 The minister will take questions at the end of her statement, so there should be no interventions or interruptions. I would encourage all members who wish to ask a question to press their request to see button sal and a call on Elaine Campbell. Thank you, Presiding Officer. Next year marks the 10th anniversary of the road to recovery. It signalled a landmark change in the way that Scotland deals with problem drug use, setting out a new vision in which all drug treatment and support services are based on the principle and hope of recovery. During those 10 years, much has been achieved, we have an impressive and growing recovery network in Scotland. That has proven invaluable in promoting a civic and cultural shift in attitudes towards problem drug use. Within treatment services, we have also seen a shift in attitude through the introduction of recovery-oriented systems of care. We have implemented innovative harm reduction measures such as the world's first take home naloxone programme. We have also established ambitious waiting time targets for access to alcohol and drug treatment. That all comes against the backdrop of almost a decade of record investment. Since 2008, we have invested £608 million to tackle problem alcohol and drug use. The main principles behind the road to recovery that had cross-party support still remain relevant. However, 10 years on, we must be alert to the changing nature of Scotland's drug problem and how we respond to new and emerging challenges. Our understanding of the underlying causes of addiction and substance use have developed aided by an ever-growing evidence and research base. There is a greater understanding of the effects of deprivation, poverty and adverse childhood experiences in driving the reasons that so many in our communities turn to drugs and or all alcohol as a way of escaping the painful trauma and experiences. That is why my intention is to bring forward a combined alcohol and drug treatment strategy in spring next year. Although there are clear differences between the two, the root causes and the fundamental culture of the responses by services have too much in common to be kept apart. The legal status of alcohol means that there is much that is different in policy terms around availability and accessibility. Indeed, the UK Supreme Court judgment on minimum unit pricing for alcohol is an example of the different levers that we have at our disposal in terms of preventative interventions. The Supreme Court judgment marks a landmark movement in our ambition to turn around Scotland's troubled relationship with alcohol. I therefore still plan to bring forward a refreshed alcohol strategy that sets out my plans for preventative action in early 2018. Turning to treatment and recovery support, the focus of our efforts must be on improving the experience for patients and their families. With rising drug and alcohol deaths, evidence of the devastating consequences of problematic substance misuse can clearly be seen across Scotland. Those substances are significant contributors to the early deaths or excess mortality that we see in Scotland. We know from the work of NHS Health Scotland, the Scottish Drugs Forum and Glasgow Centre for Population Health that that generation was made in part more vulnerable by the economic and social decision making of the 70s and 80s. Those impacted are now reaching an age where multiple social and health issues are meeting years of problem substance misuse with devastating consequences. However, I fully recognise the importance of resources for treatment and that is why the £20 million per annum announced as part of our new programme for government is crucial for this refresh. That represents 60 million additional funding over the life of this Parliament to help to deliver improved services, delivered with the person at its heart, not the addiction, and to enable a greater consistency of quality services across Scotland. It will also support alcohol and drug partnerships and services across Scotland as we instill the principles of the seek, keep and treat work, which I will mention more on shortly. Our refreshed strategy and the resources behind it must be innovative in approach, guided by evidence of what works, but also informed by those with experience. Whether that is practitioner or patient to stand any chance of delivering the impacts that we seek, it must be authentic and be empowering of the people seeking to make improvement. The growing demands placed on health services by ageing drug and alcohol users in particular demands services realign to appropriately and collaboratively link into other areas, including mental health and primary care. That will remove some of the current stresses placed on the system by emergency and unplanned hospital admissions. We must continue our approach of recovery-oriented systems of care. Recovery must prevail as the mainstay of our policy, with care centred around the person connecting into work on homelessness, employability, mental health and family support. That refreshed approach must be viewed as providing an opportunity to enable support to reach out to those who are most vulnerable but who cannot access the sustained help that they need for both health and wider social issues. That is vital, because we know that being in treatment offers protection against a drug-related death. There is a strong sense that that is also true for alcohol, but I want to ensure that evidence-based is robust. That is why I have asked Scottish health action on alcohol problems to