SCOTTISH EXECUTIVE
Health and Community Care
Question 1 has been withdrawn.
Dental Services (East Lothian and Midlothian)
To ask the Scottish Executive how many people in East Lothian and Midlothian live in areas where dentists are not providing treatment under the national health service and what action can be taken to make NHS dental services available to these patients. (S2O-7353)
The most recent available figures show that, at 31 March last year, just over 50 per cent of adults and 70 per cent of children were registered with an NHS dentist in Lothian. NHS Lothian is currently considering the appointment of salaried dentists to improve access to NHS services across its area.
Good. Does the minister agree that it is deplorable that some dentists are kicking NHS patients in the teeth by demanding that they pay at least £10 a month to reregister as private patients, despite the substantial package for NHS dentistry that was announced on 17 March? Since tens of thousands of people in large areas of the Lothians have now been locked out by privatised dentists, will he now take a tough line—he should not offer any anaesthetic—with the British Dental Association? Will the Executive help NHS Lothian to restore NHS dental services by deploying salaried dentists in areas such as the east of East Lothian?
Mr Home Robertson is, of course, right to say that what matters for patients is access to services. That is why I am delighted that we have been able to put in place such a substantial additional funding package. My predecessor Rhona Brankin opened the Chalmers dental centre recently to provide access to emergency dental treatment for patients in East Lothian, Midlothian and Edinburgh. The deployment of salaried dentists, to which I referred, is part of the answer. We also need to work with existing dental practices in order to sustain access to those services, both in Mr Home Robertson's constituency and throughout Scotland.
Supplementaries must be specific to the Lothians.
How can the minister bring comfort to my constituents in East Lothian, Midlothian and across the South of Scotland, who, as John Home Robertson outlined, cannot access dentists? This afternoon, the Executive intends to introduce free oral health assessments and dental examinations, but how will the individuals whom I have mentioned benefit from the provisions in the Smoking, Health and Social Care (Scotland) Bill?
As I said, the comfort that I wish to bring to Mr Home Robertson's constituents in East Lothian and to other people across the South of Scotland is through encouraging greater access to dental services. Measures are being put in place to secure emergency treatment, but Mr Gallie is right to say that we want people to have access to a range of other NHS dental services. That is why we will work hard with the dental profession and its representative organisations to secure support for the measures that we have put in place. The action plan brings forward the biggest increase in support for dental services since 1948.
Does the minister agree that one way in which to bring dentists to the Lothians and to other areas of Scotland—such as Grampian—where there is a specific problem with a shortage of NHS dental services is to attract dentists from overseas to come to work in Scotland? Is he aware that, according to health officials, there is currently an oversupply of dentists in Sweden and 700 unemployed dentists in Germany? What steps is he taking to attract those dentists to come to work in Scotland to help to plug the gap in NHS dental services?
Individual NHS boards around Scotland are taking a number of initiatives to recruit dentists from elsewhere. That is part of the wider package, along with the work that we are doing to train, recruit and retain dentists here in Scotland in the NHS. We will continue to attend to that on-going project.
For the benefit of members, I advise that question 3 has been withdrawn because the member who lodged it is now a minister and has had no option but to withdraw it. The same holds with a later question. There is no discourtesy to members or to the Parliament as a whole.
NHS Greater Glasgow (Meetings)
To ask the Scottish Executive whether it has any plans to meet Greater Glasgow NHS Board. (S2O-7335)
I meet NHS board chairs and members regularly. I have just commenced the round of annual reviews of NHS boards, which this year will be held in public for the first time. I will undertake the Greater Glasgow NHS Board review on 31 August.
The minister is aware of concerns about the siting of the proposed new children's hospital in Glasgow. His predecessor as Minister for Health and Community Care said:
I assure the member that neither the Executive nor the health board will tell Professor Calder and his group how to go about their work. The group is completely independent and was brought in to help to deliver a new, world-class children's hospital for Glasgow. It has a hugely important job and should be left to get on with it.
National Health Service (Savings)
To ask the Scottish Executive what aspects of health service delivery should not be covered by any future NHS board savings review. (S2O-7292)
It is the Scottish Executive's aim to ensure that health services are delivered in the most efficient and effective way possible. Therefore, it is the Scottish Executive's view that all aspects of health service delivery should be considered for review so as to provide the most efficient service to patients.
Does the minister agree that a cottage hospital that works well and provides an important local service, such as the Victoria memorial cottage hospital in Kilsyth, should not be included in a health board savings review? Does he agree that in such circumstances the necessary savings should be sought elsewhere, in particular from administrative posts?
