Seòmar agus comataidhean

On Mr Doris’s first point, he touches on an area that we need to consider, which is whether there is a route by which we can collect robust data that is able to be published. We will consider whether more could be done in that regard.

On the second point, Maggie Page has already addressed the fact that support is available outwith the residential rehab picture and that people are being supported throughout their journey. Depending on the individual, that will shift between community organisations, statutory services and general practitioners; indeed, a variety of different individuals and organisations could and should be involved. Again, it will be difficult to audit that journey, as everybody’s journey will be slightly different, but I take the point about whether more could be done, and we will take that away and look at it.

That important area forms part of the suite of investments that are being made and the interventions that are available in order to provide a person-centred approach to responding to drug or alcohol dependency.

We have made particularly good progress on MAT standards 1 to 5, and I commend the alcohol and drug partnerships, as well as the statutory services that Paul O’Kane referenced, on the work that has been done.

Standards 6 to 10 have been more challenging, and we have more work to do on them. The intervention of some of my predecessors has been important in providing direction to alcohol and drug partnerships to meet the targets and to invest in interventions to ensure that the MAT standards are met.

Mr O’Kane queries whether there is confidence on timescales. I cannot give a guarantee today that we will meet them, but I believe that good progress is being made, as has been referenced. We will continue to support ADPs, as well as the statutory services involved, to ensure that the importance of meeting those timescales is recognised.

For some people, residential rehab and abstinence are the right route, while for others, a medically assisted treatment pathway works best. In trying to get it right for everyone, we must recognise the need for person-centred approach.

I will bring in Richard Foggo to provide more detail.

I will be honest. I do not know why 1,000 was set as the target, and whether that is the right measure of—I do not think that “success” is the right word, but I think that Ms Wells understands where I am coming from. That target predates my involvement, so I do not know why it is 1,000.

What we can demonstrate is the clear progress that is being made on the availability of residential rehab. Audit Scotland recognised that in its report, to go back to Ms Dowey’s line of questioning.

We need to demonstrate that we are making progress across all areas. We are reducing stigma, thereby giving people the opportunity to access support and breaking down the barriers to that support, as well giving their families the opportunity to receive support. The progress that has been made in access to residential rehabilitation beds is a sign of that progress.

Again, as I say, I honestly do not know the reason behind 1,000 being the target, and it will be for us all to judge whether that is the right measure. The important thing is that demonstrable progress is being made in availability and in the capacity of the system, and that is clear.

I expect that that will form part of the audit work on bed availability that Maggie Page referred to. If we have further detail at local authority or health board level once that work is complete, we will certainly seek to provide that to the committees.

I will come back to the first point that Ms McNeill made, and then I will address her second point, on the gendered aspect. I will bring Maggie Page in on both questions, too.

On the first point, constituents have come to me who are in exactly the situation that Ms McNeill has outlined. They believe that residential rehab is right for them, but clinical decisions have been made that make that more challenging.

That touches on some of the work that we are seeking to do to provide clarity and ensure that guidance is in place with regard to people who present with both mental health and substance dependency issues at the same time. I am clear that we must support people to tackle both issues concurrently, as they drive one another—the substance dependency drives the mental health issues, and vice versa. We need to be clear on that, and I certainly believe that we need to support people in both aspects. I would be happy to return to Ms McNeill’s points in that regard.

On the gendered aspect of this issue, Ms McNeill is absolutely right. The figures are clear on the level of drug deaths among men, and indeed on the prevalence of poverty and the correlation between people living in poverty and the impact of that in terms of substance abuse. I will bring in Maggie Page to talk about this, but we have been developing work on how we target men to ensure that they understand what support is available.

Again, that brings us back to the landscape of destigmatisation, which is so important when it comes to men’s interaction with health services. Mr Sweeney and I are currently participating in Movember, because we need to promote greater awareness among, and provide a greater level of comfort for, people with regard to the need to interact with health services, regardless of how uncomfortable it might be to talk about health. Over the past couple of weeks, Chris Hoy has demonstrated the importance of doing that when it comes to prostate cancer, and it is just as important in this area with regard to the drivers of drug dependency among men and the mental health aspects in that respect.

I will bring in Maggie Page to talk about the specific action that we have been taking in that area and the work that is developing there.

It is one aspect. The idea of getting it right for everyone is central not only to this policy area but to the wider health and social care policy work that we are taking forward. We must recognise that residential rehab will not work for everyone and that the abstinence route will not be the right route for everyone. Access to rehab is a central part of our national mission, as has been demonstrated by the investment we have made, but it is only one part. There are other elements, including the investment in the Corra Foundation to support community and voluntary elements.

The convener is right that there is interaction with the UK Government because of the legislation that governs our ability to roll out the naloxone programme. I do not have a specific update on the UK Government’s latest thinking on that, but I am aware of the prevalence of naloxone—it is being used and carried across statutory services, including by the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service and Police Scotland, and it is available further afield for those who are involved in alcohol and drug treatment. In addition, I believe that more than 30,000 take-home naloxone kits have been distributed, and I think that 530 doses have been administered by the police service.

We can confidently say that a substantial number of lives have been saved as a result of the naloxone programme. I commend all those in the public sector—including those in Police Scotland and the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service, as well as health professionals and others—who carry naloxone and are helping to save lives as a result.

There have been delays. Mr Balfour referenced that the facility was due to open in October. The Glasgow health and social care partnership is working with partners to ensure that it is operational as soon as possible. I am hopeful that that will happen before the end of the year.

Mr Sweeney makes a good point. The work that we have been doing to support the health and social care partnership has been around ensuring that there is signposting and support available, so that those conversations can be had.

Maggie Page referenced the varying landscape in residential rehab in Scotland and what practices would be right for people. The Phoenix Futures centre, for instance, might not be appropriate for some people, so they might need to travel further afield. That is something for us to consider. As we look to increase the availability of residential rehab, we try to make sure that that is available as close to home as possible and that we have a variety of services available.

Mr Sweeney makes a cogent point about having services as close together as possible. That said, in some cases, we are reliant on others, particularly those from the community and voluntary sector, coming forward to deliver some of those services, particularly for residential rehab. Further work will be required if we are going to do that on a co-location basis.

Ms Haughey touches on an important issue. We all have agency in respect of tackling stigma, with regard to the language and terminology that we use and the recognition that drug or alcohol dependency is a health issue. Government can show clear leadership in that regard, and we are trying to do so.

Nonetheless, there is a role for, and a responsibility on, those who report the news to be cognisant of not only the people who have a drug or alcohol dependency, but their family members. They should ensure that the language that is used to describe those issues does not create greater barriers, or maintain barriers, that prevent people from feeling that they are able to access treatment. That is the stigma issue.

We need to move on from the stereotypes and some of the language that is and has traditionally been used in this area. That is clear in the language that we in Government use, and in how we approach the issue, and I believe that we are making progress on that as a Parliament, too. However, you are right that all of us, including our colleagues in the media, have a role to play in that regard.