lead work to enhance our understanding between the circumstances and contributory factors of alcohol-related deaths. That work will develop actions to further develop the evidence-based on alcohol death prevention and treatment services. We know that the cohort that is most at risk and vulnerable to this is often furthest away from services. That is why the refresh will develop our seek, keep and treat philosophy to services. We must actively seek out this hard-to-engage cohort, whether it be through assertive outreach, advocacy or new innovative approaches. We know that retention among the cohort can be improved. Much has already been done to ensure service quality, but there is clearly a need to consider whether the range of services on offer can keep more people in treatment by responding to their care needs in a way that addresses all aspects of their wellbeing. Finally, we also know that it is imperative to appropriately treat people by providing that person-centred care and support alongside social and clinical interventions. Increasing evidence points to factors such as social isolation and stigma as major barriers to continued engagement. Seek, keep and treat will be the guiding principle for additional investment to secure change. I expect to see services being redesigned to be more active in identifying those who are disengaged from treatment. People should only be discharged for the right reasons and appropriately supported as they move on their treatment journey. We will seek to measure levels of retention and treatment outcomes that are consistent with that approach. We must consider ways in which services can provide the wide-ranging support that will keep people engaged. That must include an acceptance that some individuals will not be ready to immediately embark upon a journey of recovery or abstinence, an acceptance that some will stumble and relapse numerous times in some cases, an agreement that that must not preclude them from receiving high-quality support and treatment when they return. Earlier today I met with alcohol and drug partnerships and health and social care partnerships to begin to give shape to the shift that is cognisant that those services currently face high demand and pressure. That is why the resources that I outlined earlier are important to enable a move to invest in models that work. Transformation will take time, commitment and energy. It will also require our health and social care systems to assess its current practice, reflect on its effectiveness, be innovative and be open to change of evidence points to a need to improve. The recent efforts to introduce a safer consumption facility in Glasgow is an example of how ambitious and innovative responses are being generated at the front line. Where we see stigma challenged and a huge public health problem responded to in a way that meets the needs of that population. The law does not currently allow that facility to proceed, but we must not let that be the final word on the matter. I have written to my UK counterpart to ask for discussions on how this Parliament obtains the powers to allow us to meet a significant public health challenge. Treatment can no longer just be clinical but must also address some of the deep-rooted social and economic circumstances that people face. It is therefore fundamental that we better join the dots between health and social care partnerships and ADPs and ensure provision of addiction services according to robust local needs assessment as a priority set out in the respective delivery plans. That will require cross portfolio, cross cutting and cross-discipline working. It will require my ministerial colleagues and I across housing, mental health, justice and employability to align our work and to collaborate. I also aim to engage thoroughly with those who have lived and living experience of addiction, families and those at the front line who dedicate their lives to doing what they can to support and help those with addictions. This strategy must be based on strong evidence and research but must also be authentic and relevant to all those who interact with it. It must be focused and must drive the improvements that we so desperately want to see, but we should not lose sight of the improvements that have been made and I need to continue with the good work that has been impactful. There are no quick solutions here. Lives are complex, can be chaotic and can have suffered great trauma. The issues that we see in an ageing and vulnerable population are long-standing and deep-rooted. Developing a refreshed approach to responding to that will be a challenge, but it is a challenge that we will not shy away from—the individuals, the families and the communities that can be devastated by addiction should expect no less. Just as parties united 10 years ago to back an approach to substance misuse, so, too, do I intend to work with colleagues across the parliamentary divide and bring back to this chamber a refreshed strategy in spring of next year? Thank you very much. The minister will not take questions. We start with Miles Briggs. I would like to start by thanking the minister for advance sight of her statement today. It is important, though, that the Scottish Government does not try to rewrite history today around drug and alcohol policy in Scotland, so let's start with the Government's 50 million cut to Scotland's alcohol and drug partnerships. That has had a hugely destabilising effect, and I would have expected an apology from the Government today on that