Skip to main content

Contacting Parliament

We have been experiencing intermittent issues with our telephone system which should now be resolved. If you do experience difficulties, please contact us by email.

Language: English / Gàidhlig

Loading…
Chamber and committees

Plenary, 28 Apr 2005

Meeting date: Thursday, April 28, 2005


Contents


Question Time


SCOTTISH EXECUTIVE


Environment and Rural Development


Special Protection Areas

To ask the Scottish Executive what plans it has to extend the network of special protection areas. (S2O-6537)

The Deputy Minister for Environment and Rural Development (Lewis Macdonald):

I have confirmed in recent weeks two new sites and the extension of one existing site for capercaillie. On 7 March, I announced 11 proposed further additions to Scotland's network of special protection areas, including seven new sites, three boundary extensions and the addition of a qualifying species at an existing site. Further work is being done on possible new or extended sites for the golden eagle and certain species of seabird.

Mike Watson:

I welcome the extensions that the minister has announced. Does he agree that the special protection areas throughout Scotland do not just protect wildlife but safeguard Scotland's natural heritage in its widest sense? Will he undertake to discuss with the Minister for Tourism, Culture and Sport the opportunities that special protection areas offer for the development of eco-tourism as a means of attracting greater numbers of visitors to this country?

Lewis Macdonald:

I am happy to confirm that the work that we do in providing protection for species and habitats has wider benefits for biodiversity in general, as well as for those specific species and habitats. I am happy also to confirm that we will continue to work with colleagues throughout the Executive in promoting the biodiversity benefits, the economic benefits and the tourist numbers that those species and habitats can attract.


Mountainous Area Status

To ask the Scottish Executive what progress is being made in achieving mountainous area status for the most disadvantaged and peripheral areas. (S2O-6521)

The Deputy Minister for Environment and Rural Development (Lewis Macdonald):

We are continuing discussions on future arrangements for less favoured area support from 2007 with the stakeholder working group, which includes representatives of crofters and farmers and Highlands and Islands Enterprise. Further work on mountainous area status and related issues will be taken forward following the latest meeting of the group earlier this week.

Maureen Macmillan:

Is the deputy minister aware that the crofting community feels that achieving mountainous area status—the top-priority category in the LFA classification—would enhance the case for increased support for peripheral areas in the Highlands and Islands? Is he aware that the crofting community feels that its difficulties have not been taken fully into account in the present LFA scheme? There is concern that, without top-category status, crofting will be unable to face down the challenges of common agricultural policy reform and climate change. The crofting community hopes that the Executive will do everything possible to support it in that regard.

Lewis Macdonald:

The views of bodies such as the Scottish Crofting Foundation on mountainous area status are known to us and have been fed into the discussions of the stakeholder working group. We are keen to identify the most effective way to ensure that LFA support under the new regime is developed in a way that delivers particular support to the most fragile areas. Mountainous area status is one option for doing that; there may be others that reflect, for example, the land capability classifications of agricultural land. We would not want to go for an option that excluded fragile areas that happen not to be mountainous, but we recognise that many of the most fragile areas are in upland parts of the country. We will continue to explore the issue. Following the recent meeting that I mentioned, we have undertaken to do further work on all those options, including mountainous area status.

Mr John Swinney (North Tayside) (SNP):

The minister mentioned in his earlier answer that one of the components in the debate about mountainous area status is the potential changes to the LFA regime. Will he provide Parliament with an update on the discussions in the European Union on reform of the LFA regime and tell us when he expects to have any announcements to make on the implications for those who currently benefit from LFA support?

Lewis Macdonald:

The negotiations on the rural development regulation and the less favoured area scheme continue. In the first instance, agreement is required on the rural development regulation framework within which the LFA scheme will be developed. One of our priorities is to maintain LFA status for most of the Scottish land area that currently enjoys it. As soon as we can report to Parliament, we will do so.


