Chamber and committees

Again, that is a difficult question for me to be precise about. We are constantly reviewing the situation, looking at many data streams regarding levels of infection, pressures on our hospitals, the effectiveness of the vaccination programme and so on. Many factors must be borne in mind. At this stage, I would say to people that adhering to the advice that has been given so far about reducing social interaction before and after the Christmas period is the most effective contribution that people can make towards ensuring that we can enjoy and appreciate some time with our families over what we might call the formal Christmas period.

Obviously, the last thing that we want to do is inflict further disruption on people at this time. Sadly, that had to happen last year, and we want to avoid it this year, if at all possible. In any decision making that we undertake, we will be mindful of the plans that people will have made.

The guidance is being formulated as we speak. Given the pace at which we are operating, we are trying to discuss its detail with a variety of interested parties, and I expect it to be available in the course of Friday. In essence, it will provide the information that those obliged to have reference to the guidance will be able to take forward. We need to consult the business community, faith leaders and other relevant organisations, and that work is under way so that we can, to the greatest possible extent, act in a manner that enables activity to continue but which contributes to a reduction in the possibility of the virus circulating.

We would dearly love to be able to rule that out, but I cannot in all honesty do that at this stage. Mr Fraser is absolutely right about the severity of the situation that we face, and I welcome his acknowledgement of that point. I also entirely accept his point that the public are responding accordingly to the challenge. We all look at evidence, but we are also all influenced by anecdotes, and I have to say that I have noticed that my journeys into Edinburgh on Tuesday and Thursday this week have both been much easier in terms of traffic volumes than the ones that I made last week, and today’s was significantly easier than Tuesday’s. That suggests to me that more people are working from home and fewer are commuting, in response to the situation.

I hope that we can avoid applying further constraints on the way in which people are able to enjoy Christmas, but the message that the First Minister issued on Tuesday was deliberately phrased to get people to understand that, if we want to be able to carry on with our family plans around Christmas eve, Christmas day, boxing day and so on, the best way to ensure that that happens is by making sure that we are all Covid-free by taking lateral flow tests before we gather in family groupings and by reducing our social interactions before and after that period.

I think that that is the safest way to proceed, but I have to acknowledge that, in light of the rapid pace of the increase in omicron cases and the data that was shared by the Prime Minister and the United Kingdom’s chief medical officer yesterday, which reinforces the points that the First Minister made on Tuesday about the severity of the threat, I cannot rule out that we might have to apply further constraints in the period ahead.

Those measures are actively being pursued. The committee will be familiar with the fact that the Government has already recruited 350 full-time-equivalent additional vaccinators. As a consequence of the decisions that we took at the weekend and on Tuesday, we are accelerating the vaccination programme, which means that we need to ensure that more vaccinators are available to deliver vaccinations. That will, of necessity, require us to prioritise vaccination over other aspects of activity in the health service.

That capacity is increasing. The data shows that, on Tuesday, about 77,000 vaccinations were undertaken, 18,000 of which were flu vaccinations. The Government has taken the decision to deprioritise the flu vaccination programme, because we have got to very high levels of flu vaccination in the most vulnerable categories. We believe that deprioritising the remainder of the flu vaccination programme is a clinically safe risk to take. That frees up capacity within the Covid vaccination programme.

Basically, we need to get to about 75,000 to 80,000 Covid vaccinations a day to fulfil our objectives. On the combination of Covid and flu vaccinations, we were at 77,000 on Tuesday. We need to increase the tempo of that. There will obviously be days when it is difficult for us to deliver that volume, with the Christmas break and all that goes with it. We are expanding capacity and the vaccination programme. Derek Grieve is operational director of the vaccination programme. He is on the line, and he may wish to add to what I have said.

On delayed discharge, there is an intense focus on supporting individuals who do not need to be in hospital to be released and to be supported at home. I have to be candid with the committee that the availability of social care staff is challenging in that respect. Some people simply cannot be released from hospital to be sent home without a care package. Just last night, I discussed with local authority leaders the steps to be taken to expand at-home care capacity, and the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care has been doing that, too. That work is under way, although I have to be open with the committee that there are challenges in relation to the availability of social care staff to support packages at local level.

Derek Grieve may wish to add to my comments on the vaccination programme.

I know. It is done. Move on.

In relation to the last part of Gillian Mackay’s question, I note that, as the period within the inquiry’s scope will go up to 31 December 2022, there will be an opportunity to reflect on the experiences in relation to omicron.

In relation to the reporting questions, I refer to the examples that I gave in my response to Murdo Fraser. There will be an opportunity, should the inquiry decide to do so, to do case study reporting or produce a series of interim reports. Those are choices that Lady Poole will be able to make, and I am quite sure that she will consider the representations that are made in the course of our discussion on this parliamentary statement and elsewhere about how matters can best be taken forward.

I think that the Parliament will recognise that I have endeavoured to ensure that we have the broadest possible remit for the inquiry. Judging the treatment mechanisms for long Covid feels to me like a clinical matter that is perhaps beyond the scope of Lady Poole’s inquiry. There are plenty of clinical advisers who can consider the treatment of long Covid. Lady Poole is free to explore any questions that are relevant to the terms of reference. If issues arise in relation to long Covid, I am sure that we will hear about them.

In the timetable of an inquiry, there is always a challenge between the need to provide adequate examination of all the issues that are involved and the speed of reporting. I know that Lady Poole feels that issue very acutely. She has made it clear to me that she does not want to spend the remainder of her judicial career leading this inquiry, and I very much agree with that sentiment.

I think that Lady Poole will be determined to ensure that the inquiry covers the ground that it must cover, but that it does so efficiently and promptly so that we can learn lessons and there can be the understanding and accountability that Beatrice Wishart has rightly talked about.

I cannot at this stage prescribe the timescale, but I give the Parliament the assurance that Lady Poole is keen to make as swift progress as she can and that the Government is very happy to support her in that endeavour.

By defining a time period that extends to 31 December 2022, we expressly acknowledge the point that Mr Fairlie makes. We are in an evolving situation. That was also reflected in the question that Mr Mason put to me a few moments ago. We must recognise that there may well be changes and developments ahead of us. The inquiry will have the opportunity to consider and reflect on those issues and to make recommendations accordingly, and it will be for the inquiry to determine how best to do that. It would be inappropriate for ministers to prescribe that.

I am not sure whether Mr McMillan is using the term “constituency” in a parliamentary sense or to describe a grouping within society. It is important that the inquiry reflects the experience of every part of the country. As Mr McMillan will know from the community that he represents, some communities have had much harsher impacts as a consequence of some of the underlying issues of inequality that exist in those areas. Those issues—from across the country—will be considered and reflected on to ensure that we do adequate justice to the different experiences of different parts of the country.