Paul Sweeney
Scottish Labour · Scotland
“The single point of contact pilots that we have embarked on are making a significant difference in ensuring that people get the ability to discuss their treatment anxieties and their support. We have invested £2.5 million to expand the reach of that programme across Scotland.”
“As a member of the Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee, I welcome the news on the proposed legislation, which is very welcome. Indeed, it is something that has been long hoped for.”
“It is more precise than conventional radiotherapy, and the team behind the trial in England has begun the process of establishing it in Scotland.”
“I thank Mesothelioma UK for continuing to raise awareness each year through action mesothelioma day. On 3 July, the Scottish Government will proudly show our support by lighting up in blue St Andrew’s house and Victoria Quay in Edinburgh to get behind the go blue for meso campaign.”
“There is an awful lot to be recognised in terms of holding people to account, which has been a feature of this campaign over time. The Scottish Government confirms its commitment to continue to stand alongside those who are affected by mesothelioma, to ensure that they receive the compassionate care and treatment that they require at ever…”
“The fact that there are such abandoned factories and that the people who enter them—whether for urban exploration or whatever else—do not understand the risks that they are exposing themselves to is a difficulty that we must overcome.”
The complete record
Every one of 813 lines we hold for Paul Sweeney, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 14 of 17.
“There would be common cause on this side of the chamber, as well as with colleagues in the House of Commons, in trying to remove some of those funds from the NRPF list. Indeed, if new discrete funds were created that would not be countered proactively by the Home Office, it is worth testing that position. There would be a willingness to ally ourselves in that regard. For example, I know that ministers were concerned that one of the effects of introducing free bus travel for people seeking asylum was the risk of the Home Office interdicting that with NRPF. I do not think that that is a live risk now.”
“We hear it from general practitioners, for example, when they refer patients to social services that are not given to them. That is unlawful. We need to take action across all public services in Scotland to make it clear what the line is on NRPF, where it is and where it is not, and what can be accessed, because there is a lot of confusion out there that is either caused deliberately or purely through ignorance. We need to make guidance much clearer across every level of government in Scotland. I certainly associate myself with all five of the recommendations, but with the change in the Government, there is an opportunity to look at how we can ameliorate the effects of NRPF.”
“I am familiar with no recourse to public funds, given that, as an MP and MSP, I have represented 95 per cent of the people who are seeking asylum in Scotland in Glasgow, with the balance being distributed to other local authorities in Scotland since 2022, when the dispersal area was expanded. I am sure that, as a member in the city, the minister is aware that it is a major issue in Glasgow, and one that we have to contend with in a number of ways. One big challenge is the arbitrary nature of adding to no recourse to public funds, which creates a chilling effect. It is not simply about the list of prescribed funds; it is the fact that a culture of prohibition around NRPF has crept in across public authorities. There are many unlawful gatekeepers out there. Many people are acting ultra vires to prevent people from accessing services.”
“It is a pleasure to contribute to the debate. I commend Ms Chapman, a member for North East Scotland, for lodging the motion for this members’ business debate. It is great to see Beth Watts-Cobbe and Jen Ang in the gallery. I thank them and their colleagues for their excellent research, which informs the public debate in Scotland. We heard about that ably last night at the cross-party group on migration, where the issues were discussed at some length. This is a multifaceted challenge, and it is one of the biggest public health policy challenges in Scotland today. As has been mentioned by members across the chamber, that is the case largely by design, which is a moral stain on our country that we really need to deal with.”
“A contractual commitment of around £70 million remains outstanding on the Glasgow subway modernisation project, with the key milestone of achieving unattended train operation due by quarter 3 of 2026. Will the Scottish Government commit to ensuring that all capital works will be fully funded to achieve that milestone? Shona Robison: By the end of 2023-24, the Scottish Government will have contributed £171.9 million towards the subway modernisation programme. We have been working with the SPT on the issues. I will ask Fiona Hyslop to respond to Paul Sweeney on the specifics around the £70 million. Edinburgh Third Sector Grant Programme 7.”