issue. However, we on these benches see how this issue needs to be addressed, and we have long called for a cross-party approach on that. Assurances can the minister give that the new strategy will indeed provide some truly radical thinking that is designed to tackle the cultural and societal issues? Will the minister today agree to establish a cross-party MSP working group on this issue ahead of the strategy being published? Thanks, Miles Briggs, for his questions. The new strategy that we aim to make sure that we explore all options that are available to us to ensure that we can deliver a strategy that is cognisant of the new landscape that we face and that has an enhanced understanding of the current challenges that we face across the country is not going to put to one side the impact that road to recovery has had. I outlined in my statement the fact that the road to recovery has had an enormously positive impact in many aspects of life for those who have addiction challenges, but certainly we will not rule out any other innovative ideas. One of them that I set out has been taken forward by Glasgow Health and Social Care partnership. I intimated in my statement that I intend to write to the UK Government. If that is something that Miles Briggs is indicating that he would like to support so that we can get the powers here in Scotland to have bold, ambitious and exciting ways of using and treating substance misuse through a public health lens, I would certainly welcome that support. I should recognise, though, that, since 2008, we have put record funding into alcohol and drug partnerships, and we are committed to ensuring that we work with them on this refreshed approach. That does not ignore the fact that there are, of course, across all of public life financial challenges, but that is why the £20 million is needed to ensure that we enable innovative models of work to deliver improvements for people who are most vulnerable in our society is why we should welcome this opportunity to refresh our approach. I look forward to working with MSPs across the chamber and giving consideration to an MSP working group. Colin Smyth I thank the minister for advance sight of her statement. Scotland has a long history of drug and alcohol misuse, which damages far too many lives, families and communities and costs billions of pounds every year. Drug deaths in Scotland are now the highest in Europe per head of population, and last year, alcohol-related deaths rose by 10 per cent. When the Government publish its combined strategy next year, it will require radical action, but it will also require fully to be resourced, particularly when it comes to support for those battle and addiction. Can the minister therefore say what assessment has been made of the impact of a 24 per cent cut in support for addiction services and cuts in local government funding for those services? I thank Colin Smyth for his continued interest in the subject. I will, however, remind him that we have since 2008 put record levels of investment into tackling problem alcohol and drug use. That was £689 million since 2008. It is also important to remember that the total financial resources available in any given year is significantly higher than the contribution that is provided by the Scottish Government and includes direct contributions from the NHS and other statutory partners. However, we recognise the challenges that exist in public life, the financial challenges that exist, which is why I reiterate that the £20 million is important. Will it enable us to develop new ways of approaching some particularly difficult and challenging cohorts of drug users in Scotland, those that do, unfortunately, present in the drug death statistics that we see every year, and we recognise that. That is why I have committed to refreshing our approach, because we need to do something that enables us to tackle that problem and that challenge head on. There are particular reasons. NHS Health Scotland had taken forward some analysis of why that was happening in Scotland. It did point to economic and social policies of the 70s and 80s that exacerbated the feeling of isolation, neglect and drug deaths in the hearing now. There should be real lessons around the austerity policies that have been taken forward by the current UK Government to ensure that they are not storing up problems 30 years hence from now around the ways in which they are shamelessly pursuing austerity measures. There are lots of ways in which we can improve services and that is why the resources are important and that is why the engagement with front-line practitioners is also important to ensure that we have a strategy that is authentic, relevant and effectively tackles the challenges that we have in Scotland. Stuart McMillan, to be followed by Brian Whittle. First of all, I refer members to my register of interests. I am a member of the management board of moving on to Inverclyde. I welcome the announcement and the new strategy on new funding. Can the minister outline if the new strategy can examine and seek to address how different statutory and non-statutory organisations work together so that treatments are truly person-centred and reviewed regularly to ensure that they remain appropriate? I thank Stuart McMillan. Today, as I said in my statement, I met with ADPs and IJBs where there was discussion around the challenges and issues being faced at a local level and how that impacts on local planning and delivery arrangements. That discussion will continue to develop over the coming