Horse Strategy

To ask the Scottish Executive what the current position is with regard to a horse strategy for Scotland. (S2O-6499)

Executive officials meet the Scottish Equestrian Association regularly and I am confident that those meetings will assist the SEA if it chooses to take the lead in developing a strategic approach.

Miss Goldie:

I accept that what is happening supports the industry, which makes a significant contribution to Scotland's economy. South of the border, a draft strategy for the equine industry is being consulted on. Given where that industry might be in 10 years' time, is the danger that the equine industry south of the border may be able to make more coherent and steady progress than the industry in Scotland? Is the minister apprehensive about that? Could more be done to provide leadership in Scotland?

Lewis Macdonald:

I am not apprehensive about that. Our general view is that, because circumstances in Scotland are different from those in England and Wales, the equine sector's requirements to make progress are different.

It is important for the equine sector to be able to access all the interested sections of the Executive, whether that means my department's animal welfare section, the Enterprise, Transport and Lifelong Learning Department or the sports division of the Education Department. The Executive covers several interests. Officials from all the relevant sections participate in the meetings that I described and ministers maintain a dialogue among themselves about the issues.

I am not concerned that direction has been lost. However, if the Scottish Equestrian Association believed that it should do more, from within the sector, to develop a strategic approach, we would offer it our co-operation and advice.

Stewart Stevenson (Banff and Buchan) (SNP):

I will ask about equine welfare. Does the minister recall various parliamentary answers about the Weeds Act 1959 that I have received in recent months? Since 1995, only four notices have been served about ragwort, which is a pernicious weed that has disastrous effects on horses. Only 70 man days were committed to enforcing the 1959 act. Will he do more to protect horses from irresponsible landowners who allow the spread of ragwort on their land?

I expect that if the equine sector felt that further action was needed on that issue, the matter would arise in the meetings that I have described. Should it arise in that forum, we would respond to any request.


Domestic Waste Recycling

To ask the Scottish Executive what the impact has been of initiatives to encourage greater recycling of domestic waste. (S2O-6531)

Local authority returns prepared by the Scottish Environment Protection Agency show a recycling and composting rate of 7.97 per cent in 2002-03, rising to 12.1 per cent in 2003-04 and to 16.6 per cent from April to December 2004.

Bristow Muldoon:

Is the minister aware of the success in West Lothian of the three-bin kerbside recycling scheme, which was introduced in March 2000? That resulted in 18 per cent of domestic waste being recycled or composted in 2004-05. West Lothian Council is confident that it will meet the interim target of 25 per cent by 2006.

The only issue on which I ask the minister to back the council relates to its concern, which it has raised with me, that its ambitious plans to make further progress on waste recycling are being held up because the Lothian and Borders waste management project has not progressed as quickly as wished. Will he put the Environment and Rural Affairs Department's weight behind encouraging the councils involved in the partnership to make swifter progress?

Lewis Macdonald:

We are keen to encourage swift progress around the country. We are conscious of the achievements of West Lothian and the positive projections to which Bristow Muldoon referred, which show West Lothian not only reaching but probably exceeding the targets that have been set for 2006. That is very welcome. We encourage all the authorities in Lothian and the Borders to work together to expedite the delivery of their plans as early as possible.


Demolition Activity

To ask the Scottish Executive what plans it has to review legislation on the environmental impact of, and environmental safety in relation to, demolition activity. (S2O-6539)

The Deputy Minister for Environment and Rural Development (Lewis Macdonald):

Under the provisions of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 and other legislation, local authorities and the Scottish Environment Protection Agency have powers to tackle environmental problems resulting from demolition activity. The legislation is not currently under review.

Fiona Hyslop:

I am disappointed by the minister's response. Perhaps he will review his decision in light of the demolition activity at Motherwell Bridge Ltd in my constituency, where asbestos was involved. The agencies to which he referred refused to take responsibility for that activity. The Health and Safety Executive takes responsibility for workers during demolition, SEPA takes responsibility for removal of waste after demolition and local authorities pass on responsibility to the private contractor involved. Will he review his decision, because serious public health and environmental impacts can result from demolition activity, especially when asbestos is involved, as in the case that I have highlighted?

