are run by charities and organisations to support early detection are crucial. I, too, thank the various organisations that do that work, and those that have contacted me ahead of today’s debate for their work and for all the helpful briefings. The briefings show the scale of the problem and the challenge ahead; they also show us what we have to work towards.

Other members have mentioned the importance of research and the related challenges and barriers, as well as the important tests that can detect the disease. We need all that work to come together so that we can improve survival rates. I noticed that, in the past 15 years, the five-year survival rate has increased from 3 per cent to 7 per cent. It has not moved at pace, but it shows that we can make a difference by working together, including with other nations.

Before closing, I will take a moment, as I often do, to reflect on health inequalities and their impact on outcomes for our constituents. We know that the detection of cancer in our more deprived communities can be very difficult. In those areas, people interact with health services in a very different way, and we have a responsibility to raise this issue time and again. The latest Public Health Scotland data revealed that the incidence of all cancers was 24 per cent greater in the most deprived areas compared with the least deprived areas. Often, that is about early detection and supporting people to get the right advice at the right time.

In previous debates, I have warned about the impact of health inequalities on some of our most vulnerable communities and called for urgent action in that regard. We must do more to empower our communities to speak to healthcare professionals when they need help, and to ensure that a clear and understandable plan is put in place to address any inequalities that people might face.

I thank the guests in the gallery for their attendance and all the members who have contributed to the debate.

To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government’s response is to news that public satisfaction with the NHS has dropped to its lowest level in more than a decade, according to the Scottish household survey. (S6F-04472)

When the First Minister’s party first took office in 2007, following eight years of a Labour-led Government, 83 per cent of Scots were satisfied with the NHS. That figure is now just 61 per cent. Does the First Minister agree that a failure to show leadership and very poor decision making have led us to this situation? Given that the Scottish National Party has been in power for almost two decades—almost 20 years—how does he plan to convince the Scottish public that the SNP should be in charge of our most valued public asset, the NHS, for another five years?

I, too, thank Finlay Carson for bringing today’s debate to the chamber, and I was pleased to support his motion. As we have heard, people in rural areas face unique challenges in accessing healthcare. I therefore welcome this debate and the opportunity to highlight the day-to-day realities of those who live in my rural South Scotland region.

Issues have been raised with me not only by my constituents who are patients, but by our hard-working NHS staff. Living in a rural community should not limit people’s access to basic healthcare, as Brian Whittle has mentioned, and there should also be ways of managing more specialist care. However, for many constituents and staff, it is frustrating that things do not run smoothly. Many people in those communities feel disconnected from their healthcare, as services seem to move further and further away, and many of my constituents have told me that they feel a sense of doom, because they cannot see any improvement in rural healthcare.

Last year, we debated the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee’s findings on remote and rural healthcare, which revealed profound inequalities in access to services and care. That is a really important issue. The report reinforced what has long been known, which is that those communities experience greater inequalities in accessing healthcare compared with those in our more urban and central areas. That is true across health services—including maternity services, which I will mention only briefly, as Scottish Labour highlighted the issue in the chamber just a few weeks ago.

Mothers in Wigtownshire, in my South Scotland region, do not have a dignified service, and it is important that we address that. I know that there are staffing pressures, but women are travelling 70 miles to receive care. Those mothers, their husbands, their partners, their family members and other campaigners say that they are extremely concerned about the difficulties that might arise during that process.

I also want to mention staff recruitment, retention and training, because it is a real concern that has been raised with me. I have asked the Government a number of times about its plans to expand the apprenticeship-type model for healthcare workers, as recommended by the nursing and midwifery task force, which offers a great opportunity to grow skills in our communities. I have talked to many people about that model, which would allow people in rural areas to train, work in and be committed to their local area, whether they live there because they want to or because they cannot, for whatever reason, move away. I have been talking about the issue for five years now, but it does not feel as if it has edged forward at all. Perhaps the minister could come back to it in her closing remarks.

Lastly, I would like to highlight the workforce problems in South Ayrshire. That region might not be what some would traditionally think of as rural or remote, but people in communities such as Girvan feel that things are just becoming worse and worse. In my discussions with constituents and staff at the local hospital, I hear that it is often difficult to recruit and retain staff. These challenges are real for both patients and staff.

The Government might point to on-going work, but the reality is that communities need action and tangible changes for them and their families. What communities need now is delivery, and that is what we would like to hear more about.

The cabinet secretary clearly knows the concerns of local people regarding those roads, and I thank the Cabinet Secretary for Transport for meeting community campaigners to hear their concerns.

Given the key economic importance of the A77 not only to the south-west of Scotland but to the whole country, does she believe that the figure that she mentions is enough to significantly address the problem and ensure that it will deliver an economic benefit to the south-west?