“Will the minister commit to progressing the Scottish Offshore Wind Energy Council project for offshore support vessels and crew transfer vessels, which is a shipbuilding opportunity for Scotland, as well as the Malin and Star Refrigeration B-Neatpump renewables project, which shows great potential for significant maritime manufacturing and shipbuilding in Scotland? Tom Arthur: I recognise the member’s points, and I am happy to engage with him directly on them. Seafood Processing Sector 3.”
“We could also go back to the idea of having a Clyde Navigation Trust that is accountable to other public authorities along the river. 17:31”
“We are seeing a private tax being levied by the port authority on pleasure craft for no obvious benefit, and there is no clear plan for the development of infrastructure on the upper Clyde. If I were to take a small craft to the Riverside museum, I would pay an annual conservancy fee of £120, yet there is barely any berthage, and there are very few amenities there. We really need to get a grip on the issue, as it is a bigger problem. As the member for Greenock and Inverclyde hinted, the Harbours Act 1964 is ripe for revision. In addition, consideration could be given to how, in addressing the issue, we extend greater public oversight and accountability, perhaps through the Clyde mission and Glasgow City Region programmes.”
“One of the longer-term challenges is how we develop that vibrancy around the river if another charge is imposed without any commensurate development plan. Where is the marina for Glasgow, for example? Liverpool has the Albert dock, with myriad pleasure craft and a vibrant riverfront. Glasgow has the Scottish exhibition and conference centre and Pacific Quay, but the area is a desert. Apart from the Waverley plying its lonely trade up and down the Clyde in the summer season, there is not very much else going on. There is a broader concern in that regard. The port facilities are underutilised, and economic development on the river banks has not been achieved because of the monopolistic behaviour of the port authority.”
“It is about how we bring the assets under a greater degree of public control. That is what we all seek to achieve. Whether it is developing and maximising the opportunities of port infrastructure or facilitating democratic access to the river, it is important that we get this right. I extend the point that was made by Mr Gibson about the sheer scale of the Clydeport area. It covers 450 square miles of the west of Scotland and it is the biggest harbour authority in the UK by a considerable distance. It is not just a contained port facility; it is a vast area of territory, extending from Glasgow Green and the Clyde tidal weir right down to the Isle of Arran. As the cabinet secretary will be familiar with, the reality is that there is not much vibrancy or leisure traffic on the upper part of the Clyde beyond the Erskine bridge.”
“The issue that we have to contend with is not simply the conservancy fee, although that is an example of the monopolistic behaviour that we have become all too familiar with in relation to the Clyde; it is a symptom of a wider lack of regulation and a lack of balance of control. I offer the cabinet secretary the example of bus privatisation in the 1980s and the steps that have been taken by the Government to introduce greater regulatory scope to address the imbalance that it caused. Perhaps similar consideration could be given to how we can deal with port management in Scotland by introducing a similar process of greater public oversight, regulation and accountability for harbour and port authorities. The process does not necessarily need to be the more extreme example of nationalising assets.”
“The trust was a public body that was established under statute to democratically manage a public asset, the Clyde navigation, which is a man-made channel from Glasgow city centre down to the Firth of Clyde. It was also established to undertake port improvements, build shipbuilding facilities, enable trade and enable public access. The reality is that it was privatised like something out of Yeltsin’s Russia. It was an appalling act of surreptitious privatisation of public assets. The continuing lack of regulation that prevails over port authorities in Scotland, particularly the private port authorities, is simply unsustainable. This is another symptom of the wider disease of public policy failure in Scotland.”
“I extend my congratulations to the member for Greenock and Inverclyde on securing this members’ business debate. It is an important issue, and I am sure that the minister will agree that it brings into sharp focus a public policy failure that has loomed large in the west of Scotland for the past 35 years. The Ports Act 1991 was a disaster for the west of Scotland’s economy, and the surreptitious privatisation of what was a public body has presented long-term strategic, economic and social challenges for the development of the west of Scotland. I had the opportunity to venture into the Clydeport building a few weeks ago to discuss some matters with Peel’s property side about development on Clydeside. I had the chance to pop my head into what was once the trustees’ chamber of the Clyde Navigation Trust building.”