Lewis Macdonald:

As Fiona Hyslop says, the HSE, as well as local authorities and SEPA, has a role to play. We expect all the agencies with responsibilities not only to fulfil their remit but to ensure that the work that they do is joined up and that there is no gap in statutory provision. The case that the member highlights does not incline me towards a different view of the legislation, but I am happy to check the current state of play. I know that there have been discussions between SEPA and the local authority concerned and I am happy to ensure that those continue.


Developers (Environmental Damage)

To ask the Scottish Executive what action it will take to ensure that environmental damage caused by developers does not adversely affect communities. (S2O-6508)

The Deputy Minister for Environment and Rural Development (Lewis Macdonald):

Where planning control or an environmental consent has been breached, planning authorities and regulatory bodies such as the Scottish Environment Protection Agency have the powers to deal with consequent environmental damage. Those powers are kept under review.

Cathie Craigie:

I am sure that the minister will agree that the current regulations have varying degrees of success in ensuring that communities are protected. I could highlight a number of sites in Cumbernauld and Kilsyth where developers have begun work but failed to complete it within a satisfactory timescale, adversely affecting the communities that live around the site. I know that planning matters fall within the remit of the minister's colleague, the Minister for Communities, but will he assure me that they will work together on the forthcoming planning bill to ensure that communities such as those in Cumbernauld and Kilsyth are protected from irresponsible developers?

Lewis Macdonald:

I have no doubt that the review of planning will consider issues of enforcement, as well as many of the other issues that have been aired in the chamber in the recent past. The Environment and Rural Affairs Department is happy, as always, to engage in discussion with colleagues on those matters.

Powers are available to local authorities to intervene when a developer has failed to maintain land properly in circumstances such as those that Cathie Craigie describes—in other words, when a developer has acquired a site but has not developed it. There is a requirement on the developer to maintain that land properly. If they fail to provide proper maintenance and the condition of the land adversely affects the amenity of the neighbourhood, the local authority has the power to serve a notice requiring the developer to take action. There is already provision for that, but the planning consultation process that is under way will yield other enforcement options.

Phil Gallie (South of Scotland) (Con):

Is the minister confident that land that was formerly used for industrial development and which is currently being reclaimed in regeneration programmes through the burial of sewage sludge is not endangering the wider environment, especially watercourses?

Lewis Macdonald:

Specific requirements govern the spreading of sewage sludge on land, to ensure that there is no adverse environmental impact. The Scottish Environment Protection Agency has powers to act if it thinks that the spreading of sewage sludge is compromising good environmental conditions, and the agency recently used those powers. However, it is important to recognise that the spreading of sewage sludge on land, if it is done safely and properly, offers a far better means of disposal than does land filling and is therefore encouraged, as long as the necessary environmental conditions are met.

Question 7 has been withdrawn.


Subsidies (Information)

To ask the Scottish Executive what measures it is taking to publish more information about the amount of subsidies that farmers receive. (S2O-6485)

The Deputy Minister for Environment and Rural Development (Lewis Macdonald):

The Executive publishes an annual report on the administration of the common agricultural policy in Scotland, which includes statistics on payments of subsidy. Ross Finnie announced in January that we will publish details of recipients and subsidies under the new single farm payment scheme, which became operational on 1 January, and the new rural development regulation schemes, such as the land management contract menu scheme, which came into operation this month.

Dennis Canavan:

Will the minister comment on recent reports that disclosure of information about payments from the common agricultural policy to individual farms in Scotland is very limited, on the spurious grounds of data protection and European legislation? How can only limited information be disclosed, if there is full disclosure of information south of the border? Is the Scottish Executive operating a freedom of information system that is inferior to the system in England?

