 The next item of business is a debate on motion 3625, in the name of Keith Brown, on a person-centred trauma-informed public health approach to substance use in the justice system. I would invite those members who wish to speak in the debate, please press the request to speak buttons now or to enter R in the chat function. I call on Keith Brown, Cabinet Secretary, to speak to and to move the motion around 11 minutes, please. Thank you, Presiding Officer. In January, we marked the first year of the national mission to reduce drug-related deaths and harms. The groundwork has been laid, addressing the issues head on across government, health, justice, housing and education, and putting in place the investment and actions so that we can focus on delivering change on the ground. This change is urgently needed. Every drug-related death is a tragedy and we are again reminded of the need for continued and collective action by the quarterly suspected drug death statistics published yesterday. Sadly, we know that many people in the justice system, whether at the point of arrest in the community or in custody, have drug or alcohol issues. I welcome the opportunity today to reflect on the steps that the Scottish Government and its partners are taking across the justice system and the steps that we have already taken to reduce drug-related deaths and harms and how those will be built upon in the future. He has formed part of the person-centred and trauma-informed approach that underpins our vision for justice. It will be central to how we work with people in contact with the justice system, including people with drugs or alcohol problems. It is a bold, transformative vision of the future justice system for Scotland that sets out clear aims and priorities, including a focus on rehabilitation and shifting the balance between the use of custody and justice in the community. I want to be clear that this approach is not the easy option to take, but it is the right option. The Scottish Government is committed to focusing on what works, what everyone demonstrates makes a meaningful and lasting change. It is not about soft justice, it is about what is most effective. It is about what works to make communities safer and reduces victimisation and harm. It is not about building more prisons, putting more people in them and hoping for the best. That would be soft justice and the easy option. A person-centred and trauma-informed approach begins with the recognition of the need to treat everyone with respect, regardless of their background, providing support to empower people to make positive changes in their lives. It is clear that 50 years of outdated drug legislation that focuses on criminalising people with complex needs, rather than on how services can support them into recovery, has caused more harm than good. We have known for years that police cannot simply arrest their way out of the current drugs emergency in Scotland. Many different groups of experts have looked at the misuse of drugs act and concluded that change is needed. Across both the Scottish Government and the drug desk task force, work is under way, intended to change the way that we work within the current law, and I appreciate the work that is done by the task force to date on this. An action plan has been developed to respond to the proposals on the phase 1 report on how to take forward a second phase of drug law reform consultation and to lead a national conversation in Scotland to show that the evidence is clear and that it is time to act. Ultimately, we believe that the best way to reduce drug-related crime and the associated harms is to provide opportunities to access appropriate treatment and support services at every point of the criminal justice system. This is what the Scottish Government and justice partners are actively working towards. An excellent example of the positive steps taken to date include recorded police warnings. Last year, the Lord Advocate emphasized that the Lord Advocate is not the SNP Government, she is not speaking on behalf of the Government when she acts in this area, she is independent, and she announced that the recorded police warnings may be used for all classes of drug possession. If this was a decision for the Lord Advocate, I welcome this change, which can help towards a shift to a public health approach. There are other encouraging examples of effective practice. The drug deaths task force has developed a police referral peer navigator programme, which is offering person-centre support to people who use drugs at the first point of contact with the police, facilitating entry to wider services and the help that they need. I very much welcome the leadership and progressive approach of Police Scotland in supporting this and other operational decisions that help to save lives. For example, the recent decision by the chief constable to roll out the carriage of naloxone by all serving police officers up to the rank of inspector and the support of officers in this is helping to preserve life and to keep people safe. The roll-out follows recommendations from an independent evaluation. I am delighted to be able to announce today that Drugs Policy Division in the Scottish Government will be providing funding of £463,500 to Police Scotland to allow them to get out all these officers with this life-saving medication. Police Scotland is also playing an important role in advising on potential operational implications of establishing safe consumption facilities. As Parliament is aware, this is a sensitive but important measure to save lives within the existing legal framework. Of course, Police Scotland continues to take action against the serious organised crime groups who traffic drugs and are exploiting some of our most vulnerable individuals and communities for their own profit. Those preventative actions are helping to divert people with addiction out of the criminal justice system where appropriate and into treatment and support for their recovery. I am grateful for Keith Brown for taking intervention and I associate myself with his words about taking this as a public health issue rather than a criminal justice issue. Would he outline perhaps any moves that the Government is making to prevent people falling into the clutches of addiction in the first place rather than waiting for them to get into addiction? There are elements of the justice system that seek to do that, including a number of programmes, but my colleague Angela Constance will outline some of the ways in which we are seeking to do that through the drug deaths task force when she sums up if that is okay for the member. I am happy to provide her with more information about what we do within justice, but more importantly, the stuff done through Angela Constance will be of interest to the members. Where cases are prosecuted in court, it is rightly for the independent judiciary to decide the most appropriate sentence. This Government is, however, committed to shifting the balance from custody to more effective community interventions where appropriate. We also know that many of those who offend have experienced poverty, disadvantage, adverse childhood experiences, trauma and they often have health problems such as drug and alcohol dependency. Given the damaging effect and impact of imprisonment, our long-term aim is to see custody reserved only for individuals who pose a risk of serious harm in some categories of others, while ensuring that effective community-based support and interventions are available where needed. That is why we are taking concerted action, including through forthcoming legislation on bail and release and support to transform community justice services. The reason why it is smart justice is that we know that reconviction rates are lower when we take that approach. If we have lower reconviction rates and fewer victims and less crime in Scotland, that should be the aim of everybody involved in the debate. I will do that. I asked the cabinet secretary earlier this afternoon why he thought that Scotland continues to have the highest rate of people in prison in Europe and the highest rate of people on remand. A survey showed that almost half of prisoners, about 45 per cent reported being under the influence of drugs at the time of their offence. How do we make sure that we have the kind of systematic changes that are needed to really address that issue? How does he think that this Parliament holds the Government to account on that issue? Do you think that we need targets? Does he have a plan on how we are going to make that system change? There are perhaps different elements to the answer to that question. Certainly, in relation to should we have targets, it is not for me to tell Parliament how they should hold the Government to account, but the justice vision has a one-year delivery period, first of all, which has been put forward just now, which includes lots of existing, if not targets, certainly performance measurements and other interventions. We are also working on a three-year delivery programme, and I think that that would be, when it is published, of course, an area that members might want to quiz the Government on. I am sure that they will do that. To her other point, I have already mentioned that Angela Constance will cover some of the things that we can do within society to try to reduce that dependency on alcoholism and drug abuse. Within the justice system, we have to do more, whether it is in prisons or the way, for example, in police custody streets, we deal with people with these issues and we are doing a number of those things, not least one of the conversations that we had today with police and health professionals about how we deal through the navigator system and one or two innovative approaches, for example, in Fraserbury. I am happy to provide more information on that, if the member wishes. Those approaches include how we best use monitoring and support to improve outcomes. There are potential developments in relation to alcohol and substance monitoring, and I am committed to looking at options focusing on what works. I am also open, as I am sure that Angela Constance is, to working with members from across the chamber in doing so and we would welcome the engagement that we have had to date. As part of our efforts to encourage greater use of community interventions, our programme for government makes clear that we are committed to expanding community justice services, supporting diversion from prosecution, alternatives to remand to come back to the member's question and community sentencing. In 2022-23, we increased annual funding by £50 million to £134 million to reflect continued investment in supporting pandemic recovery work and expansion and transformation of community justice services. When combined with investment in the national drugs mission, we are enabling timely and effective interventions in communities to prevent harm and to improve life chances. It will also support the delivery of the revised national community justice strategy, which is currently under development. That will set out clear aims for partners with an emphasis on early intervention and encouraging a further shift away from the use of custody. Our approach is evidence informed and it is important that we assess the impact of existing measures such as drug treatment and testing orders. DTTOs are intensive disposals specifically targeted at individuals with entrenched problem drug use, chaotic lifestyles and a history of offending. They were introduced to combine justice and health approaches in a targeted way and we know that individuals on DTTOs can have difficulty fully complying with their requirements. I welcome the drug deaths task force consideration of DTTOs and we intend to carry out some initial exploratory work reviewing the evidence available in relation to those and how they align with what is known about good practice in this area. It is also imperative that access to appropriate support is available to everyone who is