Seòmar agus comataidhean

I will.

Although, in this case, the Government also allocated time to congratulate itself.

I will come on to address those issues.

There are so many personal stories. We have heard many of them; the experiences of young people, in particular, stand out. They are often in pain and, in many cases, they are very lost and have nowhere to turn. What do they face? They face long waiting lists. For some, getting a first appointment and continued treatment could be the difference between life and death but, in many cases, that comes far too late.

Evidence to the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee has repeatedly shown that people face long waits, with no community alternatives or basic local service provision being available. Young people and mental health organisations have repeatedly told us that the shrinking provision of local services is impacting on wellbeing. The Scottish Government’s response is to cut local government funding again. Scottish National Party members must surely recognise that that must change, and change rapidly.

It is politics by press release. I hope that the amendment in my name for Scottish Labour will be supported.

I move amendment S6M-02747.1, to leave out from “further recognises” to end and insert:

“regrets the Scottish Government’s continued failure to remedy existing problems facing NHS mental health services; notes that the 18-week waiting time targets for Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS) has never been met and there are currently almost 2,000 children and young people on the waiting list who have waited over a year to begin treatment; considers that, with over 1,000 vacancies for mental health nurses and almost 100 consultant psychiatrist vacancies, staff shortages are undermining efforts to improve services; notes that the Scottish Government is on track to miss its target to recruit 800 mental health workers; believes that every GP practice should have access to a mental health professional to support patients close to home and reduce pressure on GPs; agrees that investment in mental health must be increased, including in community-based services, and calls for mental health spending to be increased to at least 11% of the NHS budget.”

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.

I thank Rachael Hamilton for bringing such an important debate to the chamber. I know that she has championed the cause for many years.

As we have heard, endometriosis is thought to impact a staggering one in 10 women worldwide. Endometriosis UK highlights the point that its impact can be seen from puberty to menopause and, in some cases, can last a lifetime. The painful, often debilitating condition impacts many women in our country and across the globe, but awareness of it remains low and it is not given the prominence that it deserves.

Tonight’s debate will take steps towards raising awareness of endometriosis, but we must go much further: we must listen to people who have lived experience of the condition and to experts such as those at Endometriosis UK so that we can deliver what they believe is necessary to improve the day-to-day lives of people who live with the condition now, and of those who might live with it in the future.

That means that members such as me must hold the Scottish Government to account and ensure that it reaches its target of reducing the shockingly high diagnosis time of more than eight years to less than a year. We must also fight for equal access to proper care and ensure that all women have a central point of support that can provide assistance related to the impacts of endometriosis.

I welcome Maree Todd’s work on, and commitment to, the women’s health plan. Although progress has been made on it, we must acknowledge that much more needs to be done. It is fair to say that making faster progress would benefit the women who live with the condition.

We must also commit to providing age-appropriate menstrual wellbeing education. Only by removing the stigma surrounding the discussion of menstrual wellbeing will we raise awareness and tackle the issues that are staring us in the face.

Endometriosis is a condition in which tissue similar to that in the lining of the womb starts to grow in other places, such as the ovaries and fallopian tubes. Its main symptoms include painful periods; pain in the lower abdomen, pelvis or lower back; pain during and after sex; difficulty becoming pregnant; and discomfort when going to the toilet. It causes many women a long time of suffering and social and mental health problems.

One of the main difficulties that is highlighted by people with lived experience of the condition, Endometriosis UK and a wide range of healthcare professionals is that such symptoms can be attributed to many other conditions and illnesses. The condition is often missed, or it takes a long time to be diagnosed. It is therefore vital that we call for greater research into the presentation and causes of endometriosis, so that women can be provided with high-quality treatment at a much quicker rate than at present. We must also hope that research produces alternative treatments and, at some point in the future, a cure.

As we have heard, a significant amount of work is already being undertaken in our communities by individuals, groups and organisations. I have had the pleasure of meeting groups, such as the group in the Scottish Borders, that are doing a tremendous amount of work to support those who live with the condition and to hold us decision makers and those in the health services to account. We must commend the work that individuals and organisations do, because, without their support, advice and advocacy, many more women would have faced the difficulties alone.

I once again thank Rachael Hamilton for highlighting the importance of raising awareness of the condition, and I thank members who have spoken in the debate. I hope that this debate is the start and not the end of a heightened focus on the condition in the Parliament and beyond.

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.