General Questions
Legislative Plans
We understand that the UK Government’s legislative programme will not be announced until the Queen’s speech on 25 May. The Scottish Government will continue to pursue a constructive relationship with the UK Government to serve best the interests of the people of Scotland.
Now that Mr Clegg and Mr Cameron have sealed what I am sure they regard as a perfect union, it is clear that their plans will include measures to address the constitutional union. That might result in some positives, such as the additional powers that the Calman commission recommended, but it might also have negatives. What is the Scottish Government’s view on the fact that no consultation, and certainly no public vote, are proposed on the additional powers; that a legal requirement could be implemented for Holyrood and Westminster elections to coincide on the same day in 2015; that a UK sovereignty bill could be introduced to establish Parliament’s sovereignty, which would be out of keeping with the Scottish tradition; and that the partnership agreement makes oblique references to the West Lothian question?
As Patrick Harvie might expect, the Scottish Government will seek to work constructively with the UK Government. We will seek a relationship that is based on mutual trust and parity of esteem. One of the first tests of that relationship relates to the Calman proposals, to which Patrick Harvie referred. We have always said that some of the proposals are positive, as he said. However, the finance and taxation recommendations have significant flaws. They would deliver less transparency and less accountability and would expose the Scottish Government’s budget to significant risks without adequate levers to address those risks. The UK Government needs to be open about considering those issues.
I warn the Minister for Parliamentary Business not to wish for too much. He might get a referendum that is held from London.
I have every sympathy with Margo MacDonald’s point. We in the Parliament worked hard to implement the Gould recommendation that the Parliament’s elections should be decoupled from and should not take place on the same day as local government elections. If elections for this place and Westminster were held on the same day, that would run contrary to the Gould recommendations. I can only hope that, in the rush to what is now a political oxymoron, the parties did not particularly examine their decision, and that we can persuade them over time to change their minds.
Child Poverty
The growing up in Scotland reports confirm that the relationship between income poverty and other forms of disadvantage is very complex. The reports found that, although persistent low income is strongly associated with poor outcomes for children, it is highly contingent on other factors. Taken in isolation, it is not strongly associated, and many other types of disadvantage are important determinants of children’s outcomes.
Does the minister share my concern that child poverty—indeed, any form of domestic poverty—is not mentioned in the agreement that the United Kingdom coalition Government published yesterday? Will he and the Scottish Government reaffirm their commitment to ending the scandal of child poverty in Scotland? Does he agree that the best way of doing that is to give the Parliament the full powers of independence?
I absolutely agree that the best way for us to deal with child poverty in Scotland is by full independence being passed to the Parliament and the people of Scotland. We would have hoped that child poverty would be a top priority for the incoming Government. This is a missed opportunity for the Government to be more positive and to reaffirm the joint commitment to eradicating child poverty by 2020, to which all four countries in the UK have signed up. However, we remain committed to working with the new Government and the other devolved Administrations in a spirit of co-operation on our joint goal of achieving the 2020 child poverty targets.
Although all members will express concern about the fact that child poverty is not a priority for the new Conservative-Liberal Government at Westminster, does the minister agree that the Scottish Government has considerable powers to help to eradicate child poverty? Does he also agree that breakfast clubs such as those that are run in my constituency are an excellent way of ensuring that children have a healthy and inexpensive start to their day and are properly set up for a day’s learning? Exactly what commitment does the Scottish Government have to ensuring that every child in Scotland has the best start to their day?
Our policy frameworks are well known to all members. I acknowledge and agree that the initiatives in Ms Whitefield’s area are positive contributions to those frameworks.
Local Health Services
We are committed to providing health care services as locally as is appropriate and possible.
Is the cabinet secretary aware that NHS Lanarkshire has not invested in local health centres in Cumbernauld and Kilsyth in the past three years and is cutting—and proposing further cuts to—local services? For example, a registered blind 80-year-old woman living on her own has been told that she will not receive podiatry services from NHS Lanarkshire. Does the cabinet secretary believe that that is delivering at local level?
If Cathie Craigie would like to write to me about the constituency case that she mentioned, I would be more than happy to look into the specifics.
The cabinet secretary might be aware of proposed changes to out-of-hours services in parts of the NHS Lanarkshire area. She might also be aware of the proposed removal of X-ray services in Cumbernauld. Given that total expenditure in NHS Lanarkshire in 2005, under Labour, was £650 million, whereas total expenditure in 2009, under the current Government, was £850 million, does she agree that such changes cannot be justified on a financial basis?
