Seòmar agus comataidhean

Every week, I get a report on how the guidance “Open with Care—Supporting Meaningful Contact in Care Homes” is working, and where it is not working. There are still some difficulties with outbreaks in certain places, but “Open with Care” should allow greater access for relatives. Even when there is an outbreak, there are still ways for relatives to have access to their loved ones in care homes.

The committee will know that we have had two consultations that have now come to an end. I cannot remember how many responses we have had.

We are both losing our memory on that, but we can send you the figure. There has been a significant response.

I should say that Anne Duke, whom Anne’s law is named after, passed away at the weekend. I give my condolences to her family. We will move forward on Anne’s law. I think that there is cross-party support for getting that right for people as we move forward. That will be Anne’s legacy. I pay tribute to her daughter, Natasha, and her husband, Campbell, for their efforts in getting it right for their family and for everyone in the future.

The Carers (Scotland) Act 2016 provides for a number of statutory services to meet the needs of carers. However, we know that delivery of the provisions in the 2016 act is better in some parts of the country than in others, and we need to make further changes to the situation. The 2016 act is grand, but the moneys that we have given to local authorities—substantial amounts of money—are not necessarily reaching carers services in every area.

Again, we need to change that as we move forward. That may mean making changes to the national care service legislation, or looking at what we need to do to secure—I do not use that word lightly—the money so that it goes directly to carers and carers centres as anticipated. The correct term to use is “ring fencing”. It would be fair to say that, in some areas, where all our investment is going is not open and transparent.

It would be fair to say that time is precious, at the moment. I do not have with me evidence to give Ms Mackay about that impact. We are examining those things very carefully.

I know that Ms Mackay has a great interest in data. I have freely admitted to Parliament that some of our data collection is not the best. In some regards, there is duplication in data gathering—not just by the Government, but by a number of agencies. We need to do a wee stocktake—as I have called it—or audit. This is one area in which we probably need to do a little bit more.

I do not want to pre-empt Ms Mackay’s next questions, but she knows from my answers to her in the chamber that we also lack data on some minority groups. We need to do much more work on that.

I know that Ms Mochan has a real interest in community-based services and preventative measures. As I said earlier, I want to move much more towards those so that folk do not have to enter acute services.

Let me give a wee flavour of the CAMHS situation. Some of the statistics are not brilliant, and some show that things are, without a doubt, on the move. We cannot forget that each number in the statistics is a person with a family; I will certainly not forget that.

The statistics that I will give were published on 7 September. During the quarter prior to that, 4,552 children and young people started treatment. That is an increase from the previous quarter, when the figure was 4,096. The figure was up by 28.3 per cent on the figure for the same quarter in 2020. Therefore, we are getting back to clinicians being able to see more folk. That is good, but we still have a way to go.

In the quarter prior to the report on 7 September, 72.6 per cent of CAMHS patients started treatment within 18 weeks. That percentage was ever so slightly up on the percentage in the previous quarter, when the figure was 72.4 per cent. However, it was up dramatically on the percentage for the same quarter in 2020, which was 61.7 per cent. We have to understand that there was a massive impact from the pandemic at that time.

In the quarter prior to the report, 10,193 children and young people were referred to CAMHS. That was an increase on the number who were referred in the previous quarter, when the figure was 7,883, and on the number in the same quarter in 2020, when the figure was 4,052. As has been pointed out, there was a dip in the number of folk being referred during the pandemic.

In the quarter prior to the report, 22.2 per cent of referrals to CAMHS were not accepted, and the figure was similar in the previous quarter. I know that Ms Mochan believes that there should be more interrogation of that; I agree with her, on that front. We will look at that.

That gives a flavour of the situation. I have a lot more information in front of me, but I am sure that the convener does not want me to take up a huge amount of time with all that. If you wish, I can send all the statistics to the committee in writing so that you have all the information at your disposal.

I will be brutally honest with the committee: I am happy to nick good ideas from anyone, anywhere. We are doing some pretty groundbreaking things in Scotland, and we owe a debt of gratitude to the national suicide prevention leadership group, which was recognised by the World Health Organization in its most recent report. That report is worth reading. It contains some good tips from across the globe that I am more than happy to nick as we move forward.

We saw a small decrease in the number of suicides in Scotland last year, but one suicide is one too many as far as I am concerned. Therefore, we have a fair amount of work to do.

The committee might also be aware that we have a lot more to do when it comes to self-harm. That is why I have said that we will develop a separate self-harm strategy. A lot of work has been done on that issue by stakeholders and academics in Scotland. We have more to do, but we can do that. I stand to be corrected, but my understanding is that, by moving in that direction, we will be the first country in the world to have a separate but connected self-harm strategy.

A number of things are going on, as is always the case. The Scott review is taking place, which is looking at the legal aspects of how we deal with folk with mental health difficulties. That will be extremely important. As always, there are folk who are saying that we need to look at various bits and pieces of legislation. In connection with the Scott review, there are folk who are saying that we should look at aspects of the adults with incapacity legislation now, but I think that we should allow the review to take place and do all that work in the round.

As we move forward, as I said in my introductory remarks, we need to take a human-rights based approach in all that we do. I know that many members have taken a great interest in embedding human rights in legislation. There must be more of that no matter what challenges are posed by the fact that the UK Government took to the courts the previous attempts by the Parliament to embed human rights in Scottish legislation. We must continue in that vein. The Scott review is also important in that regard.

I do not have that information. I am more than happy to write to the committee with any detail that I do not have in front of me.

It is our ambition to ensure that we get waiting times and lists down, but Dr Gulhane must recognise that we are going through a very difficult period because of Covid. I am sure that he will come back at me and say that some of the problems existed before Covid. That is fair enough, but the pandemic has exacerbated difficulties for people and has put a huge amount of pressure on services.

We have put in place a national standard for child and adolescent mental health services. In co-operation with stakeholders, including the Royal College of Psychiatrists, my officials will do exactly the same for psychological therapies. That is important and we are going to be extremely ambitious as we move forward with that.

I think that Ms Webber knows that I cannot respond on individual cases—that is not possible—but she should feel free to contact me about those situations.

Ms Webber hit upon a point that came up in discussion yesterday morning. There is something that we all need to recognise, and we need to build it into the action plan and how we deal with folk on the front line.

It was said to me yesterday that, for many folk on the outside, it looks as though some folk have the perfect life—they are pretty wealthy, and they have a nice hoose and a good job—but we never know the turmoil within. You might have all those things and still not be happy and still be unwell.

Ms Webber made a point about folks who make judgments that are based on a person’s external aspects. That is wrong, and we have to put a stop to it. We have to listen more. Again, it comes back to a person-centred approach. Work needs to be done on that. That is another kind of stigma, is it not?

It is another stigma that we must get rid of. Although I canna comment on the individuals, I get that point completely. It is a very good point to make, and it was made to me just yesterday. We have got to get over that and get rid of that stigma, too.