 I will invite members who wish to speak in the debate to press their request to speak buttons now, and I call on Angela Constance to speak to and move the motion. You have 11 minutes, minister. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. I want to start by welcoming you and new and returning MSPs, as well as health spokespeople, to their new roles. I look forward to working with you all as we continue on our national mission to prevent drug-related deaths. The First Minister, at the start of the year, announced an additional £250 million over the next five years to promote recovery and to reduce the harm caused by drugs. In my role, I will continue to work across boundaries to both save and improve lives through drug services as well as in mental health, homelessness, the justice system, education and prevention and tackling inequality. The core aim of this work is to support more people into treatment and recovery, which is right for them. I gave a commitment to Parliament in March to provide an update on that and on funding allocations. In March, we announced £18 million to four new funds for recovery, local support to families and children and for service improvement. I am pleased to say that those funds opened at the end of May. Those are multi-year funds shifting to longer-term funding to provide security for third sector and grass-roots organisations that are often at the forefront of saving lives. I have listened to and acted on feedback about previous schemes. There is now a lighter-touch application process for smaller funds, and we are funding third sector partners to help people through the application progress. With the first round of grants this month, reaching communities, funding is already making a difference. Another important step forward has been the publication at the end of May of the new medication-assisted treatment standards. The implementation of those new standards for treatment and care will be one of the key foundation stones to change and to improve services, meaning that no matter who or someone lives, the right treatment will be available to them quickly. Those standards make a vital connection between informed and wider choice of treatment and other services and support such as mental health, housing and welfare, including a presumption of family involvement. Those standards make crystal clear what everyone has the right to expect and can demand from services. Alex Cole-Hamilton I am grateful for the minister taking my intervention. Does she agree with me that it is vitally important that we are trying to help mothers who have substance use issues to manage those issues, so that they are unable to do so with their children, so that we are not compounding the adverse childhood experiences that are experienced by those children? Alex Cole-Hamilton Absolutely, Presiding Officer. In short, I agree that we must keep the promise. Going back to the implementation of those standards, which is absolutely key, that is why following the first meeting of the National Mission Implementation Group yesterday, I announced £4 million of investment to ensure that we translate words into actions. The first two standards on same-day treatment and a wider range of options should be implemented as a priority, and we expect that to be in place in many areas by autumn and fully in place by April next year. The max standards also pave the way for new and improved treatment offers. One of those will be long-lasting buprenorphine buvidol. That is an alternative to methadone. There are three main benefits. It only needs a weekly or a monthly injection, and that helps to reduce the stigma that is felt by many at having to go to the pharmacy every day. It also gives people more clarity of thought, allowing them to get on with their lives. It is not usually associated with overdoses. It won't suit everyone, but feedback from people who have switched to buvidol in pilot areas and in prison settings is really positive. We are allocating £4 million this year to encourage services to make this option more available. The number of deaths where illicit benzodiazepines are implicated continues to rise. It is therefore imperative that we build a consensus among clinicians and others working in collaboration with the sector and people with living experience to help to develop a treatment offer that addresses needs and reduces risks for those who are using street substances. Related prescribing guidance is being produced this year by the Drugs Test Task Force and by the Scottish Government. I will continue in my efforts to persuade the UK Government of the necessity for drug checking facilities in Scotland. That will help to identify any substances that put lives at risk. I am continuing to call on the UK Government to allow for restrictions to be made on the possession of pill presses. Along with many members, I also support heroin assisted treatment as another option that should be made more available. We know that the option requires significant resources and a comparatively long lead-in time to set up, but I believe that the option is worth the effort. We are working with health boards to identify areas where those services could be introduced and will allocate £400,000 to explore those opportunities. The Government remains fully committed to the establishment of safer drug consumption facilities. The evidence shows quite simply that those facilities help to reduce drug deaths. I am grateful to the minister for giving way. Before she goes any further, I wonder if she can comment. Karen Briggs, the CEO of Phoenix Futures in Falkirk, has said that we know that many people across Scotland would benefit from residential treatment but are not able to access it. Will the Government take steps to provide more beds in residential situations? There are no beds at all in Falkirk currently. Absolutely. We are committed to investing and increasing capacity in residential care, particularly where there is an area of acute need. Going back to the point about safer drug consumption facilities, which I thought Mr Kerr was going to pine on, I will continue in this area to pursue two approaches at the same time. I am engaging with the UK Government on the evidence and seeking to persuade it to allow those life-saving facilities or to devolve the powers to this Parliament. In the meantime, we are working with services to leave no stone unturned to overcome existing legal barriers and our duty to seek solutions here in Scotland. I want to move on, because I did not realise that I only had 11 minutes. I thought that I had 13. Perhaps later, I do hope so. The majority of people who die as a result of an overdose will have previously been treated in our national health service for a near-fatal overdose. Therefore, a major focus in our work will be to improve our response to near-fatal overdoses. The Scottish Ambulance Service set up our first formal near-fatal overdose pathway, and we will expand those pathways so that they exist nationwide. In the first few months of 2021, our front-line emergency services also increased the use of naloxone, which can help to avoid death from overdose. Every opportunity has to be taken to immediately get people the treatment and support that will help to prevent fatal overdose. We are therefore investing £3 million to build capacity in services and to increase the number of people brought to services following an overdose. We know that there are still far too many people who services have not reached, so therefore we will be investing another £3 million to support outreach services. That will help to ensure that there is effective outreach in every local authority area. Alcohol and drug partnerships play a vital role in supporting and shaping front-line services and to ensure that those services provide support to families through a whole-family approach. I am allocating £3.5 million to ADPs for that specific purpose. On top of that, we will also ensure that ADPs receive an additional £10 million. I am specifying that £5 million of that must be used to increase the use of residential rehabilitation and associated aftercare. I will be following the money with health boards to ensure that it is being used effectively for people in need of support. Over the next five years, we are committed to £100 million investment for residential rehabilitation. That will be provided through an increasing profile of investment over five years. That will start with around £13 million of investment this year, obviously increasing as the years go on. That will be achieved through ADP funding and also crucially through the recovery and improvement funds that were launched a few months ago. During the summer, working with the residential rehabilitation working group and other partners, we will agree the crucial milestones for this five years investment. After recess, I will then commit to bringing more details on that back to Parliament. Earlier this year, we published a detailed breakdown of current capacity. We are now working with partners to assess the demand for placements where those will be provided and what sort of specialist facilities will be needed. I am particularly concerned about the lack of provision for women with children. The working group is developing new guidance to increase accessibility, to improve referral pathways and support for people when leaving rehabilitation. That is so weak and we realise our ambition that where residential rehabilitation can be of benefit, everyone can access it in a way that is right for them. In March, I gave a commitment to Parliament to ensure that the voice of real life experience informs our journey every step of the way. I said that people, families, networks and communities will be more involved in local and national decision making. I am allocating £500,000 to ADPs to be used to improve the existing local forums and panels that they lead. Many of those work well, but there is more to be done to build consistency for everyone. We will be working with ADPs during the summer to support necessary improvements. Over the summer, I will also set out our timetable to establish a national experience collaborative. I see this national collaborative as one part of our preparations for a citizens assembly on drug law reform. I have allocated another £500,000 to support the setting up and the running of the new collaborative. People with problem drug use can be the most isolated, marginalised and vulnerable of citizens and are likely to be amongst the worst affected by Covid. It has been challenging to maintain a full range of face-to-face support during the pandemic, but for those already in treatment, many have experienced more contact, albeit mainly by phone or online. We expect to see the national records of Scotland's annual reports on drug deaths for 2020 in July, and that will give us a better picture of the impact of Covid last year. During the pandemic, we have significantly improved drug surveillance. Public Health Scotland is working with Police Scotland to capture regular reports of potential drug deaths. Those reports have already helped services to react faster to emerging trends, and that is why we are now building a better public health surveillance system. We are also working with National Records Scotland on how more regular reporting of drug deaths will be put in place this year in addition to its annual report. We are consulting at the moment on a new annual target for treatment and a framework to measure progress and implementation and allocating resources to that. We will also run a media campaign on the use of naloxo and crucially on tackling stigma. We are working with partners and the lived and living experience community to develop that. Families and the lived and lived experience communities tell me that accountability at all levels is important to them, and that is the challenge to each and every one of us. I have a duty to work with and collaborate with everyone, be it local partners or the UK Government, but I also have a responsibility to fully utilise our existing powers and resources and to seek solutions here in Scotland. I move the motion and my name, and I look forward to this afternoon's debate. Thank you. I now call on Sue Webber to speak to and move amendment 400.1. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I am speaking to the amendment that has been presented this afternoon in my name for the Scottish Conservatives. Drug deaths have become Scotland's national tragedy under the SNP. They have now reached a record high, and too many families and communities have been blighted by this crisis. The drug death rate in Scotland is three and a half times worse than the rest of the UK and the worst in Europe. After nearly 14 years in power, the SNP has finally admitted that they should have done more to tackle Scotland's scandalous rate of drug deaths, and I have listened with keen interest in what the Secretary has said this afternoon. By Nicola Sturgeon's own admission, she took her eye off the ball. In 2007, 455 people died in Scotland following drug use. In 2019, that had risen to 1,264. The drug death rate has almost tripled under the SNP watch, and the SNP should be ashamed of its record. The First Minister completely failed to act before the crisis spiralled out of control. Drug-related hospitalisations have tripled in the past two decades. In 2019-20, there were 4,976 drug-related hospital stays, according to the figures released by Public Health Scotland earlier this week. The drug's hospitalisation rate in Scotland now stands at 282 per 100,000 people. That is up from 87 in 1997. In NHS Tayside, it is 334 for every 100,000 people. It is far higher than the national average, with Dundee Council area boasting the worst drug death rate in Scotland. More locally here in Lothian, the number of people dying following drug use rose from 54 in 2007 to 155 in 2019. The upward trend matches the Scotland-wide picture. We cannot disagree that that has a significant knock-on effect on the NHS, reducing their capacity to deal with other cases. We hear time and time again, and it cannot be argued that Scotland's NHS is at its limit. By doing all that we can to reduce those admissions, we can relieve pressure on the NHS. That is something that we can control now, and it should be a priority. During a meeting with a constituent of mine, who has a lot of experience working in this sector, several areas of concern were highlighted to me. It is not just the increase over the past 10 years that has caused for concern, but it is the fact that poly drug use has increased so significantly. One of the biggest challenges in the past seven years has been the massive increase in the use of non-prescribed benzodiazepines, street BDZs. The national records of Scotland reported that 94 per cent of all drug-related deaths in Scotland are from people who took more than one substance, poly drug use. Opiates such as heroin and methadone are implicated in the majority of deaths, but users are often taking a lethal cocktail of substances that increasingly includes the benzodiazepines. I was shocked to learn that in 2009 only one street benzodiazepine death was recorded, but in 2019 there were 814. He also noted how addiction services have been subjected to disinvestment for at least the past 15 years and services have struggled to retain staff. That continues to be a huge problem, and we need to continue to designate a diesel funding in that direction, and I was glad to hear of some of that today. When patients do tragically die, the workforce helping them are shaken. I heard of one member of staff who had to struggle with two deaths in one day. Those are