Lewis Macdonald:

We are certainly not operating a system that is inferior to the one in England. However, we are operating a system that is different from the one in England. The Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 applies in Scotland as, of course, does Scots law. In the situation that the member identifies, as with every other case, we take legal advice on how the law applies. For example, the cases of individual farmers or crofters who are sole traders are subject to the provisions of the Data Protection Act 1998, which protects information that relates to individuals. The basis on which subsidies were provided in the past under the CAP included the protection afforded by confidentiality. However, our intention is that under the regime that replaces the CAP, individuals' names and subsidies will be made public.


Loch Lomond and the Trossachs National Park (Byelaws)

To ask the Scottish Executive when, in this calendar year, it expects to consider revised byelaws for Loch Lomond and the Trossachs national park. (S2O-6503)

The Deputy Minister for Environment and Rural Development (Lewis Macdonald):

The Loch Lomond and the Trossachs National Park Authority is currently engaged in an extensive consultation on proposals for new byelaws for Loch Lomond. I expect the authority to submit draft byelaws to ministers in December. If the draft byelaws are approved, revised byelaws will be introduced early next year.

Jackie Baillie:

The minister is aware of my concerns about the use of jet-skis on Loch Lomond, particularly in the light of the decision of the Lake District National Park Authority to ban jet-skis from Lake Windermere. Given that a decision will not be taken until the end of the year, what assistance will the Scottish Executive provide for interim enforcement measures?

Lewis Macdonald:

We have already made it clear to the park authority that we will assist it in bringing forward byelaws as rapidly as it can do within the rules that govern the process. Clearly, a proper process of consultation must be followed, which is why the timetable that I described was set. However, as Jackie Baillie said, there is an issue to do with interim provision, in relation to which we have had fruitful discussions with the park authority. I expect those discussions to continue.

Dr Sylvia Jackson (Stirling) (Lab):

Further to Jackie Baillie's question, I welcome the minister's comments on the continuing discussions with the park authority about the possibility of introducing interim measures. Could one such measure be a pilot in which separate zones for different leisure or sports activities are identified on Loch Lomond, so that all users of the loch can be treated with equal respect?

Lewis Macdonald:

The measures that the park authority decides to take are a matter for the authority. We provided additional resources to allow the authority to increase ranger presence on the loch during the summer. That will allow the authority to enforce the existing byelaws, which limit speed and promote responsible behaviour on the loch. We will discuss with the park authority any other proposals that it brings forward in relation to how it is managing within the terms of existing byelaws. The priority is to bring forward the new byelaws as quickly as possible, which is why we have provided additional resources for that process.


Flood Prevention

To ask the Scottish Executive how it plans to improve flood prevention measures and whether any such measures will inform revision of the relevant planning guidelines. (S2O-6543)

The Deputy Minister for Environment and Rural Development (Lewis Macdonald):

We are continually looking at ways to improve flood prevention measures, and all planning guidelines are reviewed as required. We have no plans for an early review of Scottish planning policy 7, on planning and flooding, which was published last year following extensive stakeholder involvement and wider consultation.

Mark Ballard:

The minister will be aware that Scottish planning policy 7 requires that the storage capacity of functional flood plains should be safeguarded. He will also be aware of the devastating floods that hit Edinburgh in 2002, when the Water of Leith overtopped its banks. Will he confirm that he will resist any attempt by the Scottish Rugby Union to convert the flood plains at Murrayfield into development land by inappropriately positioning flood walls as part of the measures that are being taken to safeguard Edinburgh from further flood damage?

Lewis Macdonald:

Mark Ballard will be aware that a process must be followed in making and announcing decisions on specific projects. I was delighted earlier this year to open a new flood prevention scheme in Edinburgh. I look forward to seeing the full range of evidence to allow me to make a decision on the Water of Leith scheme, as it is one that has taken some time to get to its current stage. However, our overwhelming commitment in this process is to design flood prevention schemes that have the desired impact—namely, that they reduce the risk of flooding. A balance must be struck in all of that, but it is one that we will strike in the usual way, taking into account all relevant considerations.


