Health and Community Care Committee, 06 Mar 2002

Meeting date: Wednesday, March 6, 2002

Official Report 150KB pdf

---

Petitions

---

Multiple Sclerosis (PE223 and PE431)

As members know, we periodically review the situation regarding petitions. PE431 is on behalf of the Multiple Sclerosis Society Scotland. The Public Petitions Committee has asked us to consider the petition alongside petition PE223, which, I believe, is on beta interferon.

PE431 calls on the Scottish Parliament to take the necessary steps to ensure that patients who may benefit from beta interferon and glatiramer receive it as soon as is logistically possible. Members should note that the Executive made an announcement on beta interferon trials on 4 February 2002. We all very much welcomed that announcement. I suggest that we take no further action on PE431 and PE223 at this point.

Members indicated agreement.

Would it be appropriate, convener, for you to write back to the petitioners, or would you prefer to write back to the Public Petitions Committee to ask it to write to the petitioners? It is important that we keep petitioners informed.

I should write back to you, John, as convener of the Public Petitions Committee, to tell you what we have decided and why. You could then write to the petitioners. We usually have to tell you what we have done with petitions, do we not?

You should do, yes.

Actually, there is a clarification. I have just been told that we will write to the petitioners.

But you should also write to the Public Petitions Committee.

Yes, we will do both.

---

Autistic Spectrum Disorder (PE452)

PE452 calls on the Scottish Parliament to investigate a range of issues relating to the methods of diagnosis and treatment of adults with autistic spectrum disorder in psychiatric wards in Scotland. The petition has been passed to us by the Public Petitions Committee for information. I suggest that we take no further action at this stage.

Members indicated agreement.

---

Organ Retention (PE370)

PE370 is from Lydia Reid on behalf of Scottish Parents for a Public Enquiry into Organ Retention. In December 2001, the Health and Community Care Committee agreed to note the petition and to await the outcome of the Scottish Executive consultation on the findings of the independent review group on retention of organs at post-mortem. The Executive's consultation is continuing and the committee has made a response to it. It is recommended that no action be taken on the petition at this stage. Is that agreed?

Members indicated agreement.

The consultation will end on 31 March. It is for the Executive to decide when it will respond to that.

---

Chronic Pain Management (PE374)

PE374 calls on the Scottish Parliament to act urgently to redress the underfunding of chronic pain management services. The Health and Community Care Committee asked the Executive about its assessment of the needs of patients suffering from chronic pain and about whether the current chronic pain management programmes deliver the appropriate services. We received a response in October 2001. In November, we considered the reply and agreed to write to the Scottish Executive for further clarification of its position on the funding of chronic pain services. Members have a copy of the Executive's response, dated 1 December.

A response is currently being sought to some of the questions that we asked. It is recommended that the petition be continued until that response has been received. We are all aware of the fact that recently there was a debate in the Parliament on chronic pain which generated a considerable amount of public interest. I suggest that, if we continue the petition until we have received a further response from the Executive, we should return to it before consideration of the next round of petitions, as answers have been received to most of the questions that we asked. Once the remaining questions have been answered, we can consider the petition as a separate agenda item.

The head of broadcasting has just told me that there have been well over 100,000 internet hits from 18 countries for the debate on chronic pain. Obviously, most hits have come from the United Kingdom and Scotland.

The head of broadcasting has also given me some of the postings that have been received, which I will pass to the clerks. Some members may want to have those.

We recognise that there has been a big public response to the debate. Is the committee happy to accept my suggestion that we continue the petition and return to it as a separate agenda item when we have received the Executive's response?

Members indicated agreement.

Could we—

A decision has been taken on the petition.

---

Scottish Ambulance Service (PE381)

PE381 calls on the Scottish Parliament to examine the Scottish Ambulance Service's proposals to close five of its eight Scottish operations rooms. The Audit Committee is being kept informed of the business plan and the matter is in its hands. For that reason, I suggest that the committee take no further action on the petition at this time. Is that agreed?

Members indicated agreement.

---

Scottish Parliament Health Policy (PE320)

PE320 is from John Watson on behalf of the World Development Movement. The report that we have received on this matter is currently a private document. It is suggested that the report be discussed further in private at a later meeting. I propose that we continue the petition until our meeting of 13 March, to allow for discussion of the draft report.

We have also received comments from the European Committee, which has chosen to take no view on the draft report or the petition until the Health and Community Care Committee has approved the report. Are we happy to place the item on the agenda for our meeting of 13 March?

Members indicated agreement.

---

Organ Retention (PE283)

PE283 also relates to the issue of organ retention. I suggest that we hold the petition in abeyance until the Executive's consultation on organ retention has been completed. Is that agreed?

Members indicated agreement.

---

Fuel Poverty (PE123)

PE123 is from the warm homes campaign. Item 13 on the agenda for today's meeting is discussion of a draft report on the petition. It is fair to say that work remains to be done on that. Do we agree to consider the petition later?

Members indicated agreement.

---

Epilepsy Service Provision (PE247)

PE247 is from the Epilepsy Association of Scotland. We have received a response on the petition, which calls on the Parliament to ensure that there are co-ordinated health and social services that will benefit the 30,000 people in Scotland who suffer from epilepsy. On 28 November the committee considered two letters from the Executive, agreed to send the letters to the petitioner, to await a response and to decide then whether to take any further action. The petitioners sent a letter to us on 1 February, which members have in their papers. The committee is invited to consider that response, and to decide whether to take any further action on the petition. Are there any comments?

