Chamber and committees

I have one small question about something that has been raised with us. Sometimes HIS charges fees for its inspections. I want to get a wee bit of understanding of where that comes from, and whether it would continue in the national care service.

I am really interested to explore the key—[Inaudible.]—of profit in social care that was mentioned at the start of the evidence session. I am very impressed with the STUC report, and I suggest that all committee members read it. I hope that it is part of our evidence. Could Roz Foyer and all the other witnesses suggest what key aspects of that we should consider? I know that most of the trade unions contributed to that work.

My question might have been answered, but I will go back to it, if you do not mind, Mary Alexander, to clarify the point about sectoral collective bargaining. Are you saying that we know the steps that are needed to put that in place so, if we embed it in the bill—although we want to get it done before then—it would help us to progress the introduction of the national care service in a better way with the staff?

I have lodged amendment 117 primarily to reflect the numerous expressions of concern that I and many others have heard regarding the bill’s content. What I want to say first of all, though, is that, although I agree that many people are in favour of the bill’s spirit and intent, I feel that some details regarding practicalities and protections in getting a gender recognition certificate, particularly for younger people, have been overlooked.

Given that the Government has expressed its view that the minimum age for applying for legal gender recognition should be reduced to 16, it is my view that, should the legislation be passed, extra provision must be in place to support 16 and 17-year-olds, and they must be able to request that support, should they make this decision. Many young people will be reaching a time of change in their lives, becoming independent, moving away from home, beginning full-time work or starting university or college courses. For that reason, it would be preferable for a young person who seeks support in obtaining a gender recognition certificate to have guaranteed access to confidential and quality support.

Similarly, many people in that age group, particularly the youngest, are likely to be living at home and might experience difficulty in communicating their decision to direct family, leading to a sense of isolation and helplessness. That is well documented in the evidence that has been collected. Assistance can be provided through free and accessible advice that helps young people understand the practicalities of their decision and their options for the path ahead. It might also give the young person support to work with their family at a stage that is most helpful to them. Where challenges exist, the support could come from a family liaison officer, who could assist with communication. In all cases, wellbeing support ought to be available from a professional and trusted source to protect the mental health and wellbeing of young people who request such support during the process.

I ask the cabinet secretary to set out the Government’s position on the points that I have raised in amendment 117. The support must be universal and confidential if it is to succeed, and I feel that it is absolutely necessary in order to help young people during a period of particular need. Amendment 117 would give reassurance to young people and their families that balanced and universal support would be available if required and that any support would have the young person as its focus.

That is helpful. Thank you.

Thank you for that information.

Does anything need to be added to the bill to ensure that there is a statutory responsibility to enable carers to get breaks and support with breaks?

I think that we all agree that carers have traditionally been undervalued, but we are now recognising the great contribution that they make. How will the bill support carers? Is there sufficient information about how carers can help to co-design the national care service and how they can go on to become full partners in it?

I think that Nick Morris might be able to answer this question. I am interested to know whether the framework bill gives us enough information about some of the legislative stuff around adults with incapacity and mental health issues. Is there enough in the framework bill to help the transition with the multi-agency public protection arrangements and so on?

I would like a bit of information about Anne’s law, which is about rights for care home residents. We are interested to understand whether the inclusion of Anne’s law in the bill will make circumstances easier for care home residents to be visited or to visit places during a public health threat. Will the bill provide that balance to ensure safety for residents, carers and staff?

On your last statement, do you think that we need additional legislation around the issue, or more accountability in how we proceed?