“However, in the first instance, I and the corporate body would encourage more members of the Parliament to participate in the scheme that we have, which is the armed forces parliamentary visits programme. Members will be aware that a communication has gone out in the past couple of days, which identifies opportunities that will be available later this year. Too few MSPs have participated in such opportunities, and I encourage others to do so. It really is a great experience.”
“We will update Mr Sweeney and members on that in due course. Paul Sweeney: I welcome the response in relation to exploring the idea with the Armed Forces Parliamentary Trust. It would be welcome if members of the Scottish Parliament and other devolved legislatures were able to participate in the programme. Given that it is governed by an independent board of trustees and funded largely from industry, that would not necessarily come at any cost to the Scottish Parliament, and it would provide an opportunity for members to augment the existing excellent and well-attended visits programme, which I have also had the opportunity to attend, with a deeper engagement with our armed forces. Jackson Carlaw: I do not disagree with that.”
“As a member, he is aware that the Scottish Parliament’s armed forces parliamentary visits programme was established relatively recently, in 2017. Since then, many members, including me, have participated in outward visits to defence bases across Scotland as well as reciprocal visits to the Parliament. I say that as an enthusiastic former member of the Combined Cadet Force. The current programme is a good fit for the Scottish Parliament and its members, and, although there are no plans to review it at the current time, Mr Sweeney has highlighted some differences between the two schemes. Accordingly, the corporate body has asked parliamentary officials to contact the armed forces parliamentary scheme to inquire whether members of the Scottish Parliament may participate in those programmes.”
“To ask the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body, further to the answer to question S6W-34464, what its position is on whether MSPs should be able to participate in the armed forces parliamentary scheme, in addition to the armed forces visits programme, should they wish to do so, in light of it being a structured 15-day course with one of the armed services, and it also offering the opportunity to enrol on a Royal College of Defence Studies postgraduate degree level course in strategic leadership and international strategic studies, and it therefore being different in nature. (S6O-04476) Jackson Carlaw (Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body): I thank Paul Sweeney for his sustained interest in these matters.”
“That does not favour any one company, but allows the facility and the economic benefits to come into the local community. I urge the minister to look at the Australian model and to consider how that could be utilised in a future round of the small vessel replacement programme— The Deputy Presiding Officer: The member will need to conclude. Paul Sweeney: —and for other contracts. The Deputy Presiding Officer: I call Bob Doris, who will be the final speaker in the open debate. 15:35”
“It is clear that no subcontract opportunities will be available to Scottish shipyards, unlike, for example, in the Liverpool combined region, which was able to structure the Mersey ferry contract to allow for Cammell Laird to take a work share, despite the main contract originally being awarded to Damen of the Netherlands. More can therefore be done there. Furthermore, I encourage ministers to consider the common user facility model developed by Australia in both Adelaide and Perth, where the infrastructure—the shipyard itself—is state owned, but is marketed as, in effect, a common neutral facility that any contract winner can then utilise for the purpose of generating social value as part of the fulfilment of a contract.”
“Paul Sweeney: I am happy to give way, if I can have the time to do that. The Deputy Presiding Officer: Briefly, Mr Mountain. Edward Mountain: The whole issue could have been resolved if, as part of the contract that was given to the overseas yard, two ferries were built in Scotland. That would have spread the risk and maybe enabled Ferguson’s yard to stay open. Does Paul Sweeney agree that that might have been a sensible way of doing it, rather than just walking away from the situation, as the Government has done? The Deputy Presiding Officer: I will give the member an extra 30 seconds. Paul Sweeney: I appreciate that point. There were many ways to structure the contract that would have allowed more work share to happen in Scotland.”
