Official Report 932KB pdf
Computerised Tomography Scans (Review)
To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to the reported review of more than 1,000 CT scans, in light of concerns regarding the quality of assessments made by a consultant radiologist. (S6T-02241)
NHS Golden Jubilee, which hosts the Scottish national radiology reporting service, has confirmed that discrepancies were identified in some reports by an individual consultant radiologist and that immediate action was taken by it to comprehensively review all relevant CT examinations. The findings were shared with relevant health boards, which are currently investigating the clinical impact of the discrepancies under the appropriate clinical governance and duty of candour requirements. I understand that it is too soon to determine the impact on individual patients.
Individual staffing matters are entirely for the health board to resolve. However, NHS Golden Jubilee has confirmed that the individual is no longer working for the SNRRS.
I welcome the immediate action that was taken. However, I seek further clarity on how the discrepancies were allowed to happen, which health boards have been affected and when the affected patients can expect to be notified.
The audit ensures that we are able to pick up on the issues in a relatively timeous way. NHS boards have a duty of candour and must make sure that they report any issues that may impact on patients, and my understanding is that that is under way. As I said in my opening answer, it is too early to say what the impact will be, and it is also too early to say what the geographical spread will be, as Carol Mochan requests. However, as more information comes to light, I will seek to make sure that Ms Mochan and others are kept up to date.
That is very helpful. I am sure that the cabinet secretary recognises that such errors impact on public trust and confidence in the Scottish national radiology reporting service, which is relatively new, having launched in 2020, and the situation has arisen during a time when we seem to have regular scandals in the NHS. How will the Government ensure that lessons are learned and that similar errors do not occur in the future?
There are two things to note. First, discrepancies are not necessarily errors but are disagreements on the appropriate reporting between two or more radiologists. They are estimated to occur in between 3 and 30 per cent of all radiological examinations. That information comes from the Royal College of Radiologists. There will be some errors, and in a subset of those cases there may be an impact on patients, which will lead to the duty of candour obligations that I set out earlier.
My second point is about reassurance. From the start of a pilot in July 2020, through the transition to business as usual in November 2021 and until March 2023, more than 240,000 examinations were reported through the SNRRS bank, which equates to more than 42,000 hours of reporting. We are therefore discussing a small number of examinations compared with the overall system. On lessons learned and how we are giving patients confidence, I hope that the duty of candour process and the auditing process that are under way will give Ms Mochan and patients the reassurance that she asked for.
I remind members that I am employed as a bank nurse by NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde.
I note that around 10 patients have been identified as being potentially impacted by the work of the radiologist. This will undoubtedly be a troubling and worrying time for those individuals and their loved ones. Can the cabinet secretary assure those who have been affected that they will be contacted timeously by NHS boards and supported during this potentially distressing time?
I can. I share Ms Haughey’s concern about the feelings of distress that the individuals whom she referenced must be feeling. I express my sincere sympathies to the patients who have been affected at this difficult time.
I confirm that the relevant health boards have initiated duty of candour requirements. The Scottish Government is clear that, when harm occurs or has potential to occur, the focus must be on personal contact with those who have been affected, and that openness and transparency are fundamental to promoting a culture of learning and continuous improvement in health and social care settings and to ensuring that we have that feeling of trust in our institutions.
The duty of candour procedure reflects the Scottish Government’s commitment to place people at the heart of health and social care services in Scotland. I hope that that answers Clare Haughey’s question.
The cabinet secretary will be aware of the advancement of artificial intelligence in reading scans. It has become extremely accurate and quick at highlighting anomalies to healthcare professionals. What is the cabinet secretary doing to ensure that AI of that kind is adopted into the health service as quickly as possible?
As were the earlier points, Brian Whittle’s point is fair, and we are exploring it. He will understand that there are sensitivities in ensuring that we operate artificial intelligence appropriately. However, we have very good intelligence on and experience of artificial intelligence being used to read scans in certain disciplines, not only in Scotland, but across the UK. Cancer is a good example of where AI can identify issues quickly. We are looking to invest in such innovation and technology, and my hope is that the investments that we have proposed through the budget for next year will help us to proceed further with that.