Health and Community Care


Scottish Statistics

1. Mr Stewart Maxwell (West of Scotland) (SNP):

To ask the Scottish Executive whether, now that it has published separate Scottish data for some of the indicators on the World Health Organisation's European health for all database, it will submit a separate return for Scotland to the database to enable Scottish statistics on health to be compared on a like-for-like basis with those of other European countries; and the reasons for its position on this matter. (S2O-6487)

The Minister for Health and Community Care (Mr Andy Kerr):

I need a towel wrapped round my head in a darkened room after that question, but that is another matter.

The Scottish Executive considers that comparisons with health information for other countries is a vital part of understanding the health issues facing Scotland. It uses the WHO databases, along with other sources, for a range of analysis to inform relevant policy and decision making. Having invested in the new analysis for Scotland, the Executive is committed to ensuring that the maximum value and benefit can be derived from all possible international uses and comparisons. As a result, the Executive is discussing whether Scotland could be separately identified in the WHO's health for all database.

Mr Maxwell:

I thank the minister for that charming answer.

Given that the published figures are now in the public domain but only 306 of the indicators have so far been published, is it the minister's intention to publish the rest of the indicators, up to the total number of 517? Why do we not have a direct input into the WHO's European database, which gives a like-for-like comparison? The question is particularly pertinent given that the figures that he has published show that the death rate for trachea, bronchus and lung cancer among Scottish women is almost 50 per cent higher than the rate in the rest of the United Kingdom, and that the standardised death rate for cirrhosis of the liver in Scotland is 116 per cent higher than the rate in the rest of the UK. Is it not vital for the Parliament to have that direct comparison, not just with the rest of the UK but with the rest of Europe? We could also use that database for internal comparisons between the different regions of Scotland, using the software that is available.

Mr Kerr:

Care must be taken when comparing Scottish health information with results derived from other sources, such as the WHO. Different classifications, definitions and methodologies mean that results must be interpreted very carefully.

The Scottish National Party, as it always does, looks to the figures that show that Scottish health is at its worst. I could quote other figures, such as those on life expectancy of males and females born today or infant deaths per 1,000 of live births, which show strong improvements. The database gives us mixed information, which the Executive is well aware of in the context of its strategy on coronary heart disease, stroke and cancer and the priorities that it has set in regard to the hungry for success programme, the physical activity task force in our schools and the attempt to improve health and well-being in Scotland. It is very unfair, but typical of the SNP, to talk Scotland down and pick the negative statistics.

The substantive part of the question—[Interruption.] Well, the member chose to use the statistical database to talk down Scotland, so I wanted to use the opportunity to talk up Scotland's health and create some confidence in our Scottish health service. If SNP members had listened to the Royal College of Nursing conference this week, they would know that the RCN asked politicians to speak about the positive aspects of health as well as those that cause them concern—the SNP singularly fails to do that in its questions.

The member asked why we had managed to provide only 306 of the 599 WHO health indicators. Providing those indicators is a considerable effort and a lot of work that has significant resource implications for the information and statistics division and which delays other ISD activity on its work programme. Therefore, we need to balance the pressures in Scotland around the well-recorded improvements that we want to make in the ISD and in the information that it provides to the Executive and the wider public. We must manage our resources effectively to ensure that we deliver that wider programme of work while celebrating the fact that we now have 306 of those indicators in our database. I suggest that good progress has been made and that we try to understand the resource implications for the ISD and its wider work programme.


Community Hospitals

To ask the Scottish Executive when it will publish the replies it received to its questionnaire on the current and future role of community hospitals. (S2O-6500)

The Executive is not able to publish the individual replies to its questionnaire on the current and future role of community hospitals, as they were provided in confidence. We will, however, publish a summary of the responses in May 2005.

Christine Grahame:

As a result of the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002, I have the response from Borders NHS Board in my hand. One of the interesting points that it makes about cottage community hospitals is that they provide an

"intimate environment … well suited to providing Palliative and Respite Care for some patient groups."

It then makes a telling point that

"there are no hospices in the Border area."