staff that are determined to deliver the highest quality service possible despite everything that they face. They create bonds and form relationships with the service users. We need to find a way to protect and support them, too. The Scottish Conservatives secured an extra £20 million a year for the residential drug rehab facilities, and the measures were announced as part of a £250 million package over five years, and it was aimed at specifically tackling the shocking drug deaths figures. That was welcome news indeed after the SNP's cuts to rehab beds had been hugely damaging, but it should not have taken 14 years for the SNP to finally realise that their drug policies had failed. Scotland has a large network of injection equipment provision, and our national take home naloxone programme was introduced in 2011. You could perhaps assume that that would help to prevent opiate death rates, and I am certain that it has. Yet they continue to rise because we are not measuring in detail the success of the take home naloxone programme. We do not know for sure how many lives have been saved, but again we have heard of the new public health surveillance that has started throughout the past 12 months, which is welcome. How many drug-related deaths might have there been without the take home naloxone programme? How do we know therefore which programmes to invest in and which ones to put on hold if we are not measuring in detail the achievements of these programmes? There is also a strong level of support to introduce drug consumption rooms in Scotland, and in other countries across Europe, those are used frequently. In the Netherlands, there are 31 facilities across 25 cities, and in Germany there are 24 facilities in 15 cities. Other countries—Australia, Canada, Denmark and France—are increasingly adopting drug consumption rooms as part of their drug harm reduction strategies and are seeing positive effects. However, it is not as simple as a straight comparison between us and other countries. What works there does not necessarily translate into a solution for Scotland, and we have heard of all the solutions that are available to us right now in the minister's proposal of her motion today. The Scottish Government must now seek to find a solution to the hugely complex situation in Scotland that includes access to new treatments that we have heard of, safe and secure housing that is key supporting and support through the justice system and a preventive approach with children and young people. No. Like we said in our manifesto, we want to prioritise abstinence-based programmes. Everyone should have the right to rehab, and we are committed to working on a cross-party basis to deliver that for vulnerable people. We will continue to appeal for cross-party support to tackle drug deaths by opening up access to treatment and rehabilitation programmes, which is why we have submitted an amendment in today's motion calling on the Scottish Government to introduce a right to recovery as a starting point towards a bill that would ensure that everyone has access to the necessary treatment when they need it and when they want it, not when professionals or organisations determine that they can accommodate them. It is clear that the SNP's drug death task force has failed. In 2019, the SNP assembled the task force to tackle the rising number of drug deaths in Scotland. However, a year after the creation of the task force, a leading campaign group favour warned that Scotland was going backwards with its efforts on tackling drug deaths. Chief Executive Officer Anne-Marie Ward has said that, even before the pandemic struck, we were seeing very little concrete action. We need the Scottish Government to start properly funding rehabilitation and recovery programmes. The sector is rapidly losing confidence in the poor performance of the task force. The drug's death task force must publish a comprehensive review into the provision of drug and treatment services before the end of this year. We cannot stop here. Appointing a Drugs Minister, reporting directly to the First Minister, is a positive note. I look forward to working with Angela Constance in my role as Shadow Minister for Drugs Policies. However, the SNP must take action and work closely with key stakeholders in order to deliver support to those who need it most. More should have been done earlier. Families have been failed and entire communities have been left broken. The Scottish Parliament must ensure that drug deaths are reduced once and for all and introduce a right to recovery to enshrining the law that everyone has access to the necessary addiction treatment. If the member could wind up and move the amendment. I did that at the beginning. You did. Thank you for confirming. I now call on Claire Baker to speak to and move amendment 400.4. I very much welcome this afternoon's debate and I'm pleased to be leading on this role for Scottish Labour. We must tackle Scotland's high level of drug deaths and I want to work with MSPs from across the chamber to put saving lives and bring an end to the misery of drug fatalities first before our political differences. The previous Parliament rightly made clear that the Government had failed to address a rising rate of drug deaths that for Scotland to have the highest rate in Europe was shameful and a poor reflection on policy makers and past decisions and that this demonstrated a lack of leadership as well as complacency from the Scottish Government, which was unacceptable. However, we are at the start of a new Parliament. I recognise that recent announcements from the Government, including the math standards and the investment to support delivery of them, are very welcome. While I and my colleagues will push the minister and the Government to urgently deliver significant and meaningful change and hold them to account for the significant challenges that we see in our communities that drive drug use and dependency, I will work constructively and corporatively with the minister to find solutions that address this health crisis, to support the on-going work of the drugs task force and to examine Scotland's relationship with drug use so that we can lead to a healthier society that values everyone and supports positive choices. We will be supporting the Government's motion this afternoon, although I want to make clear that, while we accept the call for a four nation summit, that must not be about nursing a constitutional divide that will lead to an impasse. I wish the minister well in exercising her persuasive skills to present an evidence-based argument, but it's fair to say that this will be a difficult discussion. Changes to the misuse of drugs act would take time and it's time that we don't have to spare in Scotland. The Scottish Government must demonstrate that it will pursue all options within the existing legal framework to advance safe consumption rooms and testing facilities, and other measures that can contribute to reducing fatalities and harmful drug use. Clearly and correctly, the Lord Advocate is independent of Government, but we want to see the justice and prosecution service prioritise public, health and harm reduction. In the statement in January, the First Minister said that she was determined to overcome legal barriers to overdose prevention facilities and that a team of officials were working to pull together expertise and options. When closing, can the minister say more about how this work is progressing? Our amendment supports finding solutions within the existing legal framework, and I want to see that demonstrated. While the proposal for a UK summit focuses on where there are barriers, I want to recognise what we can do urgently that will make a significant difference. When the mat standards are introduced, they will be transformational. If this is to be achieved, it will have the effect of a right to treatment without having to rely on introducing legislation. The Dundee Drugs Commission established the need for many of the policies within the mat standards, and given the scale of Scotland's drug death crisis, it shouldn't have led to this delay for them to introduce. We need to see huge cultural change in services and an increase in rehabilitation capacity, including for mothers and babies, supported by investment. We need to address stigma and discrimination with medical intervention, mental health and trauma recovery, as well as social and community support. The commitment to April 22 for implementation will mean that some people will still fall through the cracks and not receive the treatment that they deserve and need in the coming months, so progress must be accelerated. This will be a challenging year and the standards are going to be incredibly hard to achieve, but there must be accountability. Our amendment calls for an interim report at the six-month point to monitor progress. I recognise that the mat standards include reporting mechanisms, but we need robust monitoring of implementation and clarity over where accountability lies. There are changes that we can introduce to demonstrate accountability. We need established baselines, so improvement can be measured. The service is patchy across Scotland, so we need to know where the gaps are and what ADPs and health boards are doing to address them. The mat standards recognise the reality of staff burnouts and fatigue. We need flexibility, for example, for staff to meet the same day prescribing target. What is being done to address the issue of data on drug fatalities? The 2019 figure was the highest annual figure recorded for the sixth week in a row, but the next set of drug figures that we receive will be from 2020. That makes it very difficult to model, test and evaluate policy innovation. Although I note that the minister has talked about the public health surveillance programme and that might address some of those issues, because Covid-19 has shown that we can extract data quickly and anonymised and we need to look at how we can improve data and ensure that forensic toxicology is fully resourced and supported and that the issues are resolved. There is really good stuff in the mat standards and work has to be done to raise awareness and expectation. Commitments to assertive outreach and anticipatory care are all positive. In Fife, we now have an alert system for non-fatal overdoses and we need to look for more options about where we can intervene at key points. I can also ask the minister to look at the expansion of the nasal spray for naloxone as opposed to an injection. It is quicker and it is easier to administer. Taken together, those standards will make a significant distance to treatment and recovery. This week, I visited First in Fife. While this is my first drug policy debate, I have a long relationship with drug treatment services across Fife and I want to thank them for the work that they do in rebuilding people's lives. They have been at the sharp end of silver's delivery for many years and they understand intergenerational addiction, the impact of poverty and trauma and the need for a cultural change within all our addiction services. However, they can also talk about how people's lives and families can be transformed when they are given the right support and treated with humanity. I move the amendment in my name. Thank you. I now call on Julian Mackay to speak to and move amendment 400.3. Thank you, Presiding Officer. Dignity, something that we all hope to maintain, something that drug addiction has robbed from many, that the criminal justice system has eroded and something that continued lack of reform to the misuse of drugs act will continue to suppress for many. Drug deaths have been rising year on year in Scotland. Since 2014, Glasgow has faced the largest incidence of HIV since the 80s, affecting people who inject drugs. Scotland has the highest number of drug deaths in Europe, and the war on drugs has categorically failed. To quote David Liddle, the CEO of Scotland's Drugs Forum, Scotland's drug problem has its roots in the harsh climate of the 1980s deindustrialisation and the economic and social impact in subsequent decades. Other countries chose a more interventionist approach by which the state created alternative employment and opportunity during those changes. That was not the policy in the UK, and the consequence of that on-going approach is a large and more entrenched drug problem nationally. You remember students, so no thank you. Robbing communities of their dignity by not supporting them after their industries collapsed. As a result of a lack of intervention, we are now seeing second and third generations suffering with addiction and complex trauma. We know that those with addiction often have low incomes or no income have issues with accessing income support and NHS treatment. We know that those with low incomes and addiction often have issues with accessing a wide range of services, including NHS treatment and housing. That is for a vast range of attitudes, including those not related to their addiction. For those who manage to access treatment, they experience stigma, particularly in relation to medication. We must ensure that support for those who experience addiction is person-centred and holistic, ensuring that the trauma that may have either been the catalyst for their addiction or any other acquired trauma that is addressed properly is essential to restoring and addressing the issues that dominate their lives. However, we have to ensure that being drug-free is not a condition of treatment. We would not require someone with lung cancer to stop smoking before we started treating them. Why are we insisting that, after a lengthy wait on a waiting list for treatment, they must be drug-free before they are seen? Drugs are often a coping mechanism, and the trauma is the issue. Behaviour policing should never be part of our approach to rehab. It should be maintaining dignity. There are wider impacts that also need to be addressed, including housing and how we engage with people who may have had negative experiences accessing services in the past. Stigma is an enormous part of accessing services. That is something that I hope that we can work on with Government and local government agencies to ensure that we remove the judgment of those who require help. The Misuse of Drugs Act is about to have its 50th anniversary. It is out of touch and should rightly be out of time. The briefing provided by Transformed Drugs notes that the Home Office's independent review of drugs, led by Dame Carol Black, has been explicitly prevented from addressing the overarching legislation. It is very clear that this is a health crisis. Health is devolved to this Parliament. Powers over drug legislation should be devolved to this Parliament to ensure that a more compassionate approach could be taken to that of the UK Government. I turn to the substance of my amendment. Portugal decriminalised possession of all drugs in 2001, and in 2019 it established its first mobile safe consumption room. In Portugal, drug-related deaths have been below the EU average since 2001. The proportion of prisoners sentenced for drugs has fallen from 40 per cent to 15 per cent, and rates of drug use have remained consistently below the EU average. The facilities primarily aim to reduce acute and direct harm, preventing overdoses and providing intervention where they happen, ensuring that needles are not reused and that no-one puts themselves in a dangerous or vulnerable position. During the election campaign, I had the pleasure of meeting and occasionally debating alongside Peter Kraikin. Peter is a fellow Falkirk bairn and runs the mobile safe consumption room in Glasgow. He documents his experience of running the service and the great work that he does on his Twitter. One of his most distressing posts is about a young woman, and given her debate this week on women's health, I think that this is particularly relevant. The young woman did not want to come inside the van to inject herself for fear of being arrested. Instead, she went down the nearest close, pulled her trousers round her ankles and instead sits on the floor full of broken glass, animal feces and dirty water. What have we done for her dignity? Without Peter to keep an eye on her, anything could have happened. We have the ability to start today and make a change, and I would encourage all parties to support my amendment. Let's take a stand today to restore their dignity and support the fantastic work of people like Peter. I move the amendment in my name. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. I rise for the Liberal Democrats and I move the amendment in my name. Before I start, I begin by thanking Angela Constance. I made the mistake in my intervention of referring to her as Cabinet Secretary, and I think that that is something that has been picked up by other members, but I think that she should see that as a reflection of just how important this chamber regards her role. We all want and need her to succeed. I am also very grateful for the cross-party consensus that she is trying to build in this important area. Evidence really matters. To quote Professor Harry Burns, without evidence, all you have are opinions, and the Liberal Democrats have had an evidence-based approach to drug policy for years. We called for the decriminalisation of drug use long ago, and the case for Portugal is just one example of its effectiveness, as we have just heard in another excellent speech from Gillian Mackay. We have, Presiding Officer, all the evidence that we need. It is now time to act. Lauren Kay Hamilton once wrote, "...there are wounds that never show on the body that are deeper and more hurtful than anything that bleeds." She was talking about unresolved trauma. That is why the Liberal Democrat amendment puts trauma-informed care at the very heart of every aspect of recovery from drug addiction, because there is an undeniable correlation between adverse childhood experiences and drug misuse. Adults who experience four or more adversities in their childhood are 11 times more likely to have used crack cocaine or heroin. In 2017, 74 per cent of drug death casualties in Tayside were known to have a coexisting mental health condition at the time of their passing—most commonly depression or anxiety. Written evidence to the 2019 Scottish Affairs Committee at Westminster recommended the need to include the views and lived experiences of people affected by drug harms in developing legislation. We in this Parliament must seek to listen to those voices as well, and we have to reduce the misery of drug abuse with compassion and treatment rather than prosecution. In the final days of the last session, the Parliament unanimously agreed with that idea. We agreed to the principle of diversion by endorsing an amendment put forward by my party, and it was an important moment, not least because it showed that this debate is maturing. My amendment seeks to continue that conversation today, because while the conversation may well have moved on in this chamber, the situation on the ground has not. We are still sending the same number of people to prison for personal possession that we were a decade ago, and that has devastating consequences. Police officers are well aware of the cruel cycle that follows an arrest. An assistant chief constable Stephen Johnson gave devastating evidence to the Scottish Affairs Committee in July 2019. He told MPs that it is just a matter of time, he says. Of those people who come out of prison, 11 per cent of them will die within the first month of having been released. Police officers get used to the carousel, the sense of hopelessness and helplessness. That carousel must stop, and we as a nation are already empowered to stop it. The Lord Advocate issues guidelines to the police. Those guidelines set the parameter for all police operations. It is the frame to the doorway into the criminal justice system. It could help to direct more people misusing drugs to the treatment and support that they need, as opposed to the destructive experience that many have in the criminal justice system. From correspondence with the outgoing Lord Advocate, we know that that has already been used to facilitate recorded police warnings for minor offences. I hope to reassure the Government benches that our amendment does not seek to direct the Lord Advocate. That is not its intention or its implication. It is important to be clear about that, because the Lord Advocate's role rightly is independent, and that independence must be absolute. However, Dorothy Bain, as that new post holder, will no doubt have the drug death crisis near the top of her entry. Should she consider that a review of that guidance is necessary, it is important that she understands that she does so in the knowledge that this Parliament would back her up and support her. Equal to the importance of trauma in this debate is the issue of rehabilitation. I am gratified that access to residential rehab seems to enjoy support from across the benches of this chamber, and so it should do. Residential care is not just about stabilising a person physically, it is about all the wraparound support services that come with it. Before I came to this place, I worked for Abelara, Scotland's national children's charity. We operated a residential rehabilitation facility in a block of new-build flats in just off Glasgow Green, in which mothers with addiction issues could come and get clear of those issues with their children living with them. It was the only one of its kind in this country, and it even cared for the neo-natal mums and their babies as well. Deputy Presiding Officer, it moves me still to the point almost of tears that our service at Abelara was equipped with what they referred to as tummy tubs. Those were effectively oversized buckets that could be filled with warm water and used to comfort babies going through withdrawal by simulating the feeling of being in utero. Problematic substance use among mothers accounts for as much as a third of drug dependency in some parts of this country. We know that having a drug-using parent in your early years is an adverse childhood experience of itself, but so too is time and care. Removing children from mothers for the duration of their rehab can lead to trauma, attachment disorder and loss, and those may too impact on the small children for the rest of their lives. That facility was closed a little over five years ago, as it was no longer deemed a strategic priority by the council. That reprioritisation was due in large part to the fact that the Scottish Government had reduced funding to alcohol and drugs partnerships that year by 23 per cent. Our service would sometimes be occupancy at 100 per cent, but it would also drop below 50 per cent. The city did not regard it as optimal, but that is the nature of residential rehab. It is not a hotel. You are never surely wholly sure when you are going to need it, but when you do need it, you are glad that it is there. I will finish by saying this, Presiding Officer. Above almost every aspect of social policy, it is on this matter that I hope that we in this chamber can find consensus that we can come together and answer the challenge of this most monstrous public health issues. I move the amendment in my name. Thank you, Mr Cole-Hamilton. We now move to the open debate. The first speaker will be Stephanie Callhan, followed by Brian Whittle. The chamber will wish to be aware that this is Ms Callhan's first speech in the chamber. You have around six minutes, Ms Callhan. Thanks also to the minister for her update on yesterday's meeting, and I look forward to hearing more. I also welcome the additional financial commitments and the work around women with children, and it was really good to hear from Gillian and Alex today, too. Before contributing myself, can I just say how honoured I am today to make my first speech as the first women MSP for Udingston and Bellshill constituency. My predecessor, Richard Lyle, has a proud record of being the longest-serving SNP politician. First elected to public office way back in 1976, when I was just a five-year-old wee lassie. Richard's retirement was well-earned after a lifetime serving our communities. I am sorry, I have a bit of a cold tear up stuffed up. Very briefly, I must thank my wonderful team, who put heart and soul into my campaign. My good friend and election agent Peter Craig and my family for their patience, love and hugs. To the people of Udingston and Bellshill, thank you for entrusting me with the great honour of being your representative and I will represent every corner of our constituency. I promise always to respect and value your reviews and opinions and seek to apply good judgment and balance in all of my work. I will also pursue the clear mandate that you voted for, that Scotland's future will be in Scotland's hands and a future independence referendum. Our local communities are rooted in the densely populated heart of Lanarkshire, with a 100-year history of coal mining and our working-class people are our biggest asset. People have stepped up to help during Covid-19, just as they did when my grandfather broke his back down in the pits. But we are not without our problems and drug deaths devastate too many families. Next to Glasgow, Lanarkshire's health board has the highest rate of drug deaths in Scotland, and that is 163 at the last count, up 66 and 10 years ago. Imagine for a moment wiping out nearly 15 football teams—that is the full Premier League—or over six classrooms full of children, because that is the scale of the problem, and that is just Lanarkshire. We know the root causes of addiction. The evidence is clear—poverty, deprivation, trauma, childhood adversity, poor mental health and mental illness. Those things destroy human connections and destroy hope. Today's motion is about a shared commitment to reversing the heartbreaking and appalling loss of life that affects all of us to some degree. We all know someone cursed with drug addiction. We must offer them hope and listen to their lived experience, and a citizens assembly is very welcome indeed. I welcome the motion, national mission to tackle drugs related deaths and harm. It has been a long time coming. The minister's motion notes the Scottish Government's commitment to £250 million of funding over the lifetime of this Parliament to bring vital support for local outreach services, expand residential rehab services and implement the medication-assisted treatment standards that were published last year and, crucially, to move a five-year funding cycle for third sector and grassroot organisations on the front line. The evidence tells us that tailoring the effect of individual support and providing the same-day treatment empowers people to seek support and recover. It works elsewhere and it will work here too. We have not previously done enough in Scotland to directly stem this deepening crisis and prevent harrowing deaths that traumatise the next generation. We must do better. Today, we hear lots of statistics and it is absolutely right that we do, but I will leave that to others. It is also right that the steps to directly tackle addiction must continue to be part of the Scottish Government's holistic plan around improved access to housing, health and social care, education and training, welfare and family support. We simply must continue to take steps towards eradicating poverty and hold the UK Government to account for inflicting austerity policies. However, my ask today is that all those listening at home or school or in this chamber have compassion for those who suffer from addiction and recognise that it is not a lifestyle choice or poor decision making or hedonism gone wrong and take account of the underlying issues and inequalities. We must also recognise that the actions of those addicted are not a true reflection of the person that they are inside, who they are or where or could be, because addiction is a soul-sucking reptide that casts people a drift from their true selves. It separates them from family, friends and pushes them to the margins of society. It is a public health issue, not a criminal one. I have worked in some of the poorest areas for drugs or rife. Sadly, I have seen the light go out in young people's eyes as life spirals out of their control. However, I have also seen the spark of hope ignite and watched it grow and flourish into a better future. A happy and fulfilling future and our compassion is key. So, in addition to the practical steps around finding, funding and accountability, delivering them at standards nationwide and safe consumption, we must look after those people and each other. In summary, by empowering those facing addictions, we help to break the vicious cycle for tomorrow's kids. Today's motion promotes progress and hope. To finish on a personal note, on the one hand, I sadly lost a close family member to drugs just over a year ago, but, on the other hand, a close friend has beaten addiction. For them, access and medication and training led to a job, new friends, a loving partner and raising a family of their own. They were lucky. We must ensure that investment is available to everyone and it doesn't come down to luck and live up to this motion and more. Thank you, Ms Callan. Well done. Particularly dealing with a sore throat, I don't think that there was any evidence that Richard Lyle ever suffered from a sore throat, but many congratulations. I call on Brian Whittle. Don't take this the wrong way, Mr Whittle, but we've got a bit of time in hand, so please feel free to intervene. You will get the time back, Mr Whittle, who will be followed by Emma Harper. I am delighted once again to get the opportunity to speak in a debate on this hugely important subject. As has already been said, Scotland has the unfortunate reputation as the drug death capital of Europe and a drug death rate over three and a half times that of the rest of the United Kingdom. The last speech that I gave in the chamber last term was on this topic, so I am delighted to get the opportunity to carry on where I left off. I asked Angela Constance just a few short weeks ago that crucial question in a bid to develop effective solutions to the crisis. Why is Scotland so bad when it comes to drug deaths? I was going to ask Gillian Mackay if I had been allowed an intervention. Incidentally, I think that it's also linked to the fact that Scotland has the highest death rate among the homeless community. The answer back then from the cabinet secretary was that Scotland has seen a 400 per cent increase in street benzodiau, as opinions compare to 50 per cent south of the border. I have to say to the minister that that is not the why. That is the what contributed to the skyrocketing numbers. I am grateful to Mr Whittle. I am firmly on record as saying that there are three reasons why we have a rather distinct problem in Scotland. One, we have more of our people who are engaged in problematic drug use proportionally. There are deep reasons for that. Frankly, we do not have enough of our folk in treatment. Yes, there has been a 450 per cent increase in the implication of benzodiazepines in drug-related deaths, and that is greater than it is south of the border. I thank the minister for that intervention. I am only quoting her from her last speech and the interventions that we had last