 The final item of business today is a member's business debate on motion number 11065, in the name of Linda Fabiani, on 10 October is World Mental Health Day. This debate will be concluded without any questions being put. I invite those members who wish to speak in the debate to please press the request to speak buttons now or as soon as possible. Ms Fabiani, if you are ready, would you like to open the debate? Seven minutes please or thereby. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. Yes, I would like to open this debate because it's a very, very important debate. It's something that matters every single day of our lives, but in fact the motion mentions 10 October, because 10 October was World Mental Health Day, and it's a very, very important day to reflect upon. It's a day of global mental health education, awareness and advocacy. We all have physical health and mental health to some degree, and just like physical health, mental health does not discriminate when it sends along problems, and there is so much that is linked into someone's mental health and sense of wellbeing. First, I would like to welcome the work that this Parliament has achieved over recent years. In 2005, the Mental Health Care and Treatment Scotland Act 2003 came into practice, set in motion by the previous Labour and Lib Dem Government and carried through by the SNP minority government, but backed by absolutely everyone in this Parliament. It was regarded as one of the most progressive pieces of mental health legislation in the world. Again, under the current Government, there has been a big focus with the mental health strategy 2012-15, setting out key commitments in relation to improving the nation's mental health and wellbeing. As I said earlier, like good physical health, good mental health cannot be assumed by anyone. Anyone at all can be diagnosed with a mental illness, yet, unlike with many forms of physical illness and problems, those with mental health problems clearly suffer from discrimination and stigma. There is prejudice and misguided stereotyping about mental illness, which has to be tackled. That is why charities such as CME are so important because they tackle that stigma and all the disadvantages that are put upon people who suffer poor mental health. Of course, sensationalist media stories do not help either. We have all seen those, and I will not give them the dignity of repeating any of the terrible headlines that we have seen over the years here. I think that, if we are all very honest, we have to admit that there are times that our own language is perhaps not as good as it could be. I know that I am certainly guilty of that now and then, but times move on, and terminology, which was perhaps normal and accepted years ago, is no longer perceived that way, so that is a way of moving on. Talking about things like that, there are common misconceptions about many aspects of mental health, and World Mental Health Day 2014 shone the spotlight on schizophrenia. Around 1 in 100 Scots experienced schizophrenia at some point in their lives. I reckon that 26 million people have that illness worldwide. The major symptoms include hallucinations, delusions and fatigue. Of course, the word schizophrenia does not mean that someone has a split personality or has multiple personalities, such as the common usage that has been described over the years, both in real life and in depiction, in TV, in novels and in film. It is important that we raise awareness of that condition. It is an important illness to raise awareness of, so widely misunderstood. Again, back to the sensationalising of stories in the mainstream media, it exacerbates the problem of discrimination against those with schizophrenia. For example, it is regular misunderstanding that people with schizophrenia are violent, whereas the reality is that people with mental illness are much more likely to be the victim of a crime than to be the perpetrator. Health inequalities for people with schizophrenia are alarming, too. Those with illness are expect—sorry, Sandra, I heard a wee voice in my ear, and there it was you. Thank you, Presiding Officer, and I thank the member for taking an intervention. The member rightly raised some issues there, but could I ask the member if she believes that one of the most important aspects of the mental health strategy is raising the awareness of mental health issues, particularly among professionals, as perhaps in the criminal profession, not in the criminal profession, but in the police, the justice and even in doctors as well, raising that awareness of people with mental health issues? I think that that is absolutely right. I think that there is institutional bias against people who have mental health issues, and I think that that very much has to be tackled. That feeds into the inequalities that we have, not just the health inequalities that those with illness expected to die 20 years younger than the average life expectancy, and poor physical health is a major issue facing people with schizophrenia and associated mental health problems, too, but then there is the employment issue. Nine in 10 people with schizophrenia are not employed, despite most being able to work. That is because of direct discrimination, misconception, both institutional and from the general public. There is another issue, which is that sometimes people with schizophrenia are very reluctant to take help. I know that I have, over the years, dealt with constituents, for example, who are suffering that institutional discrimination that we are talking about, and who have been diagnosed with schizophrenia. Because of that terrible stigma that we put on it, they do not want to even say the word or talk to professionals in the vertical commas that could indeed help them. There