The term "administrative posts" means different things to different people. For example, the term includes reception staff, who provide access to hospital, and medical records staff, who provide medical information—those staff are vital to health care, as are the doctors and nurses who work in the health service. Every board is receiving substantial additional funding this year—7.6 per cent on average, which is well in excess of inflation—and it would be a bit odd if a minister in Edinburgh were to tell a health board how to run local services, because that is a matter for boards. Of course, I assure the member that boards must listen to, engage with and respond to communities. Patients' needs and perspectives must be at the heart of any review of services.
National Health Service<br />(Centralisation of Stores)
To ask the Scottish Executive what its policy is on centralisation of the NHS stores operation. (S2O-7293)
Our policy on the NHS Scotland stores operation is to simplify the current arrangements by moving to a national logistics infrastructure, in order to improve all aspects of the physical supply chain at local and national level, in line with the efficient government initiative.
I have been contacted by a member of the public who is concerned about proposals to centralise the operation—to Livingston, I understand. Can the minister confirm whether that is the case? If so, what is the justification for that move?
I understand that the new, centralised operation is likely to be located in Lanarkshire rather than in West Lothian. The purpose of the measure is to ensure that we secure the best possible value for money for the taxpayer. The move will not involve redundancies and will happen with a minimum of relocation and with full redeployment of the staff involved. The additional resources that will be freed up as a result of the new approach to operating the system will be put to good use, to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of our logistics operation. The new approach will not take away the opportunity for local suppliers to continue to enter into contractual arrangements with their local health boards.
NHS Borders (Community Hospitals)
To ask the Scottish Executive whether it will offer financial assistance to Borders NHS Board to ensure that the cottage hospitals in Coldstream and Jedburgh remain open, in light of local and professional opposition to the closure of the hospitals and following the publication of the Kerr report and its support for community hospitals. (S2O-7321)
Borders NHS Board is reviewing health services in those areas and is actively seeking the views of local people and NHS staff.
That was not my question. I asked whether there would be any financial assistance. I remind the minister that the first of the Kerr report's top 10 proposals was for boards
Come to a question, please.
In the light of Margaret Mitchell's question, will the minister address the issue of funding? The proposal is a cost-saving exercise that has nothing to do with service delivery—
No, the member is making a speech.
It is entirely to do with service delivery. I am interested that Mrs Grahame is ahead of the local NHS board in having reached a view on what is required in this case and I would be interested to know what additional resources she thinks are needed. I am certainly not in a position to judge whether additional resources might be required. That is a matter for Borders NHS Board, which is why it is consulting local people and NHS staff to determine how best to deliver services. The idea that, before that process has been undertaken, a member can stand up in the chamber and tell the Parliament that a certain amount of additional resources ought to be provided, regardless of whether they are required, seems to me to be bizarre.
Does the minister agree that what is at issue is the regeneration of health facilities in both towns in my constituency? We should not just seek to keep open buildings that might be past their sell-by date. Will he join me in congratulating local action groups on their constructive engagement in the consultation process?
Yes, I will. I also commend Mr Robson for his constructive engagement with Borders NHS Board. I wish that others in the chamber would take the same approach.
Question 8 has also been withdrawn by a member who is now a minister.
Public Health (Untreated Sewage Sludge)
To ask the Scottish Executive whether national health service boards have made an assessment of the risk to public health from the spreading of raw untreated sewage sludge on land. (S2O-7379)
The responsibility for dealing with an application to spread sludge on land and ensuring that it would pose no risk to public health lies with the Scottish Environment Protection Agency. Several NHS boards have sought and received generic advice from Health Protection Scotland on the health issues associated with that practice.
I have constituents who believe that their families are being affected by asthma and by skin and chest infections caused by the spreading of such material. Has the minister read the American National Academy of Sciences July 2002 report on public health and soil science? If he has, does he have conclusions and will he say why raw sewage sludge cake is still going on to the land? Will he undertake to read that scientific report and make such recommendations as he feels necessary to his colleague the Minister for Environment and Rural Development?
I am pleased to say that the responsibility for reading and coming to conclusions on such reports lies with SEPA rather than with ministers and I have every faith that SEPA will carry out its responsibility in the usual way.
National Health Service<br />(Independent Sector Facilities)
To ask the Scottish Executive whether withdrawing the use of independent sector facilities from the NHS would impact on the amount of time people wait for treatment. (S2O-7354)
Yes. The number of patients with a guarantee who are waiting more than six months for in-patient and day-case treatment is now at the lowest level ever recorded. Partnerships with the independent health care sector have played a key role in that achievement. The Executive has allocated £10 million to NHS boards for 2005-06 to purchase private sector capacity to assist them to meet their waiting times targets. Almost 3,000 NHS patients will benefit from shorter waits as a result. NHS boards may purchase further independent health care sector capacity in addition to that.
I welcome the improvements to waiting times that have been delivered through use of the independent sector. However, the minister will be aware that one of the concerns about the continuing use of the independent sector is the potential impact on staff recruitment and retention in the NHS. Will he assure me that measures are in place to ensure that that potential impact is minimised?
Absolutely. As I announced to the Parliament, we are clear that we have to avoid such a situation and we are determined to do so. The background is one of massive growth in the NHS. There are now 1,150 more hospital doctors, 2,700 more nurses and 1,250 more allied health professionals than there were in 1999. We insist on contract terms with the independent health care sector that will penalise contractors that poach staff from the NHS. We expect at least some of the staff in the independent health care sector to come from other parts of the United Kingdom or from overseas.
Environment and Rural Development
Question 1 has been withdrawn.
Ragwort Poisoning<br />(Protection of Grazing Animals)
To ask the Scottish Executive whether the provisions in section 20 of the draft Animal Health and Welfare (Scotland) Bill will improve the protection afforded to horses and other grazing animals vulnerable to ragwort poisoning. (S2O-7372)
Section 20 of the draft Animal Health and Welfare (Scotland) Bill will replace section 1(1)(d) of the Protection of Animals (Scotland) Act 1912 and will not make a substantial change to the provision. However, I direct Elaine Murray's attention to section 22 of the draft bill, which imposes a duty on people to ensure that an animal's needs are met. That includes the animal's need to be protected from injury, pain and suffering. Therefore, allowing a horse or other grazing animal that is vulnerable to ragwort poisoning to graze on ragwort would be an offence.
I thank the minister for directing me to the provisions in section 22 of the draft bill. Am I right in assuming that those provisions would impact on the person who owns the horse rather than on, for example, people in neighbouring lands who might allow ragwort seeds to fall on the land and be grazed by the horse?
Yes, indeed. Those are two separate issues. The draft Animal Health and Welfare (Scotland) Bill will place a burden on the animal keeper; the Weeds Act 1959—which is always popular in the Parliament—is the only legislation of which I am aware that would allow the action that Elaine Murray suggests to be taken, but the primary responsibility for the control of weeds lies with the occupier of the land. There is a provision on the situation that she describes, but the two issues are dealt with separately.
Does the aforementioned 1959 act give the minister any powers to act against local authorities that fail to control ragwort and other weeds on grass verges?
It does not give me such powers, although local authorities have powers not only under the Weeds Act 1959 but under the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 to serve notice requiring occupiers to control injurious weeds that are adversely affecting other land. Local authorities have a panoply of powers that they could deploy if they so wished.
Recycling (Targets)
To ask the Scottish Executive what progress is being made towards its national target for local authorities to recycle 25 per cent of waste by 2006. (S2O-7380)
We are making good progress towards our 25 per cent target. The latest quarterly returns published by the Scottish Environment Protection Agency for October to December 2004 show a recycling and composting rate of just below 16 per cent.
I congratulate the Executive on what progress is being made. It is possible that the minister failed to notice this month's edition of "Glasgow" magazine, which I am sure is a favourite read of his. Those of us who are unfortunate enough to have it put through our doors every month saw that Glasgow City Council is trumpeting itself as the recycling champion and claiming to have devoted the past 16 years to becoming Scotland's first recycling city. Will the minister confirm that the figures that Audit Scotland has published for Glasgow's true recycling record show that those claims are spurious and that Glasgow has the worst domestic recycling level of any city in Scotland? If the figures from Audit Scotland are correct, does he agree that the magazine is shameless propaganda and well deserving of its local name—"Glasgow Pravda"?
That question has strayed into a number of political areas that are not necessarily relevant to recycling targets. Patrick Harvie is perfectly capable of writing to Glasgow City Council if he believes that he has received a magazine that has erred from the truth. My proper concern is to ensure that every local authority avails itself of the opportunity to take up the £230 million that the Executive has made available through the strategic waste fund. I readily admit that, although we are making progress with an average of 16 per cent, the performance of a number of local authorities remains to pick up the pace. However, there are some outstanding examples throughout Scotland, and I am grateful for the co-operation that we have from local authorities on trying to hit the 25 per cent target.
While we are on the subject of outstanding local authorities, I thank the minister for visiting Linlithgow constituency on Monday and launching West Lothian Council's most recent recycling site. West Lothian Council is well on target to reach its 25 per cent target by next year. Will the minister encourage other local authorities to follow the example of West Lothian Council and others in sponsoring furniture recycling programmes such as Home Aid in Bathgate, which benefit both the environment and local people?
I certainly would encourage that. I was delighted to be at the recycling plant in West Lothian, although the member and I shared the only minor moment of anxiety. As the member arrived, she drove a little too far into the site and we thought that she was about to be recycled. That caused a little nervousness among local officials.
Wind Generation Sites (Impact)
To ask the Scottish Executive what the impact on the environment and on rural development will be of planning consent being given for additional wind generation sites and what information its Environment and Rural Affairs Department has on the amount of acreage which has been, or will be, given planning consent. (S2O-7296)
Renewable energy can play a vital part in our climate change programme and contribute substantially to addressing the environmental impacts of global warming. Developments are assessed against a clear set of guidelines that ensure that they will proceed only if it has been demonstrated that they will not have a significant adverse environmental impact. Figures on total and likely land areas are not available.
I am extremely disappointed in the minister's response. He does not have the figures.
Come to a question, Mr Gallie.
Does the minister feel that the Lewis wind farm represents good use of land when compared with Hunterston? Hunterston or Torness's output is six times greater than Lewis's will be.
Do not qualify it any further, Mr Gallie. You got the question out.
I respect Phil Gallie's continuing and persistent advocacy of nuclear generation.
And that of the rest of us.
And that of John Home Robertson. Like any Liberal Democrat, I am always prepared to listen to any minority group that might be in our presence.
Does the minister agree that wind farms have a useful contribution to make to rural development? They create a small number of local jobs and developers contribute to local communities. Factories such as one in Campbeltown make some of the machinery that goes on the top of wind turbines and I presume that, in future, other areas will benefit in a similar way. What steps is he taking to encourage communities to embrace wind farms, in the face of all the black propaganda that is put about by those who are against them in any circumstances?
I agree with the member on both points. There is potential in rural and remote rural areas for us to take economic advantage of the development of renewables. In Scotland, which has 60 per cent of the United Kingdom's forestry, not only wind but biomass could make a considerable contribution in rural and remote rural areas to both renewable energy and employment prospects.
NFU Scotland (Meetings)
To ask the Scottish Executive when the Minister for Environment and Rural Development last met NFU Scotland and what issues were discussed. (S2O-7297)
I meet NFU Scotland regularly. The most recent occasion was at the royal highland show last week, at which it appeared that not only the National Farmers Union but most of its members were present.
I am sorry that I was unable to bump into the minister on that occasion, due to a particularly unpleasant throat. In his discussions with the NFU, was the issue raised of the growing anger and frustration among producers of previously unsupported products, in particular, at the fact that retired farmers who have sold their farms since 2002 can tick the necessary boxes allowing them to continue to claim the single farm payment by renting an area of rough grazing fairly cheaply? Given that some claimants no longer live in the United Kingdom, never mind Scotland, does the minister think that that is right? If he agrees with me that it is not, what does he propose to do about it?
We must keep the issue under control. We must be careful not to suggest that that is a widespread practice, which Alex Fergusson did not do.
Minister, please address your microphone. Some members are struggling to hear you.
That would be unusual, but I take the point.
Question 6 was not lodged.
Contaminated Land (Royal Ordnance Factory)
To ask the Scottish Executive what role the Scottish Environment Protection Agency has in dealing with contamination at the site of the former Royal Ordnance factory in Bishopton, Renfrewshire. (S2O-7326)
SEPA has both an advisory and a regulatory role in dealing with contaminated land. SEPA has met both the developers and the planning authority to discuss potential contamination and remediation issues at the Bishopton site.
The minister will know that to date Renfrewshire Council has not registered the ROF site as contaminated, preferring to deal with it through the planning process. As a former munitions plant, the site meets the criteria of a special site, as defined by part IIA of the Environmental Protection Act 1990, under which SEPA would have been designated as the enforcing authority because of the specific problems associated with such sites and so that the necessary expertise could be deployed. Does the minister believe that it is fair that the people of Bishopton should be denied that additional protection by the actions or inaction of Renfrewshire Council, which is an interested party in the proposed development of the site? Will the minister undertake to investigate the matter further?
I understand that, as recently as 21 June, SEPA attended a meeting of the Bishopton community council, at which representatives of both SEPA and Renfrewshire Council gave presentations on their involvement and respective roles and responsibilities in relation to the site and answered questions from the floor. This is clearly an issue of concern to the local community. Discussions have already started and I expect them to continue.
