Seòmar agus comataidhean

Alan Gray is right that, where hospital occupancy is sitting as high as it is at some acute sites, our clinicians’ ability to meet the patients’ needs and the efficiency of the flow of the hospital are reduced.

Hospital at home is another incredible example of how we can meet patient needs and expectations. Patients are treated literally in their own homes and are kept at home for longer. Our investment in the budget will take us on a pathway to reach 2,000 hospital-at-home beds by the end of 2026, which would make hospital at home the largest hospital in Scotland. That is right for patients and for the health service, and that is why it has been an important innovation in the NHS over the past years.

I do not remember saying that winter pressure is not as bad in reality. I am not sure where Mr Gulhane’s reference comes from.

There is pressure at all times of the year, and our health boards need to be able to have a surge capacity response to meet the demands on them. For example, at the peak of the last wave of Covid-19 in the summer, 600 beds in Scotland were taken up with Covid patients, which is equivalent to the capacity of Wishaw general hospital. We have pressures in winter, but that example illustrates that pressures and surges can happen throughout the year. That is why it is important that we give our boards the flexibility to be able to respond to those in ways that are right in their areas.

On what Mr Gulhane referenced in relation to NHS Tayside, the budget is about creating greater capacity in the health service to meet scheduled care demand and planned care and to reduce waiting times. We are working right now at increasing that capacity and ensuring that we can have a better run rate so that more patients are treated. We will eat into and erode the longest waits so that patients can get the treatment that they need.

Sorry, but will you repeat that? I missed what you said.

I will bring in Alan Gray in a second to provide more detail on that. First, I note that I did not use the words that Mr Sweeney used to describe the situation on mental health services. I said that there is a challenge, and I want it to be clear that I recognise that there is a challenge. For some people who are waiting too long to access services, Mr Sweeney’s description would be apt, but that picture is not faced by everybody in the system, nor is it faced by every mental health practitioner—although, again, I understand that those practitioners who are under pressure will recognise the description that Mr Sweeney used.

I will bring in Alan Gray now to determine issues around the budgetary situation.

That ignores the £200 million in the budget that is allocated to waiting times improvement and improvement in capacity in relation to delayed discharge. Those budget lines—the £200 million—are not just about meeting immediate need and delivering capacity; they are also about working with boards to have a sustainable service delivery model that means that they provide health service and social care capacity on a sustainable basis. That is about reform and improvement, as well as meeting the immediate demand that we all know exists for us to address waiting times and delayed discharge.

The point that Mr Gulhane makes ignores some of the investment that is being made elsewhere in the budget.

In spite of our investing a significant amount on a record increase to bring health and social care spending to record levels, there are challenges remaining, and there will be boards that continue to face financial challenges. The financial delivery unit will keep working with them, and we expect those that are on the escalation framework to continue to progress towards becoming more financially sustainable.

I have a number of points to raise. Providing greater certainty over funding allows for longer-term planning; I made that point in response to questions from Mr Whittle and Mr Sweeney. Bringing down the level of demand, particularly on secondary care services, and shifting the balance of care into the community, will be of critical importance to achieving greater financial sustainability in health and social care services.

Improving the health of our population is also critically important. I made the point on “The Sunday Show” with Martin Geissler that one of the most important things that individuals can do to take responsibility is to take advantage of the vaccination programme, if they are eligible for it. It is good for people in terms of preserving their health, but it is also good for the health service because it reduces the demand that arises from, in this case, respiratory conditions such as flu, respiratory syncytial virus and Covid, which tend to spike at this time of year.

We continue to invest in breaking down barriers to people looking after their own health and wellbeing better. That comes through the likes of the community link worker network, as well as the investments that we are making in sport, physical activity and wellbeing, and the impact that the culture budget spend will have on our health and wellbeing, particularly our mental health. As a former culture minister, I know that that expansion is good in its own right, but it also has the opposite impact to what happened during Covid, when not being able to go out and experience culture and leisure services had a clear and demonstrably detrimental impact on people’s mental health. Expanding provision and increasing access in those areas can have a virtuous and positive impact. A number of areas that are outside the health budget help to improve our health and wellbeing.

Finally, we are making investments to reduce child poverty on a wider Scottish budget and cross-portfolio basis. Poverty is one of the greatest drivers of ill health and health inequality. By addressing child poverty, we can also increase the health of our population and reduce demand on our health services. I can therefore point Mr Torrance to a number of areas that help to make our health service more sustainable.

I do not have a specific timescale that I can articulate to you, convener, because the matter is still subject to negotiation and discussion with the United Kingdom Government. We have had constructive discussions with the Home Office on the drug checking pilot, and our interaction with it is important. We certainly believe that the evidence points to its being another harm reduction measure that can make a difference in saving people’s lives. It is linked to some of the work on the rapid action drug alert and response—or RADAR—system to identify issues with regard to the supply of drugs and to give people a greater understanding of what they are purchasing and, therefore, what they are using.

We want to take forward the pilot sites in Aberdeen, Dundee and Glasgow, and that, alongside the safer consumption facility, will help us take forward our work on the basis of harm reduction, and give people the opportunity to access treatment as a result. As with the safer consumption facility, signposting would be available to help people move towards recovery opportunities. Predominantly, it is all about ensuring that we reduce harm.

Yes. We will continue to work with local systems on ensuring that the money that is provided for ADPs is spent on the services that we would expect to be delivered.

ADP funding has doubled, as Ms Dowey recognises, and as is covered by Audit Scotland. There has been an increase in ADP funding, and that is provided both through the regular funding for alcohol and drug partnerships and through the increase that has been provided from the national mission funding.

There is local decision making at play here, and I do not want to cut across that, nor disrespect the principle of local decision making itself, as Ms Dowey will recognise. However, we are looking at how we can work with local systems. I have a wider interest, beyond this policy area, in our health and social care partnerships on issues such as social care and making sure that there is transparency about where the money is going so that services are tailored to the people who need them. That is as true for social care as it is, in this case, for people seeking alcohol and drug services.

We are making progress on the stigma action plan, as Maggie Page set out. The workforce plan—I will be corrected if I am wrong—is being progressed at the end of this year, and we are coming forward with more advice there. There is work in train on all three areas, and I would be happy to provide the committees with more information on that if it is not in the written evidence that I provided previously.

That is a matter for the Lord Advocate. She will determine when it is right and appropriate to do that. I do not have any further update on her thinking on that or on the timescales that are involved.