are big issues there. I also think that there is an issue about early diagnosis, and I do have concerns—the minister will be able to tell us more. I have concerns about waiting times for child and young adult mental health referrals and the early diagnosis kicks into that. In my motion, I mentioned support in mind Scotland, and that is a charity that focuses on supporting people with severe mental illness and their supporters. In fact, locally, in my constituency of East Kilbride, there has been a support group there for over 35 years, and I have attended many of their events over the years that I have been representing in that area. Another big shout-out for Sheila McLeod in the Eleanor Gardner is that, for 35 or 36 years, those two women have been heading up that organisation. That is back to what I said about the fact that, so often, people do not want to speak to professionals. That is where the voluntary sector really comes into its own and can gain the trust of people who really need that bit of help. I am aware of the time, Presiding Officer. I will close here. I just want to mention another constituency organisation, which is Theatre Nemo. Again, that confidence building and relationships building can come from drama, culture and the arts. It is so very important. Let us celebrate supporting mind Scotland's 30th anniversary. Let us support the 1 in 100 campaign, which has just been launched. Let us make yet another pledge here in this chamber that wherever we come across stigma and discrimination for mental health issues, we will stand against it. Colin Malcom Chisholm, to be followed by John Mason. I am bringing the subject of mental health to the chamber in recognition of World Mental Health Day earlier this month. The motion points out that there is this year a particular focus on schizophrenia and the impact that mental illness has on the lives of individuals and families across Scotland and the wider world. I will stick to that particular aspect, although I agree with what Linda Fabiana said at the beginning of her speech about the mental health act, CME and other initiatives. I think that there has been a great deal of continuity between this and the previous Government on those developments. As she points out, the support in mind Scotland has been running now for 30 years and doing exceptional work in bringing the issues faced by sufferers into the public consciousness, challenging stigma and raising awareness. The first stage of their 1 in 100 campaign was launched earlier this month, with a broad inquiry into people's experience of living with schizophrenia and the obstacles that they face in navigating everyday life. Their efforts to reach communities in Scotland who have experience of coping with mental illness is commendable, reaching out to share best practice and learn from the experience of others. I notice that they have a particular interest in the English schizophrenia commission's report on schizophrenia in England called The Abandoned Illness. I think that some of the findings from that report are interesting. I do not know if the minister can comment on whether there are similar features in Scotland. For example, premature mortality rates, that report says, for people with schizophrenia are dying 15 to 20 years younger than their fellow citizens. It also talks about poor employment outcomes, little support for families and significant fear to speak up because of stigma. I imagine that many of those features are also present in relation to schizophrenia in Scotland. The group is keen to emphasise the mutual experiences of service users in Scotland and England on the basis of those findings, which present ample evidence for taking a more targeted approach to mental health services. They propose—this is very interesting—to carry out a review of the report and the findings to consider what applies here in Scotland and what the response of polyps and makers should be. To carry out this analysis, a small steering group of academics and professionals has been convened from across the NHS and other mental health networks. That will be another interesting report when it appears. The mental health foundation has also taken a great deal of interest in schizophrenia. It points out that, around the world, 26 million people live with schizophrenia. They are keen to highlight that the perceptions of mental health in schizophrenia are slowly changing and many who are asked state that, in fact, people with schizophrenia are not the danger to others once believed, so that is certainly progress, although there is still further to go and not least in the media. Moreover, if you are diagnosed with schizophrenia, they say that, while it is a cause of concern, it should not mean that you lose the capacity to have a full and productive life. That can be helped by co-ordinating services more efficiently, which is one of the areas highlighted as an issue in the report on England that I previously mentioned. There needs to be a joined-up approach to treatment and support, and that starts with early intervention and accurate signposting. Most importantly, the view that treating conditions such as schizophrenia should be seen as being as important as treating physical conditions, just because an illness is not visible does not mean that it is any less critical. Without vital early diagnosis, a mental illness can very quickly lead to physical symptoms and also self-harm. One of the worrying features is that people with schizophrenia and, indeed, other mental illnesses often are not looked after as effectively in terms of their other more straightforwardly physical health. The motion speaks of the one in every hundred people who have a life expectancy of 15 to 20 years less because of their mental illness. That enormous