weeks and months and will help to inform the strategy. The strategy again offers us an opportunity to join those dots more effectively, not just for the immediate and front-line treatment of drug addiction but also allows us to have an impact into that wider service delivery arena, helping us to link into homelessness and employability in mental health provision as well. Reviewing and monitoring is currently under development by ISD, the daisy approach to reviewing treatment. NHS Scotland is developing a monitoring and evaluation framework. Both of those things together will allow us to get a bigger and better picture about the way in which addiction manifests itself across the country. That evidence will allow us then to take forward the best approaches to help to effectively tackle addiction in Scotland. Brian Whittle, to be followed by Neil Findlay. Thank you, Presiding Officer. Now that we know, according to the SNP Government policies some 40, 50 years ago, Westminster has specifically raised Scotland to the highest level of drug-related deaths in Europe and could have nothing to do with anything that the SNP has done over the past 10 years, even though drug-related deaths have doubled in the last since 2006, 80 per cent of whom are under 50. Can I ask the minister, given the statement that focuses on treatment, what it plans to invest to help to prevent the issues of substance abuse and poor relationships with alcohol going forward? I think that Brian Whittle does the research and analysis by NHS Health Scotland, a real disservice. Unfortunately, it is not made with any great deal of happiness that the policies pursued in the 80s have resulted and can be in part resultant in some of the drug deaths that we see today. That is the reality. I think that we should all do well to listen and reflect on the fact that those economic policies have had an impact on public policy and social policy in the here and now. That should be a real lesson for the Conservatives, whose party down at Westminster continually and harshly continue to pursue austerity measures at Westminster. I do not make that point with any great deal of satisfaction, as I have said. I think that the Tories would do well to listen to the calls not just by the SNP but around every political party in this chamber to halt the roll-out of universal credit, to stop austerity policies, because all they do, if we look at examples from the past, is to store up problems in the future. We will continue to do what we can to pick up the pieces, to do what we can to support those vulnerable people who deserve to be seen through, who deserve to have services delivered through a public health lens to enable them to go on and contribute in society and to be filled that they have the support from services that are delivered in a holistic way. Brian Whittle does a disservice to the research and analysis that has been undertaken by others who have lent their expertise to enabling us to develop a strategy that will help many people in Scotland. Neil Findlay, followed by Clare Haughey. Presiding Officer, I could not give a toss about the party politics of this. I could not give a toss about the party politics of this. This is one of the greatest issues that communities across Scotland face, but most notably the poorest communities, such as those that we all represent. People are dying years before their time. The streets are awash with illegal drugs and organised criminals have grown fat on the profits of misery. Is it not time that we had a radical change of direction? Otherwise, we will be back here in another 10 years, with so many more sons and daughters having become a grim statistic of what is our collective failure. Again, that is why we have come to this chamber today to engage what I have said at my statement. I certainly do not think that I am somebody who shies away from engaging with other people regardless of their party politics at all. The whole reason for me to take forward this refresh was exactly because of the drug-drath statistics that come out that are not just statistics. They represent individual people who have lost their lives, individual families who have suffered bereavement, loss of potential and a huge devastating blow to the communities and families that those people have come from. That is exactly why my focus is on making sure that we can get things right. That is exactly why we have got 20 million extra going into the services. That is exactly why I will continue to focus my work and to work and engage with people who are constructive in their approach towards creating a strategy that we can ensure developers for people who are in greatest need of help. Clare Haughey, to be followed by John Finnie. I refer members to my register of interest and that I am a registered mental health nurse and I hold an honorary contract with Crater Glasgow and Clyde NHS. As the minister set out in her statement, the proposal for a safer consumption facility fell recently, an ambitious innovative proposal by Crater Glasgow and Clyde NHS. I note that she has written to the UK Government seeking a change in the law to allow such a facility to proceed. If the UK Government refused act, will she request that the necessary powers are devolved to Scotland so that this Parliament can make the decision? Absolutly. We support Glasgow health and social care partnerships proposals, particularly in light of the growing number of HIV cases in the city. However, as I mentioned in my statement and as Clare Haughey outlined, the law in