“Accident and Emergency: Performance update”
We move on to agenda item 5. We have a progress report update from the Scottish Government in relation to the committee’s “Accident and Emergency: Performance update” report. We have already noted the Scottish Government’s substantive response to the committee’s report. Do members wish to make any comments?
I have a couple of points. First, there is undoubtedly some useful information in Paul Gray’s answer, although I do not quite understand some of it. For example, on page 4, in the annex, on “Workforce”, there is a wonderful phrase in the middle of the paragraph headed “Shape of Training” that says:
“while providing a robust mechanism to ensure linkage across the wider UK landscape.”
For the life of me, I am not sure that I know what that means, and he does not say what the “robust mechanism” is. It would be helpful to have some clarity around language.
What I really want to know is whether we are due to get another report on the matter from Audit Scotland. The subject is topical—there is something about it literally every week at the moment. Given our continuing interest in it, will it come back to us at some stage through Audit Scotland’s work? How else is the Parliament scrutinising it? I recognise that a lot of this goes into another committee’s policy responsibilities, rather than being an audit matter.
I am informed that the Auditor General does not have anything planned at this stage, but we could—
We could at least suggest it.
We could write to the Auditor General and seek an update.
We could seek some advice from her as to when she might wish to consider the matter further.
Yes. Are there any other comments, colleagues?
On the basis of what has been said, I think that we should just note the progress at this point.
To be fair, we were planning a trip to Ninewells. We thought that the report raised serious concerns. We took evidence from NHS Grampian, NHS Forth Valley and NHS Tayside. We found that NHS Tayside was a beacon of good practice and we wanted to learn from that, but it has been difficult to get that visit organised.
Tavish Scott says that the issue is topical. The recent figures for meeting the target are lower than they were when the Auditor General wrote the report, so things are getting worse. I appreciate that there are issues in Glasgow with the three hospitals merging into one, but the overall figure across Scotland is not good.
We learned in evidence that this is the 24/7 open door to the NHS, and we wanted to look into the matter further. To be honest, I do not want to just note the report. We have an obligation. The increase in presentations to accident and emergency services, with all that is behind that, is incredibly important for the national health service and it has impacted on general practitioners, the Scottish Ambulance Service and all sorts of things. I do not want to just note the report and leave it behind, because things are not getting better; they are getting worse.
I will throw another wee issue into the mix. It refers to something on page 4 of the report. I agree with Tavish Scott. I am not sure what the sentence that he quoted means in relation to the nationwide situation. It would be good to get clarification of that. There is a paragraph on Scottish international medical training fellowships. I would be interested to know, if the committee can find out, whether the new immigration laws that are being put through by Westminster, which the nursing profession has raised as an issue, will have an impact on its recruitment internationally. The Royal College of Nursing has raised that. I wonder whether the committee can look at that as well.
I suggest that, in order to take forward those issues and the points that Mary Scanlon made, we ask Paul Gray to come to a future meeting.
That would be helpful, given that we were not able to fulfil our inquiry.
It might help to amplify things, and it would be an opportunity to address some of the points that Sandra White raised.
Yes.
In suggesting that we note the progress, I was trying to close down the report. That does not mean that we could not ask the Scottish Government for figures, perhaps in a few months’ time.
I agree with your suggestion, convener, and it would help with Colin Beattie’s point. It will be in a few months’ time, as it will be September before Paul Gray can come before the committee, but Sandra White and Mary Scanlon have raised serious questions that, in the context of what we have been considering over a period of time, it would be a very good idea to ask. I would welcome Mr Gray appearing before the committee in September.
Is that agreed?
Members indicated agreement.
Before the committee moves into private session, I mention that two members of our support staff are leaving us. Jane Williams is moving to another committee: the Health and Sport Committee. I am sure that we all wish Jane the very best.
Tom Williams is also leaving us to go much further afield—he is going to Sweden, I understand. I am sure that the whole committee wishes both Jane, whom we will still see in the Parliament, and Tom, who is leaving the Parliament, the very best for the future.
Members: Hear, hear.
11:31 Meeting continued in private until 12:15.Previous
Section 22 Report