Finance Committee, 09 Feb 2010

Meeting date: Tuesday, February 9, 2010

Official Report 346KB pdf

---

Public Services Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2

Good afternoon and welcome to the fourth meeting of the Finance Committee in 2010 in the third session of the Scottish Parliament. I have received apologies from Tom McCabe and, therefore, I welcome to the committee Lewis Macdonald, who is his substitute. I ask members and the public to turn off mobile phones and pagers, please.

Agenda item 1 is consideration of the Public Services Reform (Scotland) Bill at stage 2. I welcome to the committee Shona Robison MSP, Minister for Public Health and Sport, and her officials. I intend to move straight to amendments, as we did last week.

Section 55—Applications under Chapter 3 in respect of conditions

Amendment 133, in the name of the minister, is grouped with amendments 134, 172, 173 and 178.

Amendment 133 will give people who are providing a care service the ability to request that social care and social work improvement Scotland add a condition in relation to their registration. At present, that can be done only by means of an enforcement notice, which is inappropriate when a care service is actively seeking a condition notice. For example, a care home that offers personal nursing care may lose the nursing staff who are qualified to carry out that level of care and may therefore request that a condition be attached to the service that states that it may not look after individuals who need personal care until appropriate qualified staff are found.

Amendment 134 is a technical amendment that will ensure that, in granting an application under section 55, SCSWIS states any conditions that have been added.

Amendments 172 and 173 set out the same amendments for healthcare improvement Scotland in respect of independent health care services.

The amendments have been prepared as a result of representations from the Scottish Commission for the Regulation of Care, based on its experience in this area.

Amendment 178, which is similar to section 84, in relation to care services, will ensure that if any local authority health board or special health board makes arrangements for the supply of an independent health care service on its behalf, it must ensure that the service is registered appropriately with HIS.

I move amendment 133.

Amendment 133 agreed to.

Amendment 134 moved—[Shona Robison]—and agreed to.

Section 55, as amended, agreed to.

Sections 56 to 62 agreed to.

Section 63—Regulations: care services

Amendments 135 and 136 moved—[Shona Robison]—and agreed to.

Section 63, as amended, agreed to.

Section 64—Complaints about care services

Amendment 137, in the name of the minister, is grouped with amendments 138, 139, 142 to 144 and 174 to 176.

Independent care providers are unlikely to be listed authorities under the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman legislation and will not be directly required to comply with SPSO guidance, therefore such guidance will not apply specifically to SCSWIS when undertaking its duty to deal with complaints about care services. Nevertheless, it would be good practice for SCSWIS to develop its procedures for handling such complaints in line with SPSO guidance and to consult the SPSO on its proposed procedures. Amendment 137, therefore, requires SCSWIS to consult the SPSO on its proposed procedures. Amendments 138 and 139 remove the requirement for SCSWIS to seek the approval of the Scottish ministers, as that is not considered necessary.

Amendment 142 requires SCSWIS to consult the SPSO when drawing up its procedures for handling complaints about how it has carried out its functions, and amendments 143 and 144 remove the requirement for SCSWIS to seek the approval of the Scottish ministers for its complaints procedure or for changes to it, as that is not considered necessary. Amendments 174 to 176 make the same amendments for HIS procedures for handling complaints about independent health care services.

I move amendment 137.

I have a brief point about amendment 142, which is about the complaints procedure. I may just have misread something, but I am sure that the minister will clarify. Replacing "Ministers" with "Public Services Ombudsman" in section 81 is welcome, but am I correct in thinking that as a result of that change, ministers will not have to approve the SCSWIS complaints procedure? If the ombudsman has to approve the complaints procedures, might what is effectively a statutory body have ministerial powers of direction, and might ministers not have any responsibility for the complaints procedure? The ombudsman will have no power over SCSWIS, so a constituent with a complaint might prefer ministers to be accountable for the complaints procedure.

The amendments provide that the body will consult the SPSO in drawing up its procedures for handling complaints. The body will not be directed by the SPSO, but it will consult the SPSO on best-practice procedures for handling complaints. The amendments that remove the requirement for the Scottish ministers to oversee and approve the complaints procedure recognise that, given that the body will follow SPSO best practice, there is no requirement for ministers to approve the complaints procedure. It is unlikely that either body will seek to put in place complaints procedures that are somehow not in line with SPSO guidance or are out of the ordinary, therefore I am comfortable that the requirement for the bodies to consult the SPSO, get their complaints procedures in good order and follow good practice means that ministers' approval will not be required.

