2. One of the foremost reasons for growing pressure on the national health service is a growing crisis in care provision. The sector is on the brink of collapse. Demand for high-quality care homes for our elderly is rising and Scotland needs at least 1,200 more care home places a year to meet it. Can the First Minister tell us how she plans to do that?
First, although I recognise the challenges in social care, I do not agree with Richard Leonard that the sector is on the verge of collapse. I think that that does a disservice to those who work in it.
In the current financial year, almost half a billion pounds of front-line NHS spending will have been invested in social care services and the integration of health and social care. That will continue to support the delivery of, amongst other things, the living wage for adult care workers and increase payments for free personal and nursing care. In the next financial year, we will give an additional £66 million to local government to bring into force the Carers (Scotland) Act 2016 and maintain payment of the living wage. Over the past three years, funding through the national care home contract has increased by more than 13 per cent, which helps independent care providers to invest in their staff and the quality of their service and to make a return on their business.
There are some care homes—those run by Bield Housing & Care, for example—that are in difficulty right now, and our priority is to ensure continuity of care for those residents with no compromise whatever in the quality of their care. In fact, Scottish Government officials will be meeting Bield today, I think, and the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Sport will meet the company later this month. We will do everything we can to protect the interests of residents in such very regrettable situations.
I am glad that the First Minister has mentioned Bield care homes. Last Saturday, Labour MSPs attended a save our Bield campaign group meeting in Glasgow and heard first hand from families, telling of the stress that their frail, elderly relatives are under, because they are about to be evicted from their specialist care homes. These are people in their 70s and 80s who are being evicted—some are even in their 90s. One woman, Nancy Sutherland, is 94; she has been a Bield tenant for 23 years and, along with 166 other elderly people, she is about to lose her home. Mrs Sutherland has dementia, so every day she relives the trauma; every day, she asks her daughter where she will be moving to; and every day, her anxiety levels rise. They rise, because her daughter has no answer. Does the First Minister?
I appreciate that Richard Leonard has raised this issue; it is important in general, but it is particularly important for the residents of Bield care homes. It is exactly because we recognise how unsettling—indeed, how traumatic—this decision has been and will be for residents, families and employees that the Scottish Government will continue to work to do everything we can to guarantee continuity of care for Bield residents and ensure that there is no compromise whatever in the quality of their care.
Since being alerted to Bield’s decision, we have engaged with the company, the Care Inspectorate and the chief officers of integration authorities to ensure that plans are being put in place for residents. As I said in my previous answer, officials are meeting Bield today and the cabinet secretary will personally meet the company later this month to discuss the progress of that work.
The national contingency planning group, which includes the Government, the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, the Care Inspectorate, integration authorities, trade unions and providers, is also engaged on this issue. In particular, the group considers how national and local partners are managing the impact of such decisions in respect of residents, their families and, of course, the workforce. This is a vital issue, which is why the Scottish Government has been and will continue to be engaged in making sure that the interests of residents are protected.
I thank the First Minister for the tone of that answer. I remind her that she told the chamber last March that she was
“absolutely committed ... to protect the most vulnerable people and ensure that supported accommodation is put on a sustainable and secure financial footing.”—[
Official Report
, 2 March 2017; c 24.]
I am bound to ask the First Minister where that protection and commitment to those most vulnerable people are now. Scottish Care’s chief executive, Dr Donald Macaskill, has warned her Government that the care home sector is in a fragile position. He has said that the Bield situation should
“act as a wake-up call” to properly fund care in Scotland, yet we know that, instead, it faces cuts. Week after week, my party makes the case against those cuts—the First Minister’s cuts—which affect people such as Mrs Sutherland and too many others like her. The First Minister’s care policies are failing. Surely she must see that the time has come for her Government to stop the cuts to lifeline services, or will she continue to fail people like Mrs Sutherland?
I am not sure whether Richard Leonard listened to the first answer that I gave him, in which I pointed out that, over the past three years, funding for the national care home contract has actually increased by more than 13 per cent. That is a recognition that the Government understands the challenges that the care home sector faces. We are working with care organisations, including with Scottish Care, to address those challenges, and we will continue to do so. I have already addressed the issue around Bield care homes, but as well as the care home sector we are seeing an extension of care delivered at home. The hours of home care delivered in Scotland have increased in the past year by 11 per cent, so across all those different aspects of care we are taking action to ensure that the interests of our older people are protected, and t hat will become increasingly important because of the ageing nature of our population.
I am not particularly keen to get into a political to and fro over an issue that is important to the interests of so many older people, but Richard Leonard has mentioned the budget. We are putting forward a budget that is about protecting public services, investing an additional £400 million in our national health service, and giving a fair deal to local authorities. Yesterday, we agreed with the Green amendment to the motion that said that we are open to amendments from other parties ahead of the next stage of the budget. It was regrettable that, on a motion that talked about protecting public services and giving a fair wage increase to public sector workers, instead of voting with the SNP and the Greens, Labour actually voted with the Tories against those things. It is utterly inexplicable.
If Richard Leonard wants to engage properly in the remainder of the budget process—assuming that he can get a tax policy together before then—I will welcome that, and we can have constructive discussions about how to ensure that we continue to deliver on the very important issues that he has raised today.
There are some constituency questions, the first of which is from Kenneth Gibson.