Chamber and committees

I was going to say 26. We are just about there.

To have 1,500 patients in hospital with Covid is still quite a sizeable number, but a great deal better than when it was in excess of 2,400, which is where we were just a few weeks ago. We are seeing the number steadily coming down, which marks the decline in the prevalence of the omicron variant.

All those costs will be met within the assessment of the health budget that we undertake in Scotland. That number, of course, is constructed significantly by funding decisions that are taken by the United Kingdom Government about health provision in England, for which we receive consequentials. Although the total budget position will be informed and framed by funding decisions in the rest of the United Kingdom, we are, of course, free to take our decisions about how significant that programme is.

The committee will be aware that our decisions will be significantly framed by decisions in the rest of the UK because we have other health issues with which we have to wrestle. Mr Whittle is not here but he persistently presses me—understandably—about the need to ensure that other health conditions and circumstances are addressed. We cannot just ignore those issues as we take our decisions.

I do not have the number for the allocated budget for lateral flow testing in the front of my mind but it will be somewhere in my papers and, if I get to it in the course of the meeting, I will share it with the committee. If not, I shall write to the committee to inform it of the number.

I invite Professor Leitch to give more detail to my response. The policy might vary from site to site because, essentially, we have tried to encourage hospitals to undertake an approach that is as safe as possible. The approach that is taken will vary on the basis of the prevalence of Covid, so there will be variation in how that is administered at sites.

My experience, which is based on what I have seen around the country, is that health boards have been endeavouring to get as close as possible to a normal but safe approach to hospital visiting, although there will be periods when specific outbreaks and challenges will make that difficult to deliver.

That approach is the key thing that most patients are interested in.

I do not. Lady Poole is actively preparing the inquiry. I met her on Tuesday, when she updated me on the careful work that she is doing to put in place the foundations for the gathering of information that she needs to look at, some of which is already being gathered; how she will engage in public dialogue and consultation; and, obviously, the conduct of the inquiry. It is entirely for Lady Poole to determine those questions.

First, that is not what the Government says—I dispute that very firmly. Mr Rowley’s extensive local authority and parliamentary experience mean he is very familiar with the journey of social care that has been undertaken during—if I am being charitable about those questions—the past 20 years. In that time, a number of developments have been undertaken to try to address the fundamental issues that Mr Rowley has raised. Those developments have focused on the aspiration to create person-centred care to avoid a situation in which people see any fragmentation in the delivery of care between what one experiences in the national health service and outwith it, if I can make that distinction.

Various developments have been undertaken, such as integration joint boards and health and social care partnerships— a variety of different mechanisms have been tried—to try to erode the barriers that exist in the system so that individuals have a much smoother journey and assessments are undertaken in a transferable way. Mr Rowley and I have been around long enough to remember when assessments undertaken by local authorities were not recognised by health boards. Over time, we have overcome things like that, but that absurdity used to exist in Scotland.

I see the national care service as a continuation of the efforts to try to deliver person-centred care. I accept Mr Rowley’s point; I do not think that all the arrangements today are perfect. That is why the Government argues the necessity of the national care service.

However, some practical and tangible issues are making the delivery of social care challenging. One of those issues is the size of our working-age population. Mr Rowley and I have been around long enough to remember the population projections that came out about 20 or so years ago suggesting that the Scottish population would fall below 5 million and that it would be particularly weakened by the erosion of the working-age population. Thankfully—in my view—European Union expansion and our access to freedom of movement boosted our working-age population as a result of individuals migrating here. Indeed, they boosted our population in general, because they had relationships, had children and stayed here for a long time.

I have lots of these folk in my constituency; they are very welcome and I am delighted that they are there. However, many of them worked in our care sector, and, unfortunately, we are seeing quite a number of them leaving us as a consequence of Brexit. Our working-age population has been diminished and we have shortages in it in countless sectors, of which social care is one.

The Government is trying to address that in the short term by increasing remuneration in the social care sector and by trying to make it more attractive as a career. We are taking a number of steps to try to expand the workforce, because there are two issues that lie at the heart of the challenges that we are facing. The first is the availability of personnel to deliver social care. The second is the issue of quality that Mr Rowley has raised and which, of course, the Care Inspectorate addresses and, in some cases, intervenes directly on by placing requirements on care homes to improve performance.

A lot is being done in the short term to try to address those questions, but our overall efforts will be assisted by the way in which we develop the national care service to provide person-centred care for everyone in Scotland who requires it.

The booster programme is going well. I am just getting the precise data in front of me. Among care home residents, 65 per cent have had booster jags. As of 26 April, among older adults in care homes, the figure is 69 per cent. The rate among the population who are aged 75 and over is 59 per cent. In total, 329,942 doses of the booster have been delivered. That comes on top of 4.4 million people receiving dose 1, 4.1 million receiving dose 2 and 3.4 million receiving dose 3. The programme continues apace.

Obviously, we are waiting for advice from the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation to inform any further steps that we take, but the existing programme is going well among the target population.

That is absolutely the issue.

There we are. The number of patients in ICU is—

Yes, I think that that is essential. I have had several meetings with bereaved families who have lost loved ones during the pandemic. It is absolutely central and fundamental for me that those families are confident about the process that is undertaken and that they have satisfactory engagement with the inquiry. That has been a critical element of the preparation of the inquiry, as I stressed in my answer to Mr Fraser. I have to be careful that I respect the independence of the inquiry, so I will simply read what Lady Poole’s spokesperson said yesterday:

“Lady Poole has already met a number of different organisations representing those affected by the pandemic, including bereaved families in January 2022. These meetings have been extremely important and informative and will help shape the Inquiry’s investigations in the months ahead.”

That is a very clear indication from Lady Poole and the inquiry of the importance that is attached to hearing the views of bereaved families, which I have reiterated from the point of view of the Government. It is vital that the issues and concerns that they have are properly addressed. I give my assurance that, when the remit for the inquiry is finalised, those issues will be central to its purpose, and that, although the inquiry is independent of the Government, it must address the remit given to it by the Government; that is a requirement of law.