Amendment 137 agreed to.

Amendments 138 and 139 moved—[Shona Robison]—and agreed to.

Section 64, as amended, agreed to.

Sections 65 to 71 agreed to.

Section 72—Right to make representations to SCSWIS under Chapter 4 as respects conditions

Amendment 140, in the name of the minister, is grouped with amendments 146, 154, 161 and 168.

Amendment 140 is a technical amendment to ensure that two similar sections have a consistent effect: it brings the wording of section 72 into line with that of section 57.

Amendment 146 is a small technical amendment to ensure that section 84 is grammatically correct. Amendment 161 corrects a typographical error and amendment 168 inserts two words that were omitted in error when the bill was introduced.

Amendment 154 is a technical amendment to ensure that any regulations that might be required to ensure a smooth transition to the new body, SCSWIS, can be made.

I move amendment 140.

Amendment 140 agreed to.

Section 72, as amended, agreed to.

Sections 73 to 80 agreed to.

After section 80

Amendment 141, in the minister's name, is grouped with amendments 159 and 180.

The bill gives SCSWIS powers to issue general and more specific guidance, advice and information about its social services functions. Under the Mental Health (Care and Treatment) (Scotland) Act 2003, the Mental Welfare Commission for Scotland has powers to promote best practice in relation to that act's operation and to publish information or guidance on any matter that is relevant to its functions.

Amendment 141 requires SCSWIS to consult the Mental Welfare Commission as appropriate when exercising its powers to issue guidance, advice or information on issues on which the commission could issue similar guidance. The amendment will ensure that the commission's expertise on mental health and learning disability informs SCSWIS guidance as appropriate and will help to eliminate conflicting or duplicate guidance from the two bodies.

Amendment 180 makes a similar amendment in relation to HIS. Amendment 159 is a consequential amendment to ensure that a reference to a section is correct.

I move amendment 141.

Amendment 141 agreed to.

Section 81—Complaints procedure

Amendments 142 to 144 moved—[Shona Robison]—and agreed to.

Section 81, as amended, agreed to.

Section 82 agreed to.

Section 83—Liability of persons exercising functions

Amendment 145 moved—[Shona Robison]—and agreed to.

Section 84—Arrangements entered into by local authority or health body: services to be registered

Amendment 146 moved—[Shona Robison]—and agreed to.

Section 84, as amended, agreed to.

After section 84

Amendment 147, in the name of the minister, is grouped with amendments 147A, 147B, 147C, 179, 179A and 179B. I point out that an amendment to an amendment is disposed of before the original amendment.

The Finance Committee's stage 1 report recommended that SCSWIS should have a role working with local authorities to ensure that quality of service is given greater weight when the commissioning of services is being considered. We agree with that recommendation. It makes sense for local authorities to be aware of any relevant information from the regulators when commissioning services and, indeed, when providing services themselves. Amendments 147 and 179 will require local authorities and health boards, in providing care services or arranging for others to provide such services, to make themselves aware as far as is reasonably practical of any reports, information or notices that SCSWIS or HIS have produced. In doing that, the authorities must follow any guidance that the Scottish ministers issue, including published inspection reports, gradings and any other relevant information, such as condition notices produced by the regulator. The information from SCSWIS and/or HIS could also be about services that are provided elsewhere in Scotland by providers that are tendering to provide a service.

I cannot support amendment 147A. Amendment 146 will address concerns that were raised at stage 1 about the commissioning of care services. It is neither appropriate nor necessary to extend the scope of the new duty to cover social work services, as amendment 147A seeks to do. SCSWIS reports on local authorities' exercise of their social work service functions will be sent to the authorities concerned in just the same way as Social Work Inspection Agency reports currently are. There is therefore no need to require local authorities to make themselves aware of such reports, because they will be made aware of them anyway.

Arguably, amendment 147B would make the provisions in amendment 147 more positive by replacing making "aware of" with taking "into account". Our concern in drafting amendment 147 was to ensure that we did not elevate the status of the reports to such a degree that they could carry more weight than the decisions of local authorities when procuring services. However, on reflection, I am content to accept amendment 147B. As amendment 179A proposes an equivalent provision for HIS, I am content to accept it also. Amendment 147C appears to seek to remove the discretion of local authorities and health boards in making themselves aware of reports and so on produced by SCSWIS. I am content to accept amendment 147C and the equivalent provision relating to HIS that is proposed in amendment 179B.

