General Questions
Kinship Carers
The Scottish Government has done more than any previous Administration to support kinship carers. We introduced legislation that specifically recognises and defines kinship care, supported it with comprehensive guidance and delivered training with our partners through the concordat. We remain fully committed to our 2007 strategy “Getting it right for every child in kinship and foster care” and we are actively seeking changes to the benefits system to improve and simplify financial support for kinship carers.
The services are all very well, but funding has to be available in the first place to deal with the serious challenges that kinship carers throughout Scotland face. There are more than 15,000 of them. Does the Government agree that the time is right for consistency between councils to ensure that a more consistent approach is in place to support kinship carers?
As the member is well aware, local authorities are best placed to make decisions about the level of allowances and what is needed to support a particular child with a particular carer, but we are sympathetic and committed to continuing to support kinship carers. The key thing is for kinship carers to be treated as parents and to receive child tax credits and child benefit when a child enters their home.
The Scottish Government announced recently that carers will be included in the energy assistance package. Can the minister tell us what effect that will have on carers?
I will address the issue with the minister who is responsible for the energy assistance package.
Autistic Spectrum Disorder (Young Adults)
The soon-to-be-published Scottish strategy for autism contains a number of recommendations that will help to improve services and provide personalised support. In addition, the 10-year self-directed support strategy sets out a vision for the development of self-directed support nationwide based on a set of values and principles that aim to ensure that everyone who is eligible for social care has a choice in their support arrangements. The forthcoming self-directed support bill will underpin that aim.
As the minister is aware, the combination of an autistic spectrum disorder complicated by other conditions can create significant challenges when it comes to the provision of high-quality care and stimulating day facilities. There is a particular need to ensure that young adults in such situations can access suitable residential placements that provide learning opportunities as well as care once they have passed school age. Will the minister undertake to look at what can be done to improve the availability of appropriate, fully funded residential placements for young adults with an autistic spectrum disorder and comorbid conditions?
I am aware of the concern that the member raises. Part of the reason for introducing the autism strategy is to address those issues and ensure that there is a greater consistency in the types of services that people with autistic spectrum disorders receive. Alongside that, subject to the Parliament’s agreement, some £10 million will be made available over the next three years to help to embed some of the recommendations around the strategy. Through doing that, we can help to ensure that the level and nature of services are appropriate and that they are provided in a way that better suits individual needs.
Supported Workplaces
The Scottish Government is committed to increasing the opportunities for disabled people to work in a supportive environment. We want a consistent, person-centred approach to supporting those who want help to enter, sustain and progress in work. There is a variety of employment models for achieving that, of which employment in a supported workplace is only one, and Scottish businesses have a role to play in enabling disabled people to access jobs based on their skills and abilities.
I thank the minister for his answer, although it offers little comfort to Blindcraft in Edinburgh. I know that the Government assured workers and unions that every effort would be made to disseminate Blindcraft’s customer base to other supported workplaces across Scotland that are currently on a three or four-day week. Is the minister able to confirm that the mission has failed and that Blindcraft’s business is now in private hands?
The member will know that Blindcraft was supported for a great many years by various administrations in the City of Edinburgh Council and that all parties in the council, including her own, recognised that the public funding element was not sustainable in the long term. It is fair to recognise, as I thought that the member had done when we met and discussed a matter that is, of course, not party political, that the City of Edinburgh Council and its staff did a huge amount of work and made every possible effort to support each of the workers at Blindcraft in Edinburgh on a one-to-one basis. It was entirely correct to carry out that work. It goes without saying that all of us in the chamber will ensure that whatever can be done to support those individuals will be done but I believe that a terrific power of work has already been done and has helped a great number of the staff into fruitful employment and training and other productive work.
I note the minister’s dedication to the idea of disabled people finding gainful employment. Is he able to advise whether the Scottish Government has responded to the consultation on the Sayce report on the future of workplaces such as Remploy in my constituency? If so, what conclusions did it reach in its submission?
First of all, I met the member’s colleague Helen Eadie to discuss this important matter, which, as all members will expect, has been taken extremely seriously by the Government. Moreover, when she met Maria Miller, the United Kingdom Minister for Disabled People, the Deputy First Minister Nicola Sturgeon highlighted her concerns about the impact of any changes to Remploy on Scottish employees. A letter setting out our concerns will shortly be sent to the Department for Work and Pensions, with which we will continue to discuss any implications for Scotland.
