Chamber and committees

The national agreement of maintaining the pupil teacher ratio at 13.7 was met in 2016 and therefore there was no clawback of funding from any local authority.

The Scottish Government engages routinely with the Office of National Statistics (ONS) on a large number of issues of shared interest, supported by officials from across government. Over the period from 2013, engagement with the ONS on issues related to ESA10 and the Aberdeen Western Peripheral Route project has predominantly been led by the Scottish Futures Trust and Scottish Government Finance Directorates and involved a range of different officials over time.

As the main focus of engagement has been the classification of the Aberdeen Western Peripheral Route, discussion has centred on the contract documentation for the project and supporting information, elements of which are considered commercial in confidence.

When HMRC announced the next stage of their Building our Future transformation programme on 12 November 2015, the First Minister personally spoke to the second Permanent Secretary at HMRC to relay her grave concerns over job losses. Keith Brown, Cabinet Secretary for Economy, Jobs and Fair Work, wrote to David Gauke MP, Financial Secretary to HM Treasury, on 5 July 2016, to relay the Scottish Governments concerns over HMRC office closures and to request a meeting to discuss the plans in detail and to establish what might be done to mitigate the programmes impact on Scotland.

David Gauke's successor as Financial Secretary to HM Treasury, Jane Ellison MP, replied on 20 December 2016 and it was agreed that Mr Brown and Ms Ellison would meet on 24 January 2017. Unfortunately, events conspired against both parties and the meeting was delayed. A new date, convenient to both parties, is actively being pursued during which time concerns raised by stakeholders with Scottish Ministers will be raised with the UK Government.

The Scottish Government had no involvement in the January 2013 visit of Eurostat officials to the UK, and there is no correspondence we have had on this specific issue.

The implementation of the Scottish Trauma Network is not about centralising A&E Departments in the four new major trauma centres. It is about joining up existing A&E departments across Scotland with the major trauma centres, to provide co-ordinated care across the entire network.

As confirmed to Parliament on Wednesday 18 January, the Scottish Trauma Network Steering Group will now guide the establishment of the major trauma centres and priorities for investment across the wider network.

All four trauma regions will be represented on the steering group, which will take under consideration all existing facilities and services, and clearly set out how enhanced trauma care will be delivered across their region. We expect the trauma regions to have their plans ready by October 2017.

The link between safe and sustainable staffing levels and high quality care is well established. It is vital we have the right number of staff in place, with the right skills.

Scotland has led the UK in the development of nursing and midwifery workload and workforce planning. The Nursing and Midwifery Workload and Workforce Planning Programme provides a validated framework and suite of tools that enable NHS Boards in Scotland to make evidence based decisions regarding Nursing and Midwifery workforce requirements in a variety of settings. The tools use a triangulated approach to determine appropriate staffing levels taking account of patients’ clinical needs, local context, professional judgment and associated quality measures, rather than a reliance on fixed ratios which are less responsive to the specific needs and dependencies of patients and to fluctuations in service demand.

Use of the tools was mandated for use in NHS boards since April 2013, as part of Local Delivery Planning.

The Scottish Government has committed to enshrine safe staffing in law, placing the nursing and midwifery workforce planning tools on a statutory footing.

The Scottish Government is strongly opposed to the UK Government’s Trade Union Act and sought an exemption from the UK Government during the passage of the Bill. The Act is a threat to the fundamental rights of workers and seeks to undermine Scotland’s approach to industrial relations.

In light of the judgement expressed by the previous Presiding Officer on the UK Trade Union Bill, the subject matter is outwith the legislative competence of the Scottish Parliament. Despite this, we will continue to utilise all available powers to limit the impact of this unnecessary legislation and promote strong industrial relations in Scotland.

Contrary to the actions of the UK Government, the Scottish Government recognises that it is vital to support strong trade unions. That is why we committed £250,000 to the STUC for a Trade Union Modernisation Fund to help mitigate the negative impacts of this UK legislation so that trade union representatives are not diverted away from supporting their members and helping employers embrace fairer working practices. And that is why we provided £2.26 million in 2016/17 to support Scottish Union Learning and an additional £100,000 to support Equality and Leadership Projects.

In the original response to question S5W-05864 asked by Neil Findlay MSP, it was stated: 'the word "inequalities" occurs three times in the Health and Social Care Delivery Plan'. There is no mention of the phrase "inverse care law" in the Health and Social Care Delivery Plan.

The Scottish Government does not hold information on how responsibility and accountability for health and safety is divided for employers that have multiple sites across Scotland and the UK. Regulation of occupational health and safety is reserved to the UK Government. Arrangements for inspection of workplaces is the responsibility of the regulatory authorities - the Health and Safety Executive and local authority environmental health services.

The Scottish Government has no plans to commission independent economic analysis of the impact of the Small Business Bonus Scheme.

Policy-making in respect of the Small Business Bonus Scheme is informed by objective internal analysis and wide-ranging stakeholder engagement. For example, the Federation of Small Business recently said that, having surveyed almost 1,000 business owners to ask what would happen if the support through the Small Business Bonus Scheme was abolished:-

"About a fifth of small firms (18.9%) reported they would close the business, with similar proportions arguing that they would have to cancel investments (19.9%) and amend their plans for growth (18.3%)."