“At the heart of the public procurement strategy for Scotland is surely community wealth building, but that is not translating into a demand signal that is then able to be captured by Scottish industry. That is at the heart of the problem. Regardless of whether it is a direct award or an open procedure, we need to make sure that our procedure is competitive. We know that there is a cross-Government shipbuilding pipeline across the UK of more than 150 new vessels, but we are seeing those vessels flowing overseas to Turkey, Spain, in the case of the Northern Lighthouse Board’s vessel, and now Poland, with the latest contract going to Remontowa. We need to address that matter. It is clear to me that the Government must engage with the issue of social value. Edward Mountain: Will the member give way?”
“Indeed, if the ministers had been paying any attention to the recommendations from Maritime UK—and, indeed, the views of the cross-party group—on the refresh of the national shipbuilding strategy, they would have recognised Maritime UK’s recommendation 3, which stated: “Despite welcoming the minimum 10% social value weighting, the UK shipbuilding enterprise urges the UK and devolved governments to show more ambition in their use of social value, in line with the practices of competitor shipbuilding nations, and raise the threshold for UK content.” No wonder the contract went overseas, if we are not prepared to put in place the fundamental basis for our yards to be competitive. I do not think that anyone here wishes to see public expenditure in Scotland support the social value and economic multiplier of a foreign nation and its economy.”
“Independent teams checked the procedures in relation to the different tenders and then came together to make a decision, which is how they arrived at the award to Remontowa of Gdansk. What has been missed in all of that, of course, is social value. In every UK nation, there is a minimum requirement for a 10 per cent social value weighting—apart from in Scotland. That seems like a glaring omission in the procedure.”
“Reflecting on yesterday’s announcement about the award of the small vessel replacement programme, it is clear that the public procurement strategy for Scotland is incompatible with an industrial strategy—and that has not been unpredictable. The Government made a reasonable conclusion that it would be too risky to pursue a direct award of the contract—fair enough—so it decided on an open procedure. However, when I met representatives of Caledonian Maritime Assets Ltd, who kindly came to the cross-party group last night—as Mr McMillan, the member for Inverclyde mentioned— they were clear that, according to the public procurement strategy for Scotland, there was to be a split of 65 per cent technical weighting and 35 per cent financial weighting.”
“Presiding Officer, “Britain is an island nation—a nation of islanders and shipbuilders”. So proclaimed the opening sentence of the 1961 film “Seawards the Great Ships”, which was the swan song for Clyde shipbuilding. At that time, the country still held a global share of around 10 per cent of the world market for shipbuilding; now it is less than 1 per cent. John Grierson and Hilary Harris produced Scotland’s first Oscar-winning film—at that time, great achievement was celebrated in the industry. It is a great tragedy that, in more recent years, the islanders and shipbuilders have been in conflict—unnecessarily so—as a result of the incoherent policy of this Government.”
“There are current challenges in the network, but with six new large vessels being delivered, 10 new vessels to be procured in the next 12 months and extensive ports and harbour works, supported by £530 million investment this coming year alone, this Government is working hard to provide the resilience, reliability and sustainability for the future that people, businesses and island communities need and deserve.”
“Work on other ports continues. The potential purchase of the Ardrossan port is in commercial negotiations. The direct award of the Clyde and Hebrides ferry services contract, on which we are making good progress, provides considerable flexibility for input from communities and workers. Indeed, only this morning I attended a round-table event with the ferries community board, trades unions, CalMac, CMAL, Transport Scotland and local authorities that was set up to further harness that essential input and hear stakeholders’ priorities and ambitions for the direct award. The eventual contract will be public service focused and structured with a direct role for islanders.”
“What weighting was social value given in the tender procedure? Fiona Hyslop: We are currently in a standstill position on that procurement, so, quite clearly and quite responsibly, I cannot comment on the procurement process at this time. We are also progressing the business case to replace the MV Lord of the Isles. Taking all those investments together, around 37 per cent of the CalMac fleet will be replaced with new vessels in the next few years. Further, we are also progressing the business case and procurement of two new freight vessels for the northern isles, meaning that we will be placing orders for 10 new ships in under 12 months. That will bring a step change to fleet replacement. On ports, work is well under way in advance of tenders for new port facilities at Gasay, for Lochboisdale and at Port Ellen.”