serving a custodial sentence in Scotland and the prison service is working tirelessly to eradicate unauthorised drugs in prison and is continuously adapting its security measures to prevent, detect and deter the introduction of contraband. In November, we laid legislation that allows prison officers to photocopy correspondence as another means to prevent the entry of illicit substances into prison and to reduce the availability of those substances to prisoners. That can only help to reduce the risk that these illicit substances present to those living and working in our prisons. Another key priority in prisons is mitigating against the known elevated risk of drug deaths at transition points such as release from custody and ensuring the look-for provision and continuity of care on release. Prison officers and DWP staff continue to offer assistance to prisoners to plan for their release, whilst the Scottish Government continues to support the work of through-care services, support individuals to reintegrate back into the community after the release. That includes the excellent work done by Scotland's third sector and justice social work services across the country. The examples that I have touched on today are making a real difference and they will continue to do so. However, there are just some of the steps that we have taken so far and that need to be taken. We know that this is a complex issue and it is not easy. It will require further action, further investment and a collective will to address the challenges ahead. Although the approach that we are taking is not the easy one, we are absolutely clear that it is the right one to deliver lasting improvements. It is based on evidence of what works and it is focused on actions that are effective in tackling drugs-related deaths and harm and, ultimately, which make our communities safer. The Scottish Government will continue to take that forward at pace and will welcome the opportunity to work with everyone across the chamber in doing so. I move the motion in my name. One of the issues that unites the chamber is Scotland's drugs death record, which is a matter of national shame. Working as a journalist in the 1990s, before this Parliament existed, I recall the shock of an annual death toll in the low hundreds. Year after year, the numbers rose ever upwards and it is important to pause and reflect that in 2020 there were 1,339 drug deaths. Since this SNP Government came to power more than 10,000 lives have been lost. For reasons that I have never heard explained, the Scottish death rate is perhaps the highest in Europe and more than 3.5 times greater than the rest of the UK. Behind those statistics are real people and families. Each number is a lost son or daughter, brother or sister. Vibrant lives truly cut short. It is proper that Scotland is treating the chronic drug problem as a public health emergency and I expect that we will hear more about that from my colleagues Annie Wells, Jamie Greene and Sue Webber. I have concerns about some of the language and the actions of the Scottish Government. I worry that ministers are embracing a public health solution but at the expense of the robust use of criminal justice. I worry that they have become blinkered to the damage done by violent, wealthy and powerful drugs gangs. In essence, I worry that greater store has been given to wishful thinking than to an approach based on evidence and pragmatism. The fact is that we need to harness the resources and expertise of both health and justice. It cannot be either or. Last month in this chamber, I discussed the Scottish Government's newly published division for justice document. As I said, then, it reveals much about the Government's thinking, not least the blurring of lines between victims and criminals. That same mindset, in which criminality can always be explained and perhaps even justified, can be seen in the language of the cabinet secretary's motion today. The following line stood out. The Scottish Government's long-term aim is that imprisonment should be reserved for individuals who pose a risk of serious harm. It seems that criminals who pose mere harm should never be imprisoned, and they must be deemed to pose serious harm. How, I wonder, does the cabinet secretary define serious harm? Does that mean only those who inflict violence on people? Or does the cabinet secretary believe, as I do, that drug dealers cause serious harm to our most vulnerable people and therefore should be in prison? I am happy to give way to the cabinet secretary if he is willing to answer those questions. I think that it is preposterous to allege that somebody in his chamber does not think that drug dealing presents serious harm to people. Surely we can have a more elevated debate on those serious issues than that. I appreciate your clarification that serious harm does constitute drug dealing. What about the commonly held idea that some criminals should be sent to prison as punishment for their actions? On the basis of the above line, are we to understand that this concept is to be abandoned? Again, I am happy to give way if an explanation is forthcoming. I think that it would have been advisable for the member to listen to my statement, because when I came to that point, I mentioned the fact that there are other categories other than prisoners that present serious harm. Of course, there has to be a role for punishment in the criminal justice system, but what we are trying to say is that it has to be trauma-informed, recognised where people are coming from when they present to the criminal justice system. That seems to make a sensible approach, and it would be useful to hear for any sensible suggestions that the Conservatives can make in that area. The inclusion of that line is enough reason for my party to be unable to support the Government's motion nor indeed Labour's amendment. I previously pointed out that there is no mention of organised crime in the cabinet secretary's vision for justice. It is a subject that former SNP justice secretaries at least used to talk about. I was heartened when the UK minister, Kit Malthouse, recently gave evidence to a joint committee to this parliament. He spoke passionately about the need to give people help to beat their addictions. The same thinking motivates my party's right to recovery bill, which is one support from those at the coalface of the drug crisis. However, Mr Malthouse also spoke about the need for robust policing to hit the pernicious and dangerous drug gangs who amass huge fortunes from dealing in death. I share his disappointment that the SNP Government rejected the opportunity to take part in project adder. The member is talking about organised crime and people who are drug dealers in prison. He recognises a lot of people in prison who have had problem drug use and who are not involved in either of those things. Absolutely. Our party led and gave voice to prison officers over the past few months in respect of the huge volume of drugs coming into prisons via mail. It was only by agitating and pushing that action was finally taken. I suspect that the same tactic—I wonder whether the rejection to take part in adder was motivated—forgive me if I'm wrong—by the cynical strategy of always seeking to differentiate from UK policy. I suspect that the same tactic might be the reason for some error. The member may recall that, in the previous debate in this Parliament, I advised that the reason that we didn't participate in project adder is that we really just wanted to re-badge the work that we were already doing in Scotland and that, ultimately, project adder is enforcement-led as opposed to public health-led. Mr Finlay, I'll give you a wee bit of time back for the generous interventions, but I think that that probably should focus your mind and concluding into the course and not to hear any more interventions. Absolutely. I'd like to point out to the minister that adder stands for addiction, disruption, diversion, enforcement and recovery. It's not just about enforcement, it's about all those elements. I've clearly run out of time here. One of the other issues is the drugs consumption rooms. As my party said, we're open-minded about this, but we've yet to hear how it would work in practice with the mobile facilities or bricks and mortar if it was a building. I bet they wouldn't be in the post-codes that middle-class MSPs live in. Would addicts who lead chaotic lives be expected to book an appointment, turn up and stand in line if mobile would be able to post office fans serving communities? At a time when this Government is presided over the closure of one in eight libraries, what kind of message would this send out? Never mind folks, we've shut down your library in your sports centre but we've found the cash for a mobile hero in van. What would that say to parents seeking the best for their children living in drug-scarred communities? I share the concerns expressed by Police Scotland about DCRs and the associated so-called tolerant zones and I declare an interest as I am married to a police officer. It was only conscious of the time. Perhaps as Nicola Sturgeon has previously admitted ministers have taken their eye off the ball in respect of drugs and my concern is that eyes are still off the ball. Our amendment is grounded in reality with the right to recovery at its heart. It recognises shortcomings recently laid bare by Audit Scotland, not least poor data, a lack of transparency and this Government's cuts to addiction services. I would therefore urge members to support the amendment in my name. I now call on Claire Baker to speak to and move amendment 3625.2, around six minutes. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I welcome the opportunity to open this debate for Scottish Labour. We agree that Scotland's drug of death crisis and the huge scale of drug-related harm must be addressed through a public health approach, and that extends to the justice system. We support the use of policies such as the recorded police warning system, where appropriate, to divert individuals from the criminal justice system and towards support services. In our prisons, it is vital that individuals experiencing drug-related harm are also offered appropriate treatment and support, and that we provide the personalised and trauma-informed care that they need to rebuild their lives. The implementation of the MAT standards is an important step, and they must be fully implemented in prisons as part of the public health approach. Delivery is crucial, and as we approach a year on from the introduction of MAT, what can we expect to see in terms of measurable progress? The minister previously committed to updating Parliament, and I would like to know if we are going to see publication of relevant data on progress. The majority of prisoners seen by drug and alcohol services are also presenting with mental health symptoms, so integration of these services is key. However, I am disappointed by the Government's motion seeking to introduce constitutional politics into today's debate. The drugs minister, while she has a view on these powers, has focused on consensus building and building support for a change of direction, so I am disappointed that today's approach presents a barrier to consensus. The Government is also asking for support for an undefined consultation. It is not clear what its aims are, what its focus will be and if it will be independent. Is it intended that it is led by Parliament, which would be a constructive approach? I would concentrate on any consultation that takes place, but it must not delay any action on delivery. Laser focus in this area must be on delivery. I remind the Scottish Government that all the UK comes under the issues of drugs act, yet it is Scotland that has three times the number of fatalities in England and Wales. I agree that the UK Government's approach is wrong and that to approach this crisis from a justice perspective is set up to repeat mistakes. Although I note that within the UK Government's