I am aware that NHS Lanarkshire is considering a number of proposals, to ensure best value for taxpayers’ investment. I also understand that no decisions have been made to date on out-of-hours or X-ray services. Local people should be assured that proposals from any health board that would significantly alter services must be subject to full public consultation and, in certain circumstances, to ministerial approval.
NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde (Meetings)
I meet all health board chairs regularly. The next meeting is scheduled for 24 May.
In response to a previous question the cabinet secretary referred to increased funds being made available to NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde. She also referred to ministerial approval. Has she given ministerial approval for the redundancy notices that have been served on porters at Stobhill hospital, in my constituency?
If Paul Martin writes to me about a constituency issue that concerns Stobhill hospital, I will be happy to look into it and respond to him in detail.
The cabinet secretary will be aware of the many on-going difficulties in community health and care partnerships, in particular in Glasgow. Last month, the British Medical Association said that CHCPs are
In principle, CHCPs and community health partnerships are a good idea, because they help to integrate health services with the services that local authorities provide. If CHCPs are to work effectively, it is important that health boards and local authorities go into them in a genuine spirit of partnership. I want that to be the case in the NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde area.
Food Products (Labelling)
Scottish ministers have attended meetings of the EU environment council, but that subject has not been discussed.
The European Parliament’s Environment, Public Health and Food Safety Committee has voted overwhelmingly in a second reading debate that
The EU is currently involved in a number of debates about regulation of genetically modified organisms in the EU area. The Scottish Government is, of course, in favour of transparency in food labelling and believes that Scottish shoppers have the right to know what they are buying. Our stance on genetically modified organisms is well known. However, I understand that, although GM animal feed must be labelled as being GM, the European Food Safety Authority says that it is impossible to detect genetically modified material in food products such as meat, milk and eggs from animals that have been fed on GM feed. Therefore, there are technical difficulties. That said, I note that the European Parliament and the member have suggested something a little different. The more general labelling idea is attractive, and I hope that it will be part of the Commission’s review of the GM regulations.
NHS Lothian (Meetings)
I met the chair of NHS Lothian on 17 March, when we discussed a wide range of matters that affect the delivery of patient services. As I said in an answer to a previous question, I will next meet the health board chairs as a group on 24 May. I also met NHS Lothian informally at the opening of NHS Lothian’s X-ray and ultrasound service yesterday.
There should be a little bit less noise from members, please.
From the cabinet secretary’s discussions with Lothian NHS Board, can she say whether the rezoning of patients from the west of Edinburgh to St John’s hospital is still being progressed? If it is not, why not?
In general, when I meet NHS Lothian representatives, I take the time to discuss with them the considerable improvements that have been made at St John’s hospital over the past three years. I will elaborate on that for Mary Mulligan and other members. In-patient admissions to that hospital have increased by nearly 2 per cent, out-patient activity has increased by 43.5 per cent, and revenue expenditure at the hospital is up by 19 per cent. Those are all signs of the commitment that the Government has given to the future of St John’s as an acute hospital in Lothian.
In view of the funding challenges that the national health service faces, does the cabinet secretary think that it is particularly important that each NHS board should get the funding share to which it is entitled under the NHS Scotland resource allocation committee formula? Is she concerned that, this year, NHS Lothian is getting 13.69 per cent of the cake although it is entitled to 14.61 per cent of it? That is a funding gap of £69 million. It is even more concerning that the gap is £5 million greater than it was last year.
Malcolm Chisholm asks an important question, which he is right to ask as a member for the Lothians. As a former health minister, he is aware that a number of boards in Scotland, including NHS Lothian, get below their parity share of funding. That has not been the case only under the NRAC system; it was also the case under the previous allocation formula which, of course, the previous Government introduced. We have made a commitment, as the previous Government did, to move those boards’ funding up towards the share that they should receive as quickly as possible. That has to be done gradually because doing it in a one-off would involve taking money away from other boards. I do not think that that would be appropriate, which is why I have given a commitment that no board will lose any funding as we move towards the target shares under the NRAC. I hope that all members welcome that commitment.
The previous Government gave a green light for the replacement of Dalkeith medical centre but, so far, no work has started on that. Will the minister give an assurance that work will start soon? Can she give us a completion date for the work?
I am more than happy to provide in writing to the member the detail on the timeline for Dalkeith medical centre. As members from all parts of the country know, we are seeing investment in health centres and medical centres throughout the country due to the record investment in the health service, including record capital investment. That is an incredibly good thing to see.