time round. I have to ask that question again to the minister. Why is there such a huge increase in street benzers compared to elsewhere in the United Kingdom? You have to be able to answer that question if we are going to develop a successful strategy. However, I did ask this week from the front line from volunteers to survivors and those battling addiction, and some of the responses are as follows. One volunteer told me of the 40 home visits that they undertake on a Thursday as part of their outreach programme during Covid, visiting the people who used to come to the centre pre-Covid. She said, and I quote, when we knock the doors, the number of people who say, I thought you'd forgotten about me is quite incredible. She went on to say that the deprivation and poverty that we witnessed is heartbreaking. People walking the streets because they have no carpets or white goods or heating. The kids without clothes and shoes. I wish the people making decisions would walk with us when we do these visits. Then we might end up with a different understanding of the problem. Mark picks up the story, and I know that the minister took the time to speak with him, which I am grateful for him doing that. He said, I have tried to speak to the council about unmet needs, but nobody wants to discuss it because it actually raises a failure in the system, and they find it very difficult to face. People are being demonised and do not access statutory services because of the way they are treated. They are made to feel worthless. People's human rights are not being met. He says, no wonder people are gubbing street benzos, his words. We went and ended up to that fact that we are reporting that people are swapping alcohol for street benzos because it is a cheaper way to self-medicate. I do have to ask the Scottish Government if there is any work around this issue. Again, we need to know if the by-product of a minimum price alcohol is to switch to a cheaper option and a component of the increase in street benzo use. In the end, it may go on another column in the ledger, but it is still someone dying. We are engaged in work to understand the reasons behind people's use of street benzo diazepines, but I wonder if Mr Whittle would also join with the Scottish Government in calling on the UK Government to introduce pill-press regulation, which would make it harder for people to produce vast quantities of the street drugs that they can then go on and sell for pennies in their communities. Brian Whittle. Angela Constance will be surprised to hear that I concur with that, and I would support that. A service user, and now a volunteer, spoke to me about his journey in and out of prison and how recovery enterprises had been the intervention that had put him on a better path. He got out of prison at the end of the week, a practice that has to stop. I have said it over and over again in the chamber why we are releasing prisoners into the community at a time that they cannot access any services for several days. It was precisely this situation that recovery enterprises rescued him from. They helped him access accommodation and services and generally made him feel welcomed back into the community. He said without them that he would have ended up back in prison in what he called his safe place. Prison was his safe place because the powers that be just assumed that once his sentence is over they would open their doors and this person, with an addiction problem, would know just how to fit in back into society. It costs £40,000 a year to keep someone in prison, not counting police and court costs. Spend the fraction of that. Stop releasing prisoners on a Friday and have a step-down service available to transition prisoners back into society. That gentleman lost his sister and brother to addiction, so perhaps that was an intervention that will break the chain. Recovery enterprises may be unorthodox and difficult to fit into a support model. Mark, as you will know, minister, can shoot from the hip and make people feel uncomfortable, but he is passionate and he is knowledgeable, but unorthodox or not, they save lives and that is not the main criteria that should instigate support. Sometimes success is just keeping somebody alive until tomorrow and that is what they do in many others like them, but the support that was promised by the Scottish Government is not getting to all the places that it needs to. It is certainly not getting to the third sector in a way that is needed and I know that the minister wants. The third sector is the organisation that is most likely to be able to work with those who do not engage with statutory services. They are the ones that are reaching out and building relationships and trust with the most vulnerable, the most isolated and the most in danger, in that society seems to have forgotten. They are the organisations that can respond to immediate needs. Those organisations are run by disruptors, the troublemakers, the ones that make us feel uncomfortable and so we should be. They are the ones that are likely to have been in recovery themselves and I am glad that the Scottish Government seemed to have their eye back on the ball at long last and are using the extensive powers that they have always had at their disposal to tackle this crisis, but the minister needs to make sure that those in the front line are getting the resource and support that is intended. I am telling her that this is not universally true and I urge her to look at how those significant gaps can be plugged and the voices of the most vulnerable in our society are heard. We need a fully-resourced third sector. Minister, you will need a fully-resourced third sector if you are to be as successful as we all hope you will be, Deputy Presiding Officer. Thank you, Mr Whittle. I also thank Mr Whittle and the minister for embracing my invitation to make and take interventions. We now move to Emma Harper, who joins us remotely, after which will be Michael Marra. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I welcome the opportunity to speak in this important debate on Scotland's drug policy, and I agree with the Government that the drug-related death figures published in December are unacceptable. I welcome that we are moving forward with updated, innovative and person-centred approaches to better address problem drug use in Scotland, and I welcome the publication of the Medication Assisted Treatment Standards and all the work that the minister has outlined in our opening remarks. There is so much going on, and I look forward to any progress, and I agree that addressing inequality, listening to lived experience, partnership working such as with housing and the police, and involving families is absolutely crucial. I am keen to continue supporting efforts to enhance ways of working. I am planning to continue to be part of the cross-party group for drugs and alcohol with colleague Monica Lennon, and I welcome others to join the cross-party group as well. In the previous Parliament session, as deputy convener of the Health and Sport Committee, I had the opportunity to participate in the Scottish Affairs Committee inquiry into Scottish drug-related deaths. That was in 2019. The inquiry heard directly from drug and alcohol support agencies, health services, academics, those with lived experience, as well as families who have been affected by problem drug use. All of the witnesses agreed that urgent reform is needed to solve the issue of drug deaths in Scotland. The inquiry also heard from experts from Portugal, Germany and Canada to examine the evidence from international examples of countries that are taking a more progressive public health approach, not a punitive criminal approach to tackling problem drug use. In doing so, we found that the levels of deaths associated with drug misuse and addiction in those countries had reduced significantly, including by as much as 40 per cent in Canada. One recommendation from the Scottish Affairs Committee said that the UK Government must urgently bring forward legislation that will allow the Scottish Parliament to have its own approach to that hugely significant issue. I support the minister's motion for a four nations summit, and I agree that the 50-year-old law needs to be reformed. A collective four nations approach could achieve and recommend law reform. The Conservatives motion does not go far enough in addressing that. Working constructively is welcome, but continuing a criminal approach, not a public health approach, is wrong in the current evidence-based approaches that we are reading about. I am not surprised, though, as the UK Government Home Secretary, Pretty Patel, has consistently stated that she will not give the powers over drug policy to this Parliament and she will not change the misuse of drugs act. Indeed, she has stated that the drug law is fit for purpose. Maintaining the status quo is not going to work. In the last few months, much welcome work has been undertaken by the SNP Government to provide additional funding of £250 million to take urgent action and deal with the addiction issues and harm caused by that. We are preventing and reducing alcohol and drug harm related to many individuals by establishing the new national mission to reduce drug-related deaths and harms. That was announced by the First Minister, supported by an additional £50 million per year. Also, supporting alcohol and drug services during the Covid-19 pandemic, that was included in Dumfries and Galloway in my South Scotland region, where assertive outreach is currently under way. Investing a further £20 million over two years through the programme for government in 2021 and 2022 to tackle illicit drugs is also really important. Brian Whittle talked about the issues of street benzos and that has been covered extensively in the South Scotland area by the BBC in my area. We are seeing more people that are accessing illicit street benzos using the internet, online, Facebook advertisements and things. One reason that my understanding is that street benzos are being used is when people can't get access to their heroin or cocaine dealers. The street benzos can be so much more potent in their strength, especially when consumed with alcohol, and that leads to the devastating consequences of death that we are seeing. In addition to other issues that the Government is investing in, I am interested in what the minister talked about with the £1.4 million in the 10 third sector projects through the national development project fund. That is also welcome because we know how important our third sector partners are. Further issues that I would like to highlight for the minister is that anything that we undertake needs to tackle stigma and discrimination. It is a huge issue, especially in rural areas. I would ask for a commitment from the minister that any new policy approach moving forward will ensure that rural parts of Scotland are absolutely included. I look forward to seeing progress across the whole of Scotland, including in my South Scotland region. I welcome that we need to achieve better outcomes and support services. We talk about compassionate communities, and I look forward to hearing the minister's response in the conclusion of the debate. Thank you. Ms Harper, we now call on Michael Marra, who will be followed by Elena Whitham. Mr Marra, you have around six minutes. I want to mention my register of interest and my recent employment as Deputy Director of the Leverium Research Centre for Forensic Science before being elected. Drug laws are the same across the entirety of the UK, yet drug deaths in Scotland are four times that in the rest of the country. Labour wishes to see the UK working together to progress reform wherever possible. We must also exhaust every avenue and challenge the limits of our powers and imagination to make urgent change in Scotland. The medically-assisted treatment standards are welcome. Implementing them is the hard work of service reform. I am afraid we have seen far too little of that in the long 5,158 days of this Government. In that time, drugs deaths have spiralled and budgets for drug services have been cut. What is needed now is appropriate resource to make those standards possible. We must write in accountability and scrutiny. I believe that early exchanges at First Minister's questions were useful in exploring the tensions of legislation and urgent action. I do believe that Labour's amendment is a useful solution in that regard. The Dundee Drugs Commission recommended a number of those same policies, the same day prescribing and, crucially, the recognition that mental illness and addiction must be treated at the same time. However, we are now years on from the publication of that report and progress has been painfully slow. When a drug user reaches a moment when they believe that change is possible, treatment must be available to them. If they overdose on a Tuesday, survive, resolve to seek help on a Wednesday and then have to wait for the next week for the two-hour slot when prescribing is available, that is not the same day treatment by any real definition. Those standards must ensure that those services are genuinely available all day and all week. I hope that the minister can reassure us on that in her own remarks. That will take resource, including consultants, who will simply not appear in a matter of months. The failure of workforce planning is costing lives and new models of nurse prescribers must become the norm by later in this year. There is a huge challenge of culture change in service delivery. Being centred on people rather than dogmatic systems, treating addiction and mental health at the same time has proven to be one of the most difficult challenges in Dundee and Tayside. It is hugely resisted by some and dismissed as not being an issue by others. Yet Tony, fighting for fairness in Dundee, interviewed hundreds of service users who identified it as the single greatest problem in receiving treatment in their lives. Those individuals who were suffering from addiction were typically involved in polydrug use that members have mentioned already, as are the vast majority of problematic drug users. In 2008, benzodiazepines were implicated in 26 per cent of drug deaths. In 2018, with drug deaths increasing dramatically year on year, that figure was 67 per cent. The massive increase was driven by the withdrawal of volume prescriptions by Scottish NHS providers. That is an answer to Mr Whittle's question that he posed, in terms of why that has happened in Scotland. Drug users replaced illicit NHS standard pills with street pill replacements. Those drugs cost pennies, as we know, and are thrown back in batches of 20 or 30 pills at a time. In the words of one expert, the decision taken in our NHS moved Scotland from safe supply to complete chaos. Mr Whittle's question is answered in just those policies that were pursued. Drug users have no idea what is in those pills. The strength varies wildly from batch to batch and from day to day. In the words of one user, sometimes I feel almost nothing, sometimes I lose a day. The inevitability of that variability is overdose. Those policy decisions, made, I am sure, with good intention here in Scotland, have been absolutely lethal. As the death toll continues to mount week by week, day by day, that amounts to one of the most lethal policy errors of the devolution era. We must own and respond to that challenge. We need close to real-time data on overdoses and deaths, not waiting two years to find out whether the decisions that we have made are killing people. We have seen fantastic examples from the First Minister on a daily basis on our TV screens talking about the