Seòmar agus comataidhean

At that time, the professions were in different areas depending on whether you were a physiotherapist, dietician or occupational therapist—those are some of the many allied health professions. Students were well supported—I know some of the students who are coming through, and it seems that they still are—and we were always thankful for the support from the colleges that trained the professions.

Throughout my career, I met patients who needed assessment and treatment. They showed me kindness and strength of character when, often, they faced life-changing illnesses. I describe it as the best job ever because I was lucky enough to go into a field that was about society’s role in maximising the best life possible.

In my job with learning disability services, we worked across communities, as many AHPs do. That nicely leads me to discuss some of the diverse services that AHPs provide and the overall aim of that work.

The umbrella term “wellbeing” can have many meanings depending on who we speak to and what wellbeing means to us. For AHPs, wellbeing is, as mentioned in the debate title, helping people live their best lives ever. Everyone will have a different view of what their best life is, with different end goals, targets and means of reaching those targets, but the first-class assessments, treatments, specialised groups and community work of AHPs in Scotland help them to get there. When members visit local AHP services, they will be greatly impressed with the diverse work and working styles of that group of healthcare professionals.

My long-standing view is that health provision delivers best when it is local and on the doorstep of the people who are most in need, and when services go to people rather than waiting on people coming to them. In a world of digital communication and over-the-phone appointments, it is important that we maintain strong connections with our communities. Using the expertise and work of our AHPs allows services to do just that.

As mentioned in the motion, prehabilitation, early intervention, prevention and rehabilitation are four key areas in which allied health professions play a significant role in the development of strategy and the delivery of services to meet the needs of all Scotland’s population. In local health centres and community hubs, schools and local third sector organisations and beyond, allied health professionals need resources to provide that service and allow people to live the best life possible.

In towns and communities that we know are suffering due to the impacts of the cost of living crisis, that have been impacted by the austerity agenda from the Tories at Westminster and, as we cannot forget, where there are impacts of cuts to local councils and services, the work of AHPs is most impactful.

Although we have come to the chamber to commend the work of our AHPs and the contribution that they make to health and social care provision as the third-largest workforce in our health service, I cannot make my remarks in good conscience without calling out the actions of the Governments here and at Westminster. I know that the Minister for Public Health, Women’s Health and Sport would expect no less of me.

Early intervention is key across many services. It is key in speech and language therapy, physiotherapy, occupational therapy and beyond, where there have been significant failings at a national Government level, putting considerable pressure on the ability of AHPs to deliver those vital services. Therefore, it is important that we hear from the minister how the Scottish Government will deliver clear plans for supporting AHPs in the workforce, focusing on prehabilitation, early intervention, prevention and rehabilitation.

AHPs are in the gallery not just for warm words but to hear clear plans for action on investment.

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I am not sure whether my app connected, but I would have voted yes.

We have to scrutinise the bill, and part of that is for the Government to bring more debates to the chamber so that we can debate the issues more fully, which are important and on which people have concerns.

The national care service is a mere shadow of what a universal care service could be, and it does not, at this stage, seem worthy of the name. The Scottish Government is not proposing a national care service in this plan; as it exists currently, it would lead only to a national procurement and commissioning service, dressed up in the language of radical change.

The profit motive is at the heart of everything in this plan, and the harsh reality of low pay and poor conditions for most workers are not set to change in any substantial way—there is no drive from the Government for collective bargaining or the improvement of pay and terms and conditions of the poorest-paid workers.

I will make progress, because I am running out of time.

As members might expect, I believe that, through their trade unions, workers understand the drawbacks better than most, yet very few of their concerns have been taken into account when drafting the bill.

Unison has, quite rightly, called the plans “not fit for purpose” and has asked for them to be recalled. I have a lot of sympathy for that position and share the view—made explicit in my party’s amendment—that the process must be paused immediately and that it requires the recommendations that are laid out in the Feeley review to be delivered as a priority. We can do that. If we do not take stock and allow for that to happen, we will create a service that, in essence, is set up to fail and built on the broken foundations of this care service.

The overt centralisation at the heart of the plan is designed to further disempower councils. Unite the union has expressed concerns about the proposal to hand power to

“unaccountable local care boards to deliver services”

with no democratic mandate.

It is clear that COSLA is firmly against the plans. It has stated that the Government is planning to remove

“decisions around locally delivered social care services ... from communities”

and hand them to

“Scottish Government Ministers in Edinburgh.”

That does not sound like a step forward to me; it sounds like an old-fashioned power grab that will put the future of many jobs firmly in the hands of ministers who are far away from what happens on the ground. Given the state of negotiations with public sector staff, we can understand why care staff and trade unions have serious concerns.

We are not here to simply tick boxes and say that a national care service has been built and then move on to the next manifesto promise. We are here to build something that, like the NHS, will stand the test of time.

I reiterate that the Government must pause the bill, listen to the concerns of carers, service users, councils, trade unions and MSPs, and get it right the first time round. Anything else would be a dereliction of duty.

I ask the members sitting opposite me to consider the fact that it is our responsibility as parliamentarians to debate the issues—we have that right. I hope that the member who spoke before me asks for some Government time so that we do not have to have short debates.

The bill on a national care service has promised a great deal but, with each passing month, the weight of that ambition has been forgotten. Instead of building a truly revolutionary service, the Scottish Government is tinkering around the edges of what the service would mean on the ground, while concentrating power in its own hands rather than in those of carers or people who require care.

Will the member take an intervention?

Okay. I suppose that Anne’s law has highlighted to us the need to ensure that such things are explored.

Thank you.

I just want to be clear. It has been mentioned that the bill moves towards centralisation. To give me some idea of what would be an alternative to that, will you talk me through what might allow us to get the good integration that we want?

I would like a bit of information about Anne’s law, which is about rights for care home residents. We are interested to understand whether the inclusion of Anne’s law in the bill will make circumstances easier for care home residents to be visited or to visit places during a public health threat. Will the bill provide that balance to ensure safety for residents, carers and staff?