disparity tells us all that we need to know about the serious challenges that are faced in terms of improving outcomes for those with schizophrenia. The worsening mental health of each individual effect should not come at the cost of deteriorating physical health. A paper published last year in the British Medical Journal by Glasgow University's Dr Daniel Smith concluded that, and I quote, "...people with schizophrenia have a wide range of co-morbid and multiple physical health conditions but are less likely than people without schizophrenia to have a primary care record of cardiovascular disease. This suggests a systematic under-recognition and under-treatment of cardiovascular diseases in people with schizophrenia, which might contribute to substantial premature mortality observed within that patient group." In short, that suggests that people are dying earlier because of delayed diagnosis. Now is the time to recognise this kind of link and to make a pointed attempt to achieve the more preventative approach that the mental health strategy sets out to do. I support the motion and welcome world mental health day's focus on this much misunderstood condition. Many thanks. I now call on John Mason to be followed by Mary Scanlon. Thank you to Linda Fabiani for bringing up the subject. I have to say that when I saw the title I was very keen to speak in the debate, as it has become increasingly clear to me that mental health is a major issue that we face and needs more attention. For example, recently in my own constituency a care home was proposed and folk in the community were broadly happy that that should go ahead, assuming that it was for elderly or similar residents. It then turned out that it was to be for folk with mental health issues and there was a fair degree of reaction in the community with concerns about the residents being a danger and a lot of misinformation was spread around. The company has said that building the home has given us a lot more information now, and I would say that most constituents are reassured by that, but I have to say that there has been a hard core in the area who have not been willing to listen. Routinely, we have constituents come into my office about housing or other problems, but my staff and myself often feel that there is a mental health angle to it. I would like to say that I am particularly grateful to GAMH, SAMH and CME for the advice, information and support that they have given. However, that was really underlined to me last week when I had three issues in the constituency, all of which made it into the media and all of which had a mental health angle. Firstly, I have a family where the 19-year-old daughter has anorexia and relations between the NHS staff and the family have become somewhat fraught. Now, I am convinced that all involved want the best for this young woman, but we are struggling to get the meeting of minds on how to move forward, and, sadly, one person was actually arrested last week involved in the case. I was very glad to see today that the evening times on pages 12 and 13 had a spread on anorexia and mentioned CME as part of that. The headline, Anorexia, had wrecked my body, but even worse was the stigma. This is a story that has to be said with a positive outcome. Bravely Ann has battled to a normal weight and is now backing mental health campaign, which is encouraging. The second case, which also had a fair amount of coverage, was between a well-known female writer and her ex-partner, who is a musician and is one of my constituents. I would most certainly agree that we should have adequate laws in place to protect actual and potential victims of stalking, and I am happy if the law is to be reviewed. However, we have to have a balance with our responsibilities to the other party in this case and in such cases who might have a mental health issue. Often, that person is not acting out of malice, and I do not accept that one suggestion that was made that anyone challenged with a stalking charge could say that they have a mental health problem. I think that that in itself is to play down mental health issues, as if they did not have an objective reality. I very much hope that there will be no rush to change legislation without taking all angles of this into account. If it is brief, yes. Suggesting that someone should have to suffer appalling behaviour from someone just and that they will be excused on the grounds of mental health problems. There is a debate on how appalling—there is a whole range. There is stalking that is malicious, but there is stalking that is just stupid and unwise and is a result of mental health issues, and I think that that is slightly more of what we had there. The third case is the Bellgrove hotel in my constituency, which some members may be aware of. It is really a hostel for homeless men rather than a hotel, and it is one of the last large homeless hostels in Glasgow. However, it is run by a private company and so avoids the care inspectorate and most other regulation. Last week, it received a new HMO licence for 160 residents, and it generally has about 140. My understanding is that a number of those men have mental health issues and are regularly in contact with the local mental health team in Parkhead. I cannot believe that the Bellgrove is the right place for them to be, and I cannot accept that the only regulation that it needs is an HMO licence. What it says to me again is that we are not taking mental health in this case seriously enough. All of these examples say to me that we are not taking mental health seriously enough. Just to mention one point, which Malcolm Chisholm also mentioned, that particularly struck me in the motion, was this about 15 to 20 years less life expectancy? So please, nobody should say to us that this is not