Seòmar agus comataidhean

Good morning, panellists. I have listened to what you have said, and I am interested in the practicalities of addressing the issues that have been raised. Alan McIntosh, you talked about the problem that we are trying to solve. In an ideal world, somebody having mental health issues would seek treatment and, during that treatment, they would come to you, but that is not the real world. In the real world, people hide their mental health issues and might not receive treatment.

Do you have the required skill set? Is extra training required? Do you have the practical skills to be able to identify and deliver on what the bill is trying to achieve in this area? I am concerned about the practicalities of what we are trying to do here.

Natalia Mendel, you talked about the need to identify those who would benefit from the mental health moratorium. You discussed very clearly that there is so much scope in mental health that not all people with a mental health issue will need that provision. How are we going to identify that? How are we going to make sure that we do not drop the ball?

I want to discuss the differences in remit and focus between the enterprise agencies. Perhaps I can come to Jane Morrison-Ross first on this, as the south-west is an area that I have more of an understanding of. It has regional challenges, a low-wage structure and economic inactivity, particularly as a result of rural-to-urban migration. Adrian Gillespie has said that the squeeze on the budget will narrow the range of businesses that Scottish Enterprise might focus on. Is there a danger that squeezing the budget will not only have an impact on the businesses that you focus on for support, but, geographically, lead to a bigger squeeze and greater inequality between agencies?

Thank you, convener.

I was going to ask how you manage the risk of investment. With any investment, there is a risk, but because you are risking public funds here, you fall between the two stools of being risk averse and overcommitting. You know that, if something goes wrong, we are going to jump all over you, even though it is part of the deal. The question is: how do you manage that risk? Will squeezing the budget make you more risk averse, given there is less funding?

Good morning. Adrian Gillespie, you mentioned the role that Scottish Enterprise has with scale-ups and the importance of scale-ups. We are a very SME-orientated country. SNIB would say that it also has a role in scale-ups, and you talked about working in partnership with SNIB, so where are the lines of demarcation? How do you make sure that there is no duplication of effort? Is there a grey area around who should lead on that?

Adrian, how are you, from a central position, going to ensure that, as budgets get squeezed, you do not just pull towards the central belt?

Good morning. Thank you for being here. I have been listening intently to the answers that you have given to my colleagues. I want to ask about the mental health moratorium working group’s recommendation that a mental health moratorium would be applied for via a money adviser.

It struck me that what we do not talk about is the creditor, and, in certain circumstances, the creditor may be the one who is perhaps being hard done by. In the scenario that Mr Macpherson set out, about somebody sitting with £1 million in the bank and a tradesperson looking for £500, which happens often, it strikes me that it is hugely unlikely that that person would seek a money adviser. I am not quite sure that that scenario would arise.

My concern is around the fact that the moratorium has to be applied for through a money adviser. Does the money adviser sector have the capacity to deal with that? Do the advisers have the necessary skill set? Are they trained with the ability to recognise people in a poor mental health situation and to access mental health services?

We are making laws and regulations based on ideal situations, and this is far from an ideal situation. Cheryl Hynd, in practical terms, does the sector have that capacity?

Thank you; that is helpful. My concern is that mental health is on such a sliding scale. We have a significant rise in poor mental health. In my experience, people with poor mental health can be good at hiding it. People go to college or university for three or four years to be able to recognise people with poor mental health. My concern is that we are saying that money advisers will be charged with recognising that—that is the point that I am trying to push here. Should they have the ability to call in mental health experts? Where do we sit with comfort on that particular issue?

To follow on from Maggie Chapman talking about the green economy, I will also throw in the blue economy, if you do not mind. We all recognise the massive opportunity in skills development for the blue economy in Scotland, but I am concerned that we are not weaving those skills and that potential for our pupils into our schools. For example, the construction industry needs an extra 22,500 tradespeople and engineers by 2028 if we are to hit the Government’s 2030 targets. In reality, that will not happen.

I believe that, when we talk about green skills, we are speaking to a lot of people who think we are talking about people planting trees rather than software engineers and what not.

I am also pleased to hear you talk about the further education sector in the way that you do, but our FE sector has unfilled apprenticeship places and our engineering companies are screaming for engineers. We do not bring the two together. That is where I am going. Did you look at how we can weave future needs into our education system at the earliest possible opportunity?

I am at a loss with the idea of how a national framework devolves down into the local economy. The obvious one is the transition from oil and gas to a green economy, although I imagine that that will be predominantly in the north-east, where the decisions on that will be made.

On Monday, I was with a group that works with children who were disenfranchised from school but who now go to school two days a week and go to the group three days a week. It is a complex landscape out there. How do we create a national framework that allows all that good work still to happen?

Yes. I have a quick one, if I could. The financial memorandum to the bill argues that there will be no significant costs to local authorities as a result of a mental health moratorium. I can see hidden costs there. I wonder what your consideration is of the bill’s potential cost to councils.