Given that the Borders currently has the highest number of elderly people in Scotland and that that will increase by 30 per cent over the next few years, does the minister agree that cottage hospitals such as those at Jedburgh and Coldstream, which provide respite and palliative care in an area with no hospices, should remain open to fulfil that important role for the elderly frail in the area?

Rhona Brankin:

The Executive recognises that it is important to develop the role of community hospitals and we are conducting a national review, as the member alluded to, on the role of community hospitals in order to develop a strategy for sustaining small, rural and community hospitals. A discussion paper on the future of community hospitals will be circulated for consultation during the summer of 2005 and a final strategy will be available by April 2006.

A major programme of investment, change and modernisation in community health facilities amounting to more than £13 million will be undertaken in the Borders by the end of April 2006. There will be a phased programme of health centre improvements, such as redevelopment in Newcastleton and Stow and the work that is under way at Kelso health centre. Work is also due to commence in 2005 on the redevelopment of Galashiels health centre. Community hospitals in the Borders have also seen major redevelopment and upgrading. Duns, Hay Lodge at Peebles and Kelso community hospitals have been the subject of major modernisation programmes for frail and elderly patients. Such patients are now admitted to and cared for in modern, en-suite facilities that are designed to respect their right to privacy and dignity in old age. I assume that Christine Grahame welcomes that modernisation and improvement.

Jeremy Purvis (Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale) (LD):

I recently visited the palliative care department at Borders general hospital, where I met the consultant Jim Rodgers and his dedicated staff. In light of that visit, although I welcome the investment in my constituency, does the minister recognise that one of the crucial elements of community hospitals and the delivery of palliative care to elderly people in the Borders is the link with Scottish Borders Council social work services and the voluntary sector? Will she affirm that community hospitals and local health provision, as well as the wide range of other services provided through local authorities and other agencies, make a real difference to elderly people?

Rhona Brankin:

Absolutely. Hospitals do not work in isolation; they need to work in partnership with local authority social services teams. Mr Purvis will be aware that an action team has been set up as part of the national framework exercise to consider specifically rural access to health services. We look forward with interest to the team's report.


Sexual Health

To ask the Scottish Executive what progress has been made towards implementing its strategy and action plan for improving sexual health. (S2O-6545)

The Minister for Health and Community Care (Mr Andy Kerr):

I fully appreciate the expectations of members and of key stakeholders following publication of the strategy. Of course, full implementation cannot occur overnight. However, two key workshops have been held. The first, for clinicians and board executive directors, was held on 16 February, to consider the clinical services implications of the strategy. The second workshop, on 24 March, was for key stakeholders who commission services, to help them to consider how best to implement the strategy. Following on from those workshops, we have now received all board clinical sexual health plans. We are considering them in the context of disbursing funds from the additional £5 million per annum over the next three years for implementing the strategy. The national sexual health advisory committee will have a crucial role in monitoring progress and supporting implementation of the strategy. Letters seeking nominations to the committee were issued earlier this week.

Patrick Harvie:

I thank the minister both for his answer and for his efforts in keeping the cross-party group on sexual health informed of developments. It has been three months since he made a commitment to the Parliament to seek time for a full debate on the sexual health strategy. Has the time now come to hold that debate, given that decisions are now being made and the direction of the strategy's implementation is being determined? I would not have wanted a debate immediately; as we agreed at the time, we needed time to digest the material. However, will he now make a clear commitment that Parliament will have a debate on these important issues at least before the summer recess?

Mr Kerr:

Presiding Officer, I am not sure of the rules about making a clear commitment. I have absolutely no problem with bringing to the forefront in the chamber the issues that affect us in Scotland with regard to sexual health and our sexual health strategy. I am happy to raise the matter with the relevant parties, starting with my colleague Margaret Curran, because, like Patrick Harvie, I believe that we should discuss the strategy in the chamber. Things are moving on—indeed, significant things have happened over the past few months—so I would be happy to debate the matter in due course.

Phil Gallie (South of Scotland) (Con):

Is it the case that the incidence of under-age pregnancy has increased in Scotland in recent times, as has the spread of sexual disease among young people? Does that perhaps suggest that the new enlightened policy on sexual health education, for young people in particular, is going in the wrong direction?