I move amendment 147.

I welcome Karen Whitefield to the meeting, and ask her to move amendment 147A and to speak to the other amendments in the group.

During its stage 1 evidence taking on the bill, the Education, Lifelong Learning and Culture Committee heard a considerable amount of evidence from Community Care Providers Scotland, which recommended that a duty be placed on local authorities to consider SCSWIS reports at the point of retendering services that are provided by the voluntary and private sectors. Amendment 147A was lodged in response to the Education, Lifelong Learning and Culture Committee's recommendation in paragraph 200 of its stage 1 report.

I appreciate the minister's point that local authorities will already know the outcome of inspection reports. However, the committee is trying to ensure that such reports are given due consideration when local authorities decide to retender services. Local authorities will undoubtedly be aware of SCSWIS reports—as they currently are aware of SWIA reports—but we want to ensure that reports' findings are part of local authorities' deliberations when deciding whether it is appropriate to retender services. I seek the minister's clarification on that point. I am not trying to be unhelpful, nor do I think that the CCPS was trying to be unhelpful when it asked for the duty to be placed in the bill.

I move amendment 147A.

I welcome Jackie Baillie, who is returning to familiar territory.

Thank you, convener. Clearly, I cannot stay away from the Finance Committee.

I welcome the minister's amendments 147 and 179 in relation to SCSWIS and HIS. It makes sense to ensure that local authorities have regard to reports about care providers that are produced by either body. I also welcome the explicit reference to guidance. It is important to link up the forthcoming guidance on social care procurement, which is currently out for consultation.

I was going to narrate all the various reasons why the minister should accept amendment 147B, but she has pre-empted that. The aim of the amendment is to improve on her otherwise excellent amendment 147. I am delighted that the minister has accepted it.

Amendment 147C is, in a sense, complementary to amendment 147B, which Jackie Baillie has just discussed. Similarly, amendment 179B is complementary to amendment 179A.

I hesitate to make a speech in case the minister changes her mind. I welcome the fact that she has accepted that this important provision needs to be strengthened. For me and perhaps others who support the provision, the background is the example of social care retendering in Edinburgh. It is probably not appropriate to go into the details of that now, although I remind the minister of what I said about it at question time last week. The important point is that amendment 147, as strengthened by the amendments to it, will emphasise the importance of taking account of quality when decisions are made about tendering and retendering.

It just remains for me to welcome the minister's acceptance of Jackie Baillie's amendment 147B and my amendment 147C.

I will respond to Karen Whitefield's comments on amendment 147A. The concerns and arguments of the CCPS were one of the reasons for lodging Government amendments 147 and 179. Amendment 147 is enhanced by Jackie Baillie's amendment 147B and Malcolm Chisholm's amendment 147C. What distinguishes Karen Whitefield's amendment 147A is that it seeks to place the duty on councils' own social work services. They are already reported upon by SWIA and councils take its reports seriously, because they are about how councils' own services are performing. That does not relate to the CCPS's concerns about tendering for other services. The two issues are distinct. SCSWIS will complete reports in the same way that SWIA does for local authorities' own internal monitoring of service performance. Councils use SWIA's reports extensively, but that is a separate issue from the CCPS's concerns and the requirement for local authorities to look at the reports when they tender for external services. That is just to reiterate the distinction. I therefore ask members not to support amendment 147A.

The minister's clarification is helpful. Amendment 147A was lodged to attempt to thrash out some of the issues and ensure that the concerns that were raised with the Education, Lifelong Learning and Culture Committee were fully addressed. I believe that the minister's amendment 147 has done that, and given her comments I seek to withdraw amendment 147A.

Amendment 147A, by agreement, withdrawn.

Amendment 147B moved—[Jackie Baillie]—and agreed to.

Amendment 147C moved—[Malcolm Chisholm]—and agreed to.

Amendment 147, as amended, agreed to.

Section 85 agreed to.

Section 86—Transfer of staff etc

Amendment 148, in the name of the minister, is grouped with amendments 149 to 153, 181 and 186.

Amendments 148 to 152 and 186 are technical amendments to ensure that the references to the sections in amendments 153 and 181 are correct.

Amendment 181 allows for an order to be drafted to provide for some staff who are currently employed by the care commission to be transferred to HIS. Although the majority of staff from the care commission will transfer to SCSWIS, there are a few staff who work on the regulation of independent health care whose function will move to HIS. Amendment 181 ensures that the power is available for those staff to be transferred to HIS. The amendments also allow for care commission property and/or liabilities to be transferred to HIS.