“I move amendment S6M-16777.2, to insert at end: “; regrets that the Scottish National Party administration has, after almost 18 years in office, allowed Scotland’s NHS to lag behind in adopting innovation, with end-to-end paperless and e-prescribing policies undelivered and dated medical diagnostics equipment still in use, and calls on the Scottish Government to move Scotland’s NHS and social care sector from analogue working to the digital age, starting by creating a shared care record system and empowering patients through an NHS app.” The Deputy Presiding Officer: I call Alex Cole- Hamilton to open on behalf of the Scottish Liberal Democrats. You have a generous four minutes, Mr Cole-Hamilton. 15:53”
“We already know about the pressures on our social security system as a result of chronic illness and that, if people are unable to access the workplace, it affects our national finances. We could have a virtuous circle rather than a vicious cycle. The pandemic shows that, when Scotland is serious about its national mission to adapt and innovate in healthcare, it can bring everyone with it and mobilise the country to achieve public health objectives. Now is the time to show that Scotland—the birthplace of the enlightenment and the pioneer of so many technologies, such as diagnostic ultrasound, which has transformed the world—can, once again, lead the world in healthcare innovation. I hope that Parliament will support the amendment in my name.”
“Those delays are also leading to duplication of work and are wasting NHS staff time and slowing patients’ treatment plans. The lack of an NHS app means that patients are often unaware of their own medical records. The lack of interconnectedness across the healthcare system in Scotland is not just hypothetical; it directly worsens the healthcare outcomes of many thousands of NHS patients and is acting as a drag on national productivity. We know that the equivalent of one in eight people in Scotland is on a waiting list for some sort of procedure. That is a huge national lag. The NHS workforce is equivalent to the population of one of Scotland’s biggest cities, Dundee. If that workforce is not efficiently harnessed, it affects national productivity.”
“Even basic things such as wi- fi and mobile signals in hospitals are so bad that modern smartphones cannot be used. The Scottish National Party came to power before the iPhone was invented, and it seems that, as far as the NHS goes, it has still not been invented. That is why staff in the NHS still rely on pagers— technology that has been scrapped, with the vendors keeping it in service purely because the NHS still needs it. The NHS would fall over otherwise. The default mode of communication is paper-based prescribing, and the goal of e- prescriptions is seemingly unachievable for a Government characterised by its satisfaction with analogue processes. There needs to be much more improvement. We know that delays in the sharing of data between health providers are slowing down patients’ diagnoses.”
“Despite our world-leading research hospitals and universities, we often fail to turn research that is developed in Scotland into action. We must follow the lead of other nations and companies that are developed in other countries. Even when we show promise, such as in the development of Touch Bionics, which was one of the first spin-outs of the NHS in 2002 and was sold off in 2016 to an Icelandic company, we do not build it into a unicorn—a major international technology company that could be headquartered and led from Scotland rather than from Iceland. We should do more to harness the Techscaler programme and make strategic investments that benefit the nation and its prosperity. We are exasperated to hear NHS staff talk about computer update timescales in terms of decades, not years.”
“However, there is still underutilisation, because the bureaucratic inertia of the NHS means that it is not fully geared up to deal with such innovation and roll it out to its full potential. That is where the Government needs to push it further. Before we congratulate ourselves, we need to recognise that Scotland could be much better at that, and we should hold everyone to account for that improvement. We need to look at international standards. It is not good enough just to meet the global standards of a decade ago and think that that is sufficient. That is why Labour’s amendment recognises that, for the past 18 years—nearly two decades— Scotland has been stuck following a technological innovation pathway rather than leading that pathway.”