Mr Kerr:

No, I do not think that it suggests that. We cannot single out aspects of our sexual health strategy—or, indeed, the position of society as a whole—without factoring in issues of equality, deprivation, education, community well-being and confidence. All those things contribute to our sexual well-being and sexual health, so I do not make the assumption that Phil Gallie makes about the work that we are doing. Whatever he may say, I think that he should take time to visit some of the much-valued services in our community and to speak to the professionals involved in delivering those services, as I, Rhona Brankin and others have done.

We have to speak to young people and communicate with them, their parents or guardians and members of their wider family to ensure that we can give them access to high-quality information. We must ensure that young people delay sexual activity until they are ready, but that, once they are ready and are embarking on having sex, they do so safely. That is the right strategy—it is a balanced strategy, in which abstinence has a place and a role. I know that our approach upsets some people, but we must ensure that the services that we provide offer the appropriate support to young people who are ready for sexual activity.

This is a difficult area in which to work, but the people to whom I have spoken deal with the matter professionally—they involve young people's families and talk about the wider social issues. We support the valuable service that I believe those professionals offer. That is what phase 2 of the healthy respect project is about. As we see in our communities these days, professionals are working with young people, sometimes in difficult circumstances. They are doing so professionally, trying to ensure that the wider family is involved and speaking to young people in language that they understand.

We are trying to ensure that we can tackle the issues that Phil Gallie raised in relation to sexually transmitted infections and teenage pregnancies. I strongly believe that the sexual health strategy and the further support that we are putting into it will have a positive impact on the figures.


National Health Demonstration Projects

To ask the Scottish Executive how the work of the four national health demonstration projects is being developed to inform practice across Scotland. (S2O-6509)

The Deputy Minister for Health and Community Care (Rhona Brankin):

Phase 2 of three demonstration projects—have a heart Paisley, healthy respect and starting well—has been launched, together with evaluation reports and learning materials from phase 1. Three national learning networks, based at NHS Health Scotland, are leading in the key role of sharing learning and informing national practice throughout Scotland. The fourth demonstration project—the cancer challenge—became Scotland's contribution to the United Kingdom colorectal cancer screening pilot. It is being continued while plans for national roll-out are developed as part of the bowel cancer framework, which was launched in April 2004.

Susan Deacon:

I welcome the progress that has been made, but does the minister agree that valuable lessons on how infant and maternal health can be improved can be learned from the starting well project? In particular, will she join me in recognising the contribution that multidisciplinary teams have made to the project, which involves health visitors, lay health support workers and many others, including community nursery nurses? Will she assure me that, in the on-going debate about future health service provision, she will work to ensure that appropriate attention and investment are given to the vital work that goes on in people's homes and in people's communities and that the debate does not focus only on hospitals and other bricks-and-mortar issues?

Rhona Brankin:

Absolutely. One of the key lessons in phase 1 of starting well was the need for inter-agency work. The importance of the phase 2 development is that it will focus on the needs of the most vulnerable children—aged zero to five—and their families throughout Glasgow. The work will be done through a multidisciplinary and multi-agency team, which will include social work, health and education. Through referral from generic services, starting well will pilot common assessment processes among groups of professionals and multi-agency partners. The work will be developed through the "Health for All Children" guidance, the fourth edition of which has now been launched.

I agree with Susan Deacon about the importance of parenting. We now understand the vital importance of the early years in any child's life. I also agree with her that, as part of our health improvement strategy and our work to tackle health inequalities, we need to tackle some of the inequalities that we see among parents and families throughout Scotland.


NHS 24

To ask the Scottish Executive what its position is on the current performance of NHS 24. (S2O-6489)

The Minister for Health and Community Care (Mr Andy Kerr):

The Health Department continues to receive weekly reports on performance from NHS 24 and tracks significant trends closely. We recognise that more needs to be done to ensure that NHS 24 improves the services that it provides to the public. A major programme of work is under way within NHS 24, in partnership with local NHS boards, to bring about those service improvements. The internal programme of work is running in parallel with the independent review, which was announced in February. The review team has been asked to provide an interim report by the end of May and a final report—with recommended actions for NHS 24, NHS boards and the Health Department—by the end of September.