real-on strategy, there is diversion policies, and the Conservatives are highlighting ADAR. They may not be emphasising them, but they are there, which is another reason why I cannot really understand the Conservatives' rejection of this approach in Scotland through our police-recorded warning system. However, the Scottish Government cannot rewrite the history of drug deaths in Scotland and suggest the responsibility lies elsewhere. Over the past 15 years, while the crisis has grown and embedded itself in too many communities and families across Scotland, we have seen the wrong response, a complacent response and a slow response. While it was driven by the Tories and introduced by the SNP, the Parliament must take responsibility for the wrong-headed road to recovery strategy that set back progress and harm reduction policies. However, the Scottish Government must take responsibility for cuts to ADPs in 2016-17, meaning reduction in support and services. When the drug deaths figures started to rise, the Government's response was that this was generational and almost to be expected. This delayed investment delayed political focus and the will that was desperately needed. Mismanagement of the prison service and the underfunding of key services, including mental health, cannot be swept aside. Prison numbers are still too high, and staffing pressure among healthcare staff continues despite repeated warnings over the impact of overcrowding and a lack of treatment services and through-care. The period immediately following release from prison is a time of increased risk of drug-related death, as well evidenced. The national drug-related death database records that more than one in 10 people who had a drug-related death had been in prison in the six months prior. The criminal justice committee around table recently highlighted the lack of support prior to the release of prison for prisoners, but concerns about the adequacy of services throughout through-care is not new. We acknowledged the recent announcements made by the Scottish Government, many of which are highlighted in the motion, but the true test will be in delivery. Although the indicative figures that were published yesterday suggest that some interventions may be starting to make a difference, though we are at early stages, the rise in fatalities for women is alarming, and we desperately need more targeted services for this group. Although we do not support the Conservatives' amendment, it is right that they highlight the recent report from Audit Scotland and the need for more focus on the root causes of drug and alcohol dependency. By using the extensive powers and resources that are disposable, the Government can make real and lasting impact, such as fully funding front-line services for drug treatment and prioritising policies that should urinate the most deprived areas. Ministers have had 15 years in which to take decisive action. What impacts could we have seen in that time if they had chosen to act earlier to invest properly in mental health services, drug treatment services and social care, to expand residential rehabilitation, to create clear pathways and support for prisoners with drug problems upon release? The Labour amendment today makes it clear that, without sufficient investment and action to address inequalities, the failure to make progress will continue. It also references the support for specialist adult drug courts. While the approach was trialled in Scotland, the Scottish Government stopped funding, and it was interesting that the cabinet secretary talked about DTOs and issues with full compliance. I think that the evidence from the drugs court shows that that works well. It supports people through the process. In Scotland, we then had a significant closure programme of local courts. That included the closure of the Coopershire Court, which meant that there was insufficient capacity in Fife to accommodate the drugs court that was in Fife. We had one in Glasgow and one in Fife. There is now just one left in Glasgow. That shows positive results. At the time that the Government said that there was not enough evidence, it did only have two pilots, so it was difficult to create the evidence when it was so limited. However, Glasgow shows that there is strong evidence that adult drug courts reduce substance issues and re-offending, but it is a model that has been allowed to weather. Although I do not anticipate that the Government will support an amendment, I would ask it to pursue drug courts as a part of the diversionary approach to criminal justice and embedding the person-centred approach to substance use. I move the amendment in my name. Thank you. I now call on Alex Cole-Hamilton up to four minutes please, Mr Cole-Hamilton. Very much, Deputy Presiding Officer. May I start by extending apologies to the chamber? An urgent appointment will see me absent during closing speeches. I am very grateful for the Government securing parliamentary time for this important debate. As you know, this is a matter of great importance to Liberal Democrats. Police Scotland have advised us, as we have heard already, that there were 1,295 suspected drug deaths in our communities in 2021. This is a dip, but it is still among the highest in the world. That is 1,295 lives needlessly lost, a wealth of potential dashed and countless families and indeed communities broken. This cannot continue. This is a particularly Scottish problem of international proportions. It has been a stain on our record for years now. In recent times, Scotland has been taking on paper at least a public health approach towards drug deaths, and that was evident in the words of the new Lord Advocate when she addressed this a few months ago, but implementation of such an approach, particularly within the justice system, has been inconsistent. This is starkly evident in the use of fatal accident inquiries in our prisons. This is an issue that my colleague Liam McArthur, your self-deputy presiding officer, has worked particularly hard on. Evidence taken from FAIs show that drug-related deaths are not being treated as the complex issues that they are, but rather they are labelled as drug-seeking behaviour or death by misadventure as a choice that one makes. As a result, those cases are not investigated properly, and their individuals and their families are not being treated with the dignity and the answers that they deserve. More crucially, however, it means that lessons are not being learned. This is why the Scottish Liberal Democrats have long called for an overall of the FAI system in order to gain an understanding of how to properly tackle substance abuse in the justice system. In addition, we must work faster and harder to see the introduction of safe consumption rooms. They are crucial to lowering the risk of substance use and preventing blood-borne infection, and ultimately death. This is why my party, working alongside amazing activists like Peter Criken, has been advocating for several years now. It is mentioned in the motion today that the Government supports the exploration of options to deliver them within the existing legal framework. I want to believe the Government and its intentions here, but I am anxious that this might translate to further delay. I am also intrigued by an Ieco-Claire Baker's questions about detail around the consultation that is mentioned in the last line of the Government's motion. I hope that we get further clarity on that. The law is not a set in stone regarding this matter, as some may think. I think that there is a significant reason to believe that there is much more that we could achieve and much more that the Government could do to push the legal boundaries and break the legal impasses that we encounter. I am afraid that I do not have a great deal of time, Mr Whittle. I would otherwise. All that was confirmed by the Lord Advocate last year following my party's campaign for a review on those laws. Let me also be clear that my party, the Liberal Democrats, are open to further discussion around the further devolution of drugs policy to Scotland. That devastating problem is not a deficiency of devolution, nor is it a product of UK Government policy. However, if devolution of the misuse of drugs act would save lives, then we as Liberal Democrats would not be closed off to that. That bears further scrutiny and discussion. We need to make sure that those in need of help are given it freely, without suspicion, without judgment or punishment. That is why we should be working with the Sentencing Council to offer education and treatment services to those in possession of drugs. We must be introducing policies such as a matter of urgency, but it is surely clear to everyone that, as the situation has spiralled out of control to such an extent, we need as much expert advice as we can get. That is why I repeat my call for the World Health Organization to provide specialist drugs task force, where we can learn from international examples in Scotland. Presiding Officer, we cannot just continue to talk about this. We need to act. Thank you very much indeed, Mr Cole-Hamilton. We now move to the open debate. I would invite speakers who have not yet pressed their buttons to do so. Thank you very much indeed, and I call Audrey Nicholl to be followed by Annie Wells for up to four minutes. Please, Mr Nicholl. Thank you, Presiding Officer, and I draw members to my register of interests. I am a councillor in Aberdeen City Council and a member of the Aberdeen City ADP. Today's debate is bittersweet, another reminder of the pervasiness of our relationship with drugs, but an opportunity to take stock of the work being done and still required to address drug use and reduce drugs deaths. I welcome the latest Police Scotland figures showing a slight decrease in drugs deaths, but every death is a tragedy. The criminal justice committee has been taking evidence on problem drug use. We see that as a defining challenge of the session. We also recently joined colleagues from the health and social justice committees to consider the intersect between health, criminal justice and social justice in tackling problem drug use. Today, I want to highlight key points that are linked to the Government motion, but first reflect on some witness testimonies that shone a light on the factors that pushed and pulled people into a relationship with drugs. One witness was not a heroin user when he entered a young offenders institute, but after release he became one. Another born into the heroin epidemic of the 80s when, as she put it, crime and drugs took precedence over education and nurturing. Another raised in poverty experience and trauma in a violent relationship. By the time she got out, she was broken and using drugs to ease the pain in her head. Witnesses spoke of limited access to person-centred support, that addiction was not severe enough or treatment not available for the drug that they used, all further marginalising them at a time of need. We heard about the importance of trauma-informed interactions with police officers, court staff, sheriffs and prison officers, and we welcomed Police Scotland and Crown Office plans to develop trauma-informed training for officers and practitioners with more solicitors and sheriffs now also trauma-informed. We welcomed the task force stigma strategy to address the alienation and damage caused by the war on drugs and their desire that distressed beef interventions be developed. I know that, locally, provision of DBI in my constituency was curtailed significantly during the pandemic. We also took evidence on diversion from prosecution and, while there are challenges with monitoring and attendance, there were real consensus that, where appropriate, community-based remedies are much preferable to prison sentences. I welcomed Dr Liz Aston's contribution on the role of police officers in diverting people to drug services and I welcomed the development of programmes such as Navigator that will allow front-line staff to undertake