Official Report 254KB pdf
Agenda item 3 is consideration of the Scottish Government's strategy document "All Our Futures: Planning for a Scotland with an Ageing Population".
Thanks very much, convener. It is a pleasure to be here, and I welcome the opportunity to speak to you about "All Our Futures: Planning for a Scotland with an Ageing Population". In my letter of 28 September, I offered to come and speak to the committee about the strategy, and that is why I am here today.
Thank you, minister, for that very full opening statement.
As I said, we support the overall strategy and we will take it forward. In my opening statement, I mentioned some of the new measures in the budget—the freeze on council tax, the uprating of free personal and nursing care, and the commitment to improve the support for people with dementia. Those are important issues that affect older people in particular.
That is helpful.
To which roadshows are you referring?
The minister mentioned various roadshows in her opening statement.
The folk who are involved with the Scottish centre for intergenerational practice have developed the roadshows. I am not sure why Edinburgh is not included. I can feed that point into the process.
If members think that there should be a wider range of venues, we can feed their comments back to the centre. It is early days for the centre, which is feeling its way and is trying to speak to as many people as possible. The centre will visit not only the places that have been mentioned—there will be more visits.
It would be helpful if you fed our comments back to the centre. Lanarkshire seems to have been left on the periphery. People can go to roadshows in Glasgow or other places, but it would be nice if Lanarkshire was considered for a visit, as it has a big catchment area. The same applies to Edinburgh, if no roadshow is planned for it.
We will feed that point back to the centre.
The strategy is detailed and complex. Who has overall responsibility in the Government for ensuring that it is implemented? Are there timelines for actioning particular strands of the strategy?
The answer to the first question is me, but not me alone. I have lead responsibility, but because much of the work spans a number of ministerial responsibilities, there is collective responsibility for meeting the commitments in the strategy.
Rightly, you mentioned the diverse spread of "All Our Futures" across ministerial portfolios. You have indicated that you will be the lead minister on the strategy. Do you have or intend to put in place a system to bring ministers together periodically to discuss the progress that they and their departments are making or can make? Will there be short to medium-term reviews of the progress that each minister is making in their portfolio?
The national forum on ageing is the implementation group that will act as a champion and provide direction for "All Our Futures". It may sometimes be appropriate for other ministers to meet the implementation group to discuss how they are taking forward specific aspects of their portfolio. Ministers often meet to discuss and provide progress reports on issues. It would be sensible for "All Our Futures" to be subject to that process at some point, so that we can look at where we are going, what progress has been made and what more we need to do. We can certainly commit ourselves to doing that.
The strategy outlines a 12-point vision of how its success can be measured. However, to the reader, some of the points are aspirational. For example, the strategy says:
You will be aware that one of the commitments in the strategy is to
I am a bit confused. If I heard you right, you said that you will use the information that you have, but you do not want just to keep collecting information. However, if you do not collect information, how will you know whether progress is being made?
The point that I was making—perhaps not as well as I could have done—is that the Government collects a range of statistical information and the information that we need to measure progress is among it, but we need to ensure that we choose the right indicators. We do not need to collect a load of new statistical information, because it is already available, but we need to decide which indicators we will use and draw on the available statistical information to monitor progress.
However, when the outcome agreements have been drawn up, local authorities will have to provide evidence that they have made progress.
That is why the indicators need to match up. A number of indicators that are relevant to the work of "All Our Futures" are already within the concordat, so match-up is important.
The introduction to the strategy states:
We have seen the influence that it has had in the public sector. The policy direction for our Government draws on "All Our Futures" and looks at the priorities for the work on older people. That is happening in a lot of other directorates as well as in health. Within the public sector, the strategy is already influencing the direction of policy and priorities.
In your introductory statement, you said how important it is that we tackle ageism. The first figure in the summary of "All Our Futures" is of particular interest to the committee, because it clearly exemplifies the problem that life expectancy in Scotland for males is 74, while for women it is 79. What will the strategy do to address that inequality?
The reasons for that difference might be historical, such as our industrial past and the working lives that men had. Given that the nature of work has changed over the years, the gap might close naturally. On life expectancy, I want to focus our attention on the health inequalities between parts of Scotland—the fact that where a man or a woman lives is more important to how long they live. That is an important aspect of the Government's work.
One factor is where people live, but is another the fact that males are reluctant to go to the doctor with initial symptoms? A case in point is that many needless deaths from prostate cancer could be avoided by going to the doctor a little earlier. Is there an issue of raising awareness?
Absolutely. Through our public campaigns, such as that on prostate cancer, we need to encourage men to access the health service, because we know about that issue. That work is important and we want to develop it. However, I cannot stress enough the fact that a man from a deprived area is likely not only to approach the health service later but to have several co-morbidity issues—other underlying health factors that make the prognosis for a serious illness worse, because they hamper recovery. That is a double whammy—a person presents late with a serious illness and has several problems that reduce their chance of recovering. Much work needs to be done, and we are determined to take it forward.
Will those issues influence any possible campaigns? Are campaigns in particular areas more likely to be triggered than general awareness campaigns about life-threatening diseases for males?
We are already working through the keep well programme to find people who are hard to reach and who do not regularly access the health service, and groups in communities that have co-morbidity issues and lifestyle factors that we need to address. That proactive use of the health service, which encourages people by knocking on their doors, inviting them into the health service and giving them health checks to identify health problems before they become big, has been successful. We are determined to extend that model to other parts of Scotland, to ensure that deprived communities that are not benefiting from the programme can benefit from it.
Are you confident that that approach to the problem will leave no one out?
If we get the approach right and if health boards get it right locally, we should reach out to the people who are least likely to access the health service proactively. If we do that, the programme will be a success.
Is that prioritisation reflected in expenditure plans in the areas that we are talking about? Will you give us an example of that?
The subject is prioritised in "Better Health, Better Care". The budget gave a large increase to tackling health inequalities, health improvement and the commitment to extend the keep well programme. The commitment to tackle health inequalities and improve health is reflected in the budget. Allied to that is the fact that some chronic problems, such as issues of alcohol use and smoking, are more pronounced in more deprived communities.
The committee understands that a national stakeholder event on the strategy was not held last November as planned. Will it be rescheduled?
We intend to hold the event or events in 2008. Rather than having one big national event we are considering holding a number of regional events, so that we reach out to more people instead of expecting everyone to travel to one point in Scotland. We are considering where the regional events will be held and how we can ensure that we maximise the input from older people at them. We are considering how to take that forward. The process will begin in 2008 and the regional events will conclude in the summer or autumn.
So you do not have a date yet. I understand your point about people travelling. The Equal Opportunities Committee is good at travelling out to meet people, but on the other hand there is something to be said for a national event. For example, the event that we held in the Parliament got a lot of publicity.
We might consider that for the future, but the evidence suggests that we will reach out to more people by having a more accessible event that does not require older people, who may, for example, be infirm or have caring responsibilities, to travel. It is easier for them to get to an event if it is held closer to home, but that does not preclude us from holding a national event in the future.
A national event should still be held, because a difficulty with regional events is that it is impossible for them to cover everybody's area.
That is true.
Does the Scottish Government still intend to report regularly on the strategy to the Scottish Parliament? If so, when will the first report be made?
Yes, we want to do that. We think that every two years might be appropriate, but I am happy to hear what the committee thinks. Our current thinking is that we want to produce the first report in the autumn of this year, because by then a reasonable time will have elapsed to enable us to report on progress. I am interested to hear whether the committee thinks that it has a role as part of the reporting to Parliament. Previously, a written report would have been lodged in Parliament, but it does not have to be done in that way. If committee members think that there is a better way of reporting to Parliament, I am willing to take their views on board, whether they want to give them to me today or reflect on the matter and give them to me later.
The suggestion that we should consider different ways of reporting is welcome, and I am sure that the committee will reflect on the issue.
I will reflect on that suggestion and see whether we can build it in.
Thanks, minister.
I will raise a couple of issues that relate to Marlyn Glen's question. It is an excellent idea to hold regional events. It would also be good to have a national stakeholder event, at which I would like not only the usual suspects to be in attendance. That is always a problem in national events, and it is important for such an event to include other people. It might be a good idea to hold the national event after the regional events.
I will respond to that question after I have commented on the first two points that Sandra White made. First, there is a balance to be struck between holding local events and reaching out to a wider group of people. I take the point that we might also need a national event. I quite like the idea that regional events might lead to a national event—I will consider that. Secondly, we will look at how feedback on the report might be structured so that we can allow more dialogue on the report, rather than present it on a take-it-or-leave-it basis.
That was helpful. Will the funding commitments in "All Our Futures" be continued by the Scottish Government?
Yes.
There are questions about advertising and so on, but I will not go into that as other folk want to ask about that.
The issue is topical. We will keep it under review—we need to see how some of the new bodies work out. Members will know that the Commission for Equality and Human Rights was established in October 2007. Its responsibilities cover all six equality strands, including age. We also have the Scottish Commission for Human Rights, which will raise awareness and promote the human rights of disadvantaged groups. We are keen that there should be no duplication.
Has there been a tendency to appoint commissioners despite the voluntary sector's being more than able to carry out their remits? In some cases, the voluntary sector might have been better placed to do such work because of its flexibility and expertise.
It is true that the landscape of public services has become overcomplicated in recent years and that it has to be simplified. That is another reason not to rush into establishing another commissioner when the work could be done by another body. We have to take time to consider the issues.
That approach is welcome.
There are priorities to be considered and strategic action will include improving opportunities and removing barriers. Both are important: what weight has the minister's department and the Government put on them?
Are you talking about changing attitudes among younger people? If we are to change attitudes in society, we have to change the attitudes of the younger generation towards the older generation, which they will inevitably join at some point. The new Scottish centre for intergenerational practice will present an opportunity to challenge attitudes and change them. As we said earlier, that will be a long-term objective. The centre will also promote positive images of older people. The anti-ageism campaign will send a message to older people themselves about their life chances and opportunities. In work, leisure and health, older people should expect more. Their expectations are rightly higher than those of the previous generation of older people.
Will the funding that you have described be divided equally between the two strands?
We are still working out what the key messages of the anti-ageism campaign will be. We will challenge attitudes and assumptions about older people and we will promote positive images. A balance will need to be struck in respect of how the £750,000 will be spent. It is important that the messages are the best messages—the ones that will have the best effect in changing attitudes. Obviously, we are taking professional advice on what will work, or what is most likely to work.
You confirmed that work is under way on the commitment to set up a national forum on ageing. I seek detail on the exact role of the forum. Who is represented on it? How were they appointed or selected? Finally—once again, we are back to the money—will you make available long-term funding to support its work? If so, for how long will the funding be made available?
As I said earlier, we are in the process of setting up the national forum, which I have agreed to chair. Given that it is an implementation group, its members will be hands-on. It will act as a champion in taking forward the strategy. Membership will include four older people, two of whom will be nominated by the older people's consultative forum. We will try to draw the other two people from sections of society that are underrepresented. The forum will include representatives from the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, the Scottish Federation of Housing Associations, the Association of Directors of Social Work, the Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland, the councils for voluntary service, Age Concern, and Help the Aged. We remain committed to the older people's consultative forum. Its range of representation is wider than that of the national forum. I chair the older people's consultative forum, which meets approximately quarterly. That forum provides an opportunity for direct dialogue on issues of the day that affect older people. As I said, the national forum is an implementation body; it is not the forum for those wider discussions.
What about funding?
The commitment is to provide £100,000 for the first year. We will seek to continue funding by way of a grant, although we will need to ascertain the forum's on-going running costs. At present, I do not have accurate information on that, and will not until the forum is up and running.
Given that the strategy is in part on the intergenerational nature of things, have you considered having younger people on the forum?
I have not considered that, but that idea is not unreasonable. As I said, once we get around the table and have our first couple of meetings, it may become apparent that voices that should be at the table are missing. I am willing to reflect on the idea.
What exactly will the Scottish centre for intergenerational practice do and how will it fit in with the national forum on ageing? How will it ensure that best practice is shared across different communities and organisations, including schools and local authorities? Finally—of course—I turn to the money. Will long-term funding be made available?
I will give some of the background. The centre is rapidly coming together and has just published its first newsletter, which I think the committee has seen. It is based at Children in Scotland's office and its director is Brian McKechnie, of the University of Strathclyde. Its priorities are to develop a website with materials that are accessible and usable by all and to run introductory roadshows across Scotland in February and March. Part of the aim of the roadshows is to find out what future activities people want the centre to do. It is a bit of a moveable feast. The centre is keen for its work to be directed by its users and potential users as far as possible.
Continuing in subsequent years.
Thank you, John. That funding will continue in subsequent years.
I have a couple more questions. I know that one area was mentioned and, from looking at the list of roadshows, I notice that Renfrewshire is not on the list. I take the opportunity to point that out while I am speaking.
You are right that there is an opportunity to lead by example, and the Scottish Government as a large employer has a duty to do so. It has an equal opportunities policy that aims to tackle discrimination and unfair treatment on the grounds of age, disability, gender, race, religion, belief or sexual orientation. There is also the age positive campaign, which promotes the benefits of employing a mixed-age workforce that includes older and younger people. It encourages employers to make decisions on recruitment, training and retention that do not discriminate against people on the basis of their age. The campaign uses publications, research, the press, events and reward initiatives to get the message across.
Part of the aim is to ensure that younger and older staff share skills and experiences. I am curious about how the Scottish Government is developing its techniques and measuring their success. I appreciate that you will almost certainly not be able to answer that question now, so perhaps you could come back to the committee. I would be interested to know how you measure success and check that the work is happening at all.
That will be done through staff survey feedback, which monitors how staff feel at their work, and issues that are raised through the normal disciplinary and grievance procedures, which would begin to show a pattern if there were particular problems. Bill Wilson is right that the work perhaps needs to be more systematic—I can certainly come back to the committee with more details if that would be helpful.
That would be interesting.
Again, it is a matter of leading by example. We can obviously share good practice with the organisations that we are directly responsible for and those that are at arm's length and follow public sector policy.
You mentioned that people are increasingly working past 65 and that one way to encourage them to work would be to offer more flexible pension arrangements. Can you think of any other flexible arrangements to encourage such people to go on working so that there is no burn-out at retirement age? Given that many people find it hard to adjust to retirement from working life, how could the strategy encourage, for example, phased retirement, retirement planning or other good human resource practices?
A number of flexible working arrangements are in place in both the public and private sectors that allow employees to arrange their working week around child care or other caring responsibilities. As people get closer to retirement, they might also wish to work fewer hours. I made the point to Bill Wilson that if employers get better at providing such arrangements they will find that they lose fewer members of their workforce and will hang on to their skills and experience for longer. Phased retirements, in which retirement is not all or nothing, and other such practices should be encouraged. All we can do is to lead by example, promote good practice and encourage other organisations to do so.
Is awareness being raised to promote good practice and to give examples of it to encourage employers?
I think that it is. I am sure that some private sector organisations are probably doing that, too. I would like to think that they are: if they are not, they should be. We need to get across the message that it is a win-win situation for the employer.
It is more effective to encourage best practice than to leave it on a voluntary basis.
I am sure that there are lessons to be learned. The point that John Storey has just made to me is that action plans such as "Better Health, Better Care" are relevant in this context as they allow us to lead by example. I am sure that we can learn lessons and we are happy to do so. Perhaps we need to do more work on that.
The strategy makes provision for £0.75 million—I think you said that it is over three years—for an advertising campaign to portray more positive images of older people. When will the campaign be launched? At whom will it be targeted? Will it be targeted at older people themselves, or at employers and local authorities? Will it make it clear that some people can work past retirement age and encourage employers to keep such people on?
The money will be over three years, subject of course to approval of the Scottish budget, about which we are confident. Work is under way with the Newhaven Agency on developing the campaign, which will have two prongs: tackling ageism and ageist attitudes and promoting positive images. There is still work to be done on what direction the campaign will take. For example, will it use YouTube or other tools that young people use to get messages across and to challenge some of their attitudes about older people? We need to think a bit differently. There is still a role for mainstream television or radio adverts, billboard posters and so on, provided that we get the message right, but we have also to be a bit more inventive and use tools that are effective in reaching a wider audience. Young people in particular use certain sites on the internet and we need to get smarter at ensuring that we are tapping into such resources. Work on that is under way.
Sometimes with big expensive campaigns the data are not gathered in advance of or during the campaigns to ensure that they work and to identify which parts are not operable. I seek reassurance that the campaign has been well thought out in advance and that the data will be gathered before and during it.
I can certainly reassure you about that. We have undertaken a review of how we use the advertising budgets. I am not convinced that all the public information campaigns of the past have had the evidence base that they should have had. We are keen to ensure that when we embark on a campaign, it is evidence based, it is the most likely to work and it will get to the right audience. We are aware of that issue.
The Newhaven Agency has already undertaken work for us. It has done quantitative work, which involved a survey of 1,022 people throughout Scotland—old people and young people—to find out their attitudes. That provides a baseline. It has also undertaken qualitative work, through focus groups, which has looked in more detail at people's attitudes to older people, older people in employment and older people in front of them in the queue at the supermarket and so on. That information will allow us to measure what impact any campaign has had.
I am duly reassured.
Minister, you mentioned earlier the intention around support for carers. We on the committee were pleased to note that you intended to publicise the national care standards. In response to another question, you said that funding was available to communicate what to expect from national standards and care homes. Are arrangements in place to monitor the implementation of the care standards? I ask that because a lot of care homes are run as businesses in the private sector. How can you ensure monitoring of care standards?
There was a lot there. It is important to publicise the national care standards. It is okay for them to be there in a document, but they are not as effective as they should be if people do not know what they should expect from services. That document is an important piece of work. In its assessments of care homes, the Scottish Commission for the Regulation of Care ensures that care homes comply with the standards. It is the responsibility of ministers to ensure that the standards are monitored.
One of the fears of older people is social isolation—that in itself can lead to health problems. Is the Scottish Government committed to maintaining dial-a-bus services to take older people shopping, to hospital and to visit friends and so on, particularly in rural areas?
Demand-responsive transport services were an element of "All Our Futures: Planning for a Scotland with an Ageing Population". Although that has been rolled up as part of the concordat with local government, I am very much of the view that local authorities will want to deliver that service. Many of them already do so very well; others could learn from best practice elsewhere about how to develop those services. In many local authorities in rural areas, the services are already quite far developed, but it is up to local authorities to develop and maintain the services at a local level as part of the local government settlement.
I do not want to get into the whole ring-fencing argument. Will the Government continue to support concessionary travel programmes and improvements to the accessibility of public transport?
Absolutely. I can give the committee some figures on that.
We are almost out of time.
Basically, the answer to the question is yes. Spending on concessionary fares for older people will rise to £180 million in 2010-11.
That is helpful.
What progress has been made on the Scottish Government's commitment to develop all-age housing—housing that is suitable for people's changing needs throughout their lives?
We still have that commitment, which Stewart Maxwell is taking forward as part of the housing strategy. I can write to the committee with more details of that work.
We can fit in one more brief question, if Sandra White asks it quickly and the minister provides a short answer.
You spoke about younger people using YouTube and so on. How can more peer training be provided in supermarkets and other areas to encourage older people to use the internet?
That is an important issue. A number of schemes are available to encourage people, especially from more disadvantaged communities, who do not currently have internet access to access the internet. As you say, there are a number of prominent public outlets where people can use it. I am encouraged by the number of older people who have become internet wise. They include my mother, who is over 80 and is now quite a whiz on the internet. It is a tool that breaks down the information barrier, and we should encourage older people to access it. We will seek to do that.
I have one more tiny question, which relates to an issue that is close to my heart. We have talked about employers and employees, but I want to touch on the subject of older people who are entrepreneurs. Given the increasing number of older people, has the Government carried out an analysis of Scottish Enterprise's pilot personal enterprise shows?
I have some information on the issue, which I will include in my written response to the committee.
That would be terrific. Thank you for taking part in a full evidence-taking session, which we have found very helpful. We look forward to receiving the additional information that you have promised to provide. I suspend the meeting for a couple of minutes to allow a changeover of witnesses.
Meeting suspended.
On resuming—