Chamber and committees

Primary care is the front door of our national health service. It is the cornerstone that allows intervention as early as possible to ensure that people can be successfully treated in the community. It refers people to the support that they need in the right place, and it should be able to do that at the right time. It is that early intervention that keeps people out of hospital by diagnosing, referring or treating them before their condition deteriorates. It is a vital service that people have trusted over many years.

Our relationship with our GP is crucial in all of our lives, and supporting general practice is crucial to reducing pressure on acute and emergency services. However, a survey from the British Medical Association has revealed that four in every five—more than 80 per cent—of GP practices in Scotland have reported that demand for their service is exceeding their capacity and almost half have reported that the level of demand for their service is substantially exceeding capacity.

As colleagues have said, I am not alone in looking at my mailbox and seeing that it is full of people who are struggling to see their GP and full of GPs who feel at their wits’ end trying to do the job that they love fully. Indeed, Dr Andrew Buist, chair of the BMA Scottish GPs committee, issued a stark warning by saying that the situation in primary care is at a “tipping point” because of the Government’s decision to slash funding for GP practices by £65 million.

The target to recruit 800 GPs by 2027 is short of what is required, and it kicks the issue down the road. The SNP has had 15 years to get NHS workforce planning right, but it has failed miserably year after year.

Of course, it is important that we look at the needs of every community in Scotland, but it is clear that the issues go far beyond that and that we need sustained investment.

For 15 years, there has been a lack of a strategic plan on NHS staffing not only for GPs but across acute settings and all other healthcare settings.

The cabinet secretary did not want to hear that from his colleague.

Our NHS is on its knees and its front-line staff are suffering. They have had enough of the failing health secretary not listening to what they need. That is why the RCN is striking for the first time in its history and why Scottish Ambulance Service staff, including paramedics, are striking for the first time in over 30 years. The cabinet secretary should deliver

“A decent and acceptable pay rise for NHS and social care staff”,

which

“is essential, not just to avoid strikes but to retain and recruit the staff we need to make essential improvements to our health service”

Those are not my words; they are the words of another former SNP cabinet secretary, Alex Neil. Perhaps the health secretary should heed the advice of his former colleague and get back round the table and listen to what staff are telling him, because it is clear that the health secretary had lost the confidence of front-line staff, patients and their families. His record speaks for itself in comparison to those of his predecessors, and he has no idea, plan or support to offer.

Patients and staff deserve so much better than this Government and this cabinet secretary.

The First Minister committed to the build back better approach for Scotland as we recover from Covid, but what has happened to that ambition? We need investment and support for people whose lives have been fundamentally affected by the pandemic. The Office for National Statistics estimates that there are more than 170,000 people across Scotland who are living with long Covid, yet the support from the Scottish Government to date has been inadequate. The Scottish Government committed £3 million in funding when the number of Scots with long Covid was estimated to be 70,000 people. Even that has not yet been fully allocated. Funding has not increased—

Will the Deputy First Minister commit to working across Government to protect funding for long Covid sufferers in Scotland to help their recovery with access to physiotherapy and multidisciplinary rehab?

I would like to make some progress, if the cabinet secretary does not mind, because I am conscious of time.

The NHS is the Labour Party’s proudest achievement. It has transformed the health of our nation and is envied across the world for its defining principle of providing healthcare that is free at the point of use. However, this week, it has been revealed that the possibility of creating a two-tier healthcare system through privatisation has been explored under the watch of the cabinet secretary. This week, the First Minister and the cabinet secretary scrambled to state that they do not support any shift toward privatising the NHS, and SNP back benchers and members were scrambling to add BBC journalists to the list of things that are to blame for the current state of the NHS in Scotland. However, perhaps we should not be surprised by what we heard this week, because the SNP has form on this. Indeed, in his book “Grasping the Thistle”, the current SNP president and former MSP, Mike Russell, who was appointed to the Cabinet by Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon, said:

“We would encourage the private sector to compete with established NHS, hospitals, clinics and other services. We would encourage NHS management and staff to buy out existing NHS facilities and services under favourable financial terms and join the private sector.”

To ask the Scottish Government what the reduction in funding for Covid recovery will be as part of the emergency budget review. (S6O-01576)

Sure. I presume that the Care Inspectorate pointed to those services not being included in the Feeley report. Kevin, will you comment on that?

I will pick up on Dr Meechan’s point about what is said in the bill and in the policy memorandum. Concerns have been raised that much of this will be dealt with in secondary legislation and that the bill does not provide clarity on what process will be used to gather the data and develop the platform. Dr Meechan referred to the enormous amount of data that would have to be managed.

Do the witnesses have concerns about the issue being dealt with in secondary legislation?

I will explore the notion of social work being within the scope of the NCS. That was not included in the Feeley report. What are your thoughts on why it was not? What is the potential impact of transferring those services into the national care service?

I will start with Suzanne McGuinness, if that is possible.