“That is where we could see significant improvement on a number of fronts. One example in the NHS that is very promising but still tantalisingly underutilised is robot-assisted surgery. We have already achieved the breakthrough milestone of 10,000 robot-assisted procedures in Scotland, and, in the NHS Ayrshire and Arran health board area, more than 250 women have benefited from minimally invasive robotic surgery in the past year alone. That has transformed outcomes. They walk out the door within hours of the surgery, whereas previously it required convalescence for weeks. That is testament to the skill of the NHS staff— the surgeons and clinicians—who are supporting those roll-outs and improvements.”
“Neil Gray: To bridge the gap between what Brian Whittle mentioned in his intervention and what Paul Sweeney said in his response, I point to the Techscaler network, the NHS test bed programme and the integration of ANIA. On the point about how we mobilise innovation to support the population, I encourage Paul Sweeney to look again at the digital dermatology programme, because that has the potential to accelerate productivity massively, as I set out in my speech, but also to improve patient care. I wonder whether the member has engaged with that yet. It is a clear example of the innovation that is going on in the health service. Paul Sweeney: It is perfectly fair that the health secretary highlighted those examples. The question is how quickly we can disseminate, integrate and rapidly roll those things out into operational improvements.”
“He said that the key component—in addition to academia, Government and industry—is public and civic society buy-in. That was tested adequately, effectively and promisingly during the pandemic, during which we saw rapid introductions of NHS clinical interfaces that were readily accepted and adopted by the public. Who would have thought, mere months before the pandemic struck, that we would be engaging in such a national effort and unified purpose to improve national outcomes? I think back to the big public health initiatives such as the 1957 tuberculosis eradication campaign in Glasgow, during which the whole city got together to try to eradicate tuberculosis through mass X-ray campaigns. We could mobilise the population behind the agenda in a more effective way, and I encourage the health secretary to look at opportunities to do that.”
“We are in danger of creating another echo chamber—one in which the same people with the same vested interests say the same things to the same Government bodies while the nation continues to drift ever further behind. Brian Whittle: I agree with Paul Sweeney on that point. To follow on from the point that I made to the cabinet secretary, we had the DHI, which was supposed to be there to trial innovation, but the problem was in taking any successful trials and adopting them in the health service. That is the disconnect that we need to deal with. Paul Sweeney: There is an instinctive risk aversion about rapid prototyping and adoption, which the member rightly highlights. There could be greater achievements in that respect. Mr Gulhane referenced the quadruple helix.”
“Scottish Labour’s policy is to rationalise the 14 current territorial boards into three, which would largely mirror the cancer pathways that are currently in existence. We feel that that is a more optimised scaling for the NHS in Scotland. With a population of 5 million or so, that seems like a more optimised balance. A direct comparator is not necessarily clear. My point is about productivity across the system. We are not fully utilising the benefits that the national health service provides to Scotland and the UK—such as purchasing power and scaling ability—to drive improvements in patient outcomes. At present, the accelerated national innovation adoption pathway talks mostly to Scottish Government bodies and NHS boards. That seems like a very insular ecosystem.”
“The test, truly, is how we are delivering improved at-scale patient outcomes and how we are achieving productivity enhancements across the healthcare system. There is huge unmet potential across the national health service. Sandesh Gulhane: On the point about how we are achieving that, does Paul Sweeney back Keir Starmer’s idea about scrapping NHS England, and does he think that we should do the same and scrap NHS Scotland? Paul Sweeney: As the member knows, the healthcare system in England—which has been a separate entity from the one in Scotland since its foundation, in 1948—is broadly modelled on a trust system. Scotland experimented with the trust model in the 1990s and moved to health boards in the early 2000s. Therefore, it is not a fair comparator.”
“For example, we are told that we can expect the full roll-out of the NHS digital front door over the next five years, yet Estonia—a European country with less than a third of Scotland’s population—has already pioneered digital healthcare, embracing digitisation of its healthcare system as early as 2008. We are told that the Government is building partnerships between itself and healthcare professionals, universities and technologists in a so-called triple helix of innovation, which the health secretary referred to, but, to an extent, that has always existed in this country. It seems that the Government is only announcing something that is already long established from when this country pioneered diagnostic ultrasound, back in the 1950s, for example.”