Licensing (Scotland) Act 2005
Selling alcohol is not a right and those who wish to profit from its sale should expect to go through a rigorous licensing process. The Scottish Government believes that the current system, whereby applications for a licence to sell alcohol under the Licensing (Scotland) Act 2005 are assessed by licensing boards, is the best way to do that. However, the Government is aware of concerns about the current system of licensing fees and I am happy to announce that we intend to commission an independent review of the system of alcohol licensing fees to inform our thinking on how we can best address such concerns. Further details will follow.
I genuinely thank the cabinet secretary for that response, which is very different from the one that he gave a couple of months ago when I spoke to him on this issue. I am delighted at the outcome and the announcement of the review.
I am aware of how Mr Fergusson has pursued this matter, which has a great deal of legitimacy. We are addressing licensing fees because we are aware that there is a distortion. There are areas in which industrial sales of alcohol take place and areas in which there are limited sales, but the system causes great financial difficulties.
I welcome that interplay between Alex Fergusson and the cabinet secretary.
We have always been aware that licensing matters cannot simply be dealt with individually. The purpose of minimum feeing is to ensure that discounting is dealt with, and we brought action on multiple sales, which I think was supported by Dr Simpson and his colleagues, because of the problems that are caused by them.
Question 5 has not been lodged by George Adam, and question 6 has not been lodged by Clare Adamson.
National Health Service (Local Services)
I set out clearly the Scottish Government’s strategic vision for achieving sustainable quality in the delivery of our healthcare services. That includes a commitment to retaining and improving local NHS services and prioritising support for people to stay at home or in a homely setting for as long as appropriate.
On the sustainability of services in particular, NHS Lanarkshire has just decided to close a treatment room in Kildrum health centre in Cumbernauld, which means that residents will no longer have simple clinical procedures such as blood tests or dressing changes available locally, despite the Government’s stated determination to keep services local and to improve their availability. Patients who are fit enough to access the services locally will have to travel into the new centre in Cumbernauld, and many will not be able to travel—
Can we get to the question, please?
Those patients will have to have a home visit by a nurse, which is a false economy. Will the cabinet secretary commit to investigating the change and the additional costs that will result from increased home visits?
I will, of course, look into any concerns that are raised in the chamber or directly with me by members.
The cabinet secretary will no doubt be aware that I have written to her concerning the decision of NHS Lanarkshire to remove X-ray services from Coatbridge health centre. Given the Scottish Government’s policy to protect local access to healthcare, will she consider intervening to require the health board to reconsider its plans for this local health service?
I am well aware of the close interest that Elaine Smith and other members, such as Christina McKelvie, have taken in this issue. Much of what I said in response to the previous question stands in response to this question. Where changes are made, it is incumbent on health boards to demonstrate quality improvement as a result of those changes. The changes that Elaine Smith talks about do not constitute major service change, but that does not change the fact that NHS Lanarkshire has to take forward its plans in consultation with local communities and demonstrate to them the improvements that it is seeking to introduce. Of course, I am happy to continue to give reassurance to local members about the benefits that will come with those changes, as, I am sure, is NHS Lanarkshire.
Council Tax (Banding)
If an individual believes that their home has been banded incorrectly, legislation provides that they may make a proposal to the assessor to alter the valuation list. If the assessor disagrees and the proposal is not withdrawn, it is then referred for appeal to the valuation appeals panel. Further appeal, on a point of law only, can be made to the Court of Session.
Valuation appeal committees are refusing appeals due to time limits that have been set on appealing wrong council tax banding. Will the Government give due consideration to a member’s bill proposing the removal of time limits to appeal?
The Government would certainly give consideration to any members’ bills that are introduced. I give the member that undertaking.
Prison Visits (Children)
The SPS currently records all instances of children visiting a family member in custody if they have been registered as a visitor by the prisoner. However, the SPS depends on prisoners volunteering information about the number of children they have and registering them as visitors. In such circumstances, it is difficult to see how the setting of targets for child visits would be possible.
I have a letter from John Ewing, the chief executive of SPS, which was sent to one of my colleagues. It states clearly that it should be up to the social work department to carry out the collection of data. Does the cabinet secretary agree with that statement, and does he agree that the social work department has sufficient resource in that regard?
I believe that the social work department has sufficient resource. We must consider first principles. There is a great deal of hypocrisy from Labour on this issue. In the previous session—I acknowledge that Mary Fee was not a member at that time—my colleague Aileen Campbell moved an amendment that would have required the judiciary to take children into account when imposing a sentence. That was opposed vehemently by the Labour Party. It seems rather rich that Labour should be concerned about the rights of children once their parents are incarcerated and not at the time of sentencing.
Before we turn to the next item of business, I remind members, as I did this morning, that all mobile phones and other electronic devices should be switched off.