a real and serious health issue. I would also like to thank Linda Fabiani for securing this debate on World Mental Health Day and for giving us the opportunity to debate the critical issue that is mental health. In response to Senator White, Linda mentioned early diagnosis and institutional issues, but I would also say that for many people it is not only early diagnosis, for many people it is a lack of diagnosis. Although the motion shines a spotlight on schizophrenia, many issues relating to this condition also apply to most other mental health conditions, including difficulties getting employment, discrimination and stigma, shortened life expectancy, as other members have said, and so much more. Farns the motion highlights the work of the East Kilbride support group. I would also like to acknowledge the work of hug, the Highland users group on mental health, which is very competently managed by Graeme Morgan. As a member of the health committee, which scrutinised the mental health care and treatment act 2003, with nearly 3,000 amendments at stage 2, I hoped that significant improvements in early diagnosis, early intervention, appropriate treatment and support, such as part on antidepressants, access to CBT, cognitive behavioural therapy and other therapies, psychology and psychiatry specialists, advocacy and treatment with dignity and respect. I hoped and trusted that all those issues that we discussed in the first session of this Parliament would be significantly improved 10 and more years later. However, when I looked at a recent briefing paper from the Royal College of Psychiatrists, I doubt the progress and the success of the previous legislation. The Royal College of Psychiatrists paper, and I quote directly from the paper, despite its long-standing position as a priority within health policy, remains the case that mental health services do not receive the same degree of focus for funding as other diseases. Secondly, mental health is responsible for 23 per cent of the disease burden, yet it gets 11 per cent of the budget. The life expectancy of those with severe mental health on average is 20 years less for men and 15 years less for women. Depression is associated with a 50 per cent increased mortality, a threefold increased risk of death in subsequent years in coronary heart disease and disparity in research funding, which particularly applies to schizophrenia. One of the UK funders on health research showed that mental health got 6.5 per cent of total funding, despite it being 23 per cent of patients who suffered from that. The recent Health and Social Care Act for England sets parity for mental health and physical health, and I would be thrilled to bits if that was the case. I hope that it will be in this Parliament. So often, especially Richard Simpson and others, we spoke about dual diagnosis. People with mental health and also drug addiction and alcohol addiction. We know that many people use alcohol and drugs as self-medication to mask and cope with mental health issues, and here it is again in the Royal College of Psychiatry paper. Then we talked about for older people in dementia, access to psychological and other services is much poorer for older people, and they make plenty points, but they are still saying that the college is concerned that the lack of adolescent intensive psychiatric care units for young people with need for this that are required to be admitted to adult units. And also the consultant vacancies in psychiatry. I appreciate that psychiatrists are not the only specialists, but it is disappointing to read all the issues raised in this paper from the Royal College, given that they were all raised 11 years ago when the mental health legislation was passed by this Parliament and implemented it later. Finally, I just wanted to mention the experiences that others have mentioned about trying to help constituents find support, particularly in relation to personality disorders. The time taken to diagnose this condition and indeed the need to look at the transition from child to adult services is very, very poor indeed. I think that I would probably overstep my time, so I will leave it there, but I am pleased to have the opportunity to speak in this debate and thank Linda Fabiani. Thank you very much. I now call on Stewart Stevenson to be followed by Liam McArthur. Thank you, Presiding Officer, and thank you very much to Linda Fabiani. Let's make this personal. Statistically, every one of us here has a 50-50 chance that at some time in our lives somebody whom we have a direct one-to-one relationship with in a familial sense will suffer mental ill health. That's two parents, a partner, and a single offspring, which statistically is what we have as relationships, so it will be close to home. I've only discovered in the last year, for example, that one of my mother's aunts lived most of her life locked away in the asylum in Loch Gilpedd. Never talked about, I never knew that she existed until I was doing some family research. That was the past, that was the stigma that happened and it simply wasn't talked about. I very much enjoyed in 1964 working for some six or seven months in a psychiatric hospital as a nurse, as a 17-year-old before going on to university. It was a time when the treatment was, if you were seriously mentally ill, you were locked in a ward and forgotten about. The staffing levels were appallingly poor. The world today is very different and let's hope that that is good. Let's just talk about a few things. Awareness. What does it mean for the sufferer? Not all people who suffer from mental ill health are self-aware that they have a problem. We can't do much about that, but what we can do, the family and everyone else, is, by being aware of the needs of that person, be there to support