Seòmar agus comataidhean

To ask the Scottish Government what assistance it is giving to maintain bus services in the Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale constituency. (S6O-00265)

The First Minister said in her statement that the over-70s are now receiving booster jags. Will she clarify whether the timing of that booster is dependent on when a person received their second vaccine? Might people be offered the booster and the flu jag in one visit?

The dreadful cases that we are hearing about must be of concern to all of us. We must also be concerned about the fact that 79 per cent of calls in August were not emergencies. Paramedics are turning up to places where they should not be, when they should be dealing with cases such as those that have been described in the debate. Can the cabinet secretary give more detail on how the system operates across various regions and say why crews have been sent out to cases that were not emergencies? That is another issue that we must consider carefully. Seventy-nine per cent of calls in August were not emergencies.

Will the cabinet secretary give way?

Will the First Minister say when the Covid mitigation measures in schools might be reviewed? The measures have an impact on many voluntary organisations, such as Earlston scout group, in my constituency, which cannot meet on school premises. The issue is becoming pressing as winter approaches, which will make meeting outdoors impractical.

I see that the clock is now operational.

I congratulate Jamie Halcro Johnston on bringing this important members’ business debate to the chamber. It follows a statement from and questions to the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care, a debate, and questions to the First Minister on the performance of the Ambulance Service.

I know that we all agree that any issues that arise, particularly during the extended and continuing pandemic, in no way reflect on the men and women of the Scottish Ambulance Service.

Since the statement, questions and debates, measures have, of course, been taken by the Scottish Government. Funding of £20 million has been announced to deliver the assistance of more than 100 military personnel—88 drivers and 15 support staff; around 100 second year paramedic students to help in ambulance control rooms, which I will come to later; and more hospital ambulance liaison officers at the busiest A and Es. They are to increase from 11 to 20 to help to ensure the timely admission of patients at A and Es because of the knock-on effects on ambulances arriving. There will be additional help from the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service in the form of volunteer drivers as well as from the British Red Cross and private transport companies, where clinically appropriate. To go back to call centres, there will be additional senior clinical input in ambulance control rooms to assist and speed up decision making on mental health, addictions, falls, breathing difficulties, high-intensity users, and trauma.

During the recent statement, we learned that, in August this year, only 21 per cent of calls were actually emergencies. Ambulance personnel are being called out for what one might term lower-level medical issues. That includes social issues: for example, someone sleeping rough, or passing out drunk or through drugs. That can take up a great deal of a crew’s time as they either take the person to A and E or try to find someone to look after them while they are in that state, because both the police and the Ambulance Service have a duty of care to that person and cannot leave them somewhere unattended. Sometimes, that can take up hours of a crew’s time. It is a complex mixture, which puts the service under pressure at any time, but more so during Covid.

I understand that staff are frustrated about wasting time at call-outs that should not have happened. That is why I raised with the cabinet secretary the issue of the information technology triaging system, which, in my view, needs to be refreshed to match the current circumstances. I understand that it was designed a couple of years ago and is highly automated. Call handlers—who are not at fault—run through questions, and the system tells them what to do next, based on the response. We need to revisit that, given that only 21 per cent of those call-outs are emergencies. Arriving at A and E must also take longer, because of the Covid processing of patients, tying up ambulance time as the ambulance is cleaned and as case notes have to be documented at that time and transferred into the system.

There will be regional variations. I cannot speak for the Highlands and Islands but, to date, I have not had any emails about cases in my constituency of Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale. That may change after the debate.

The pandemic means that the Government and the public must look afresh at what we require of a modern ambulance service. There is a duty on the public to behave responsibly. Of course someone must call an ambulance, without hesitation, in an emergency. That is defined by the Scottish Ambulance Service as:

“Loss of consciousness ... Cardiac arrest ... Heart attack ... Stroke ... An acute confused state ... Chest pains ... Breathing difficulties ... Severe bleeding that cannot be stopped ... Severe allergic reactions ... Severe burns or scalds ... Major trauma, such as a road traffic accident or fall from a height”.

That can be checked out, if in doubt, on the SAS website. However, it may be that other medical advice should be sought first, such as from a general practitioner, pharmacist or optometrist.

I thank Jamie Halcro Johnston for raising again what is an important issue, and I add that much of what I have said came also from a paramedic.

Does Mr Stewart agree with Ruth Davidson that the £20 per week cut to universal credit should be reversed?

I refer to the joint agreement that was signed by the Scottish Government and organisations such as the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, the Scottish Trades Union Congress and the Institute of Directors, which states that no worker should be penalised if they are off work following medical advice relating to Covid-19. I have a constituent with long Covid, and she is being pressured by her employer. Does the agreement apply to people who have been diagnosed with long Covid?

I thank the committee for its short but comprehensive report. As others have done, I offer my thanks to all carers.

I welcome the carers allowance supplement, although it has reminded me—as if I needed to be reminded—of the complexity of the UK benefits system. To claim carers allowance, a person has to spend 35 hours a week caring for a disabled person who must be in receipt of certain disability benefits, such as attendance allowance. However, the twice yearly payment of the supplement is in advance of the introduction of Scottish carers assistance, which is on the cards.

Notwithstanding its limitations, the carers allowance supplement puts an extra £700 per annum into the pockets of carers. That is in contrast to the 33,000 carers in Scotland who will lose £20 a week following the cuts to universal credit—that is almost £1,000 a year. I was interested to see that Ruth Davidson opposes that cut. That is what happens when someone leaves this parish—they grow wings.

There is another rule of which I was not aware because I am not a benefits expert. Who is? The overlapping benefits rule disallows people from carers allowance. That matters if someone is a particular sort of carer. For example, for a pensioner in receipt of state pension, which is just above the carers allowance threshold, the rule prevents that person from getting the allowance and, as it follows that the additional payment in Scotland is piggybacking on that, they also do not get the carers allowance supplement. That is unfair.

I want to see that injustice addressed when we get the other benefit that is coming up—Scottish carers assistance. That will be an opportunity to cure some of the system’s ills. However, although I am very sympathetic to more money going to carers, I know that there is no money tree—I wish that there were. We have to know how we can pay for things and not make promises that we cannot pay for.

It is crystal clear, although members will not necessarily agree with me, that the UK benefits system is so complex that we would never choose to start from this point. It is extremely difficult for the Scottish Parliament to wedge its own benefits into another system. It would be far better if the benefits system were in the powers of the Parliament, so that we could integrate it, make it fair and undo the unjust complexity that prevents many people from getting benefits—even people who are entitled to benefit do not claim it, because the system is so bewildering.

Finally, I put on record my thanks to all carers: the young—as has been mentioned, many of them are very young indeed—and the old. Regardless of whether they receive carers allowance, their dedication mainly comes from love—love, duty and responsibility—and takes the burden away from the state. They deserve the money to back them up, and they deserve respite, too.

Many addicts are indeed victims of things that have happened in their life. I distinguish those people clearly from those who supply drugs. I welcome diversion where it is appropriate and tailored to the individual. Does the Lord Advocate agree that diversion is certainly not a soft option, but that there is a chance that the addict can break their destructive habit, which is not something that prison can often achieve?