The bill already provides that staff from the care commission and SWIA may be transferred into the new body, SCSWIS. Amendment 153 allows for an order to be made to provide for some of the staff who are currently employed by Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Education to be transferred into SCSWIS as appropriate.

I move amendment 148.

Amendment 148 agreed to.

Amendments 149 to 152 moved—[Shona Robison]—and agreed to.

Section 86, as amended, agreed to.

After section 86

Amendment 153 moved—[Shona Robison]—and agreed to.

Section 87—Orders and regulations: procedure

Amendment 154 moved—[Shona Robison]—and agreed to.

Section 87, as amended, agreed to.

Sections 88 and 89 agreed to.

Schedule 10

Social Care and Social Work Improvement Scotland: modifications of enactments

Amendments 155 and 156 moved—[Shona Robison]—and agreed to.

Schedule 10, as amended, agreed to.

After section 89

Amendment 157, in the name of the minister, is grouped with amendment 158.

These are technical amendments that make provision for the Scottish Social Services Council to review and revise the process of notifying decisions on applications for registration that are made by social service workers, to place social service workers and their employers under an obligation to have regard to the code of practice, and to allow the Scottish ministers to issue directions when necessary to social service employers and workers. The amendments also provide for the council to consult the SPSO in drawing up complaints procedures.

The current procedures for issuing a decision on an application for registration are time consuming and administratively burdensome. The amendments will allow the council to replace the current processes with a more streamlined approach, which will benefit applicants while still protecting their rights of appeal in the registration process.

Most employers take account of the code of practice, but the amendments will ensure that all employers and social service workers must have regard to it. The power to give ministerial directions in respect of certain aspects of the code will mean that, where necessary or appropriate, ministers can direct persons to comply with certain aspects of the code.

As no member wishes—

I am sorry, but there is more, you will be glad to hear. [Laughter.]

Should employers fail to provide training and development opportunities for staff, or fail to comply with council proceedings, or should workers fail to respect the rights of services users or to improve their skills and knowledge, directions can be made to rectify those situations. I am sure that it is helpful for the committee to have examples of that. It is intended that the council will be a listed authority for the purposes of the SPSO, and the amendments will require the council to consult the SPSO on future changes to its procedures, but the council will no longer be required to seek Scottish ministers' consent to the procedures.

I move amendment 157.

A full explanation is a virtue, as is brevity. Do you wish to wind up, minister?

No.

Amendment 157 agreed to.

After schedule 10

Amendment 158 moved—[Shona Robison]—and agreed to.

Section 90—Healthcare Improvement Scotland

Amendment 159 moved—[Shona Robison]—and agreed to.

Amendment 160, in the name of the minister, is grouped with amendment 162.

Convener, I will be brief. The amendments seek to add independent ambulance services to the list of independent health care services in proposed new section 10F of the National Health Service (Scotland) Act 1978. The type of activity that would be captured would be patient transport to or from a place of medical treatment, where that transport is accompanied by a medical or other care element; attendance at events such as sporting events, music festivals, and so on; the provision of first aid services that might range from minor to more serious treatment; and the transport of persons from events to permanent medical facilities. Regulation by HIS would apply to services that act outwith the national health service. The Scottish Ambulance Service will, of course, be regulated when it is providing a service outwith the NHS, such as when it provides cover for private events for which it is remunerated.

Ambulance services that are provided or secured under the NHS will fall to be reviewed by HIS under proposed new section 10I, "Inspections of services provided under the health service", of the National Health Service (Scotland) Act 1978.

I move amendment 160.

I seek clarification on amendments' drafting, although I understand the reason for them. Can the minister make it clear that, for example, volunteer drivers who have a financial relationship with NHS Scotland will have their expenses covered? Will they be covered by the definition of "independent ambulance service"? Charities such as the Red Cross and others operate in this way, but there is also a network of volunteer drivers. I am slightly alarmed that I cannot see anything in the bill that would exclude them from the definition of "independent ambulance service", although they are clearly not that.

That will depend. The definition of "independent ambulance service" that will apply, under amendment 162, is a service that includes

"provision … of medical treatment, medical care or other care to relevant patients while such patients are being transported to or from a place of medical treatment".

The issue for volunteer drivers is whether the service that they provide comes within the orbit of that definition.

