Seòmar agus comataidhean

No—that is fine. Thank you.

With regard to our being able to robustly monitor and put forward improvements that would work for people and staff members, you are saying that we would need to make sure that more funding was available—that even if what we had to do was clear in writing, it would not be doable if we do not have the resources to implement it.

Am I picking up rightly that monitoring seems to be based on process, but that what is really important in is quality both for the individual for whom we provide the service and for their family?

I have listened closely to what the witnesses have said that we can and should do now. However, part of the committee’s responsibility is to scrutinise the bill as it progresses. I am interested in monitoring. The papers mention performance, but having listened to the witnesses, I think that we are talking about whether the bill and the amendments address the outcomes that we wish to achieve for the people that we seek to represent and support. Pauline Lunn, in particular, expressed strong feelings on that. Will you talk to us a wee bit about the bill and the amendments as they stand? Can we monitor the processes and get the outcomes that we are looking for? Can we get that right? Can we hold people to account for that?

You have mentioned the missing millions campaign. Is there any sense that the Government is picking up on the notion that we should seek to remove the private sector from the provision of service? Has there been any engagement on that at all?

Despite the discussion about whether the bill should progress, we still have to scrutinise amendments, as they stand.

One question that I am interested in is whether you think that the bill would, with amendments, give us a robust way of monitoring improvements in social care and make sure that we can look at performance in social care and outcomes for clients. Would the amendments, as they stand, allow us to do that, if the legislation was in place?

Like others, I thank my colleague Martin Whitfield for bringing the debate to the chamber. I am not surprised to see it under his name; I think that we can all agree that this issue and the rights of children and young people are always a priority for my friend on these Labour benches.

Martin Whitfield has spoken to me before about the excellent work of the no time to wait campaign, which, as we have heard, launched a pilot wellbeing and resilience service called the haven in September 2023 in Tranent. It is super to hear that others have been along to that; I think that the minister has also been.

From the discussions that I have had with Martin Whitfield about his visit, I know that he met the most amazing young people, such as we all have in all our communities. It is not just the young people but their families, too, who have benefited from the scheme. From Martin Whitfield’s experience, we know that the staff have also benefited from the service. As many people out there in our communities do, the staff are going way above and beyond the call to help our young people and ensure that we do not have young people unnecessarily going into mental health crisis.

As we know, the service is designed to work with and complement CAMHS. That is an important point—the more our local services join up with our public services, the better our outcomes will be. Providing a service that means that a young person might not have to go into a more psychiatric or clinical environment is a super intervention. My colleague Ben Macpherson mentioned other services out there that are doing that. We are so lucky to have those services, and we need to ensure that we work together to get it right.

Across the chamber, we all talk about taking a preventative approach, which, from the speeches that we have heard today and at other times in the chamber and in our committees, I think that we all believe in. That is why it is important that such members’ business debates take place.

For me, the important point is that we want young people and their families to know that they do not need to go into crisis and that there are services out there in the informal local space where young people and families can talk about their struggles, what they might do and what might help them. We are not just talking about the service; we have heard that the scheme has been successful. From its six-month report, we know that 52 per cent of those who visited felt that their situation had improved. That is an example of the lived experience that we talk about so much across the Scottish Parliament.

I was fortunate enough to visit Edinburgh Children’s Hospital Charity last year, which the haven is linked to. I could tell that it does tremendous work. On its website, the first thing that comes up when someone is going to donate is a message that says, “Will you give more than medicine to children in hospital?” That shows what the charity is seeking to do. The staff at the site that I visited showed me that the great facility there, which is mirrored at the haven site, is about understanding relationships and having a sense of play in normal space and in family time. It was very impressive.

The staff team is dedicated, and we know that young people are advantaged by having the service in the local community. We can all agree that we should get behind local community-based projects. I hope that the minister will refer to that in her closing remarks and that she will give us a sense of how we can all work together. Sometimes, members’ business debates allow us to have conversations about how we can all work together. I thank all the speakers in the debate, and I hope that our constituents can get the benefit of such services across Scotland.

I thank the cabinet secretary for advance sight of his statement. The reality for our staff and communities is that winter pressures now happen all year round. I will focus on delayed discharge and will use figures to do that, but we must remember that those are about real people and their families, whose lives are on hold.

The most recent monthly data, which is for July, in the middle of summer, revealed that an average of 1,900 beds were occupied each day as a result of delayed discharge and that 61,165 total bed days were lost, which is the highest ever monthly figure.

The Government talks up its joint plan with local government, but that includes no new money and is just not sustainable. Will the cabinet secretary say what it will take for this Government to take clear action on that particular point?

It is welcome that the UK Government has hit the ground running with the delivery of its child health action plan, which includes action on childhood obesity.

Given that a recent Scottish health survey found that one third of Scottish children are at risk of being overweight, does the First Minister accept that the UK Government action is an opportunity to act with urgency to use the devolved powers that we have in Scotland?

A quick question comes to mind. Will NHS Scotland be taking part in the review of adult gender services, as recommended by the Cass review across NHS England? Will there be some connection between NHS England and NHS Scotland on that?