Seòmar agus comataidhean

Amendments 17, 18 and 19, in the name of Tess White, relate to the statement of principles, which is currently not clearly defined, in section 3 of the bill.

Amendment 17 would require that the commissioner must include the principle that they

“will seek the views of staff working in the National Health Service Scotland on ... safety concerns”.

That responds to the point that was raised by the Royal College of Nursing that, even though pathways are already established for NHS staff to raise concerns about safety within their health board, they do not always feel that those concerns are heard or addressed. The Scottish Government undertook to review the bill to ensure that the commissioner could hear from staff, but it is not clear from the minister’s amendments that that has been carried out. I would appreciate some clarity from the minister on that specific point.

I note that amendment 16, in the name of Paul Sweeney, includes the principle that people who are underrepresented in healthcare will be involved in the commissioner’s work. The Scottish Conservatives fully support that amendment.

Amendment 18 provides more detail about what the statement of principles should include. It does not seek to be prescriptive, as I agree that the commissioner should have the freedom to establish their own principles. That is reflected in the drafting of amendment 18. Amendment 18 would provide more detail in the bill about the areas that the commissioner should consider when drafting those principles.

Amendment 19 would create a duty to consult on the principles with

“stakeholders ... the Parliamentary corporation ... the advisory group”

and, crucially, the relevant committee of the Scottish Parliament. I note that the Scottish Government has lodged a similar amendment about consulting on the principles, which covers the strategic plan as well. I do not have an issue with that approach, but the minister’s amendment 5 does not include in its list of consultees a parliamentary committee. I would like clarity from the minister as to whether she would consider including that in the bill ahead of stage 3.

Amendment 21 creates a duty on the commissioner to have an annual work programme. That is not designed to be onerous, as I appreciate that the commissioner must also produce a strategic plan and the statement of principles. The key point, though, is that the principles will inform the way that the commissioner works and the strategic plan will set out objectives and priorities for a period of as long as four years. The work programme is intended to be far more agile—an agile document that is produced every year—and to give the commissioner the opportunity to consider the resources that are required for carrying out their work. It is worth reflecting on the Patient Safety Commissioner for England’s recognition, after a short period in post, that more resources will be required to support her work.

I have shared with the minister the possibility of pooling human, financial and legal resources among commissioners to mitigate the costs of office-holders, where possible. As we look at the underpinnings of the commissioner at stage 2, and as we move into stage 3, it is worth considering how we can facilitate value for money in the commissioner system.

Thank you.

Thank you, convener. I want to drill into that a bit further. How much did you pay for the locum agency fee? I am not asking about the proportion that then went to the medical staff or the nursing staff. How much money went to the agency itself?

A lot of sports governing bodies that appeared in front of the committee do not have the data and said that they are looking for it, so once we have that data, will it be centralised or, if you will not have an entire database, will you at least be able to access it in order to do research on it?

The one thing that I would never be brave enough to do is wheelchair rugby—that is quite scary.

I would like to ask questions around ethnicity in women’s sport. Minister, you have spoken about how participation drops off, but that is even more acute when it comes to ethnicity. You gave a very good badminton example of a way to engage with the community.

However, my first question is about information and data, because every single time that we have had someone in front of the committee, I have asked them what data they have around ethnicity and very few of them have come back and said that they have good data around that. Is that an issue?

I want to ask Calum Campbell about NHS Lothian’s hospital sterilisation and decontamination unit. Everyone has been talking about increasing the work that you do within a theatre complex, but you cannot do anything if you do not have any kit. Your specific sterilisation unit is severely under the required capacity right now. What steps have you taken, and what steps are you taking, to ensure that you can meet not only the demand right now but your ambitions going forward?

Forgive me, but do you plan to expand that?

What steps have you taken already? You need to have done something already. In addition, one of the questions at the very beginning was about a lack of money and how you have a deficit. There is a lack of capital to support new things, especially plans to do that. How will you achieve your plans with that deficit?

Calum Campbell, I want to ask you about audiology. FLAAG—families failed by Lothian audiology action group—has said quite a few things in public that I would like to raise directly with you for a response. It feels as though there is a lack of access to British Sign Language tutors, as well as a lack of access to speech and language therapy and appropriately qualified professional support for deaf children. What support are you putting in place for families who are affected, and what would you say in response to FLAAG?

The development of speech occurs between birth and the age of three, which is when speech becomes fluent. The average age at which issues are identified is about four and a half. My understanding is that 2018 is the cut-off. What is happening to potentially affected families?