them when they need it. Be there to catch them when they fall. Be there to lift them back up when they need it. Treatment. There is health treatment that we need for people with mental ill health and we are increasing investment in that and that is very welcome. Albeit, as Mary Scanlon correctly highlighted, it is still very much the poor relation financially, but also more critically the poor relation in terms of being a chosen specialism for people with medical training. That is even more critical than money, because if we don't have the people with the skills, we can't actually spend the money to help the people who need it. I think that we all have to be careful about the social interactions that we have with people with degrees for mental ill health. Let's put a positive spin on some of this, because having a different mental approach to things, although it creates a huge burden for people, can deliver benefit. I want to highlight the careers of three famous schizophrenics. First of whom is Vincent Van Gogh. He died at the age of 37, and he did so because he shot himself. This is not the place to explore why there is doubt about that, but he produced the most wonderful impressionistic art. There is little doubt that the way his brain and his mind worked was a contributor to that. However, he paid a huge price for that, but he delivered a great deal for us, which we remember to this day. Clara Ball, the It girl, was one of the first stars in the silent cinema and continued on into the area of the talkies. She suffered from schizophrenia for her entire life, but contributed enormously to the experience and enjoyment of others. Najinsky, the great dancer, was schizophrenic and, like Clara Ball, died relatively early at the age of 60. Many of those people were in the artistic domain rather than science or other domains, but many others could speak about it. Let's remember that people with mental illness are there and can make a huge contribution, sometimes aided by the fact that they have that mental illness. We talk about stress in our modern society. Stress is good as long as it pushes us forward within our ability to deal with the stress. For too many people in the complex world in which we live, stress gets overloaded and becomes distressed and can lead to mental ill health. We have to each and every one of us be watching for that to happen. Let me conclude by saying that, ultimately, of course, one of the outcomes from some people's mental ill health is suicide. My life has been unfortunate to be close to three different people who have committed suicide. One who did so because of a chemical imbalance arising from a physical condition that led to suicide at the age of 18, another who suffered post-natal depression through herself of a high building, and the third one, to this day, no sign of suicide coming to this day. We do not know why suicide took place. That is a mystery wrapped in enigma, but we all individually have a duty to help people with mental ill health, to guide them to treatment, to make sure that we, as parliamentarians, provide the resources to help them. I now call on Liam McArthur to be followed by Mark McDonald. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I start like others, but I congratulate my good friend Linda Fabiani in giving us this opportunity to rather belatedly mark World Mental Health Day, which, as others have said, focuses on the area of schizophrenia this year. I think that that gives me an opportunity to commend and support in mind Scotland for its excellent 1 in 100 campaign. Again, this is just the latest debate that we have on the issue of mental health. I was very fortunate to take part in the debate led by my Liberal Democrat colleague Jim Hume back in April. I may return to one or two of the points that I made on that occasion. It struck me during the course of that debate that many, if not all of the members across the chamber who contributed were doing so by drawing on some element of personal experience. I think Stuart Stevenson rightly drew us back to that approach in this debate. It came as no surprise. The figures from Sam H and others suggest that 1 in 4 will suffer from a mental illness at some point through the life that three out of four of us will know somebody fairly directly who suffers from poor mental health. The mental illness remains the dominant health problem for people of working age. It continues to damage careers, relationships and lives and comes at a colossal financial as well as human cost. As Linda Fabiani fairly observed, there has been a succession of initiatives over many years in successive administrations. I would like to congratulate the current Government on the mental health strategy, which, as waiting times targets, places an emphasis on data collection, both of which are absolutely fundamental to ensuring timely delivery and diagnosis and effective treatment thereafter. That treatment can safeguard the welfare of the individual in the first instance. Without offering any guarantees, it also increases the chances of that person enjoying good mental health subsequently. However, encouraging early signs of progress towards meeting those targets, there are aspects of recent figures that suggest that there are calls for some concern. I think that Mary Scanlon pointed to some of those. At a regional level, we are seeing variations between health boards that Sam H earlier this year suggested that we are giving rise to a postcode lottery. For example, additional experts have been recruited, but the evidence of significant variations in the per capita ratio of psychologists in different parts of the country is a cause for concern, particularly in rural areas. As I said in the debate in April, Sam H, a nowhere to go campaign, found that