Chamber and committees

Before we move into private, I understand that some members wish to say a few words about our cross-committee work during this session. I invite Collette Stevenson to make some remarks.

Thank you, Ms Stevenson. As no other members have indicated that they wish to make any remarks, I will close the public part of the meeting

I do not have time.

Not only would it be completely inappropriate for ministers to seek to do anything other than allow that process to continue—which, yet again, is being obfuscated by the Labour motion today—but it would be unlawful. The clue is in the name: public inquiries, such as the one that is being led by Lord Brodie, are obliged to conduct their work in an open and transparent manner.

That is why we know that Lord Brodie commissioned the reports and audits that have been referenced already on water and ventilation from Andrew Poplett, the inquiry’s expert; that Andrew Poplett’s view is that the Queen Elizabeth university hospital’s current procedures for managing the water system are suitable and safe; that he noted that the facilities team is now exceeding standard guidance and adopting a proactive and preventative approach that prioritises patient safety and resilience; and that expert testimony to the inquiry has advised that governance arrangements for water and ventilation are now optimal.

Those independent judgments are important markers of the progress that has been made and of the seriousness with which patient safety is now embedded in day-to-day operations at the hospital. I will not pre-empt the inquiry’s final conclusions and recommendations, but I am pleased that, during its course, we have been provided with important reassurances about the hospital’s water and ventilation.

As I did in my speech two weeks ago, I will finish by bringing my focus back to the patients and families. I sincerely hope that, when the inquiry’s final conclusions and recommendations are published, they will finally gain a sense of closure and feel that their questions have been answered.

15:28

I fear that Mr Bibby is unaware of the irony with which his question is tainted. Just last week, his own colleagues quietly submitted a motion to annul an order giving disabled people and unpaid carers on IJBs such as Renfrewshire’s the voting rights to decide how the funding that he has referenced would be spent. Will the minister join me in calling out Scottish Labour for once again politicising our health and social care services, and will he outline how all IJBs will be funded in a way that best meets the needs of all service users over the next financial year?

I remind members of my entry in the register of members’ interests, which shows that I hold a bank nurse contract with NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde.

I begin as I did when I spoke on the subject two weeks ago, which is to express my deepest sympathies to all of those who are grieving the loss of a loved one in the circumstances that we are discussing today.

In 2019, the Scottish Government decided to establish a public inquiry to get to the truth. It did so precisely because the families’ pain was being compounded by having to tenaciously chase the truth themselves. An independent inquiry, with comprehensive statutory powers granted to it, is how we will get the level of open scrutiny and truth that families and patients deserve. That is what we all want to see.

As a nurse with 30 years’ experience, I have spoken previously in the Parliament about how important trust is to patients’ and families’ experiences of healthcare, and about how patient experience and reassurance are related to recovery and patient outcomes.

The Government’s amendment to today’s motion agrees that whistleblowers in Scotland’s NHS must be protected and supported; notes that NHS Assure was created in 2021 to improve risk management and safety in Scotland’s NHS estate; and acknowledges notes that both Healthcare Improvement Scotland and independent experts have commented on the procedures now in place to ensure the safety of hospital for patients and staff. I also welcome the involvement of Sir Lewis Ritchie in the safety and public confidence oversight group, which will look at specific issues, including in relation to the built environment and validation.

Let us pause for a second to remember that the independent public inquiry, which I am confident will provide the answers, reassurances and recommendations that we are all looking for, is still under way. While that is the case, it would be completely inappropriate for ministers to pre-empt its findings or final recommendations or otherwise direct its business.

I do not have time.

Not only would it be completely inappropriate for ministers to seek to do anything other than allow that process to continue—which, yet again, is being obfuscated by the Labour motion today—but it would be unlawful. The clue is in the name: public inquiries, such as the one that is being led by Lord Brodie, are obliged to conduct their work in an open and transparent manner.

That is why we know that Lord Brodie commissioned the reports and audits that have been referenced already on water and ventilation from Andrew Poplett, the inquiry’s expert; that Andrew Poplett’s view is that the Queen Elizabeth university hospital’s current procedures for managing the water system are suitable and safe; that he noted that the facilities team is now exceeding standard guidance and adopting a proactive and preventative approach that prioritises patient safety and resilience; and that expert testimony to the inquiry has advised that governance arrangements for water and ventilation are now optimal.

Those independent judgments are important markers of the progress that has been made and of the seriousness with which patient safety is now embedded in day-to-day operations at the hospital. I will not pre-empt the inquiry’s final conclusions and recommendations, but I am pleased that, during its course, we have been provided with important reassurances about the hospital’s water and ventilation.

As I did in my speech two weeks ago, I will finish by bringing my focus back to the patients and families. I sincerely hope that, when the inquiry’s final conclusions and recommendations are published, they will finally gain a sense of closure and feel that their questions have been answered.

15:28

I fear that Mr Bibby is unaware of the irony with which his question is tainted. Just last week, his own colleagues quietly submitted a motion to annul an order giving disabled people and unpaid carers on IJBs such as Renfrewshire’s the voting rights to decide how the funding that he has referenced would be spent. Will the minister join me in calling out Scottish Labour for once again politicising our health and social care services, and will he outline how all IJBs will be funded in a way that best meets the needs of all service users over the next financial year?

I remind members of my entry in the register of members’ interests, which shows that I hold a bank nurse contract with NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde.

I begin as I did when I spoke on the subject two weeks ago, which is to express my deepest sympathies to all of those who are grieving the loss of a loved one in the circumstances that we are discussing today.

In 2019, the Scottish Government decided to establish a public inquiry to get to the truth. It did so precisely because the families’ pain was being compounded by having to tenaciously chase the truth themselves. An independent inquiry, with comprehensive statutory powers granted to it, is how we will get the level of open scrutiny and truth that families and patients deserve. That is what we all want to see.

As a nurse with 30 years’ experience, I have spoken previously in the Parliament about how important trust is to patients’ and families’ experiences of healthcare, and about how patient experience and reassurance are related to recovery and patient outcomes.

The Government’s amendment to today’s motion agrees that whistleblowers in Scotland’s NHS must be protected and supported; notes that NHS Assure was created in 2021 to improve risk management and safety in Scotland’s NHS estate; and acknowledges notes that both Healthcare Improvement Scotland and independent experts have commented on the procedures now in place to ensure the safety of hospital for patients and staff. I also welcome the involvement of Sir Lewis Ritchie in the safety and public confidence oversight group, which will look at specific issues, including in relation to the built environment and validation.

Let us pause for a second to remember that the independent public inquiry, which I am confident will provide the answers, reassurances and recommendations that we are all looking for, is still under way. While that is the case, it would be completely inappropriate for ministers to pre-empt its findings or final recommendations or otherwise direct its business.

I thank the cabinet secretary and his officials for their attendance.

Does the committee agree with those recommendations?

Members indicated agreement.