Most members of Holyrood’s Health Committee have given their qualified backing to the principles of the Scottish Government’s controversial National Care Service, but warned that their support depends on ministers coming forward with far more details.
The legislation, currently making its way through Holyrood, will see the government set up “care boards” directly accountable to Scottish ministers who will take on functions and staff that are currently managed and run by local authorities and health boards.
READ MORE: Holyrood committee has 'significant concerns' over care reforms
Criticism of the bill has been mounting in recent months, with MSPs, councils, unions and charities and carer’s groups expressing concerns.
It has already been delayed to 2029.
In their report, produced after months of scrutiny, the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee said that while they appreciated that this is a ‘framework Bill’ - which means decisions on some of the finer details will be made later - the lack of information on how the NCS would operate was “concerning.”
MSPs said this had limited their ability to scrutinise the proposals effectively.
Ahead of the next parliamentary stage, they have called on ministers to “explore the possibility of establishing an expert legislative advisory group for the Bill to help guide the proposed co-design process".
The Committee has also given “due notice” to the Scottish Government that it will require additional time to take further evidence on the content of any amendments to the Bill.
Clare Haughey, the SNP MSP who is convener of the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee, said: “We welcome the Scottish Government taking on board the views and concerns of stakeholders and its plan to revise the original proposals, but it is essential details of these revised proposals are shared with the Committee in a timely manner and sufficient time is allowed for the Committee to undertake substantial further scrutiny ahead of formal Stage 2 proceedings.
“It is on this basis that a majority of our committee has concluded that it recommends that the Parliament should agree to the general principles of the Bill.”
Labour MSPs Paul Sweeney and Carol Mochan dissented from some of the Committee’s concluding recommendations on the general principles of the Bill.
Scottish Labour deputy leader Dame Jackie Baillie announced her party will not back the Bill at its first vote next week.
Speaking in Holyrood on Thursday, she also criticised the committee for backing the Bill.
Dame Jackie said the “page after page of criticism” in the report did not match with the final recommendation, and she asked Presiding Officer Alison Johnstone if there is a mechanism for the committee to look again at the report in light of changes made since the Bill was introduced.
Ms Johnstone said MSPs can table a motion under parliamentary rules that, if passed, would compel a committee to reconsider a report.
READ MORE: MSPs query SNP care shake-up costs after up to £1.2bn lopped off bill
SNP MSP Emma Harper said the committee’s support was welcome.
“This takes us a step closer to improving the quality, fairness and consistency of social care provision across Scotland; easing pressure on our NHS and representing a huge investment in those who deliver and receive care.
“Scotland can and will build a National Care Service that meets the needs of the people it will serve, and this Bill is instrumental in achieving that goal."
Colin Poolman, the Scotland Director of the Royal College of Nursing said: "As we’ve made clear throughout the process, we share the Scottish government’s desire to improve the quality and consistency of social care and community health services.
"But we’re still unclear how the Bill will achieve this or address the challenges facing a sector in crisis.
“Despite the pause to the Bill, we still have serious concerns about the lack of a detailed plan around how the NCS will operate or even a clear definition of what functions the NCS will be responsible for. Pushing ahead as it stands will do nothing to address the current crisis."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel