Seòmar agus comataidhean

I do not think so, and I think that the evidence bears out why that is the case. In my opening remarks, I talked about the fact that we are in a much stronger position in relation to the number of people in hospital with Covid. However, although that figure is falling, it is still double what it was just before Christmas.

Before Christmas, in this committee and externally, I used language that warned about the galloping nature of omicron and what that would do to hospital admissions, and it did, indeed, affect hospital admissions in the way that I said that it would. Hospital admissions reached very significant levels—at its height, the number of people in hospital with Covid came very close to 1,700. Comparatively, that was a very high level, and it got there very quickly, at a time when the rest of the health system was under all the acute pressures that winter brings.

Therefore, I think that the preventative measures that we put in place were necessary to avoid us getting to a position where our health service was overwhelmed. It is clear from looking at the pace of the increase in hospital admissions that took place prior to Christmas that, if we had not acted but just allowed omicron to take its course, the health service would have been overwhelmed. I am pretty certain of that.

I do not know whether Professor Leitch wants to add to that.

We will have to consider that issue. At this stage, however, my answer is a firm no. We have to continue with the daily publication of that information to inform the public about the state of the pandemic. Although the outlook is much better, there are still—on average—more than 6,500 to 7,000 cases daily. In previous periods of the pandemic, those numbers would have absolutely horrified us. Obviously, there is an awful lot more protection within the population through the booster vaccination programme.

We will consider those issues. However, at this stage, it is important that we continue to furnish the debate with that quality of information to ensure that there is transparency around the state of the pandemic and the decisions that Government has to take in the light of that data.

I reassure Mr Rowley that the Government is already investing in excess of £1 billion in the NHS recovery plan to do exactly what he asks of us. It is appropriate and important that we do exactly that.

Secondly, there is limited private sector capacity in Scotland, so the priority for the Government is to ensure that we work with health boards to suppress Covid and maximise the available capacity for non-Covid healthcare, so that we can rebalance the health service and so that we do not have to return to the situation that we have, regrettably, been in for the past two years of having to allocate an increasing proportion of our healthcare resources to dealing with Covid. It is important that we rebalance that to deal with routine treatments.

There is a variety of sources that the Government would go to. There is a lot of expert opinion available. During my time as education secretary, I spent some time in fascinating discussions with Professor Cath Noakes, a renowned expert on ventilation who, if my memory serves me correctly, is a professor at the University of Leeds. She provided substantive advice to me on those questions. There is a lot of good advice available for us on those questions and it is important that we take it from the people with the right discipline of view.

This relates to the answer that I gave to Mr Rowley a second ago, and I will maybe bring in Professor Leitch on this point as well. A substantial amount of data is already published on the number of people who are receiving treatment for particular conditions, the number of people who are waiting for treatment for a range of conditions and the length of time that those individuals are waiting.

A wide cross-section of information is available on that question, which allows the public to judge what progress has been made on addressing the health challenges that we face. Members of the public will be able to look at performance today compared with performance during the pandemic at its height and performance prior to the pandemic to see the comparative situation in which we find ourselves in relation to the disruption that the pandemic has created.

I assure the committee that the Government is taking steps to ensure that as much as possible is done through the health service recovery plans and the capacity that we have and that we are creating to ensure that any backlog of treatment is properly and fully addressed. Those data sets are available for us to judge performance on that question.

Just the two?

Yes.

The JCVI has decided not to recommend further booster vaccinations—which would be a fourth dose—for the over-80s, although it specifically considered that proposition. We await further advice from the JCVI about what might become the more routine approach to vaccination for future programmes. Obviously, that will depend significantly on the course of the pandemic, what we experience between now and then, and whether a new variant emerges.

I return to a point that I have rehearsed with the committee before. In late November, the Cabinet took a view on the Tuesday that the pandemic was quite benign, and, by the Thursday, we had omicron. Things can change very quickly, and we stand ready to deploy whatever is necessary to deliver on the vaccination advice that we receive from the JCVI. What reassures us is our solid experience of delivering a colossal vaccination programme with significant efficiency and effectiveness. That should give us confidence that we can pivot in order to take forward whatever the JCVI proposes.

The reason why we are taking time to gather evidence and consult is that we would rather put in place a strategic framework with significant longevity to give people confidence and certainty about how we intend to position ourselves to manage the pandemic. We think—we hope—that we have the opportunity to do that. Now that we are in a slightly becalmed situation, we can set out our assessment of the current situation, our view of what approaches might be necessary to manage the pandemic on an on-going basis, and the steps that we would need to take should we have to intensify any of our actions for dealing with the pandemic.

We therefore hope that the framework will have a longer perspective than we were perhaps able to give during the pandemic, when, of necessity, we had to change some of the foundations of our framework approach to reflect the fact that the course of the pandemic had changed significantly right in front of us.

It might be helpful if I place on the record some remarks about the various regulations.

Before the committee are motions to approve two emergency health protection instruments. The Health Protection (Coronavirus) (Requirements) (Scotland) Amendment (No 2) Regulations 2022 implement the second phase of the lifting of the omicron response measures, removing indoor capacity limits for live events as well as physical distancing and table service requirements, and allowing nightclubs to reopen. On the reopening of nightclubs, the regulations also make a small change to the definition of “late night premises” in relation to the certification requirements.

The Health Protection (Coronavirus) (Requirements) (Scotland) Amendment (No 3) Regulations 2022 amend the face covering requirements so that, in the circumstances that are set out in the principal regulations in which a person is permitted not to wear a face covering because they are at least 2m away from other people, that distance is reduced to at least 1m.

Also before the committee is a motion on the Health Protection (Coronavirus) (International Travel and Operator Liability) (Scotland) Amendment (No 2) Regulations 2022, which add the Dynamic New Athletics event to the list of specified competitions in the principal regulations. That indoor athletics event is due to take place on 5 February 2022 at the Emirates arena in Glasgow. The amendment is being made to allow international sportspeople and ancillary staff who are coming to Scotland to compete in the event to be eligible for the elite sportsperson exemption.

Finally, there are the regulations on the early expiry of provisions in paragraphs 18(1) and (3) of schedule 4 to the Coronavirus (Scotland) Act 2020. The provisions in question allowed the Parole Board for Scotland to make use of a live link for the entirety of parole proceedings during the Covid pandemic, rather than conducting face-to-face hearings. The Parole Board (Scotland) Amendment Rules 2022, which were laid on 24 January 2022, make equivalent permanent provision in the rules that will take effect from the point of expiry. That will avoid any gap in the Parole Board’s ability to conduct remote hearings and will future proof its proceedings in case there is a future pandemic or another reason why face-to-face hearings would not be advisable.

Motions moved,

That the COVID-19 Recovery Committee recommends that the Health Protection (Coronavirus) (Requirements) (Scotland) Amendment (No. 2) Regulations 2022 (SSI 2022/13) be approved.

That the COVID-19 Recovery Committee recommends that the Health Protection (Coronavirus) (International Travel and Operator Liability) (Scotland) Amendment (No. 2) Regulations 2022 (SSI 2022/25) be approved.

That the COVID-19 Recovery Committee recommends that the Health Protection (Coronavirus) (Requirements) (Scotland) Amendment (No. 3) Regulations 2022 (SSI 2022/29) be approved.—[John Swinney]

Motions agreed to.