Chamber and committees

We all want to see safe elections, and I associate myself with the comments that were just made about the conduct of the 2021 elections.

However, the matter is about not just the polling date, but the run-up to the election and the campaign itself. We all want candidates to be able to meet voters face to face—obviously in line with public health regulations—because we know how important that is. Is it the minister’s expectation that the campaign will be conducted more face to face, and can he explain to Parliament how the decisions will be taken about any further restrictions due to emerging variants?

Yes.

Thank you, convener. In some ways, ending the session on the subject of public health is quite helpful, because a lot of what we have spoken about this morning is about the need to make interventions in the lives of children and young people. This committee is focused on what positive interventions in terms of policy and legislation can make the most difference.

From a public health point of view, I am keen to understand what interventions the witnesses feel will make the most difference to tackling obesity, drugs and alcohol misuse and non-communicable diseases later in life. How do we get to a place where those interventions are not stand-alone or in a silo but provide holistic family support and work across themes? Someone mentioned there being no wrong door. That is key to the situation. Perhaps we can consider those themes to take us up to our time.

Constituents in Inverclyde who have family members who are living in care homes have contacted me to express their deep concerns about the return to a strict no-visitors policy, which I understand has been implemented on the advice of local public health teams, due to some staff awaiting PCR results. That is contrary to the current guidance, which states that one visitor should be allowed during a controlled outbreak. Indeed, Donald Macaskill, the chief executive of Scottish Care, has expressed concern that there is inconsistency on visiting rules because public health teams and incident management teams have varying interpretations of managed, or controlled, outbreaks.

Will the First Minister clarify the guidance on care home visiting and ask Public Health Scotland to communicate it clearly to local teams to ensure that people who are living in care homes can have regular visitors, as is their right?

Good morning to all who are joining us. Following on from the initial question and conversation, my questions will focus on international relations more broadly. To set the scene a bit on the topic, will the approach to international relations that has been set out in the memorandum of understanding be required often? Is that something that we will—[Inaudible.]

Thank you. That consensus approach and the desire to get it right from the start are really helpful.

In the hypothetical situation that we could not get agreement between the four nations on an international treaty or international concerted action, is it your view that we would need to invoke conflict resolution procedures, or would the UK Government seek to act unilaterally? From the conversation that we have just had, we know that consensus is certainly what we would be aiming for, but we cannot always achieve that. I am keen to get your sense of that.

I want to get a handle on the figures in the budget. Can you explain the difference between the £1.6 billion, which is highlighted in the budget, and the £1.1 billion that is identified in the budget tables under “social care investment”? I am trying to understand why there is a difference between those two figures and what the actual spend is.

My question follows on from the point about the £10 billion investment over the next decade. Given that health capital budgets are typically around £500 million, it is clear that there will have to be quite a detailed uprating, and I am keen to understand where you think that that will come from. A huge amount of capital promises have been made within that, whether in the plan that has not yet been published or in the manifesto—for example, in relation to refurbishment of the Royal Alexandra hospital and the Vale of Leven hospital in my region. There is already a £76 million repair backlog at the RAH. I am therefore keen to understand how and when we will profile those things.

It would be useful for further scrutiny if the committee could have more detail on that in writing.

I want to ask about the structure of the national care service. We are still going through the responses and the structure is not yet finalised in respect of the proposal to create community health and social care boards to replace IJBs. Does the cabinet secretary think that many of the issues that have been experienced with financial accountability and leadership in IJBs will be solved by creating a new structure?

I have just one more question, and I will segue to the subject of pay for social care workers. During the budget process, the finance secretary said that she felt that the 48p increase was fair and “pays carers for their labours”—I think that that was the expression she used. Does the cabinet secretary agree with that? Does he feel that that is an acceptable pay increase for care workers?