number of vaccines, the number of deaths and the number of cases in Covid. We need that kind of data to evaluate what we have done. If we had that data on the decisions that were taken around the withdrawal of volume scripts, we would not be in the situation that we are now. We have to be able to evaluate what we do and respond to it. We must recognise that all of that will take policy remedies, particularly to Scotland, but also that the causes of major elements of this harm are taken here in Scotland. Let us have summits and deal with the outdated misuse of drug act if we can, but the reasons that Scotland's drug deaths are four times as high as the rest of the UK are Scottish reasons. We must act now to put that right. I rise to speak in support of this motion, because, after working on the front line supporting people experiencing multiple disadvantage for almost two decades, I now finally have cause to believe that we are going to work collectively to drive forward whole systems and cultural changes necessary to tackle our drug deaths emergency. Recently, I said at yet another funeral for a young person with unbridled tears streaming down my face mourning the loss of such a talented outspoken individual at disruptor. I had grief for their loved ones and an enormous visceral sense of impotence of a seeming inability to find a way forward that would stop so many needless and preventable deaths in Ayrshire and across Scotland. How much potential? How much talent have we collectively lost? I have seen the harms caused by addiction up close and personal. I have spent countless hours helping people to try to navigate the disjointed, confusing, unyielding and often times bureaucratic and linear world of homelessness services, addiction services, mental health services, prison services, social work services, services that are full of people trying their very best, but they are not always able to join up the dots for the individual in the middle. Twenty years ago, before trauma informed was even spoken about, my colleagues and I on the front lines knew that those we supported were often self-medicating to blunt the sharp, painful edges of their lived experience. I knew that the young women I was supporting fresh from care who had been abused and abandoned as a child, now felt abandoned by the care service and her corporate parents. It was all too easily trafficked from Ayrshire to Glasgow by those intent of profiting from her body and her misery. I tried to pick up the pieces that she sank into a spiral of heroin addiction and prostitution with very little control over any aspect of her young life. At only 26 myself and with a caseload of over 40 at-risk young people to support, we were drowning in a system that was neither life preserver nor life boat. I do not know what happened to her. I think about it often. As I do of the many, many people I supported who have died, through drugs, self-harm or violence, again think of all that potential lost. What could they have been and what could they have done? What has their loss done to those left behind? The trauma has ripples right through the very fabric of our country. Presiding Officer, I have every confidence that my colleague Angela Constance will deliver the change that is needed on that crucial agenda. She has the experience of being a social worker in a prison environment that ensures that she understands sticky support and what it is and why it is so very critical to the success of someone's recovery. Like Brian Whittle, I too have spent a lot of time with Mark and the team in recovery enterprises and other grassroots organisations such as Patchwork. They epitomise sticky support. The minister has written to the UK Government to urgently request the summit so that we can look at what drugs laws reforms are required so that that can be at last understood and treated as a public health crisis. Current legislation hinders our ability to fully align the law with the public health response that would enable us to deploy all measures that this Parliament could collectively agree and our colleagues across the chamber to see how crucial those reforms are to the overall picture. Legislation needs to be reformed to treat drugs use as a health matter and not a criminal justice matter. Too often, I would see my service users lifted on a warrant, sometimes on a Friday, taken into custody and then on remand for months, effectively wiping out the countless hours of solid support work and progress that we had made to then be released into homelessness and thus starting the cycle again. I wholeheartedly welcome the new match standards as I have always understood that same-day access to services and treatment is vital for recovery. When someone is asking for help for addiction, they need it then and there in not three months' time. People need to be the heart of the decision making and they must have choice over what is appropriate for them, and if that includes residential rehab, we must ensure that it is available in every part of the country. Michael Marra, thank you very much. The experience that we have had in Dundee in pursuing the issue of same-day prescribing has been exactly as I described in parts on a Tuesday afternoon, and the same-day prescribing was available for two hours. Does the member agree that in the implementation of those standards, we have to ensure that it is genuinely available the same day when it is required, and that has to be reported on by Government as they implement it? Thank you for the intervention. I would agree and I would think that from what our minister has said out, we can see that that is definitely the way that we are going, but there is the wider issue of who can prescribe, so people have brought it up. We need to have advanced nurse practitioners, etc. We need to have a huge skills audit and we need to see where we need to divert those monies. I absolutely agree with you. First intervention and now I've lost my place. We need to make sure that there is a collective effort across the sectors to break down the silos. We need to remember that those who have lived experience in those tireless grassroots organisations are operating on shoe strings and are going to play an absolutely vital role in that work. We must provide them with the opportunities and funding, so I was very happy to hear the minister reiterate that and also talk about making sure that the funding that's out there is actually getting to where it needs to go. We need to dismantle a system created decades ago by building single issue services. We need to see that as part of a bigger whole. We're finally in a place where housing first and rapidry housing are being rolled out with wraparound support for those with complex needs. We're exploring how a duty to prevent homelessness could significantly reduce incidences of homelessness by making sure that this duty would go beyond the door of the housing department. We've got gold standard domestic abuse laws, we've got collective understanding of what trauma informed practice is and how adverse childhood experiences impact on our life chances and we're moving towards a community justice model, a smart justice model that seeks to understand offending behaviour and offer up the tools required for real and meaningful behaviour change without sending somebody down the road of incarceration. Finally, by knitting all those golden threads together, we will ensure that Scotland is somewhere where people can access the sticky, consistent, effective and flexible support that is required to prevent those harms that collectively harm all of us. Thank you Deputy Presiding Officer. From the outset, I hope that today's debate is the start of regular updates and debates and cross-party working on this most critical issue that all our communities in Scotland are facing. More should have been done much earlier. Families have been failed and entire communities have been let down and left broken, as Sue Webber said at the start of the debate. It's for this session of the Parliament to make sure that SNP ministers deliver change and are held to account. I welcome the approach that Angela Constance and Scottish Conservatives have tried to work constructively with her since her appointment. Speaking to people who are in services today and trying to access services, it's clear that we are only at the very start of necessary reforms and that those reforms can make a real difference, but we need to start to look to how we can turn around these unacceptable levels of drug-related deaths and harms in our society. Many people working on the front line who have been mentioned already today have told me that they expect to see higher drug-related deaths for the 2020 recorded period when those are published next month. The pain and heartbreak for many families across Scotland is therefore only set to continue and the negative impact that a pandemic clearly and understandably has had cannot be underestimated, but it cannot be used as an excuse either. I want to see and spend some of the time that I have today to focus on the experiences of a family I know personally. My childhood friend Jamie Murray died from a drug-related death. Jamie was found dead in a flat in Perth on September 1. In his system was a cocktail of drugs, including methadone, heroin, street valium and cocaine. Mum Jane bravely spoke out about the chaotic approach that Jamie faced trying to access support services and rehab. Much of what I want to say today are the words of Jamie's mum, Jane. It's vital that we understand the experience of those who are desperately trying to support their loved ones in Scotland today with addiction issues and navigate the access to services, which is so complicated so often. For too long, many families have felt excluded and have had to fight for everything for their loved ones, at the same time facing stigma and, yes, often feeling that they are being blamed by services as well. I know that the minister is aware of this and I welcome the fact that she has been reaching out to many people as well. Jane said that she used to go with Jamie to meetings where he'd be handed leaflets about methadone programmes, but when he'd begged to be sent to residential rehab, he was told that there wasn't any funding. He'd asked to be taken off methadone and as the side effects were so awful, but when he asked to have his dose reduced to try to look towards different treatments, he was simply told no. It was so destroying and easy to see why he felt he was on an endless roundabout with no way off. Despite the fact that it was supposed to be family meetings, we were attending. All the professionals ignored me and just spoke to Jamie, who was clearly very ill and unable to think clearly. I want to also thank, as others have, all those working in drug and alcohol addiction services across Scotland. I know from the very many visits that I undertook across Scotland while serving as shadow health secretary that this is one of the most challenging healthcare jobs in Scotland today. However, a key area of improvement and one that I welcome at the fact that minister has focused on is the need to urgently address the issue of continuity of care. Jane again was critical of the system supposed to actually help addicts. She said, as soon as Jamie would build up trust in one worker, they would move on, leaving him to start at the very beginning all over again. What we did see was catastrophic policies that did not involve methadone reduction, but they insisted that, if anyone had a dirty test, that they would be out of the programme after one strike. I will, if I can get back some time. Perhaps in speaking to advocacy groups, they would be hearing what I have been hearing in terms of the significant burnout in professionals working in this situation, particularly over the pandemic, and that that will require significant resource to make sure that we can have the kind of continuity that you are suggesting, which I would entirely agree is appropriate. I absolutely agree with the member on that point. This is something for five years, I would argue, with ministers around a workforce plan, which we have not heard mentioned today. I know that it is also part of the minister's work and that we need to see it prioritised. There is too much moving around of NHS staff, sometimes, who quite rightly get burnt out in the service and, as has been mentioned, feel demoralised often in the work that they have to do and picking up the pieces too often as well. However, as I was saying, one of the key parts of this is also looking towards how we support patients having rights as well. For too long, I do not think that people with substance abuse issues have felt that they do have any rights. That is why I fully support Scottish Conservative calls for a right to rehab. If we are generally going to deliver a person-centred drug addiction services, as we all want to see, I do not doubt that that will present many challenges, but accessing rehab must be a right, not an afterthought or an added extra. In many cases, that will be resource intense. I welcome the resources that have now been outlined, but addiction maintenance services have only got us to where we are today with the drug deaths crisis, so we need to see reform and a new approach. As I mentioned last week in the Scottish Government's debate, building a fairer Scotland and addressing inequalities, access to healthcare is an issue that has been raised by many stakeholders over many years. I welcome some of the reforms that the minister has outlined today, but when summing up, I hope that the minister will outline whether or not the Scottish Government will also now commit to reviewing access to healthcare for people living with addictions and also, as has been mentioned, for people who are homeless, especially around the reform of access and registration with a GP. I raised my own constituent's case last week, in which people have to queue up for just 10 available appointments, so that is also one of the critical areas that we need to see reformed. Finally, the minister touched on that, as did my colleague Sue Webber. It is extremely important that we focus on changing the nature of addictions and drug use and drug deaths currently being outlined. We will see the explosion of self-prescribing, for example, that has taken place over the pandemic. Hearing Edinburgh, for example, the region that I represent, NHS Lothian published figures for 2019-20, which saw a number of hospital admissions for opioids increased by 24 per cent. There has been a significant trend in the number of hospital admissions for cocaine up over 300 per cent. The number of hospital admissions for cannabinoids has also increased by 64 per cent. The number of hospital admissions for sedatives and hypnotics has doubled over the past five years. Those are worrying trends, and we need to not just see a one-size-fits-all. To conclude, the Scottish Government has an awful lot of work to do. The minister has all of us wanting to make sure that she can drive forward this agenda. As Michael Marra outlined, outcomes must be at the heart of all those reforms, not processes. The treatment targets that have been outlined, I really want to see more detail of what that means, because so often treatment targets have just been not met in this country. Patient pathways are patchy and must be formalised. Standards of care must be delivered and reformed. I hope that in the spirit of urgency and the emergency response that we have seen brought by cross-government working during the pandemic, that that is in the spirit of how the minister can act in government, and that we will see constant updates to make