Two-child Benefit Cap
To ask the Scottish Government what discussions it had with the United Kingdom Government at the British-Irish Council summit regarding ending the two-child benefit cap. (S6T-02237)
The First Minister had positive discussions with the Prime Minister at the British-Irish Council summit last week. They discussed a range of issues, including scrapping the two-child cap in Scotland—a measure that could lift around 15,000 children out of poverty.
Last week, our draft budget committed £3 million in the year 2025-26 to develop the systems that are required, but we need co-operation from the Department for Work and Pensions to move at pace. That is why I have also written to the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, and I hope to meet her as soon as possible to discuss the matter further.
Scrapping the two-child benefit cap is the right thing to do and will lift 15,000 children in Scotland out of poverty. However, the Scottish Government requires data from the Westminster Government to make payments a reality. Is the cabinet secretary confident that the Westminster Government will provide that data?
Overall, under the previous Conservative Administration and the Labour Administration, we have had good relations with the DWP with regard to the devolution of social security benefits. However, it would be fair to say that relations were somewhat strained during winter fuel payment discussions. I believe that those good relations will stand us in good stead, and the discussions that the First Minister and the Prime Minister have had will, I hope, set the tone for both Governments. If we are at the point where Keir Starmer has said that he will not stand in the way of allowing Scotland to scrap the cap, it is perhaps ironic that Scottish Labour and Anas Sarwar might do so, unless they support our budget at the final vote.
I hope that there will be an easy data transfer from the Westminster Government. I also hope that Labour in Scotland will reflect on some of the things that have been said by the likes of the Child Poverty Action Group and that it will back the budget.
The right thing for the Westminster Government to do would be to scrap the cap right across the UK, which would be beneficial for children and families from Aberdeen to Aberystwyth. Has the Scottish Government been given any indication that the UK Government is willing to do so?
Kevin Stewart is quite right to point out that the best way to alleviate poverty in that area would be for the UK Government to do the right thing. It is one of the policy interventions that could make the biggest difference in tackling child poverty. Indeed, the Institute for Fiscal Studies said that reversing the two-child limit would lift 540,000 children right across the UK out of absolute poverty. The lack of action in Rachel Reeves’s budget—and in further pronouncements from the UK Government—is therefore deeply disappointing.
Repeated calls on the UK Government, which has failed to take action, have resulted in absolutely no change in the Labour Government’s policy. The Scottish Government has decided that it cannot wait any longer, so this Government will take decisive action to scrap the cap.
How much will the policy cost? There is no mention of any amount in the budget documents. Will the cabinet secretary tell the Parliament how much it will cost?
The budget clearly sets out that there is £3 million within the 2025-26 budget to allow us to build the systems and scrap the cap. That obviously cannot be done at source, as we do not have the powers, but that is how we will mitigate it.
The Scottish Fiscal Commission, which is responsible for setting out the detail of how much social security will cost, has estimated the figure at £150 million. The commission will do further work on that and, as always, we will base the Government’s work on the Scottish Fiscal Commission’s work. That is an important investment in the people of Scotland that the Government will make.
I welcome the Scottish Government’s on-going positive engagement with the British-Irish Council, which is a very important body for promoting peace and stability across these islands. As a dual citizen, I take it extremely seriously, and I hope that all members take its work seriously, too.
I welcome the commitment made at the weekend by both the Prime Minister and the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster to work constructively with the Scottish Government as part of the wider reset of relations between the Governments. The cabinet secretary and I have previously discussed the new UK Government’s child poverty task force, which is examining a range of issues including universal credit and the two-child limit. I know that Scottish Government ministers and officials were at the task force meeting in Glasgow on 21 November with the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, Liz Kendall. Can the cabinet secretary confirm whether the Scottish Government discussed its policy proposal on the two-child limit at that meeting?
That was a public meeting, as the member will be well aware, and it would not be appropriate to get into discussions about what may happen within a Scottish Government budget at a public meeting in such a setting.
It is fair to say—and this should not come as a surprise to Paul O’Kane or the Labour Party—that, after the “change” election, when there was no change to the two-child cap; after the budget, when there was no change to the two-child cap; and after the launch of the child poverty task force, when there was no change to the two-child cap, it is the Scottish Government that has delivered the change that people were looking for.
That concludes topical question time.