Epilepsy Action Scotland, formerly the Epilepsy Association of Scotland, suggests at the end of its letter that it would appreciate a chance to speak directly to the committee about the response and the petition. We should give the association the opportunity to do so.

We should hear from the petitioner, because there is a legitimate concern. The letter from Epilepsy Action Scotland says that only one health board, the Greater Glasgow NHS Board, gives early diagnosis within four weeks, in accordance with the Scottish intercollegiate guidelines network guidance. It also states that the misdiagnosis rate is up to 30 per cent. The organisation has a genuine case, and I support hearing its evidence.

If there are no other comments, is it agreed that we will take evidence from Epilepsy Action Scotland?

Members indicated agreement.

We will factor that into a future meeting.

We have already dealt with petition PE223.

---

Hospital Services outwith Cities (PE407)

PE407 is from the Action Group for Chalmers Hospital. The Public Petitions Committee considered responses from the Scottish Executive and NHS Grampian on the issues that were raised. It agreed to copy the responses to the petitioner and to the clerk to the Health and Community Care Committee, and to take no further action. Given the Public Petitions Committee's response, it is recommended that no further action be taken by this committee. Is that agreed?

Members indicated agreement.

---

Organ Retention (PE406)

PE406 is again on the subject of organ retention. In keeping with the two previous decisions that we have taken, we should take no action at this stage. Is that agreed?

Members indicated agreement.

---

Myalgic Encephalomyelitis (PE398)

PE398 calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Executive to carry out a strategic needs review assessment on myalgic encephalomyelitis and chronic fatigue syndrome, and to take a range of other steps in relation to the treatment of and research into those conditions. The Public Petitions Committee considered the petition and passed it to us for our consideration.

We had a debate on the issue recently, soon after the English chief medical officer's report on the matter. Some positive steps were taken in recognition of the condition. The members' business debate on ME was well attended and brought a positive response, if I recall, from the Deputy Minister for Health and Community Care, Hugh Henry. He said that the Executive would examine the issue over a three-month period—that was about a month ago. Any consideration of the issue by the committee should be set against the background that we know that the Executive is examining the issue positively and proactively.

I declare my interest as the convener of the cross-party group in the Scottish Parliament on ME and as the convener of the Public Petitions Committee. The petitions on this subject are among the most impressive that have appeared before the Public Petitions Committee. The Executive's response, although helpful, does not address the central issues that are raised in the petition. The response refers to the possibility of asking the Public Health Institute of Scotland to consider the feasibility of a Scottish needs assessment programme after the CMO's report is published. We have no information on whether the Executive will actually do that.

Equally, the Executive clearly believes that it should address the suggestion that there should be a centre of excellence, as is called for in the petition. It has recently come to light that research projects into ME are being funded at the moment, but they are all being funded from a psychiatric aspect, which the petitioners are opposed to. There is a short-term working group, and we know who the chairman is, but we do not yet know the group's remit. The cross-party ME group is to elect two patient representatives to that working group.

Would it be possible to appoint a reporter to monitor developments and report back to the committee on what is happening? The petition needs to be watched carefully.

Are there any comments? Everyone seems to be happy with that.

Do we have a volunteer to be the reporter?

I do not know whether I would be qualified, given that I am the convener of the cross-party group.

No. Could I have clarification? You said that a reporter should be appointed to monitor the situation.

To monitor the situation with the working group and report back to the committee.

We should seek clarification on the points that you have made about finding out about the remit and consider whether we can have input into that remit in the way that we did into the hepatitis C working group. We should seek clarification of some of the other points that are covered by the petition but might not be covered by the short-term working group. If members are happy, we will appoint a reporter to continue with that work on behalf of the committee. Do we have a volunteer?

It should be John McAllion.

Are you happy to do that?

I am happy to do it.

We are happy to accept that you should do it. You can count yourself as being the committee's expert on the issue. It would not make sense to not make use of that expertise.

---

Sleep Apnoea (PE367)

PE367 is from my old friend Eric Drummond and calls for the Scottish Parliament to ensure adequate and equal services for diagnosis and treatment of sleep apnoea. There has been a good conclusion in that Lothian Health Board is considering the service under its health plan. I suggest that we take no further action—

I am not trying to cause problems but I want to give some information to the committee. Since the Public Petitions Committee took that decision, Eric Drummond has written again to the committee and it will be considering his correspondence at a future meeting. It seems that the Lothian Health Board health plan does not refer to a sleep apnoea clinic. That issue will be raised in the Public Petitions Committee at a future meeting.

In that case, we should say that we are happy to discuss the issue as a separate agenda item.

Once the Public Petitions Committee has dealt with the issue.

We should check out the situation and discuss the issue as a separate agenda item rather than holding it back until the next round of petitions, especially if all we are doing is seeking clarification before we make a decision. Is that agreed?

Members indicated agreement.

That brings that agenda item and the public part of today's committee meeting to a close. We now move into private session. We will take a five-minute comfort break.

Meeting suspended until 10:42 and thereafter continued in private until 11:25.