“I am pleased to open for the Labour Party in this debate. In an age of technological marvels—from artificial intelligence to identifying cancers earlier and advanced robotics that can turn what were once impossible surgical procedures into routine day cases—it is clear that innovation is vital for the national health service and for our wider population’s long-term health and prosperity. However, when we look across the past decade or so at innovation and who is truly leading the field, I am afraid that the Scottish Government, given its leadership of the national health service, can be considered something of a laggard by international standards.”
“To ask the Scottish Government what discussions the housing secretary has had with ministerial colleagues regarding what work can be done to repurpose empty commercial and other proprieties for affordable housing in Glasgow. (S6O-04440)”
“The long-term capital funding perspective is largely driven by what will be detailed in the United Kingdom Government’s spending review later this month. I urge him to unite with the Scottish Government in urging the UK Government to invest in capital provision. It is good for the economy, it is incredibly important for our public services, and it would be remiss of a UK chancellor not to do so. “Women’s Health Plan 2021 to 2024: Final Report” 4.”
“The cabinet secretary knows that there are a number of important capital projects across NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde that are beset by serious delays, including the new radionuclide dispensary and the institute of neurological sciences. The Government says that it is committed to publishing a new infrastructure investment plan later in the year. Will that include details of timescales for delivery of those critical projects, which must progress so that patients can be assured that they will happen without further delay? Neil Gray: I am keen to see our capital programme continue. Paul Sweeney listed a number of projects that I am desperately keen to see move forward. Paul Sweeney has some agency in that regard.”
“The Deputy Presiding Officer: Thank you, Ms Mochan. We move to the open debate. 17:58”
“In my final minutes—I promise, Deputy Presiding Officer—I return to services for people who are currently suffering from ARBD. The reality is that services are at risk of diminishing rather than expanding. I believe—as I hope that I have shown tonight—that we need to take the subject seriously. I hope that the debate is merely the start of a conversation in the Scottish Parliament. What high-quality service provision currently exists for those who are suffering from ARBD, and how does the Government ensure that funding for those services continues and that there is funding to open other services in Scotland? We must talk about national treatment standards and how we ensure that there is a referral pathway for the condition to the services that provide care. I will stop there, Deputy Presiding Officer.”
“I know that time is tight, Deputy Presiding Officer, but we cannot have a debate on the subject without mentioning the root causes of alcohol misuse, the link to poverty and deprivation and the role of Government in policy development. I acknowledge the Government’s role—as the Minister for Public Health and Women’s Health will know—in progressing minimum unit pricing. However, I hope that the minister might, in her closing remarks, respond with regard to future movement on the introduction of evidence-based population-wide measures around availability and marketing of alcohol products. With those measures, we would see population-level changes in alcohol intake, resulting in a change to the drinking norms in Scottish society. That is the reality.”
“There is evidence that if excessive alcohol consumption is stopped and thiamine intake is increased, around 25 per cent of people can make a full recovery and 50 per cent of people can make a partial recovery. However, the reality is that, as a result of a lack of services to raise the profile of ARBD and its treatment, those opportunities are being missed. That is an important point. As my friend Martin Whitfield said, it is often younger people who are affected, and they can experience poor quality of life. Care home beds for them are very expensive, and that poor quality of life continues because, once someone is admitted, it is difficult to get the expertise to support them and get them home. The evidence shows that we can change that, and it is important that we talk about that in Parliament.”
“The brain damage is often caused by a lack of thiamine, also known as vitamin B1, which the brain requires in order to work properly. Absorption of thiamine while drinking alcohol to excess is one cause, but we know that those with serious dependency often have chaotic lifestyles, and that can result in poor dietary intake, which exacerbates the lack of thiamine. It was reporting on the use of thiamine in treatment that made me realise how important it was to raise awareness of the condition and argue for better services. That treatment should be achievable, but people need knowledgeable clinicians and specialist services to support them.”