sure that we do genuinely start to turn around the drug deaths crisis in Scotland. Before I begin my speech, I want to pay tribute to my brother Brian, who we lost to a heroin overdose in 2002. I also want to thank my dad, my sisters and my niece for their unwavering support and their resilience. I am so proud of how they have tackled that. As well as Covid-19, the Scottish Government is working to tackle another major public health emergency, drug-related deaths. The reappointment of Angela Constance as the dedicated minister for drugs policy shows the Government's determination. The minister has made many welcome announcements since being appointed, and I support everything that she has said today. Through the drug deaths task force, much funding has been allocated to the effect of evidence-based interventions. For example, take-home kits of naloxone will now be given to people who are at high risk of an accidental overdose. The introduction of same-day support will be invaluable. The minister has been proactive in talking with people with lived and living experience, some of whom are developing a stigma charter so that we can work towards a stigma-free Scotland, and engaging with stakeholders and the third sector to address the many issues that people with addictions face. Locally, the beacons operate across South Lanarkshire and will have a centre in four localities of the council area, including East Kilbride. Alongside support services, they aim to ensure that there is visible treatment and recovery embedded into local communities, with the essential values of compassion, dignity and respect for all who use the service. Another organisation, Y People, operates pathways based in East Kilbride. That is a service for homeless people, some of whom have a history of drug use. As well as supported accommodation, there is a community-based service to help people to maintain their tenancies. Such support is vital. Some people with a history of drug use may need that supported accommodation to help them in their early days of recovery, or to provide a solid foundation to think about recovery. Maintaining recovery is made easier with wraparound support in place. Of course, housing support is just one aspect. We need to ensure that people who are in recovery also have the right support to stay clean, whether that is from health and social care services or from the third sector. I hope that this is something that the Government will continue to keep in mind as we go forward. The Scottish Government's commitment to increase investment over the next five years will support a range of community-based interventions, quicker access to treatments and an expansion of residential rehabilitation. It is also important that families have somewhere to turn. Families as lifesavers, also funded by the task force, is a new initiative that will help relatives increase their understanding of drug addiction but also support them so that they can, in turn, continue to support their relatives. I know from past experience that many families have felt hopeless and, no matter where they turned, faced barriers to rehab, addiction services and self-health groups. I grew up in the 80s, jobs were hard to come by, benefits were slashed, nothing came easy to many families. Poverty and inequality laid the foundations for stigma and marginalisation that, for some, never leaves them. For many of us, there was a lack of hope in the 80s and that is something that many people had to experience during and after the recession and now exacerbated by Covid. We had factured in the 80s and we have had Westminster austerity for the last decade. Yes, the Scottish Government can improve at treatment pathways and that will happen but the public health response is just one part of the solution. Social economic factors are also important. For too many people, addiction stems from poverty, marginalisation, stigma and lack of opportunity. Given their inability to understand how their economic ideas affect wider society and their inability to accept the evidence-based proposal for medically supervised safe consumption facilities, I take exception to the Scottish Tories for calling out the Scottish Government on this matter. There is nothing in the Government's motion that any other party should object to. I note that the Labour, Green and Liberal Democrat amendments only add to the Scottish Government's motion. However, the Tories clearly have no interest in reforming a 50-year-old law. If they are serious about working across party lines to tackle this public health emergency, I want to see the Tories work with the SNP and others to influence their counterparts at Westminster. Let's have an urgent four nations summit to discuss reforms of the Missus of Drugs Act and let's at least pilot safe consumption facilities where appropriate. I applaud the work that Peter Cragant has done to help to tackle drug-related deaths. As an ex-addict, I know how hard he has worked and I acknowledge the often very lonely experience he has had to endure. For all the people who have lost their lives through drugs, I want each and every one of their lives to have mattered. If nothing else, let them be known for defining our future policies and legislation. As MSPs, let's work together and be bold and imaginative as we try to do right by them but also by the thousands of people who are currently struggling from the impact of drugs. By reforming the law and powering people to seek support and making services stick with the people they support, we can and will tackle this emergency. I now call Paul O'Kane, who is the final speaker in the open debate, before which we will move to closing speeches. Everybody who has contributed to the debate will need to be in the chamber. In rising to speaking in this debate, I feel a number of different emotions. First, there is an overwhelming sense of sadness about the life that is lost, because behind every number is a person, people who are sons and daughters, parents, partners, family and friends, brothers and sisters, and I think that Collette Stevenson very powerfully outlined that as others have in the chamber today. The word scandal is often overused in our politics, but there is no other word. It is painfully sad and heartbreaking for those who are left behind. People who have all too often struggled to get the right support at the right time for their loved ones. I do feel anger as well, Presiding Officer. Anger that quite simply not enough has been done to tackle the root causes of the problem, to be innovative and flexible in approaches to policy around care and treatment, and there has not been enough funding to properly support services and indeed a lack of prioritisation of the issues. Long before the Covid-19 pandemic, a pandemic was raging in our cities, towns and villages. A pandemic born out of poverty, trauma and poor mental health. A pandemic that demands a public health response, one of the size and scale of what we see in our current day-to-day context. It will take leadership and a genuine commitment to listen, and we know that in the past that has not always been the case. The Scottish Government, where one that cuts to alcohol and drug partnership budgets in 2015-16, would lead to more deaths, but it went ahead with those anyway. We on these benches have long called for funding to reverse these cuts, so it is welcome that the Government appears to be listening. I want to focus my comments this afternoon on the public health response that is required to this crisis. Reporting is not regular enough. The annual reporting on death, which is two years retrospective, is not adequate to be able to react with the flexibility that we need. I know that the minister has touched on that, and I hope that she will say more in her concluding remarks. Throughout Covid, we have had a wealth of data at our fingertips and on our television screens on a daily basis, as Michael Marra referred to, analysis of trends, data-led decision making, and we are all acutely aware of the importance of intelligence such as this in making the right public health decisions. It can be done, so why then shouldn't it be done, for drugs deaths? We also need better data on issues such as the number of people who are dropping out of treatment. The Scottish Drugs Forum has highlighted the high levels of poor retention of people in treatment, and we know that through research by the University of the West of Scotland, there have been significant challenges in alcohol and drug partnerships, properly recording the number of unplanned discharges and, crucially, the reasons behind those that would allow for consistent follow-up and support for people to re-engage with services. The Scottish Labour's amendment calls for robust scrutiny of the new max standards, including six-monthly reporting to the Parliament, and we must ensure that how we will know if the standards are being met and the impact that important interventions such as same-day access to services are having. Too many people are being failed by inflexible services, leading to those unplanned discharges that I have spoken about. Indeed, the Scottish Drugs Forum has said that treatment needs to be attractive and offer what people want when they want it, and it needs to respond to changes in what people want over time. Substitution prescriptions support to access immediate health or social issues, support with longer-term mental or physical health. We must invest in services such as those advocated by the Royal Pharmaceutical Society and others, for example the availability of naloxone in a variety of community settings, and appropriate training for a variety of individuals in communities and healthcare settings on how to use it. In common with many other organisations and parties across the chamber, we must have meaningful and swift action on exploring all options to deliver safe consumption rooms. Breaking down silos is also key. We cannot just pay lip service to initiatives like housing first, and then witness sustained cuts to local government budgets for support services and housing. We also know some of the concerning challenges that have been raised by Shelter Scotland relating to people being forced to give up their homes, having been told that they cannot claim housing benefit, which is needed to pay for stays at residential rehabilitation centres run by the voluntary sector. I spoke at the beginning of the speech about the range of feelings that I had approaching the debate, but I also feel a sense of hope. I hope that we can work in partnership across the chamber, work with individuals, their families and communities, those who provide services, those who provide support, whether that be in healthcare settings or in local government. However, we can only achieve that sense of hope and optimism in this debate if the Government is willing to listen. I believe that, from the tone of the debate today and the contributions, there is a sense that the Government is listening. We on those benches will hold the Government to account. We will relentlessly seek the data that we need, we will interrogate it and we will continue to make the case for well-resourced, flexible services that prioritise individual needs and trauma-informed practice. Because, Presiding Officer, life depends on that action and we need to ensure that we all collectively take responsibility, make the right decisions and move Scotland forward to deal with the scudge of our death. Thank you. We move to closing speeches and I call on Alex Cole-Hamilton. Thank you, Presiding Officer. This has been a deeply powerful and moving debate and I will reflect on some of the contributions made by members in my remarks going forward. The misuse of drugs act, as we have heard in this debate, turns 50 this year and the need for reform of that act is greater than ever. It is outdated. It costs the taxpayer billions of pounds every single year and quite simply is not fit for purpose. I have already spoken in my remarks of the destructive cycle that is borne out of a prison sentence to drug users when I quoted the evidence given by Assistant Chief Constable Steve Johnson. Presiding Officer, it is estimated that there are almost 2,000 organised crime groups involved in supplying illegal drugs and between them they have trafficked over 1,000 children, as rightly referred to by Eleanor Whitton. Indeed, the cannabis cultivation industry alone—these children from Afghanistan and Vietnam—held in slave-like conditions in this country in 21st century Scotland. Those are not the statistics of a system that is fit for purpose. They are the statistics of a broken system, one that is failing our most vulnerable citizens. Of course, it is imperative that we work closely and constructively with all other nations across the United Kingdom, but Scotland has a drug death problem that is far more acute than any of our other counterparts in the British Isles. I am grateful for the tone that the minister struck at the top of the debate, particularly for her restating her commitment to put lived experience at the heart of Government policy here and our route map out of it, particularly for taking my intervention around the importance of dealing with substance use and mothers and their children. That kicked off a thoughtful debate. Sue Webber was absolutely right to raise the proliferation of poly-drug use, and in particular street benzos. That undermines the correlation of death in street benzos in Scotland right now and undermines the suggestion that we have repeatedly been given for many years that our particularly Scottish problem with drug mortality was somehow caused by the ageing, train-spotting generation and co-morbidities that lie within that group. Those are young people dying on our streets right now. Gillian Mackay was the first to mention the issue of the HIV outbreak in Glasgow, but that outbreak was absolutely coterminous with the 23 per cent cut in Government funding to alcohol and drug partnerships in that city, not just in that city, but across Scotland as well. While members like Emma Harper are keen to restate the level of Government investment that has happened since that time, we still come jarring up against that devastating decision. In that decision, we lost organisational memory, we lost relationships and we lost good hard-working services that have been saving lives for years. That is why, going forward, this Government should mainstream project and protect funding, particularly for rehabilitation going forward. The current approach is not working, and that is why we need a health-centred approach that will not only save lives but mitigate risk factors that lead to drug usage in the first place. In 2001, Portugal ended the criminalisation of people who used drugs and established a health-led approach instead. Since then, drug-related deaths in that country have consistently fallen below the EU average. Problematic use and school-age use have also fallen. Portugal has gone from accounting for nearly 50 per cent of yearly HIV diagnosis linked to injecting drug use in the EU to just 1.7 per cent. That is partly why I welcome the amendment that has been put forward by the Labour Party. Safe consumption is essential for saving lives. Blood-borne viruses such as HIV and Hep C occur in one in four people who inject drugs. Safe and adequate provision of clean needles is vital. I thank Alex Coleham for giving ways to make a very powerful speech about the importance of overdose prevention and the importance of using that facility to ensure that we have other public health benefits such as minimising HIV transmission. The reality is that, in Scotland now, overdose