Seòmar agus comataidhean

I thank the panel for coming along. Much of what has been discussed has involved things that need to be done and support that needs to be given to address inequalities and prevention.

I want to pick up on a couple of things. In their evidence to us, young people said that lots of support is available when they are in crisis but there is not so much support available on the journey or on the way towards crisis. What do the witnesses think about that? Have you experienced that, and is there some way of looking into that?

I am also interested in hearing from the panel about how we deal with poverty and take a whole-family approach. I have heard about that before, but I would like a wee bit more information on that.

We talk a lot about Government investment, funding and finances, and I am sure that people have views on what we need to do there. What things do we need to do differently that are not just about the financial provision? Could the panel give a wee bit of feedback on that, too, please?

I would be particularly interested in hearing from Kirsty-Louise Hunt about what kind of things people say they need before they are in crisis.

Tackling inequality and poverty is, I believe, absolutely what we, as MSPs, are here to do. That goes for every portfolio. In almost every one of our evidence sessions we have heard from experts that in order to tackle health inequalities we have to tackle poverty. We have been advised that we have to be politically brave on the issue, so my question is this: are you prepared to be politically brave? Can you give us examples of what you believe we can do, and give us timeframes for that? It is very important that we know the timeframes within which we will measure outcomes.

Yes. It is referred to in our papers. Where could we use that approach quickly for people?

We have heard evidence on the Scottish Government’s place-based community-led approach. Will you give examples of where that will make a difference?

I know that we are short of time, convener, but I hope that we can make a commitment to come back to the issue.

I thank all the witnesses for their input so far. As the convener said, I want to talk about the workforce. One of the biggest things that struck me was evidence from the Royal College of Nursing that suggested that we can make the biggest difference to improved mental health provision if we address staff vacancies and the workforce, as there are significant problems with the workforce in the area of mental health. I know that the Government is trying to address the issue, but it is important that we understand what workforce planning it is doing for specialist perinatal mental health services. Has the Government done any workforce planning? One of the things that we hear from nursing organisations is that the retention of good and well-trained staff is key. Do you have any feedback on that?

Yes, thank you.

I thank the minister for lodging amendment 1.

In moving amendment 5 and speaking to all the amendments in the group, I want to be clear that I am happy with the spirit of the bill and the collaborative nature of the approach that the Parliament has taken in moving forward through each stage to ensure that the women involved are reimbursed at the earliest possible time.

My amendment 5 would ensure the broadest scope for the qualifying residence element of the bill. As the minister stated, the committee has always agreed that that is the correct approach. Amendment 5 would ensure that any women who had mesh implant removal undertaken by the NHS but who were not ordinarily resident in Scotland would be included in the eligibility criterion, so that they could seek expenses and so on.

Towards the end of our discussions at stage 1, the committee touched on the rights of all women who have been adversely affected by transvaginal mesh surgery and who had any surgery in Scotland. Therefore, I lodged amendment 5 in the interests of clarifying the bill and ensuring that parts of it are not unclear for those who are affected.

I appreciate the discussion that we have had on the amendments and accept that there will be time before stage 3 to discuss the issues further and get things right for people. As a result, I seek to withdraw amendment 6.

Do you want me to go on, convener?