I understand that. For the sake of absolute clarity, will you reconsider the matter of definitions and volunteer drivers in advance of stage 3?

I am happy to take that on board.

Amendment 160 agreed to.

Amendments 161 to 164 moved—[Shona Robison]—and agreed to.

Amendment 199 moved—[Malcolm Chisholm].

The question is, that amendment 199 be agreed to. Are we agreed?

No.

There will be a division. All those—

I am sorry, convener, but I moved amendment 199 in error.

Because you moved it, we have to take it to a vote.

Cannot the member seek leave to withdraw amendment 199?

I have been told that he can do that.

That is kind of you, convener. I was thinking not about the amendment but about the speech that I will make in a moment. I seek leave to withdraw amendment 199.

Amendment 199, by agreement, withdrawn.

Amendment 165 moved—[Shona Robison].

Amendment 165A moved—[Malcolm Chisholm].

The question is, that amendment 165A be agreed to. Are we agreed?

No.

There will be a division.

For

Brownlee, Derek (South of Scotland) (Con)Chisholm, Malcolm (Edinburgh North and Leith) (Lab)Macdonald, Lewis (Aberdeen Central) (Lab)Purvis, Jeremy (Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale) (LD)Whitton, David (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (Lab)

Against

Fabiani, Linda (Central Scotland) (SNP)FitzPatrick, Joe (Dundee West) (SNP)Welsh, Andrew (Angus) (SNP)

The result of the division is: For 5, Against 3, Abstentions 0.

Amendment 165A agreed to.

Amendment 165 agreed to.

Amendments 166 to 178 moved—[Shona Robison]—and agreed to.

Amendment 179 moved—[Shona Robison].

Amendments 179A and 179B moved—[Malcolm Chisholm]—and agreed to.

Amendment 179, as amended, agreed to.

Amendment 193, in the name of Malcolm Chisholm, is grouped with amendment 194.

This may be the only point of controversy this afternoon, convener. That said, perhaps my luck will hold and the minister will agree to the two amendments in the group. I am sure that she supports the Scottish health council. The question is whether we should ensure that it continues to exist through the bill or leave the decision to the new body, healthcare improvement Scotland. I am a great admirer of NHS Quality Improvement Scotland, which is the predecessor body to healthcare improvement Scotland and has done a great deal to improve the quality of health care in Scotland.

The Scottish health council was set up, to be located in NHS QIS, by a statutory instrument in 2005, although debates about it took place during consideration of the National Health Service Reform (Scotland) Bill in 2004. At that time, the Health Committee—which included the minister, Shona Robison—was concerned about placing the Scottish health council within NHS Quality Improvement Scotland and thought that the council should have its own status, because it had to be an independent body. Eventually, the committee was persuaded that it would be acceptable for the council to be part of NHS Quality Improvement Scotland, but only if its independence within the body was guaranteed. Over the years, that aspiration has been fulfilled; the council has been part of NHS Quality Improvement Scotland but has been an independent body with which NHS Quality Improvement Scotland cannot interfere. It is important that we preserve the council's independence and do not leave it to healthcare improvement Scotland to decide its future.

The Scottish health council should remain independent because it has an important role to play in the public involvement agenda in health. Great progress has been made in that area over recent years, partly because of the council's work in monitoring and reporting on health boards' activities in respect of public involvement. The role of healthcare improvement Scotland, following on from NHS Quality Improvement Scotland, will relate to quality, but that does not intrinsically mean that there must be full public involvement; there can be a quality agenda that is based on the notion that "we know best". That is not the approach that has been taken in Scotland but, potentially, the quality agenda is not identical with the public involvement agenda. That is why it is important that the council continue to have guaranteed its future and its independence within the new health improvement body.

There is much concern about the use of "may" rather than "must" in the bill. The Health and Sport Committee expressed that concern in its report and recommended that the word "may" be replaced by "must". Amendment 193 would effect that change; amendment 194 is consequential on it.

I move amendment 193.

I do not support amendments 193 and 194 and will outline why. As Malcolm Chisholm said, the Scottish health council plays an important role in supporting public engagement and patient focus in the NHS. We wish that role to continue. When HIS is established it will establish the council as a committee. However, we also want HIS to develop a strong public engagement and patient focus role. Under part 6 of the bill, HIS is subject to the user focus duty. We are of the view that, as HIS develops that role over time, there may be a case at some point in the future for the role and functions of the council to be absorbed into HIS more fully. Under the bill as it stands, there is sufficient flexibility to allow that to happen. If amendment 193 were to be agreed to, that flexibility would be removed from HIS.