people living in remote and rural areas face additional barriers to accessing information, help and support. A culture of self-reliance and stoicism in places such as Orkney can work against efforts to get people with health issues, including poor mental health, to engage early with medical professionals. Even with a wider community as a source of support, that can almost make things more difficult and increase the fear of stigma, not just in relation to the individual but also to their wider family. The result is that delays in people to seek help for mental health problems, as Sam H explained, the later individuals engaged with health services, the more complex their treatment and recovery will be. In the islands, I represent, there are additional practical difficulties as well. The Blyde Trust and Orkney Minds, who do fantastic work, highlight a lack of transfer beds at the Balfour hospital for those who may require a spell of hospital on the mainland, or instances of poor discharge planning affecting patients returning to Orkney. While those involved in the mental health team in Orkney carry out phenomenally good work, there is an opportunity with the move to the new Balfour hospital, the further integration of health and care services in the islands, to look at how the needs of those with mental health patients can be addressed more timuously and more effectively. I am sure that that will be the focus of an event that the Blyde Trust is organising next month, at which I am looking forward to taking part. The stakes are high. Sam H highlights suicide rates that are twice as high as those with mental health issues, as Stuart Stevenson observed. I think that each of us probably have some knowledge of a close friend. In my case, a guy called Andrew Harrison, whom I worked with in Westminster back in the early 90s, committed suicide almost out of the blue. Those rates are not unusual. The mortality rates in the Fabianianian emotion alludes to a far, far higher for those with mental health issues. I was noticing a report from the British Journal of Psychiatry, a Nordic study— Do you draw to expose those, please? Even with improvements, what we are seeing is far, far highlights of mortality. It is just one of the reasons why mental health needs to be put on a similar footing to physical health. As I said in April, that is an issue that needs to be discussed openly, taken seriously and addressed effectively. It is not a second-class condition and ultimately there is no good health without good mental health. Again, in closing, I welcome the fact that Linda Fabiani has brought this debate. I look forward to the minister's response. Thank you very much indeed. Many thanks. I now call Mark McDonald after which we will move to the closing speech of the minister. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I think that it has been a very interesting debate so far, and I take on board the point that Stuart Stevenson makes. One of the people who has been a very strong influence on me in terms of my interests in mental health issues is a former council colleague of mine, Councillor Jim Kiddie, who is a representative of Tory and Ferry Hill on Aberdeen City Council. Jim has spoken openly in the council chamber and at SNP conferences in the past about his own issues with mental health and his own mental health problems. Jim has been a fantastic champion on issues related to mental health and has inspired those of us who take an interest in those issues. I, too, recognise the points that Stuart Stevenson made. One in every four of us will likely experience a mental health problem at some stage in our lives, and that emphasises further the point that Stuart Stevenson made about those in our social networks, our family networks as well. One of the things that always strikes me aside from the stigma issue and the fact that, to this day, 9 out of 10 people are reporting that they feel that there is a stigma attached to them revealing a mental health condition, whether that is in work education with healthcare professionals or in their own home life, is the fact that often there is a cartoon that is shared on social media that compares how things would be if we treated physical health in the way that we treat mental health in society. Have you tried not having a broken arm? Maybe you should try cheering up a bit and that will stop the bleeding. That is essentially the realms that we would be in if we spoke in the way that we do about mental health, often about physical health. It is worth noting that Halloween is just around the corner and Halloween is one of those times when it is fair to say that mental health is probably at its most misrepresented. Who could forget the controversy that was created just the other year with some major supermarket chains having to withdraw what were very inappropriate costumes, mental patient costumes that were designed to perpetuate the stigma that people with mental health conditions are dangerous in some ways. It is almost without foundation, but it has continued to be perpetuated by some elements of the media that, somehow, if people have a mental health condition, they become dangerous. I think that we also need to focus on beyond how we treat mental health in terms of both recognising the needs of the individual and also how we look to future treatments that could be realised. One of the things that I found while flicking through the news earlier in the year was research that had been undertaken at Aberdeen University, which has identified a potential genetic mutation of the ULK4 gene that could be linked to schizophrenia. There is more work that needs to be done, and the academics behind this at the University of Aberdeen's medical science department have said that there is more work that needs to be done, but they are encouraged by the work that they have done that could enhance understanding of how schizophrenia takes form in those individuals who are affected by it. However, there is always the potential, if we have identified potential genetic mutations and genetic markers, to also look at how future treatments for the condition may be informed as a result of that. It is important that we recognise the work that is being done by the many organisations across Scotland to raise awareness and to tackle stigma, but we must also recognise the work that is being done across Scotland by our dedicated medical professionals and researchers to try to get to the bottom of how conditions such as schizophrenia take form and to hopefully work on treatments for the future that can help tackle that at a much earlier stage. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I, like others, begin by offering my congratulations to Linda Fabiani in securing time for this debate in recognising World Mental Health Day, which was a few weeks ago. I also welcome the fact that we are having a debate on mental health. I think that several speakers, Liam McArthur, have made mention of the fact that we have had regular debates in this Parliament on mental health issues. Although there are very often a lot of focus around services that are provided by the statutory sector or health service in particular, there is also a tremendous amount of work that is undertaken by third sector organisations in helping to support individuals with mental illness, including support in mind Scotland, and the volunteers that Linda Fabiani made referred to in her East Kilbride support group. Part of the work that we take forward as a Government is to support organisations such as support in mind, which we presently financially support over a three-year financial programme to 2017, to help them to deliver some of our shared objectives of improving wellbeing and the quality of life for people who are affected by mental illness. The challenge is very clear, Presiding Officer. Mental illness is one of the top public health challenges in Europe. It is estimated that mental health disorders affects more than a third of the population every year. People with mental disorders have a much higher mortality rate than the general population dying on average more than 10 years earlier than others at a point that was referred to by Malcolm Chisholm in his contribution. That is why, as a Government, mental health is one of the Scottish Government's clinical priorities, our priorities in this area are taken forward as part of our mental health strategy and the 36 commitments that have been set out in the existing mental health strategy. Within the sector, there is a broad consensus that the approach that has been set out in the mental health strategy is the right one and it can help to deliver further improvements in the services that we all wish to see happening on a consistent basis. One of the areas that I am keen to see further progress in is to help to reduce the variation and availability of services and to increase the pace of change in the delivery of quality mental health services for those who need them. It might be helpful, Presiding Officer, if I outline to some of the members here today the progress that has been made is part of the commitments that were set out within the mental health strategy. There are already seven commitments that have been, of course—I will give way to Mr Carter. To the minister for taking intervention. As I said in my own remarks, I very much welcome the approach that has been taken by the strategy. You will recall the exchange that we had in the debate in April about the legal status or priority attached to mental health as compared to physical health. Does he not believe that perhaps a signal that that would serve in terms of parity within the law might address some of the issues that Stewart Stevenson was recognising about the point that it would give to people in terms of the disciplines that they would pursue through higher education and the research funding that would go into those sorts of conditions? Let me come to that point slightly later on in some of the issues that I want to address, because I want to go through a couple of the issues around the policy that has been set out within the mental health strategy. The Mental Health and Treatment Act is probably not the right basis in which to measure the progress that has been made because the legislation is not there for the purposes of on-going operational policy purposes, but it might be helpful if I can set out some of the progress that has been made in turn to some of the points that I intend to that Mr MacArthur raised. There are seven commitments that have already been completed, and the remainder, well under way, are scheduled for work in 2015. Although there is not time to cover all of those areas, I want to go into a few of them. One of them is in the issue of tackling stigma and discrimination, which a number of members have made reference to in the CME campaign, Scotland's Anti-Stigma and Anti-Discrimination programme. That is a programme that is hosted on behalf of the Scottish Government by the Scottish Association for Mental Health and the Mental Health Foundation. It was refounded, it was principally focused on stigma, and it has been extended to not only the deal with stigma but also discrimination, and in a partnership that we forge with Comet Relief, funding has gone from £1 million a year to £1.5 million a year. That has allowed us to significantly increase the level of funding that goes into this area. In refounding it, a key part of it is looking at areas where people have particular experience of discrimination and stigma, in particular in the workplace, and