Mr Swinney:

I welcome the minister's comments, in particular his recognition that all is not well with NHS 24—the acknowledgment that there are difficulties is a starting point from which we can work to improve the service for the safety and health of our constituents. In the light of the concerns that general practitioners now regularly express in the media about the quality of advice that is given to patients who phone NHS 24 and of the volume of constituency cases that come to me on the subject, will the minister assure the Parliament that he will look carefully at the feedback from the review groups and make early recommendations on how the performance of NHS 24 can be improved for the safety of all our constituents?

Mr Kerr:

Absolutely. I share some of John Swinney's concerns—he has written to me on a number of occasions about the performance of NHS 24. However, NHS 24 is a large service that deals with a multitude of calls. On many occasions, the calls go perfectly well. In response to some of the more negative press articles, I point out that I have received many letters of support from the public about their personal experiences of using NHS 24. I have also visited NHS 24 and seen some of the work done by the excellent front-line staff, who deal with a million calls per annum.

However, when things go wrong, they go badly wrong. A reassurance that I can offer is that we can follow the service all the way through from the initial call. That allows us to find out exactly what happened to that individual caller. I advise all members to ensure that they are aware of the service that is provided. Those with complaints should contact NHS 24 directly and find out about the whole call experience.

I share John Swinney's concerns and am aware that such concerns are being expressed. However, it is ironic that—following the expansion of NHS 24 as a result of GPs saying that they would no longer provide an out-of-hours service—some GPs are now heavily critical of the service.

The service is evolving. It can and will improve. I acknowledge the concerns, which is why we are having a review. A work stream within the review team will also take account of some of the rural issues that John Swinney has raised. I look forward to the interim report and to the subsequent September report, which I hope will give us a good steer towards improving confidence in the service.

Janis Hughes (Glasgow Rutherglen) (Lab):

I thank the minister for his continuing commitment to reviewing NHS 24. The organisation has had problems in the recruitment and retention of staff. Will he work with NHS 24 to consider more imaginative ways of recruiting staff, such as secondments from other parts of the NHS?

Mr Kerr:

NHS 24 offers flexible employment opportunities; it offers nurses and others a different way of working in the health service. Staff to whom I have spoken—both on formal visits and informally—want to balance eye-to-eye engagement with patients in hospitals or other care environments with engagement through the telephone-based system. Both systems are equally valid.

I agree with Janis Hughes that we must be more creative. We must also be more supportive of staff, because they work under considerable pressure. We must provide proper training and give people proper skills. We must value the staff. I am sure that, through such measures, we will be able to recruit and retain more staff.

NHS 24 is an essential part of modern health care. People outside Scotland look at it with some envy, but we need to be sure that we can deliver the service more effectively. I share Janis Hughes's concerns; we must be more creative.

We have to go now to—

Linda Fabiani (Central Scotland) (SNP):

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I will check the timings in the Official Report tomorrow, but it seems to me that ministers have taken an inordinately long time to answer questions. As a result, only five health questions have been asked. I ask the Presiding Officers to look into that and to come back at some future time to tell the chamber what length of answers is acceptable.

The Deputy Presiding Officer:

If members check the Official Report, they will find that we covered nine environment questions in 21 minutes and five health questions in 21 minutes. Members will also see that the health questions were significantly longer than other questions.

Not all of them.

The Deputy Presiding Officer:

No, not all of them, but the health questions were generally longer. The answers were also longer. The consequence, of course, is that we got through fewer questions. I do not have any power to direct either the questioners, so long as they are asking pertinent questions, or the ministers, so long as they are giving answers. For ministers, it is a matter of judgment whether they require to give detailed information in answer to specific questions, or whether they wish to answer more questions.