first-point-of-contact referral to services and support. Recently, the Lord Advocate announced her decision to extend the use of recorded police warnings to include class A drugs, as the cabinet secretary outlined. In her statement, she highlighted the Inverness pilot led by Medics Against Violence that supports referrals to a mentor providing support at the first-point-of-contact with police. I would be interested to hear more about progress on the project. Through care on liberation, including GP access, opiate substitution therapy and take-home naloxone, was considered a priority as well as alternatives to remand and imprisonment such as bail supervision and residential rehabilitation. On naloxone, I welcomed the chief constable's commitment to national roll-out to all police officers, and I also wished to commend the Scottish Ambulance Service for their work to develop carriage and use of naloxone. Finally, the committee heard overwhelming support for law reform to facilitate safe consumption spaces and the Lord Advocate's comments that she would be willing to consider specific proposals presented to her on that. To conclude, I hope and expect that the committee's work, including our recent joint sessions, will inform the national mission, the delivery on the new vision for justice, to develop a whole-system approach, public health-based, with persons-centred and trauma-informed practices at its heart. I now call on Annie Wells to be followed by Gillian Martin for up to four minutes. Thank you, Presiding Officer. The problem with drugs-related deaths in Scotland does remain our national shame. The numbers do not lie. In 2020, we saw around four people losing their lives each day to drugs. As the First Minister admitted, for too long, this Government had taken its eye off the ball. I recognise the estimated data from Police Scotland, suggesting that the number of people who died from drug-related deaths in 2021 was lower than a year before. However, it is clear that there is much more we can do, particularly around bolstering rehabilitation facilities. Indeed, only last week did Audit Scotland's astonishing report reveal clear shortcomings in this Government's stewardship of our drugs and alcohol services. For many vulnerable people, these services are the last resort to obtain the treatment they need to get better. That is why the Scottish Conservatives have proposed our right to recovery bill, developed in collaboration with front-line experts to ensure that people have the statutory right to obtain the treatment that is right for them. I sincerely hope that we can continue to collaborate on the bill, as surely the time has come for us to stand up and say that tackling Scotland's drug deaths crisis should be the defining mission of this Parliament. Substance misuse is also an acute problem across Scotland's justice system, as it is in the wider society. We must be doing our utmost to tackle the supply of drugs into Scotland's prisons. By stemming the flow of deeply dangerous substances such as so-called spice, it will help to protect the wellbeing of both Scotland's prison officers, who work under extremely difficult circumstances and those in custody. Recent figures have suggested that a fallen drug-soaked male infiltrates his prisons, and that is to be welcomed. I know that my colleague Russell Finlay pushed hard for the Scottish National Party Government to take seriously the threat of drug-soaked male in our prisons calling for the introduction of photocopied male procedures to disrupt the supply of those illicit substances. However, as pointed out by Favour UK, not only has the UK Government's project added been effective in providing support to communities in England and Wales regarding treatment, but it has also disrupted organised crime and their supply of illegal substances. As revealed by UK Police Minister Kit Malthouse, project adder has already helped to seize up to 27 million benzodiazepine tablets that were destined for Scotland. Project adder value is clear, and as reflected in our amendment to the motion before us, it is deeply regrettable that the Scottish Government has so far not signed up. Tackling the supply of these substances into Scotland's prisons is only part of the solution. We must also focus on demand. We are clear that access to high-quality drug treatment and rehabilitation for those across the justice system is vital, including in our prisons. Many in custody are trapped in a cycle of substance misuse, harm and despair. Strengthening rehabilitation for those in custody will not only help to safeguard their own wellbeing but give them confidence as they look to successfully reintegrate into society following their release. Most of us are agreed in this chamber that radical action is needed to stem the tide of our drugs-related deaths in this country. While we make every effort to be a constructive opposition on this most pressing issue, it is also our duty to be upfront about where the Government is falling short, and that is what we will continue to do. There is no escaping the fact of the matter that many of our prison population are in the criminal justice system as a result of situations that have been influenced by the poor socioeconomic situation. Many are coming from a childhood filled with adverse experiences, often as a consequence of poverty. Many of them have problem drug use, also as a result of those often undiagnosed and certainly untreated childhood traumas. Trauma-informed care is essential in all cases of problem drug use, but particularly in our prison settings where people in our prisons will arrive often with problems with substance use. It is our duty of care to facilitate prisons with problem drug use getting well and back into society with an improved chance of never returning to prison and a chance of having a better life. If MAT standards are the goal across Scotland, proving standards that get people well, they must also apply to those with problem drug use in our prisons. I will take Mr Finlay's intervention now. The member may be aware that the Scottish Prison Survey of 2017 revealed that 13 per cent of prisoners entered custody without a drugs problem but left with one, yet it took many years for the SNP Government to finally act on drug-soaked prison mail. Do you agree that that should have been done sooner? I was making the point to Mr Finlay, because he seems to suggest that people went into prison and all of them came out with drug problems when I was making the point that many of them went into prison already with serious problems with drug substance abuse and need help. I particularly want to use my time today to speak about prisoners with children and how effective treatment of MAT standards is particularly important in their case. The MAT standards say that a person should have the support to remain in treatment for as long as they are requesting. It is particularly important to ensure continuity of that support upon release. It is an already vulnerable time for any offender, as well as a key time in ensuring successful rehabilitation in general. It is particularly important for those returning to a family home with dependent children. I believe very strongly that a key part of anyone's rehabilitation is family support, both in terms of the addiction recovery and the recovery from the behaviours that led to their incarceration. I have spoken before in the chamber about how important it is to maintain family connections while a person is in prison. I have raised that, particularly in relation to HMP Grampian and the Family Centre and Help Hub, which was run by volunteers and has historically faced cuts, as Aberdeen City Council and Aberdeenshire Council in particular have reduced their financial support. The Family Centre is a welcoming place where families can get help and support, as well as a place for a cup of tea or something to eat for visiting partners. We play for the kids in the playroom ahead of their visit into the prison of state. That environment means soft interventions and signposting to services can be made, and that families are more likely to keep visiting and keeping maintaining those relationships with their family members in prison. I have spoken to families outside who have told me that good practice for support is given for fathers in particular, who often have quite difficult relationships with their parts and children and who have been assisted to play a more active part in family life. That is facilitated by both prison staff and the visitor centre. Becoming a better parent, ready to make a successful and permanent return to the family home, is more likely. That cycle of ACEs can be broken, and I see match standards complete with positive family access and support being key in breaking that cycle. If families outside the facility that I visit from the HMP Grampain, I came away thinking that every single prison in Scotland should have a centre like that. I would be happy to speak to the justice secretary about the funding shortfall there. Before I finish, I want to say how much I fundamentally disagree with the Conservative amendments clause, which seems to suggest that anyone in possession of class A jobs should be criminalised. Diversion from prosecution and presumption against short sense is not an ideological position. It is one backed up with expert opinion on successful rehabilitation. Our law enforcement resources should not be used to immediately criminalise victims of the illegal drug trade, often for the ill and vulnerable people who time after time have been dealt a raw deal by society. The buying them up and throw away the key ideology might play well with daily mail readers, but when it comes to getting people well and improving the lives of families affected by problem drug use, particularly children, demanding the state puts ill people into the justice system for possession, is simply ill-informed backwards and ultimately is the rhetoric of the angry mob. Thank you everyone who has contributed to this necessary debate so far for their contributions. From our part, I would like to focus on the problems that are evident in our prisons. When we talk about problems with substance misuse, we are really talking about people who have, for one reason or another, slipped through the net, and in so many cases they will encounter some form of the justice system along that path. Fortunately, we now seem to be at a point where the vast majority recognise that simply locking up someone with a serious addiction will not make that problem go away. Evidence shows that prison stays only exacerbate existing substance misuse problems, leaving a legacy of addiction and distress. Whether prisons can be reformed to prevent this and provide the opportunity for more substance rehabilitation is perhaps a wider debate, but it is one that we dearly need to have. We won't be able to get through all of that today, but what we can say is that the current model is not working. Whether there should be adequate support to get drug users back on their feet, there is still far too often more of a focus on abstinence and a lack of effective intervention to look at a person's misuse from a long-term perspective. However, above all, the most significant baratani progress is the massive overcrowding within our prison system. The incredibly hard-working healthcare staff who work in prisons are facing unimaginable pressures already, and on top of that, they must manage time constraints that, in any ordinary circumstances, would be deemed completely unacceptable. There are so few of them and yet so many people who need help. As always, just like a vast number of problems that we speak about in this chamber, we are expecting exceptional results, but we seem unwilling to fund them. It is time that we viewed prison if we insist on sending so many people there as a unique opportunity to address many of the health inequalities that blight the worst off in our society. However, due to the same pressures on the entire NHS, with