Chamber and committees

As indicated in response to S5O-03674, it is important that we give further consideration to those reports. This is a serious issue and the proper process requires careful review of selected patient cases. We therefore need to establish which cases require review and, importantly, to identify individuals with the required knowledge, authority, standing and independence to carry that out. Health Board accountable officers discussed the matter at their October meeting. I have asked NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde to propose a means, scope and timeline for that review to be conducted, with assurance from the Accountable Officers group and the Chief Medical Officer that that is the required level of response to determine the basis of the reports.

All answers to written parliamentary questions are available on the Parliament's website, the search facility for which can be found at: http://www.parliament.scot/parliamentarybusiness/28877.aspx

Earlier this year I asked that a short-life working group be set up to examine the present course of care for women who experience mesh complications. The group agreed a remit to consider what additional steps could be taken to offer choice to women who want – and are clinically suitable for – removal of mesh. The group further agreed to review and identify areas of best practice in the United Kingdom and beyond, and if not already available, consider how these can be provided in Scotland. The group's remit is set out in more detail in response to S5W-23623 on 6 June 2019.

Given the action already taken by the Scottish Government, it is not clear what a public inquiry would achieve.

All answers to written parliamentary questions are available on the Parliament’s website, the search facility for which can be found at http://www.parliament.scot/parliamentarybusiness/28877.aspx .

Neither the Scottish Government nor NHS Central Legal Office holds the information sought.

The General Medical Council (GMC) sets the professional standards to which all UK doctors must work as a condition of continuing registration; recording their work, establishing and maintaining partnerships with patients, and acting with honesty and integrity. Where serious concerns are raised about a doctor’s behaviour or professional performance, the GMC will investigate and take action where necessary. The GMC will normally work with employers (where applicable) in the first instance, to see if there are any wider concerns about a doctor and identify if concerns relate to contractual matters or potentially impaired fitness to practise. Where a doctor’s fitness to practise is found by a panel of the Medical Practitioners’ Tribunal Service (MPTS) to be impaired for any reason, that panel will impose appropriate professional sanctions such as a period of supervised practice or, for the most serious failures, erasure from the medical register and removal of licence to practise.

Any visit by Dr Veronikis will take place after discussions with the Chief Medical Officer who, as set out in response to S5W-25664 on 8 November 2019, is visiting him in the US this week. As previously advised in answer to S5O-03531 on 12 September 2019, Dr Veronikis has indicated that he has clinical commitments until at least January 2020.

All answers to written parliamentary questions are available on the Parliament’s website, the search facility for which can be found at http://www.parliament.scot/parliamentarybusiness/28877.aspx .

Health Boards may seek out-of-area treatments for patients where considered necessary and appropriate. However, any such referral is a matter for the patient and the clinicians involved in the case.

As indicated in answer to S5W-23623, answered on 6 June 2019, should a patient make a request of this kind, clinicians will initially have a discussion with that patient and, if agreed, will then refer it to the Health Board for consideration. The Health Board will review the application, in doing so considering whether the treatment requested can reasonably be provided in Scotland, and in due course will inform the clinician and patient whether the request is accepted.

All answers to written parliamentary questions are available on the Parliament's website, the search facility for which can be found at: http://www.parliament.scot/parliamentarybusiness/28877.aspx

The continued sharing of learning and experience is an accepted part of a clinician’s role. UK clinicians will seek to work with other clinicians or academics based on their reputation amongst peers and an assessment of the specific learning or technical practice they can bring.

Should any engagement require a formal contract, Health Boards will undertake due diligence as set out in answer to S5W-25684 on 8 November 2019.

All answers to written parliamentary questions are available on the Parliament’s website, the search facility for which can be found at http://www.parliament.scot/parliamentarybusiness/28877.aspx .

Scottish Government officials informally discussed with Dr Veronikis the possibility of meeting with him during his September visit. However, this was ultimately not considered practical.

Scottish clinicians were not requested to provide evidence of skills prior to travelling to the US. However, comparison of techniques and review of available objective evidence of both benefit and harm, will form part of the discussions clinicians are undertaking during their visit there.

NHS Central Legal Office is not aware of any of any case where a pursuer has been required to sign a non-disclosure agreement.