If Malcolm Chisholm's amendments are agreed to, the council will be established as a statutory committee under primary legislation and there will be no scope for HIS to reorganise the council's functions in the future. There are many changes on the horizon, not least of which is the impact of direct elections to NHS boards. There are other on-going developments. I ask for HIS to have the flexibility to take such changes into account in the future by reorganising the council's functions, if HIS's doing so is deemed to be appropriate. I urge the committee not to support the amendments and to allow HIS that flexibility.

In a sense, the minister's comments confirm the worst fears that the Health Committee voiced a few years ago, and which were repeated in a different way by the Health and Sport Committee.

Much as I admire the health improvement body as it exists and, no doubt, will exist, I do not think that it should have the freedom to take over and assimilate the Scottish health council. That would be a decision for politicians. One of the good things about having political leadership of health is that the whole patient focus and public involvement agenda has been led by politicians of both Administrations. I am sure that the current Administration would want to claim credit for having pushed forward with that agenda

There may be many aspects of the quality agenda that ought to be led by clinicians rather than politicians, but the patient focus and public involvement agenda ought to be directly led by politicians. I do not think it right that the quality improvement body should have the freedom to, as it were, downgrade that agenda. The minister will say that it is just going to do the same thing in a different way, but there is always a danger that the important focus on public involvement and patients will be downgraded. We must reassert the importance of that agenda. It is a good thing for the Scottish health council to be set up through primary legislation, because it is a primary guardian of that agenda; however, we must change the wording of section 90, as amendment 193 proposes.

I press amendment 193.

The question is, that—

I am sorry. Can I just respond to be helpful? There are two things here. This is about providing more flexibility for future changes; nothing is ever set in stone. The debate around reform of public services requires us all to remain fairly open-minded and flexible about the future, instead of embedding things for forever and a day. Perhaps I could address Malcolm Chisholm's concern about Parliament's role by lodging at stage 3 an amendment that would require a fundamental change to the Scottish health council to be brought back to Parliament through an order-making power. That would address his concern about Parliament having the final say—that would be protected—but would not require us to go back to primary legislation for every reform of, or change to, a public body, which is what we are trying to get away from.

If Malcolm Chisholm's concern is that politicians should have the final say in such things, I would be happy to lodge an amendment at stage 3 that would give him that security without making flexibility more difficult in the future through a requirement to revert to primary legislation. I would be happy to discuss any such amendment with Malcolm Chisholm as we progress to stage 3, if he would be reassured by that.

That is getting us entangled in the broader debate about part 2. I want to press amendment 193. If the amendment is passed and the Government wants to introduce an alternative at stage 3, it can delete the amendment and substitute its own proposal. We could be open minded about that. However, in the absence of an alternative, I want to put the matter to a vote.

The question is, that amendment 193 be agreed to. Are we agreed?

No.

There will be a division.

For

Chisholm, Malcolm (Edinburgh North and Leith) (Lab)Macdonald, Lewis (Aberdeen Central) (Lab)Purvis, Jeremy (Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale) (LD)Whitton, David (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (Lab)

Against

Brownlee, Derek (South of Scotland) (Con)Fabiani, Linda (Central Scotland) (SNP)FitzPatrick, Joe (Dundee West) (SNP)Welsh, Andrew (Angus) (SNP)

The result of the division is: For 4, Against 4, Abstentions 0. I use my casting vote against the amendment, which therefore falls.

Amendment 193 disagreed to.

Amendment 194 not moved.

Amendment 180 moved—[Shona Robison]—and agreed to.

Section 90, as amended, agreed to.

After section 90

Amendment 181 moved—[Shona Robison]—and agreed to.

Section 91 agreed to.

Schedule 11

Healthcare Improvement Scotland: establishment etc

Amendments 182 and 183 moved—[Shona Robison]—and agreed to.

Schedule 11, as amended, agreed to.

Schedule 12

Healthcare Improvement Scotland: modifications of enactments

Amendments 184 and 185 moved—[Shona Robison]—and agreed to.

Schedule 12, as amended, agreed to.

That ends the third day of stage 2 consideration of the bill. The target for the next day's consideration will be the end of part 6. I remind members that, although the February recess is next week, the deadline for lodging amendments is this Thursday, 11 February, at 12 noon.

Meeting suspended.

On resuming—