the added problems of working in a fractious and poorly managed environment, it is always going to be very difficult to achieve for staff who feel like they are not always being supported. In order to give them that support, we need to be honest with the public that, to tackle the drug problem in this country and make our justice system more effective, we will require greater investment and a much longer term approach. Two things that the world of politics is often poorly prepared to deal with. If we continue to address each problem individually, then it will take a great deal of time to make any headway. However, as you would expect, my position is a socialist one, and that is a position of understanding that the root of all of these problems is social economic inequality. Inequality has gone on for generations and will continue to persevere for generations to come if more is not done. If we do not seriously tackle the low pay, the high debt, the exorbitant housing costs society that we have built, then reliance and substances to deal with those pressures will only get worse. The minute someone is made homeless or put on the cusp of homelessness through losing a job or unaffordable rents, then their health, their mental and physical will rapidly deteriorate, and the likelihood that they will look to substances to alleviate that pressure will increase. Those are largely the people who end up in our prisons, so I ask again why are we not dealing with the problems at source. Scottish Labour believes that we must begin to look at the several decades in which drug issues have spiralled out of control in Scotland, and we have come to the conclusion that this should be a top priority for every Government, not just here in Edinburgh, but in London, too. It needs to remain a priority for a long time to come. You need to conclude now, Ms Mocken. There will be no overnight fix, and I ask that we continue with this important work. Thank you very much, Ms Mocken. I am afraid that we are now well over time, so I will have to insist that colleagues stick to their time limit. With that instruction, I call Stuart McMillan to be followed by Sue Webber. Up to four minutes. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. That was it. I want to remind the chamber that I am a board member of moving on in Berkeley, the local addiction service. Like others, I want to add my condolences to the families of people who have lost their lives due to drugs. Every life lost to drugs is a tragedy and one that we as a society need to address. The turning substance abuse from a justice to a health priority is imperative and the direction of travel in that regard is positive. It is absolutely vital that treatment and recovery that is right for individuals is available at the right time. That is a crucial key factor of the national mission. It is also worth reminding the chamber of the SNP manifesto from last year's parliamentary election, which committed the SNP of the Government to develop a new national community justice strategy. As the Government motion states and I quote, determines that access to high-quality drug treatment, rehabilitation and recovery services at appropriate points in the justice system. No one in the chamber can actually argue against that, and the work that takes place in our prison state to help prisoners with addictions is something that we should all be supporting. Can we do more? Absolutely we can do more. We can always do more in every single aspect of our lives. However, it is vital that we ensure that the cycle of reoffending is broken to help to rebuild lives. The reinforcement commitment to continue to improve support for people leaving prison is also something that every single one of us can support. One of the key ways of helping to deal with this is in tackling stigma. I have spoken to various people over the years about people whose lives have been blighted by addictions, and the issue of stigma is a constant. If the Parliament genuinely believes that dealing with the drug's death situation that Scotland has, we would have some genuine and hard questions to put to ourselves but also to society. Annie Wells touched on the other one regarding the issue of reintegration into society. I agree with Annie Wells on that particular point, but the issue of stigma, dealing with stigma, is crucial to help with that reintegration. The national mission led by the drugs policy minister Angela Constance is clearly leaving no stone unturned. Working with people with lived experiences is absolutely essential. I welcome the creation of the national collaborative, chaired by Professor Alan Miller, and his commitment to ensure that the views of people with lived and living experiences are reflected. The fact of bringing people together who have been affected by drugs to make recommendations to the Scottish Government about changes to services can only help to improve and save lives. As part of the new vision for justice policy that was announced last month, the Scottish Government's ambition to share with COSLA and many other partners is for a trauma-informed and trauma-responsive workforce across Scotland to address inequalities and improve life chances, ensuring that services and care are delivered in ways that, first of all, are informed by people with lived experience. It also recognises the importance of wellbeing in the workforce, recognises where people are affected by trauma and adversity. It responds in ways that prevent further harm and support recovery and can address inequalities and improve life chances. Embedding trauma-informed practice will ensure that Scotland's justice services recognise the prevalence of trauma and adversity and realise where people are affected by trauma and respond in ways that reduce re-traumatisation. Today and previously, we have heard from some members about their opposition to the new approach adopted by the Lord Advocate with regard to the diversion from prosecution. Scotland prosecutors are provided with a range of alternatives to prosecution, including diversion from prosecution, to respond appropriately to the facts and circumstances of each specific case. It is obvious that there is no one size that is all and certainly that there is a long journey ahead. However, I believe that we are now moving in the right direction, but I also want to highlight that there is a long, long journey ahead. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I would like to draw your attention to my register of interests as a City of Edinburgh councillor and a member of the EADP. This is a very important debate and I am glad to have the chance to speak in as the Shadow Minister for Public Health, including Drugs Policy. I am just sorry that I am not there in the chamber today. Under the SNP's watch, drug-related deaths have tripled, while rehabilitation services have trailed far behind. The number of drug deaths in Scotland continues to shame the nation and is a damning indictment of the First Minister having, in her own words, taken her eye off the ball. Figures from Police Scotland show that there were 1,295 suspected drug deaths between January and December 2021, which is likely to remain the highest per capita figure in Western Europe. Scotland's drug death rate is also three and a half times that of the UK as a whole. In addition, the latest report shows that the number of female deaths has risen from 345 in 2020 to 356 in 2021, with women now making up 27 per cent of the victims. The number of women dying from drugs is especially worrying, and it is high time that the SNP got a grip of the sickening epidemic. You have said yourself, minister, that the Scottish Government needs to do more to help female victims, including more women-specific services. The treatment plans offered must be tailored to enable women to access them, so, for example, daytime recovery sessions need to be provided to women who have children to care for, because residential rehab programmes won't suit or be an option for everyone. I recently visited the river garden of charity in Ayrshire. It's a training and social enterprise development centre offering a residential programme for people in the early stages of recovery from drug and or alcohol addiction. Their model has up to an 80 per cent recovery rate globally on completion of the programme. It was a truly fascinating visit, and I was heartened to hear that they are expanding and building a women-only residential block. The feeling of calm that I experienced on arriving was noticeable, and it leaves me in no doubt that the location and surroundings are so key to the successes that it achieves. Those types of facilities and programmes have shown to be successful and should be properly funded to ensure that they continue to make strides in this difficult and challenging field. Although not specifically related to drug misuse, there was an insightful study carried out in South Korea. That study revealed that a therapeutic community-orientated day programme resulted in continuous abstinence rates at six months nearly eight times higher than those seen in the control group. Both the treatment group and the control group were women. Instinctively, when it comes to treating dependency, men and women will have different needs, so we must ask ourselves what more can we do to address the needs of women specifically. This week, Ann Marie Ward, a leading drugs campaigner in Scotland, expressed doubt over the latest drug death figures, warning that some overdose may have been wrongly classified as Covid fatalities, and the SNP Government yesterday said that there had been an 8 per cent fall in suspected drug deaths last year. However, the head of one of the country's top recovery charities said that reports from the front line suggested that the crisis has not improved, and the numbers, remember, are still higher than 2019. Our focus should be on improving access to rehabilitation and treatment, and that is just as valid for prisoners too. That is why I urge once again that the SNP Government must back our right to recovery bill, which is backed by experts in the addiction field and would enshrine in law the right of everyone in Scotland to receive potentially life-saving treatment. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. Thank you very much indeed, Ms Webber. I now call Maggie Chapman to be followed by Elena Whidham for up to four minutes this time. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I would like to begin by restating what others have said. Every drug-related death is a tragedy, and my sincere condolences to all those who have been affected by such a death. The drug's death crisis is a public health crisis. It is not inevitable, and it is high time that we are at last seeing the shift in political positioning from most in this chamber at any rate around how we tackle this. As I've said before, we need a culture of care, not a war on drugs. Because the war on drugs has been an abject failure, both in terms of restricting the use of drugs and in protecting individuals and communities from the harm of drugs, criminalising users and petty suppliers rather than seeking solutions to the deeper problems that underpin substance use has not worked. We need to understand the underlying causes that lead people to use drugs and develop addictions and tackle those if we are to effectively deal with a crisis that is not inevitable. This means holistic interventions that do not treat the substance use or dependency in isolation, but consider all of the person's experiences and challenges, their economic conditions, housing, family relationships and so much more. Drug dependency is like the canary in the mine for trauma, poverty and other social ills. It is a long-term and complex issue and can only be fully tackled when recovery happens at every level of a person's life. Addressing substance misuse in this context can bring significant co-benefits in terms of better stability, health and so on, and it means, as the Cabinet Secretary has outlined, rethinking our approaches across the justice system. Prison is not a good place to be. I get that that is the point, but when dealing with substance dependency issues, prison might be the very worst place for someone. There are high levels of drug use among people arriving at prison while they are incarcerated and on leaving prison, including many who substance use only begins for the first time in prison. Drug deaths are also especially high among people while incarcerated and after being released. People in prison need support, which meets their individual needs and focuses on their challenges in a trauma-informed person-centred way. We must consider the issues of demand, isolation and long periods of being locked in cells and the lack of appropriate activity. All of those make it more likely that people in prison will turn to substance use, and rigid drug testing in prisons may dissuade people from seeking help or encourage them to use less detectable, perhaps more dangerous substances. We also know that levels of re-offending are directly related to levels of post-release support available, so co-ordination between and across agencies is vital, including links to appropriate community support. There is significant evidence that suggests that interventions in prison tend to be less effective than those in community, and they are definitely more costly. Those reasons, among others, are why community justice and other alternatives to prison are so important in our collective cross-departmental efforts to tackle drugs deaths and substance addiction, as well as the causes of criminal behaviour. Addressing people's substance abuse problems requires work at community level, as well as at an individual level, using a wide range of policies and systems. We need to ensure that approaches take account of people's age, gender, race and so on. Strict treatment orders might just not work for some people, especially young people. Similarly, some people may have caring responsibilities, or they have concerns about losing their tenancy, which means that residential treatment might not work for them. In closing, we must ensure that appropriate resources are available in the community sector, as well as in our police and prison services. We must acknowledge the connections between all Government departments, and therefore the importance of a whole Government approach. Only then can we tackle what is a public health issue with care and humanity. I love beside a church that has a very old cemetery that contains several Covenanted Graves, and despite a sterling effort by the church and the local authority, at times it needs some extra attention to ensure its upkeep and preservation. Last year, as I walked past on the way to the shops, I could hear tatering voices accompanied by the sound of power tools and lots of activity. I keeked in the side gate to see a group of folk hard at work tending the cemetery and engaging each other in jovial conversation. Great to see, I thought to myself. On my way back from the shops that we went later, as I walked down the lane behind a woman carrying a shovel over her shoulder, she was singing to herself as she made her way to their vehicle. She blushed when she saw me, as she said to me, I was having such a good day, I just had to sing. She then went on to say that she was doing community service and was almost apologetic about it. The stigma that she felt was writ large across her face. She had gone from being so happy that she was singing to being embarrassed by why she was there that day. I responded positively to her to say thank you to the entire crew who had made such a wonderful job of the cemetery and said that she should be proud of what she had achieved that day and never to let anybody stop her singing. I walked home thinking about how it is the small things that make all the difference to an individual's feeling of self worth and just how much stigma impacts upon somebody's ability to enter and sustain recovery and avoid repeated interactions with the criminal justice services. Later that evening, I posted photos in a thank you on my social media that was positively received by the wider community and I hope went a wee ways to breaking down those layers of stigma. After having worked for many years supporting people facing addiction, homelessness, grinding poverty and mental health issues and multiple and complex trauma, I understand fully that self worth all but disappears when you are facing a world full of chaos with repeated periods of incarceration, meaning any real chance of entering into and maintaining recovery can seem almost absolutely impossible. I saw this time and time again. There is no doubt for me that trauma and poverty exacerbated by stigma can be what leads someone to self-medicate as they seek to plot out that which they are unable to work through. Those can be the very same people who enter into a revolving door of incarceration, liberation, problem drug use, homelessness and repeat. And whilst it is not everyone who has experienced trauma that will end up in that situation, just about everyone in that situation has experienced trauma and that is why that must be seen as a public health emergency and a national mission. We must move away from a justice system that re-traumatises people and that is why I fully support the Scottish Government's new vision for justice that has at its heart a trauma framework, giving staff the knowledge and skills that they need to embed trauma in form practices. Recognising the prevalence of trauma and adversity experienced by those interacting with the criminal justice system will help us as a nation to tackle repeat offending and, importantly, our national loss to drugs deaths. The normative of that loss is felt keenly by the families affected, but we also need to recognise that as a country we have lost far too many people and with them all of their hopes, their dreams and their talents. There is no one-size-fits-all approach here, but a combination of access to same-day treatment by embedding the match standards, widening access to rehab, diversion from prosecution, funded recovery community supports, navigators, a national nationwide naloxone roll-out, meaningful and funded community justice options, funding facilities such as river garden and my constituency, which Sue Webber has already mentioned, gives us the best chance of preventing the worst outcomes. Make no mistake, community justice and diversion from prosecution are not soft justice, they are smart justice. In recent years, there has been an unacceptable increase in drug-related harm in our prisons, with an 18-fold increase in types of drug seizures within the space of a year. There has been an increase in street volume, in synthetic cannabinoids, but also in psychoactive substances and cocaine. Synthetic cannabinoids in benzodiazepine mixes are emerging in prisons and, frankly, we have no idea what these do to people. Like Scotland's streets, Scotland's prisons are awash with drugs. I don't say that for controversy of our headlines, we must accept the reality of the situation if it is to be dealt with. The latest Scottish Prisoner survey sets out that foreign-term prisoners had used drugs during their time in prison. The research group that I ran at the University of Dundee would analyse children's drawings soaked in psychoactive drugs, dried and then posted into prisons and then smoked. The Government has taken action to deal with that by enabling the folk copying of mail, but for every solution, there will be another cunning means of dealers accessing a captive marketplace where losing yourself from the daily reality of a limited life is a premium product. For example, photographs being received in the mail are now being used in the same way, but are classified differently as personal possessions rather than as mail. I would ask the Minister to deal with some of those issues to consider piloting a waste water analysis scheme in the prison estate in Scotland to best identify the types of drugs and circulation. SIPA has the capability to work with analysts to put this place in short order. Rapid analysis could help with health measures understanding what someone has taken is vital to ensuring that they receive appropriate healthcare and can also help with behaviour management as some substances will result in higher levels of aggression towards staff and other inmates. I would welcome the Minister's response on that suggestion. Just as in Scotland's streets, all of this equates to an incredible loss of human life, human potential, and it tears families and communities apart. In preparing for this debate, I asked Spice for information on the number of citizens entering prison clean of drugs and emerging with drugs problems. They told me that that data does not exist. Mr Finlay quoted a 13 per cent figure from 2017. It is my understanding that those figures relate to England and Wales and not Scotland at all and that there is no analysis that is actually captured. We can perhaps compare notes on that after the debate, but the citizens are at their most vulnerable when they emerge from the prison estate. Many with no real home to go to, no productive way to spend their time and the stigma that we have heard about quite frequently in the debate that surrounds them, they are very susceptible to falling back into usage with reduced tolerance levels and overdose is very common. Again, in preparing for this debate, I asked Spice for information on the number of citizens leaving prison who then rapidly overdose and that data does not exist either. Data that is now five years old does show that Scotland's drug deaths have an inherent connection with prison, with over half of those having lost their lives having been in prison before. Such a common factor is so identifiable, yet nothing is done to immediately identify those for whom the impact is immediate and so severe. That is an intolerable dereliction of duty of care from the state, but it is being tolerated daily across Scotland. The figures that we have seen on suspected drug deaths in recent days show that there is the possibility of some very limited progress, but we must know why and where. If something is worked, how can it be replicated? If changes driven by external factors in the drugs market, whether there might be issues of purity, supply or the myriad of other possibilities, what controlled analysis can be undertaken so that those factors can be acknowledged? If we do not do this, then we cannot lock in any progress. Thank you very much indeed, Mr Marra. We now call a final speaker in the open debate, Stephanie Callahan, who joins us remotely up to four minutes, Ms Callahan. Thank you, Presiding Officer, and thanks to Keith Brown for bringing this important Scottish Government debate to the chamber. A public health emergency currently ravages Scotland's communities, and a report from Police Scotland on suspected drug deaths during 2021 said that it estimated 1,295 deaths. So many mothers and fathers, brothers and sisters, friends and neighbours and colleagues, all of them gone too soon. Presiding Officer, the Scottish Government and everybody in this chamber knows that we can and we must do better. Funding is hugely important and we need to better understand where and how that money is spent and what real difference it is making to people's lives. Audit Scotland recommended greater transparency, and the Scottish Government is taking that on board because we need to understand what is working well and what is not, and the impact policies have on liberty experience. What we all want to see is our national mission dramatically cutting drug deaths and quickly. I am sure that I am not alone and often feeling that we are not going fast enough, but at the same time I understand that we need all that research, strategic thinking, data collection, targets, systems for measure and progress—all the number crunching and stats—to help us to save lives. The role of the