Seòmar agus comataidhean

Again, that is really helpful. Thank you.

Last week, we heard from the UK Climate Change Committee and others that, before carbon budget levels are put into law, a draft plan should be published alongside the proposed levels, and that the Parliament should have a chance to scrutinise those. We learned that the previous Environmental Audit Committee of the House of Commons proposed something similar. Does anyone on the panel have any views on that suggestion? You do not all have to answer every question, but does anyone have a particular view? Do you agree with the Environmental Audit Committee?

Thank you. I think that that is a point of consensus.

I will move on to cover a couple of other issues. This has been helpful so far.

As the bill proposes removing and not replacing the interim targets, can the witnesses help us to understand what might be the implications of an indefinite period with no interim climate targets or carbon budget targets?

Thank you, convener. I appreciate that this is my second appearance at the committee this morning.

I will reinforce Jackie Baillie’s comments about safety. That issue has to be paramount in the minds of everyone. I am here as a Central Scotland MSP. Lynne McRitchie, who lodged the petition on behalf of the Wishaw Neonatal Warriors, is a constituent of mine, as is Monica Sheen, who is here today.

I do not want to repeat the comments that Jackie Baillie has made, so I will move on to the lack of meaningful public consultation and take my lead from what Fergus Ewing said with regard to a petition that the committee addressed earlier. He talked about the importance of having the confidence of the people who you seek to serve and your local communities. When the Scottish Government got around to doing some consultation, beginning on 21 June this year, people had only 17 days to submit comments. People with lived experience, such as Lynne McRitchie, Monica Sheen and many others, were told that they had to summarise their comments, with a limit of 500 characters, in an online document. There are families whose babies, sadly, did not survive and others who have life-changing conditions, and it is unfair to ask them to summarise their experiences in a few hundred characters.

As well as the issues that Jackie Baillie has raised about the inconsistency and inaccuracy of the data and the way that evidence has been presented, I note that we have not had meaningful consultation, so there is no public support or public buy-in for the change. The proposal is not only flawed but has been built on very shaky foundations, which will put at risk the lives of Scotland’s most premature, smallest and sickest babies, and their mums.

It is no exaggeration to say that there is a real sense of betrayal across Lanarkshire. As Jackie Baillie said, Wishaw is a much celebrated and award-winning neonatal intensive care unit that is highly respected across the UK. We often say in Parliament that we need to learn more from good practice. This is exceptional practice. The staff are upset, not for their own sakes but because they have very close relationships with the families, who they continue to care for long after babies have left the unit.

I will briefly touch on the young patients family fund, which is in place for parents of babies who have to be cared for outwith their community. Colleagues will know that that is a reimbursement system, which means that families can apply for their expenses after they have incurred the expense. It is good that that is in place, but many families, particularly those in Lanarkshire, where poverty is sky high at the moment, do not have money for hotels and accommodation and to buy extra food and pay for childcare. That needs to be looked at, too, because the Government has not costed the proposal in that regard and we do not know how much any of it will cost.

Lynne McRitchie, who is not able to be here today, has done a great deal of work in her own time. She is mum to Innes, who received care at Wishaw. In an earlier comment she said:

“I cannot imagine how we would have felt if we had then been told that best case scenario was to transfer to Glasgow to receive that care. It adds a whole new level of stress and trauma into what is already a horrific experience for parents and families.”

We know that, because of capacity issues, many of our families in Lanarkshire could end up in Aberdeen. That is a long, long way from home.

In conclusion, we fear that, if the issue is left in the hands of the Government, with its flawed data and lack of meaningful consultation, we will have a very dangerous outcome. I know that it is not entirely in the gift of the committee, but I urge the committee to bid for a committee-led debate. You have Labour talent here today but there are many more owls in the Parliament. We have had a members’ business debate on the issue led by a Scottish Conservative member and others have asked questions. There is cross-party support—that is important to know. We cannot play politics. If we truly want the best start for all of Scotland’s babies, at the very least we have to pause this process before a terrible mistake is made.

Good morning. I thank the convener for that very helpful summary of the journey that Karen McKeown has been on and of where we are currently. I would like to say that things are improving in addressing Scotland’s mental health crisis, but, sadly, they are not.

It is timely that we are meeting today, following world suicide prevention day yesterday. My thoughts are with everyone across Scotland who has lost a loved one to suicide and with those who are struggling today with their mental health. Help is available but, sadly, there is not always enough help when people need it. It is still very difficult to access services.

On the point about data, Karen McKeown and others continue to do their own research and to ask questions. I will not repeat the information in your packs, but the responses to Karen’s recent freedom of information request show that there are still gaps in how data is collected.

I have written to NHS Lanarkshire to ask why it is not recording waiting times for adult mental health referrals and on-going waiting times, but I have not had a response. I do not say that to embarrass NHS Lanarkshire. The convener had his finger on the pulse when he talked about Karen’s concerns about staff burnout and wellbeing. I will not give a lot of details but, when I recently attended an appointment with a constituent and one of their family members, I was very aware, in the course of that interaction, that the NHS staff involved in trying to help constituents were extremely stressed and burned out.

I support Karen in pushing the Parliament and the Government for an independent review. I heard what the convener said about the demand on the committee’s time, but, if the committee had time, it would be good if it could go out and speak to staff on a confidential basis, because I am picking up that staff are afraid to speak out. I know that trade unions are doing an excellent job in supporting staff, but we are not hearing from those on the front line.

We need more data and to help people before they fall into crisis. I recently read in Third Force News that some charity leaders have said that, in Scotland, we now have not a mental health crisis but a scandal, because we know that more action is required.

I want to leave the committee with this. From reading some briefings, I know that the Scottish Government has committed to increasing the suicide prevention budget to £2.8 million by the end of this parliamentary session, but experts say that that is nowhere near enough and that there will be more suicides and more people in crisis. I also hear appeals for an early review of the 10-year national suicide prevention strategy, which is a joint endeavour between the Scottish Government and the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities. There are good things in the strategy but, without resources, we will not see progress.

I continue to urge the committee to do whatever it can to ensure that we get a proper in-depth review of mental health services in Scotland, which should include consideration of what data we do and do not record and proper evaluation. Having more scrutiny and debate in the Parliament can only be a good thing. I know that committees, including the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee, are stretched, but if we do not find space in this parliamentary session to do that work properly and to push the Government further, more of our constituents will lose their lives, and we will have more Karen McKeowns looking to the Parliament and asking what we did.

I thank the convener and other committee members for all their work on the petition over the past three years.

It would be good to simplify this a bit more. We have talked about the proposed carbon budgets. I am keen to understand from each of our witnesses when and how the Scottish Government should publish its climate change plan or plans. We have touched on that a little.

Initially, however, I would like to pick up on some of the comments that you have made, David. We have heard from some of our witnesses about what is technically possible and on the table, and about what is fair and just—and what the public will accept. I am interested in that potential gap between the technical side and the policy solutions that will help us to get to a just transition. My question is about the when and the how. How do the proposals align with the work that the Government is doing around the just transition? That has not been mentioned today, but that is what people might have been alluding to. I am glad that the citizens assembly was mentioned.

If we can get a simple answer on when and how, that would be really helpful to the committee.

Before I move on to Professor Roy, do you have a view on what the frequency of the publishing of the climate change plan or plans should be? How could the Government achieve the aims that you have set out? What do you think would be the right form of practice?

I am trying to get a sense of when and how you think the climate change plan or plans should be published, because we want to be able to make recommendations to the Government on that. How could the way in which the Government manages that cycle help with budget alignment and with persuading people and bringing people with us?

Are there any additional comments on that?