prevention centres are not illegal. If they were illegal, I would be arrested and charged, and so would Peter Crichton. Can we get a grip of the situation? Will the minister address this? Will he agree that the minister should address this in our final remarks? Can we find a legal pathway to legalising safe consumption in Scotland and ensure that Peter Crichton gets the resources that he deserves to continue his work in Glasgow? I am absolutely happy to endorse that point of view. I hope that the minister will reflect on that in her remarks. I take this moment to put on record my thanks to Paul Sweeney and indeed Peter Crichton for the volunteer work that they have both done on the front line of the drug deaths emergency. They have both put themselves at risk of criminal prosecution, but I hope that history will regard both of them as heroes and as pioneers in this field, and they deserve all of our thanks. Preventing deaths does not go far enough. We need to provide people suffering from addiction with both physical and emotional support that they need to recover, and that is why rehabilitation is vital. Stephanie Callaghan reminds us what I thought to be another excellent first speech, that we must see the person beyond the addiction and reveal just how close to home this can be for some of us. I am grateful for your bravery, but I particularly collect Stevens, and I thought that you captured the chamber there. You carried us with you in a very emotional powerful speech. Michael Marra, as usual, articulated in terms of absolute clarity the importance of getting help fast, that people who are in the grip of a chaotic lifestyle cannot wait days upon days for help that they seek in a moment of lucidity that may be all too rare. He was not overstating things in his use of the word the lethal when it comes to the bad decisions that have been made. Miles Briggs spoke of the trepidation. We all fear feel at the publication of next month's drug death statistics. Addiction is a disease, brought out in large part by trauma, and Paul O'Kane was absolutely right to call it a pandemic. Nobody chooses to become dependent on drugs just in the same way that nobody chooses to develop any disease or mental illness. Those who suffer from addiction deserve the same level of care and compassion as any other person suffering a chronic health condition. People are most at risk of death from drug use when they are at their most vulnerable, after being released from prison, after a bereavement, a relationship breakdown, or when an impor mental health and physical health underpins why drug use is a symptom of and a response to trauma rather than the cause of it. I am closing with this. The responsibility of reversing Scotland's drug crisis does not lie solely with the Government or its task forces, but it is incumbent on all of us here in this chamber as a Parliament and as a country. It is time that we stopped asking victims of drug misuse what is wrong with you. Instead, we need to ask what has happened to you and, crucially, how can we help you to heal? I am pleased to speak in support of the Scottish Greens amendment today. We also support the Labour and Liberal Democrat amendments and consider that, when taken together, the motion and those three amendments signal a very welcome shift in political support for doing something very different to tackle our drugs crisis because we desperately need something different, something so much better. We need a culture of care, not a war, on drugs. Scotland has followed many other jurisdictions in pursuing a war on drugs. The war on drugs approach focuses on the criminalisation of users and petty suppliers rather than seeking a solution to the deeper problems that underpin drug abuse. The war on drugs has totally failed, both in restricting use of drugs and in protecting from the harm of drugs. Julian McKein, opening for the Scottish Greens, talked eloquently about how the drugs death crisis is a public health crisis, and we need to understand the underlying causes of addiction and tackle those if we are to deal effectively with a crisis that should never be considered inevitable. Drug deaths are like the canary in the mine for the impact of poverty. We know that places where drug deaths are highest are the places that most suffer from poverty. Scotland has been scarred by poverty over the past 50 years, and so it has some of the worst drug death figures in Europe, about eight times the average. The lives scarred by drugs are, of course, concentrated in particular places. In the region that I represent, Dundee's drug death rate, 0.23 per thousand people, is almost double the national average. Michael Marra has made a powerful point about the impact of poverty and the correlation between poverty and drug deaths. However, there are many areas in the UK that have similar levels of poverty in the north-east of England and other areas, but do not have the same level of drug death that Scotland has. Perhaps the member would touch on the reasons for that difference, as some of the contributions that are made point to the core issue of poverty, but there is a particular Scottish problem. I agree with you that there is a particular Scottish problem that we need to get to grips with. It speaks to a whole range of issues around the way that we police, the way that we criminalise in very particular systems in very particular communities that I do not think is mapped across the rest of the UK, but I think that this deserves much wider discussion. Alex Cole-Hamilton spoke about evidence earlier, and I think that we really need to understand better why we have such a distinct position in Scotland. However, we know that the right response to drug misuse is to approach it as a public health issue, as a social justice issue, not a criminal justice issue. We have to stop criminalising those who suffer addiction, and we must stop enforcement action that we know disproportionately affects already marginalised people. For example, the practice of stop and search. Two years ago, Police Scotland stopped a seven-year-old girl on suspicion of being in possession of drugs. She was seven. She was just one of over 3,000 children who stopped and searched in a 15-month period. While 20 searches involve a strip search, almost always for drugs, women are more likely than men to be strip searched, even though detection rates for drugs are significantly lower for women who were strip searched. Unfortunately, we have a Westminster Government with significant powers over drug policy that sees drugs as an issue to be dealt with through the criminal justice system, although only for the poor. We know plenty of UK Government ministers who have got away with their drug use. We now have over 40 years of evidence demonstrating that approach fails. One curiosity of the devolution settlement is that, while laws relating to drugs are Westminster's responsibility, enforcement of those laws is up to the Scottish Government. That is why Scottish Greens have asked the previous Lord Advocate—as I mentioned earlier this afternoon—to use her powers to ensure that safe drug consumption facilities be exempted from legal action. Enforcement is not in the public interest. Already, professionals in places such as Glasgow, as we have heard from Paul Sweeney and others, are taking the lead on providing those vital facilities, but they are doing so at risk of prosecution. We have also been arguing for a care-based approach to public policy that would ensure that drug users get the social and medical support that they need. Dundee City Council has responded to the situation with a commission to seek solutions to the problem of drug deaths. The commission has made a set of really strong suggestions about how to deal with drugs at a civic level. It includes seeing the problem as a whole system and seeking whole-person solutions, increasing accessibility of mental health services and taking an approach based on kindness, compassion and hope. While that is moving in the right direction, the key questions of how services will be funded and whether we can make the shift from a criminal justice focus to a social focus remain unanswered. The Scottish Government has begun to recognise the value of community-based solutions, but we need a whole system approach to that, which cuts across the artificial divide between Westminster and Scottish Government powers. We need to learn from countries such as Portugal, as has already been mentioned, where decriminalisation has led to fewer deaths as a result of drugs and fewer wider societal problems such as organised crime. Taking such an approach would change how we see drugs and begin to move from the war on drugs to a care-based approach that reduces the enormous harm caused by drugs. The most mesmerising speaker that I have ever heard in this place—no offence—was Nana Gotford. She was a radical street lawyer who helped to open Denmark's first drug consumption room. I hope to bring her back to this place so that you can all hear her. She helped to raise a volunteer force to run a drug consumption bus in Copenhagen in 2011, which enabled addicts to consume drugs safely, and that soon paved the way for the public sanctions facilities. I chaired this meeting in 2018 thanks to the work of Fiona Gilbertson for recovering justice. We basically do not have any drug deaths in drug consumption rooms, and that is the same all over the world. I honestly think that she said, it is crazy that Scotland has had a terrible problem and you are not doing this. Exactly, Nana. What have we been doing? Why are there no beds in Falkirk? It is outrageous, and so Webb is right to say that the SNP should be ashamed of this record. But let's work together from this day forward. I raised the issue of high strength, street volume, with the First Minister two years ago. I got a good enough answer, but when I look back now, to me, it is utterly complacent. Clare Baker hits the nail on the head. It is about saving lives. The Lord Advocate should prioritise public health first, as has been highlighted by Scotland as the drug death capital of the world, and we have held this dismal title for six years. Several lawyers, Amaran, Mike Daley and others, as Paul Sweeney said earlier in an intervention, believe that we can operate within the law and the grounds of necessity to save lives. We have done some of this before, for example in the early 2000s to protect women in street prostitution in Glasgow. We did it. We can operate within the existing law without interfering with the independence, which is an important point of the Crown Office. In Greater Glasgow and Clyde, there were 404 deaths in 2019 around the same as the whole of Spain the year before, and Scotland accounts for a third of all UK deaths. It is a dark Crown to hold. Brian Whittle is also right when he says that we have to be able to answer the questions as to why that is. Is it any wonder why there are the College of Physicians of Edinburgh's call for bold measures, including the decriminalisation of the possession of illicit drugs? Portugal once had a similar drug death crisis until it focused on health and not criminalisation and funded treatment properly. Drug consumption facilities supervise people injecting their own drugs. No one has ever died from an overdose in one. It is one strand of a bigger policy, obviously. Drug consumption facilities are currently operating in at least 66 cities around the world. Concerns at those facilities may encourage drug use, or increased crime have proved unfounded. Use is also restricted to existing dependent users. Under review by the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction concluded, there is no evidence to suggest that the availability of safer injecting facilities increases drug use or the frequency of injecting the services facility rather than delay treatment entry and do not result in higher rates of local drug-related crime. Of course I will, yes. Brian Whittle I thank you very much for taking the intervention. In the last Parliament, we actually accepted the Government motion that discussed accepting safe injection rooms, even though I am still to be convinced, to be honest. The question for me is that the resource that is required to deliver safe injection rooms is around have we looked at what else we could do with that resource and how that money might actually benefit in other areas? Certainly for me, in a rural area, where a safe injection room would not necessarily have such a big impact. It is around that area there of how that resource can be best utilised. I agree with the member that it is one part of a bigger policy. However, as you have heard and Paul Sweeney has seen for himself, I spoke directly to Peter I can't myself. The man has literally saved lives. Lives have literally been saved. What I am trying to point out is that any concerns that people might have that it might extend drug use, the evidence is there. We have some hurdles to get over, but I know that it means that I want the member to think that Scottish Labour's position is solely to deal with this. The member is quite correct to say that we need a wholesome comprehensive approach. The UK Government's official advisers, the advisory council on the misuse of drug supports, the setting up of drug consumption rooms. I believe that Westminster must change the law to do this across the UK in the same way that Portugal did, for example. I believe that Angela Constance is right. It is not just about change to the 1971 act for that purpose. There are other reasons why we want to modernise the law and I think that, hopefully, other nations will support us in that. I, too, as others have paid tribute to Peter Kajkarant running this unofficial drug consumption room because this is the man that has saved lives. By the end of March, he had supervised more than 500 injections and no doubt saved lots of lives that are not on record. I don't believe that there is any further time to waste on this. Collette Stevenson and Stephanie McAllum remind us that many of us have a personal stake in this, but such as public concern, I believe, is that the public, rightly so, won't allow this Parliament to waste another term. Michael Marra, in an excellent speech, said that we must have the data, we must have safe supply, but we must have same-day treatment too, and I agree. Wales runs a website and a service that allows users to anonymously have their drugs tested public health wheels. Let those users do that and it makes them aware. Ms McNeill could wind up, please. I will close, Presiding Officer, to say that surely we have learned lessons of complacency in the past and never again. I am thankful to be closing for the Scottish Conservatives today on a subject that is very close to my heart. There have been excellent speeches that are very passionate from across the chamber, and I hope that we can all work constructively together to reverse this crisis. I thank the Minister for Drugs Policy for coming to the chamber today to outline the Scottish Government's plans. I welcome the fact that she is open to working across the Parliament to tackle this emergency. Some of the announcements, particularly around funding, are also a welcome first, and we look forward to scrutinising those in more detail. However, as I will touch on in this speech, I believe that we need to go much further to save lives. This crisis, as many in the chamber have alluded to this afternoon, is our national shame. Scotland's drug death rates remain not only significantly worse than the rest of the UK and Europe, but our relative drugs death numbers also exceed the USA. In my home city of Glasgow, there were 