justice system is a critical pillar of our mission, and people who face the justice system and have challenges around substance misuse need and deserve access to the treatments that work for them and that heal their trauma. Our priority must be to divert vulnerable people away from prison and into treatment wherever that is possible. Continuants embed the new medication-assisted treatment standards, reinforces a rights-based approach to treatment, and those standards help frame entire response, encouraging flexibility and urgency. There is no one-size-fits-all and equal rights to access treatment is really key. High-quality drug treatment, rehabilitation recovery services must run through the justice system, and that includes prisons and police care, as people have commented before. International evidence is very clear. Prison damages people, people lose their homes, it weakens their social ties, it limits their employment, breaks up families and creates a stigma that can be really, really hard to escape. Ultimately, prison sentences increase the likelihood of continued drug use. Stigma does not stop with the people that are battling drugs misuse, it extends to those working to support and help them at times. Why? Because stigma is cumulative in its long-lasting, and society is treated substance users with pristine and disgust for a very long time, often viewing them as worthless. While Scottish Government policy now frames drug use as a health issue, many society too often regard vulnerable people as criminals rather than people that are needing help. Time to remove stigmas now, and we in this chamber have a really important role to play. We can highlight how providing access to different forms of justice, including non-legal solutions, and following up with personalised drug, alcohol and mental health services really does help to address the underlying causes of offending, and that helps to keep our communities safer places. We must celebrate the success of people who move on problem drug use. Just over a week ago, I attended the funeral of an amazing woman, my mum's friend, who struggled with drugs misuse for decades, and later became very involved with church life and helping others. I joined her children, grandchildren and other family and friends to celebrate her life, and the eulogy was really beautiful. Facing her struggles with drugs head on and pulling no punches around the trauma she suffered, but more than anything, it captured how she made people feel, warm, accepted, supported and valued. She was a real character and a free spirit until the end, but she made you feel comfortable in your own skin. She struggled with drugs, but she also had an amazing heart. She was not a bad person. We need to help people to rebuild their lives. We need to normalise helping people in need. We need to be leaders in policy and break away from convention when that's needed, and we need to do whatever it takes to tackle this public health emergency for all of our sakes. Thank you. Thank you very much indeed, Ms Giles. We now move to closing speeches, and I call Katie Clark for up to six minutes, please. Thank you, Presiding Officer. All in this chamber know the statistics that Scotland has by far the highest drug death rate recorded in any country in Europe, and that last year, yet again, there was a record number of deaths for the seventh year in a row. The number of drug-related deaths is now almost three times higher than it was a decade ago, but we discuss this as if it's a new problem. We've been here before, damning reports are published, strategies are announced, working groups are established and recommendations are made. As Alex Cole Hamilton said, the problem is implementation. The cabinet secretary is correct to say that a trauma-informed and person-centred approach is not a soft option, and that individuals must be treated with respect. As Claire Baker, Maggie Chapman and many others have said, we need a public health approach. It's right that we question why it is that Scotland has the highest number of death rates in Europe. It's clear that tackling substance use will require policies that address poverty, deprivation and Scotland's wider health inequalities, which Carol Mocken spoke about. As Eleanor Whitham said, we know that often people with serious drug addictions also have mental health issues and more often than not have experienced trauma. Many have faced grinding poverty and the knock-on effects of a lack of hope and aspiration for a decent future. Scotland has almost 60,000 people with a drug problem, and one person who has a drug problem has many friends and relatives who are also affected by that drug use. We need to make sure that we listen to what the experts are saying. I believe that many in the chamber have highlighted the action that needs to be taken. Audrey Nicholl spoke about the work of the criminal justice committee and the need for alternatives to custody. Annie Wells also spoke about the importance of access to rehabilitation. We simply don't have enough people in treatment. Scotland only has about 40 per cent of people in treatment at any one time, whereas in England, for example, it is 60 per cent. It is clear that there is a clear link between drug taking and committing offences. In the past 10 years, the percentage of people who have tested positive for illegal drugs when entering prison has ranged between 70 per cent and 78 per cent. As Michael Marra has spoken about, new cycle active substances have become an increasing problem, and many believe that they are now dominant in prisons. We know that drug use continues to be a significant problem in prisons, and the latest drug survey, which Michael Marra also pointed to, identified that about two-fifths of people have used illicit drugs in prison at some point. However, as a number of speeches have highlighted, there is a lack of support in prison. Prisoners need support to come off drugs, support that must continue when they are released, as Stuart McMillan spoke about. The drugs deaths task force recommended that back in April 2020, saying that adequate through-care provision should be made available to prisoners on liberation. Currently, we all accept that those who leave prison and are relocated into communities are not receiving that care in the numbers that they should. It is important that we not only address the risk of death from overdose in prison, but also the risks in the months after leaving custody. We know that we face major challenges, which will only be addressed with policies that are undepend by sufficient investment. We also know that prison is more expensive than the alternatives to custody, but Scotland continues to send the highest number of people to prison in Western Europe. I believe that the Scottish Government has much of its policy in this area in the right place, but it simply has not been implementing those policies. It has the support of Scottish Labour to implement those policies, as we know that, if there was a disconnect address between what is said in the chamber and what is actually happening in reality in the justice system, it would make a massive difference to thousands in the prison system and many more in communities up and down Scotland. There is the depressingly familiar ritual in Scottish politics that takes place most often in the chamber when drug statistics are released. There is cross-party shock and horror, there is an acceptance that we all should do more, and there is even an acceptance that we could work a little bit more constructively and collaboratively, as promises the Government of more action and more money. Today's debate has followed that very predictable tone, but the reason it has been repeated every year is because the scale of the problem is immense, but the scale of the solution has never matched that problem. If it had matched the scale of the problem, then those numbers would have been falling already. Last year, according to Police Scotland, we lost 1,295 lives to drugs in Scotland. Of course, if there is a reduction, it is a very welcome one from the record high that we saw in 2020, but there are two brief notes of caution in those statistics. The first is that we have previously, as the Parliament, been using NRS figures as the metric for comparison rather than Police Scotland's. Let's wait until we see those published, we should tread carefully in doing so. Secondly, even if there is that welcome reduction, I really hope that there is one. It still remains the highest in Europe, and it still remains three and a half times the right as the rest of the UK, even against the backdrop of the same legislative environment appointed by Claire Baker. Particularly concerning the rise, according to those figures, of 3 per cent in female drug deaths last year. Of course, most drug deaths do involve men, but there is very real and very damaging effect on women across Scotland, not just those who suffer from addiction, but those whose partners or family members do, too. We need to make sure that our response is tailored to the individual needs. I point out that Sue Webber made the importance of residential rehab programmes, for example, not always being suitable for women. Mothers are those with childcare responsibilities. I was struck by the example that she shared of good work and good practice at the Rivergarden Centre in Ayrshire. I have seen the good and bad of rehab services in helping constituents and others. It can be a game changer, and it quite literally can be a lifesaver as well. However, let us also be clear, and this must make for difficult reading and hearing for the Government. Audit Scotland's review into drug and alcohol services released just a few days ago was not just worrying. It painted a quite grim picture of services in Scotland. High-risk alcohol and problematic drug use remains stubbornly high. Drug-related deaths and alcohol admissions are increasing, and we know already that problematic alcohol and drug use disproportionately impacts our most deprived communities. Here is what Audit Scotland also pointed out. In 2015, there were 706 tragic deaths to drugs. By 2018, that had risen to 1,200, and that had almost doubled by 2020. However, at the same time, it also pointed out that, in the year 2016-17, there had been a 20 per cent funding cut to ADPs year on year, from £70 million down to £53 million. I am sorry, but if you cut funding to ADPs, it cannot be a huge surprise that, in the years that follow, there will be a rise in those horrific statistics. That has not taken your eye off the ball, but it has taken your pen off the checkbook. That has been the problem. That is a point that many of us have raised consistently year after year, which is why our right to recovery bill is important. It is not just a pressure lease. It would provide a statutory right for ADPs to receive addiction, and it would ensure that our recovery services are best equipped, resourced and funded to meet the needs of individuals. Currently, only one in seven residents who have beds are publicly funded. No one in Scotland should be denied a treatment because a place is not available to them or because they do not have enough money to fund it themselves. That is a shocking place to be. I would say to Julian Martin that our right to recovery would include those who are in prison, because they have just as much a right to recovery as anyone else. In my committee visit to HMP Edinburgh, I met some inmates who had been recovering from addiction services, and that was great. It was positive to see those stories, but it was equally shocking to be told that it is easier to get drugs in prison than it is on the streets. In fact, we heard that there are people coming into the prison estate with no drug problem who had never even tried drugs and are leaving with a problem. That is shocking. I welcome the Government's commitment to improve access to support and follow-through care for those leaving prison. I am happy to work with the Government positively