also in accessing health and social care services. That is why we are giving a particular focus as part of the new campaign to make sure that it focuses in those areas. Linda Fabiani and others have raised the issue about the challenge that individuals with a mental ill health can experience in being able to gain access to employment. Again, that was a key commitment that was set out within the mental health strategy. We have the stakeholders group, which is made up of the Scottish Government, health, local authorities, the DWP third sector, specialist employment providers, who are drawing together a report with recommendations to the Scottish Government on what works for mental health employability. In order to look at what measures we can take further in order to improve employment opportunities for those with mental illness. I want to turn to another point that was raised by Linda Fabiani on calm services, child and adolescent mental health services. I also want to pick up a particular point that Mary Scanlon made about what she feels is a lack of any improvements taking place. Mary Scanlon was on the health committee with me in the last parliamentary session when we investigated the whole issue of access to child and adolescent mental health services. At that point, we found that there were significant deficiencies in being able to access child and adolescent mental health services. What has happened since 2008? We have set the heat target for faster access to child and adolescent mental health services to 18 weeks, which applies as of December this year. Over the past couple of years, we have seen a significant increase in referrals, and the number of individuals being treated has increased significantly. We have started to see waiting times on average for those services across the country to be between eight and ten weeks, which is a significant improvement on the inquiry that the health committee undertook into that area. We have also saw significant financial investment into that area. Since 2009, there has been an additional £13.5 million invested into child and adolescent mental health services. What has that resulted in? A 45 per cent increase in the workforce within the CAMH service, because one of the things that the committee identified was a lack of staff within the child and adolescent mental health services. That is not to say that everything is right in this area and that we do not have waiting times in some areas that are still far too long, but what we are seeing is a general level of improvement taking place. What we want to do is to make sure that we build on that yet further. We have also applied waiting times for access to psychological therapies as well. The reason why we set that waiting time target for psychological therapies, which again comes into force as of this December, was to create the parity that we have with physical services in a way that has not been applied anywhere else in the UK. Having something that states something in a bit of legislation does not mean that you deliver parity. Parity is delivered by the policy that you deliver on the ground, and that is why Scotland is the only part of the UK that has so far set a target for accessing mental health services that is equal with that of physical health services. I will give way to Mary Scanlon. I remember the days on the health committee when you were minister. I said that progress was disappointing, but it would be absolutely wrong to say that there would be no progress. I can remember the days when it was years rather than months and weeks. Everything that I quoted today in the lack of progress came from the Royal College of Psychiatry, which was very vocal, in the first mental health legislation. However, I did not have time to mention the fact that although you can see a mental health specialist within a certain time, they also said that 5,300 children at June this year are still waiting to access treatment in this service. That causes concern. I do not want to give the impression, as I said, that everything is as good as we would wish it to be, but we are a process of improving those services. We want to maintain that, and that is what the mental health strategy sets out. However, I think that you would agree that it would be wrong to give the impression that no improvement had taken place and that we were not making progress in improving in this area as well. I will turn as well to— How would you do Russia if you draw to her clothes? If I can. It was points that were read by Malcolm Chisholm, particularly around life expectancy and poor employment opportunities. I mentioned the commitment that we set out in the mental health strategy about trying to improve employability in opportunities and the work that we are taking forward in that. The mental health strategy also addresses that second point around life expectancy and some of the work that we are doing in that area. I finish on that particular point, which I think that members would find very useful. We are going to publish a 10-year review report that will provide us with an opportunity to obtain a national picture of mental health services Scotland from 2003 to 2013, so that we can see where the challenges remain, but where the progress has also been made. We should have that report by the end of this year, and we should be able to publish it early in the new year, which I have no doubt will help to inform members about where the areas of work that need further progress can be undertaken. I assure members that this is an area that continues to be a priority to the Scottish Government, and we will continue to build on the progress that we have made in recent years. I welcome the particular interest that so many members in this chamber show in the area of mental health.