Scotland does not allow us to proceed though we are grateful to the Lord Advocate for providing his advice. Drug law legislation is currently reserved and we are waiting to hear back from the UK Government before making any decisions. If they are not able to enable that to go forward, we will certainly always be making the case that drug policies should be and should rest with this Parliament. John Finnie, to be followed by John Mason. I thank the minister for early sight of the statement and, indeed, in response to that reply to the previous question. Minister, you rightly identify the unacceptable level of drug related deaths. At the moment, we have an outbreak of HIV in Glasgow, 105 new cases since identified at October last month. A large proportion of those have hepatitis C co-infection, a problem across Scotland. We have had the enforced closure of the busiest sterile injection equipment supply facility in Scotland and that has led to a significant decrease in the number of clients that are accessing such equipment. You touched on the issue of the Lord Advocate. This is clearly a health rather than a justice issue. Do you accept that, rather than a refresh of something that is clearly failing, that it is a radical overhaul, including looking at decriminalisation that is required? I appreciate the way in which John Finnie has articulated the points. The issue around the HIV outbreak is a matter that gives me great concern. The Glasgow needle exchange service closure is an issue that is on-going for myself and Hamza Yousaf continuing our engagement with Network Rail and Glasgow Health in social care partnership to ensure that we can try and achieve a satisfactory solution to that particular issue. John Finnie would do well to engage with some of the ADPs. The ones that I spoke to today were at great pains to say that they did not believe that the road to recovery is something that they think has failed. I outlined where there has been huge improvements across Scotland. ADPs were keen to make sure that we do not just disregard that good bit of work, but to refresh how we approach drug taking in the country and not just disregard the achievements of road to recovery. I think that there is opportunity for us to be bold, to be ambitious, but that has to be cognisant of the fact that there has been improvements made through road to recovery. We will continue to work through with front-filling practitioners and those with lived and living experiences around what we can do to improve the services across the country to ensure that we have people who are at the heart of service design and delivery. John Mason will be followed by Alex Cole-Hamilton. The minister and I attended a very moving service on Thursday evening, organised by Family Addiction Support Services, which was really our membrane service for those who had died through alcohol and drugs. She mentions a £60 million fund. Will some of that be available to support families as well as mental health and homelessness and so on? I again would like John Mason to pay tribute to FAS and the way that they do to support families across the city of Glasgow and beyond those families who are coping with the impact of addiction and the tribute that they gave to those who had lost their lives at that service last week. John Mason rightly outlines the fact that there is a need to ensure that we engage with families, and that is absolutely part of the intention of the strategy to make sure that we do not just listen to clinicians or practitioners but to engage meaningfully with those with lived and living experiences of addiction and the family who are often the ones who have to pick up the consequences of that addiction or the ones who are left devastated by the impact on a loved one. We continue to engage with organisations such as FAS, such as Scottish Families Affected by Drugs and others who will be able to input into the development of the strategy. Does the minister not accept that we cannot begin to build an effective strategy while her Government will not accept the failures of its administration, which defunded drug and alcohol services by a similar amount to that that they are presenting today as new money, on whose watch we saw a 23 per cent increase in drug deaths last year alone, making us the worst in Europe, and which continues to send people to prison instead of treatment for drugs possession? After 10 years, is that really the starting point that she would have chosen for her Government's new strategy? I reiterate that, since 2008, we have invested significantly in tackling alcohol and drug use problems since 2008, which is £689 million. Alex Hamilton would do well to recognise that the way that he articulates that problem is not as straightforward as he outlines. The trend of rising drug-related deaths has been in evidence since 1996, so it is difficult to see how there is a direct correlation between funding levels and drug death trends. He should also do well to recognise that the total financial resources available in any year is significantly higher, as I outlined in a previous response. With additional contributions from health and other statutory partners, as well as the direct contribution that the Government puts in, we will look forward to engaging with parties across the chamber to develop our new strategy, and to recognise the opportunity that we have with this additional resource to make sure that we can refresh our approach, be bold, be ambitious and to make sure that what we do delivers the impact that we