I declare an interest in that I live in the village of Bishopton. The minister will be aware that for over 60 years the site was a production site involving noxious substances and that, by its very nature, much of the activity was covert. Therefore, there is a widespread lack of knowledge as to the contaminate situation of the site. Does the minister think that leaving the situation to informal dialogue and discussion between SEPA and local community representatives is sufficient? Would it not be more sensible for there to be some ministerial guidance or directive to require SEPA to take a more formal locus in the matter?
SEPA has a regulatory role to license certain activities that are associated with the remediation of contaminated land. It also provides advice to local authorities on any potential pollution of controlled waters arising from land that is affected by contamination. SEPA has provided advice to BAE Systems on likely timescales for the assessment of any licensing applications and commented on preliminary proposals for site investigation work to assess the risk of pollution of controlled waters.
Coastal and Marine National Park
To ask the Scottish Executive how it intends to take forward plans for Scotland's first coastal and marine national park. (S2O-7382)
As I have announced, I have asked Scottish Natural Heritage to consider options for Scotland's first coastal and marine national park and to make a preliminary assessment of potential candidate areas. SNH will work closely with stakeholders and I have asked it to complete its report to ministers by early 2006. As part of the process of developing our marine strategy, I will chair a group of key stakeholders and I expect that the group will make some input into the work that SNH will undertake.
I welcome the minister's announcement on the matter, because coastal and marine national parks have been dear to the hearts of many of us for some time. He will be aware that several local groups are looking at coastal and marine national parks in their area. Will he therefore outline what criteria will be used to select Scotland's first coastal and marine national park? Who are the likely stakeholders to be involved both at the early stage and at the stage of developing a local project?
I have asked SNH to consider first of all what the criteria should be and to engage with local groups and stakeholders—such as the member and the many groups with which she is engaged—to try to elicit those. My postbag is now full with an ample number of candidates, but they have not yet been assessed by SNH.
Private Water Supplies (Scotland) Regulations 2005 (Draft)
To ask the Scottish Executive what impact the draft Private Water Supplies (Scotland) Regulations 2005 will have on the environment. (S2O-7386)
The draft Private Water Supplies (Scotland) Regulations 2005 are concerned with the quality of water that is intended for human consumption and will have minimal impact on the environment.
Many small businesses, such as hotels, bed and breakfasts, and caravan and camping sites, rely on private water supplies and now face bills of up to £435 from local authorities for analysing their drinking water to see whether it is fit for use. Will the Executive confirm that when it looks to implement the regulations, it will take on board representations from the business community about the burden of regulation and the impact that such charges will have on the viability of small businesses?
I am sensitive to the impact that the regulations will have in rural areas and on the tourism sector. That is why we are committed to providing a grant scheme to assist all individuals or businesses that need to make improvements to their private water supply. The consultation on the draft regulations has just closed and the Executive is considering all the responses that it has received. I look forward to responding to those after the summer.
Is the minister concerned about the lack of knowledge on how many businesses the regulations could affect? Will she undertake a survey to establish the number of bed and breakfasts and other such businesses that have private water supplies?
As I said, the consultation on the regulations has just closed. We will consider the responses that we have received, which should give us an indication of the scope and scale of the issues.
Land Management Contracts
To ask the Scottish Executive how many farmers have signed land management contracts and under which categories. (S2O-7301)
The number of farmers who are participating in the land management contract menu scheme is around 10,200. The measures that farmers are undertaking will not be known until the end of July, when we will have completed the data capture of all the applications.
Now that the minister is on his specialised subject, I will pursue the matter. In the run-up to the deadline for land management contract applications, farmers and NFU Scotland expressed concerns about the complexity of the paperwork and argued that it was unduly difficult to apply for some of the categories. When the figures are produced, will the minister consider revising the criteria?
Andrew Arbuckle is right that we received comments about the complexity of completing the forms, although we probably had as many complaints in the early days about the early date for completion of applications for entry to the scheme. The fact that we extended that date greatly assisted farmers and their advisers in deciding how to proceed. As further applications will be made in future years, we will consider the matter carefully. I assure the member that we will take into account the comments that we received from applicants.
Mr Gallie has hit the jackpot today.
I noticed the time, Presiding Officer.
The Prime Minister made a political comment about how he sees the future of the CAP. In relation to that issue, we are concentrating exclusively on implementing the rural development regulation that has just been agreed. We will respond to any positive proposal from the European Commission on reform of the CAP but, at present, there are no formal proposals of that nature. We will engage with Westminster when a more formal proposal emerges.
As Mr Gallie has not had the presence of mind to press his request-to-speak button again, there are no further supplementaries, so that concludes question time. The member who has just requested to speak is too late. We will now have a brief suspension, after which we will resume with Parliamentary Bureau motions.
Meeting suspended.
On resuming—