147 recorded deaths because of drugs in greater Glasgow and Clyde health board in 2007. It moved forward to 2019, and there was a staggering 404 deaths recorded in that year alone. The nature of this public health emergency is also made clear with hospitalisations as many across this country are routinely victim to serious harm from the side effects of drugs. As we have heard from colleagues across the chamber, the recent figures from Public Health Scotland highlight that in 2019-2020 there were 282 drug-related hospital stays per 100,000 people. In 1997-98, at the dawn of Scottish Devolution, that figure was 88 per 100,000, with figures in this instance more than tripling. That crisis has also hit the most vulnerable, the hardest. It has been revealed approximately half of the patients with a drug-related hospital stay lived in the most deprived areas in Scotland. That is particularly shameful, given organisations such as Waverley Centre have warned that, due to social inequalities, there are many people who are at an incase risk of being harmed by drugs, such as those currently homeless. I have lived in Springburn most of my life and I have seen firsthand the devastation that drugs can have on families, friends and communities. Speaking to a neighbour just this morning, we spoke about this issue and he said to me, how many people do we know in this street alone that I have lost our lives due to drugs? It hits home the fact that families up and down Scotland have been impacted by this dreadful crisis in some way. In the election campaign, Nicola Sturgeon admitted that her Government took the rai off the ball on this issue. After the drug death rate in Scotland almost tripled on the SNP's watch after 14 years in power. Played over many years, these are human costs and real life consequences of when a Government loses focus on tackling the issues that really matter. Two years ago, the SNP set up the drugs death task force. It had an explicit remit to improve the health outcomes for people who use drugs, reducing the risk of harm and death, and yet drug deaths continue to climb as more victims are needlessly losing their lives. It is no wonder that the failure of the task force to come up with any effective solutions to one of our nation's biggest challenges has been criticised by many third sector organisations. Victims, frankly, deserve better. Signals are real and these benches have consistently called for drug users to have better access to rehabilitation treatment and recovery programmes. However, as the First Minister admitted in the chamber this afternoon, the SNP's record in Government on this has fallen far short. The SNP Government only funded 13 per cent of residential rehab places in Scotland in 2019-20 at a time when we need them to go much further. According to the Government's own reports, waiting times for residential rehab can be up to a year. Nowhere near good enough for people often critically ill who require urgent support. In the last Parliament, the Scottish Conservatives helped to secure an extra £20 million per year for residential rehab facilities. Along with many charities, we have been convinced that more funding in this area will be effective in providing support and, most importantly, saving lives. I have been clear that my colleagues and I will continue to robustly hold this Government to account on drugs policy. However, wherever possible, I am open to having a constructive relationship with the minister. As things stand, Scotland's shameful drugs death crisis is expected to worsen. The action must be taken now and for the future. We on these benefits have appealed for cross-party support across the chamber to tackle this crisis. A key pillar of our approach will be opening up access to treatment in residential rehab. The Scottish Conservatives have pledged to bring forward 15 ambitious bills over the course of this Parliament to secure Scotland's recovery from Covid. One of which will be our right to recovery bills. Embedding our right to recovery bills will be the belief that everyone in Scotland should have a right to the necessary addiction treatment that they seek. Never again should we be in the situation in which fantastic recovery organisations need to seek legal counsel because people are denied access to rehabilitation or drug treatment. The time has come to completely rethink how we deliver rehabilitation services and addiction treatment or else we will continue to have more avoidable deaths. How the Government responds to this public health emergency will be one of the defining issues of this Parliament. I sincerely hope that the minister will heed the views across the chamber to use the powers that we already have in this Parliament on how we can reverse the drug death crisis. We have, in many words, over the years, what the time has now come for bold action. Scotland is watching, Presiding Officer, and we owe it to the victims to do better. When I last spoke in this chamber, I said that I was determined to build a consensus across this Parliament and across this country. I stress the point that consensus is not complacent and it is not cosy. It is about collaboration but it is also about challenge. Today's debate has been a very good reflection of that. Both Claire Baker and Pauline McNeill reflected that, as we are at the start of a new parliamentary term, it is now time to renew our commitment and renew our focus on solutions based on evidence and based on what will work. I give a commitment to chamber to absolutely be returning at regular intervals to chamber, to committee, to have one-to-one meetings, to have roundtables, because a debate like that can only, in many ways, ever scratch the surface. I will take the lady. Would the minister please consider reopening the Mulbury unit at Strachathrow hospital in Angus? I would be very grateful if Ms White would write to me on that matter, so I can ensure whether that is an issue for myself or perhaps the Cabinet Secretary for Health. I will certainly look out for that correspondence. I want to give a commitment to chamber that we really need a deeper dive into the integration of addiction and mental health services, access to healthcare, not excluding primary care, workforce planning and support and how we overcome issues of culture and also burn-out reporting and data are very important levers to change along with legislative options. There are issues in and around our criminal justice system, gender-based issues and issues with respect to other minorities. We will need a deeper dive debate around residential rehab and other harm reduction evidence-based interventions. I really appreciate the opportunity that you have set out to consider how that particular issue impacts on people from various different backgrounds. Will the minister consider taking an opportunity that is coming before us in this term, hopefully, to look at the incorporation of various different human rights into legislation in Scotland and how we can do that to strengthen the rights of various different groups of people, in particular with regard to people who have experienced drug use and their access to housing, their access to mental health support and their access to community care services? We absolutely need to have a rights-based approach to treatment in terms of whether we are going to address some of those very wicked issues around how we treat dependence on benzodiazepines. We need to be engaging in that debate with clinicians, guided by clinicians, developing that consensus so that we have a safer treatment option for people who, in particular, are using benzodiazepines. We are connecting that medication-assisted treatment with that broader agenda around housing and welfare, but the heart of it all needs to be choice and informed choice, our public health approach with rights throughout it all. We are not picking and choosing here. We need that whole systems solid approach. I notice that at the start of the debate Ms Webber, who I welcome to her position, spoke about how she is very much in favour of abstinence-based treatment. I, too, are supportive of resident rehab and abstinence-based models, but I want to paraphrase something that I read earlier this week. I do not support harm reduction over recovery, and I do not support recovery over harm reduction. I support people. We should be supporting people, and that is about the right treatment for the right person at the right time. Gillian Mackay spoke very powerfully about removing barriers and lowering thresholds to treatment. At the core of that is about getting more of our folk in to treatment that meets their needs, either to get them on the road to recovery or to stabilise them and to stop them dying. We must not see harm reduction in isolation from recovery or residential rehabilitation either. Many colleagues spoke about a trauma-informed approach. I will indeed say to Mr Cole-Hamilton that I will be meeting with Aberlawer and other providers very soon. I say to Stephanie Callaghan and Collette Stevenson, who really got to the heart of the matter about how we all need to take to our hearts the root causes of drug use. They both spoke about loss, hope and let's not leave this to luck. We will all be judged on our actions. Elaine Mackay spoke to us about her experience and the homelessness sector and how we need to all get out of silos. That, of course, would apply to political parties and how we all need to stick with people. I turn my attention to the amendments that I have left. I am accepting the Liberal Democrat amendment and I do appreciate Mr Cole-Hamilton's assurances that he is not seeking to direct the Lord Advocate. I have to put some words on the record that, in accepting Mr Cole-Hamilton's amendment, we will all understand that the Lord Advocate exercises her functions, reprosecutions of crime and investigations of deaths independently of any other person as enshined in the 1998 Scotland Act for well-established principles and reasons. No, thank you, Mr Briggs. I am not going to get into the debate about the role of the Lord Advocate, but we will come back to many other issues. I hope—no, because I am really short of time and I do not want to get sick of the belt of the Presiding Officer. I want to emphasise to Parliament that, irrespective of the constitutional opportunities and constraints, I am determined that we find solutions here in Scotland. On that basis, I am more than happy to accept the Green amendment. I cannot accept the Conservative amendment, I am sad to say, but I want to be very clear about where we agree and I think where we disagree. First, I want to assure the Conservative benches that I work collaboratively with everyone. That includes the UK Government, but I am not going to be ignored. I am not going to stand by and allow the UK Government to ignore our communities or, indeed, the will of this Parliament. I am not going to ignore the importance of the Miss Use of Drugs Act, because it is time for a grown-up debate based on the evidence and the growing evidence that the Miss Use of Drugs Act is incompatible with a public health approach to tackling our drugs death crisis. No, because I am really short of time and I apologise to Mr Briggs. I want to say that, in terms of enshrining a right to treatment, I would argue that our services already have a duty to provide treatment on the basis of other legislation, but I am genuinely open minded. We will look closely at the proposition when colleagues bring that forward. It will not rule it out. In the past, I have brought legislation to this Parliament in previous portfolios on the basis that sometimes we need legislation to lock in progress and to get us over the line. I want to assure the Parliament that the issues that you seek to address, we are engaged in that right now. That is about access, capacity and the money, of course. I am pleased to be able to accept and support the amendment from the Labour Party, because it does absolutely touch on that core pragmatic issue about implementation, about the scale of the change, absolutely about accountability and the importance of reporting on progress. I just want to say that, in terms of the new medication assisted treatment standards, it was not another politician, it was not a civil servant who persuaded me of the importance of those standards. It was Colin Hutchison, a parent who I met through Scottish families affected by drugs and alcohol. My very last word should go to those from the lived and living experience community. I am quoting Becky Wood, Alan Houston and Colin Hutchison when I say that the road to reducing drug-related deaths is rocky and twisting, but it is one that we must persevere on if we are to go anyway towards making Scotland a safe and happy place to live for everybody. All lives are precious, all children should expect to be nurtured and feel safe, all parents should expect their children to live long, productive lives. We believe that it is vital that we adapt and evolve our current systems using compassion, kindness, respect and dignity. That concludes the debate on tackling drug-related deaths, and it is now time to move on to the next item of business. I raised a point of order yesterday about members speaking remotely, even though they are here in their offices and even though there are clearly free spaces in the chamber. Interventions can enliven a debate and interventions can only be made and taken in the chamber. The technology that we are using currently does not allow for interventions on virtual speeches. I would also add that the people of Scotland who are watching the proceedings will be bemused that members are speaking virtually when they are physically here on the parliamentary estate. I understand the principle of members who are in Parliament and participating in debates and making contributions was raised at a recent meeting of the corporate body. Although we understand that parties have chamber arrangements, it should not be impossible to vary those such that any member making a speech can do so from the chamber when they are actually here in Holyrood, because not doing so quite unfairly gives the impression to others here and watching at home that the member has been reluctant to allow their arguments to be subject to intervention. Would you, as Presiding Officer, please give some guidance to Parliament on what is the orderly way for our business to proceed in relation to this matter? I thank Mr Kerr for advance notice of this point of order. Seating in the chamber is currently restricted, as we know, as a result of Covid restrictions. It is, of course, for parties to determine allocations of available seats and not a matter for standing orders. Although all remote contributions do not currently enable interventions, I appreciate that Mr Kerr is referring to specific circumstances and it may be the case that this is an issue that the Bureau will wish to discuss. The next item of business is consideration of parliamentary bureau, motion number 429, on committee membership. I ask George Adam on behalf of the parliamentary bureau to move the motion. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. It was a long time coming, but formally moved. Thank you. The question on this motion will be put at decision time. There are six questions to be put as a result of today's business. The first is amendment 400.1, in the name of Sue Weber, which seeks to amend motion 400, in the name of Angela Constance, on tackling drug-related deaths, be agreed. Are we all agreed? The Parliament is not agreed, therefore we will move to a vote, and there will be a short suspension to allow members to access the digital voting system.