and constructively on all of that, but we cannot agree with every step that it has taken. The issue of changes to how front-line police officers deal with class A drugs has taken the wrong turn. Arguably, it makes it difficult for law enforcement to stop criminals supplying to vulnerable people but using vulnerable people to get their drugs on to the streets. If I have any time to give, I would love to have a proper debate, but I am very sorry. I am happy to have the conversation with the cabinet secretary. What we have not heard today is getting the drugs off our streets in the first place. They do not magic themselves there, because there are wholesale factories in the UK and across Europe that are making pills by the millions. There is heroin and cocaine getting out of continents and into our islands and tackling that at the higher echelons surely must feature somewhere. We have heard none of that today. On the issue of diversion from prosecution, I want to raise one statistic with the chamber. Since that same approach was used for class B and C drugs in 2016, the number of people caught in possession has increased. It was 21,300 in the year 2016-17. There was a change in policy and a change in approach by policing. In the year 2019-20, the possession rate had gone up to 22,900, nearly 23,000. The question that we must ask ourselves is, really, if this is the approach, is it working? If the premise of diversion to prosecution is reduction in usage, then why are the numbers going up? Why is possession going up? Why is there an increase, not a decrease? We have heard lots of other good contributions that do not have time to go into the detail. Brian Whittle talked about diversion prosecution and he well has made points about stopping drugs from getting into prisons, as did Michael Marra. In fact, when you close one door, surely another one will simply open. Serious organised criminals will do what they can to ensure that their product is still punted to those who want it. However, I want to close with the words of Stephanie Callaghan, whose contribution was notable. I think that what she did is very emotionally remind us that behind every statistic is a person, a friend, a colleague and a family member. That is something that perhaps we should all and perhaps we could all remember a little bit more. The scale of this challenge must be matched by the scale of our response, our ambition and not just that but the scale of the Government's investment, top-down, right to those front-line services. I ask the Minister and the Government that it is not too light for others, but it is too light for some. Get that money to where it needs, because if we do not, those figures are never ever going to drop. Thank you, members, for your contributions today. Thank you very much indeed, Mr Greene. I now call on the minister to wind up the debate for up to nine minutes, please, Ms Constance. I want to start by quoting a mum, a mum called Libby. I do not know Libby, but she replied to one of my social media posts on the suspected drug deaths figures for 2021. She quite simply said that one life lost is one to many. In reflecting upon the reduction of reported suspected deaths by Police Scotland, we know that we can overread those statistics. That information is published more regularly at the request of Parliament for more timely reporting. We, of course, wait for the confirmed drug deaths statistics, which will be published by the National Records of Scotland in July. The harsh reality is that the death toll is heart-breaking, and every life lost will always be one to many. However, there is no complacency, and there can never be any conceit, and there can never be any acceptance that the status quo is hopeless and that it cannot be changed because it can be changed. Our priority in this national mission is to be relentlessly focused on getting more people into treatment that works for them. In addition to our work to embed match standards and investing in expanding residential rehabilitation, I am pleased to announce a new target to get more people into protective treatment. Again, this is something that I promise Parliament to bring forward. Around 90 per cent of all drug-related deaths involve opiates. Therefore, the first phase of a challenging new target will be to get more people into community-based opiate substitute therapy. Currently, there are 29,500 people in receipt of OST, and a new target to increase that by 2024 by almost 10 per cent is to 32,000. For some areas of Glasgow, that will mean that they will have to get 500 more people into treatment. There is a wealth of international evidence that supports OST, and we need to be fearless in challenging the stigma around it. Equally, and I want to be clear on this point, prescribed drug treatment is not and cannot be the only treatment option available, hence our commitment to standards on options and choices, including abstinence-based recovery. I welcome the target that has been set. Could the minister confirm that this would include access to Buvedal? Progress on her and assisted treatment would be helpful. That is an important point in terms of match standards and choice. We know that some of the work that took place in prisons during the pandemic in terms of the introduction of Buvedal showed that, for some people, that was a more optimal treatment choice. We are continuing to engage with health boards where there has been some interest in heroin-assisted treatment, but we need to turn that interest into a commitment to expand that as a treatment option. I recently had the great pleasure of visiting the heroin-assisted treatment project in Glasgow, and its evaluation is due soon. I am hopeful that we can use that to get other projects over the line, and we have some financial resources committed to that. Phase 2 of our treatment target will be to expand the target to include all drugs, including alcohol. I have written to the health committee, offered to the brief committee in much more detail about the treatment target, but also to come and talk to the committee about the Audit Scotland report. There is a wealth of work around accountability, governance, value for money and better use of data that we have started and work that we will continue to pursue. I welcome the Audit Scotland report. Paragraph 16 of the Audit Scotland report acknowledges that there has been a 67 per cent real-terms increase in funding from 2015-16 to this financial year. I will also say to the chamber that, despite the record investment of this year and the gathering and publishing of more information than ever before, equal importance is accountability, transparency and measuring impact to ensure that we can make every penny count. Part of the planning among myself and my officials is to bring forward the cross-cutting plan to ensure that the national mission is kept on track and that it is of sufficient breadth and depth. It cuts right across prevention and early intervention, recovery-orientated care, public health approach, justice, mental health, family support and reducing social harams. Absolutely. I was going to get to your point, but… Brian Whittle. I appreciate the member thinking of the intervention. On that point about transparency, would she agree with me that perhaps I know that she agrees with me on the importance of the third sector and perhaps that the money intended from the Government to get to the third sector is not always getting there? Is there a way in which we could track the money better to make sure that it gets to those third sector organisations that do so much good in this area? In short, we have made significant commitments and are indeed have significant funds to support the voluntary sector, but I think that there is much more we can do to assist that and improve transparency, particularly in terms of the funds that are routed through alcohol and drug partnerships. I was also really pleased that Sue Webber has visited Rivergarden in Ayrshire. She may recall that the last time I was in Parliament on the front bench, we made an announcement that announced significant funding for the project in Rivergarden to assist them, amongst many things, to be able to accommodate more women. I want to say a quick word about young people, because there is a relationship about hospital admissions, increased hospital admissions, whether that is A&E or psychiatric admissions, in relation to drug use, such as cannabis that is involved in a deterioration in the mental health of young people. That is why we need to have more age-appropriate services. There is work under way. I have answered lots of written parliamentary questions on this point that Clare Baker has tabled, but we have to also be clear what does not help young people to push them up tariff in the criminal justice system with convictions in and around the possession of drugs. Instead of having a debate about what is best for young people, some of the debate has been about a mischaracterisation of the option of recorded police warnings. We need to be prepared to debate drug law reform, whether it is at a Scottish Government level or at a UK level. I would be interested in pursuing discussions with Clare Baker and Alex Cole-Hamilton about how we could ensure that we do that in an evidence-based way and in a collaborative fashion. The international evidence is clear. Excessively punitive measures increase harms. Haram reduction is effective in reducing deaths. Diversion works in terms of reducing re-offending. In a more collegiate note about Project Arder, we participate in learning networks, so we monitor and keep an eye on developments elsewhere. The issue about the Misuse Drugs Act is that it limits the full implementation of a public health approach and it limits the reorientation of practice, because there is something much wider about a cultural change because the focus needs not to be on criminalising people with multiple and complex needs who have experienced serious disadvantage. The focus needs to be on tackling those underlying causes, whether it is adverse childhood experiences, trauma and poverty and equality. Of course, the Government invests around £2.5 billion of its budgets to support low-income households. We all accept that jail is for serious offenders who cause serious harms, but for others, prison is an expensive means of making matters worse. Minister, that concludes the debate on a person-centred trauma-informed public health approach to substance use in the justice system. It is time to move on to the next item of business. The next item of business is consideration of a business motion 3639 in the name of George Adam on behalf of the parliamentary bureau sitting out of business programme. Any member who wishes to speak against the motion should press the request-to-speak button now, and I call on George Adam to move the motion. No member has asked to speak against the motion. Therefore, the question is that motion 3639 be agreed. Are we all agreed? The next item of business is consideration of five parliamentary bureau motions. I asked George Adam on behalf of the parliamentary bureau to move motions 3640 to 3643 on approval of SSIs and 3644 on designation of a lead committee. All of which move, Presiding Officer. Thank you very much indeed, Mr Adam. The question on these motions will be put at decision time to which we seamlessly come. There are four questions to be put as a result of today's business. I remind members that if the amendment in the name of Russell Finlay is agreed to, the amendment in the name of Claire Baker will fall. The first question is that amendment 365.1 in the name of Russell Finlay, which seeks to amend motion 365 in the name of Keith Brown on a person-centred trauma-informed public health approach to substance use in the justice system is agreed. Are we all agreed? No. We are not agreed. There will be a division, and we will have to move to a vote. There will be a short suspension to allow members to access the digital voting system.