need for this vulnerable group of people in Scotland. Richard Lyle to be followed by Donald Cameron. Minister, can you outline how people with lived experience of substance abuse will be able to inform those new strategies? Again, the member makes a good case for ensuring that we do actively engage with those who have lived and living experiences. That has certainly been the hallmark of our pads group that has been looking to tackle the issues around stigma. We held a recovery community gathering in Glasgow in July of this year. That was the first time that we brought together recovery communities from across the country so that they had a direct input into the work and influence of the work that we are taking forward as a Government. That engagement will continue and will continue to seek out ways in which we can reflect the voices of people with experience and lived and living experience in the new strategy that we take forward. Given the continuing public debate surrounding the efficacy of Scotland's methadone programme, can the minister confirm if the new strategy will review the use of methadone in treating addiction? It is important to recognise that we should not characterise that as something that is wholly negative. The opiate replacement therapy has been one of the approaches that has allowed that harm reduction to take place and has allowed people to have function in lives and has enabled families to recognise the positive impact that it has had on people who are requiring support. I have spoken again. People across the chamber are looking for me to ensure that I have direct engagement with people who have lived and living experiences. While the heckling happens across from the Conservatives, I will continue to work and engage with people who are telling me about the impact that that has had, the positive impact that it has had in their life to reduce harm in communities across the country, to reduce some of that criminality that others have talked about and to enable us to allow them, when it is appropriate for them, to embark on a journey of recovery. I welcome the statement and the minister's commitment to cross-party working, because I think that that is an issue in which we must have cross-party working. I think that she is absolutely right. We cannot disregard where certain programmes have been successful. Clearly, there have been very good examples of success up and down the country, but there is also a need for new thinking. Let me suggest four areas to the minister, and there are many others. I am sorry, Mr Neil. Four areas sounds like a rather long question. I am just going to mention nothing more than the headline. First of all, in children, particularly children living in poorer communities, what more can we do to ensure greater prevention of children becoming involved in drugs? Secondly, we need to evaluate the impact of the methadone programme and whether there are other alternatives that have been tried in other countries that should be looked at. Thirdly, we need to do more in relation to prisoners. Finally, we need to do much more in the poorer communities, because clearly we all agree that there is a link between poverty and drug and alcohol abuse. Clearly, we need to try to tackle the problem at source, i.e., reduce the levels of poverty and deprivation. I think that we all need to do some new thinking in all of those and other areas. Again, I thank Alex Neil for making the point. Certainly, the four headlines that he outlined will be something that will continue to engage with him on. The fact that he mentioned children is important, and there has been a continued focus on ensuring that we support this very vulnerable group of young people who we do not want to predetermine to a life of substance misuse either. We need to take a life course approach to this. While I have set out what I think has been some of that innovative thinking that I do not think that anyone has asked about, seek, keep and treat approach, which is to seek out assertive outreach to try and find people who are harder to reach, who cannot engage with services, who find that there are barriers involved in them engaging with services, to seek out and help them to keep them in services, because that stands the best chance of preventing a drug-related death. That is certainly something that is bold and ambitious. Again, it is disappointing that nobody has recognised that or wants to develop that issue more. Poverty, of course. I said and outlined the NHS Health Scotland's analysis of drug-related death that poverty has a huge link to drug taking and drug misuse in Scotland, so absolutely we will certainly look at the issue of poverty. It was interesting that the Conservatives at that point decided to clap at that point that Alex Neil made, because they should again have a close look at some of the policies that their UK counterparts are taking down in Westminster. I hear Brian Whittle talking about 10 years. How many years will he and his Government continue to pursue harsh austerity measures? How many years will he continue to consign generations of children across the whole of the UK, not just Scotland, but the whole of the UK to poverty? How many problems is he storing up and his party storing up 30 years from now, and who will be left to pick up the pieces? I thank the minister and all members for their contributions this afternoon. We will move on now to the next item of business, which is a debate on motion 9205 in the name of Angela Constance on making Scotland equally safe.