– in the Scottish Parliament at on 7 March 2019.
1. To ask the Scottish Government under what circumstances a national health service board would limit the amount of necessary operations that a patient requires due to budgetary concerns. (S5O-02963)
No clinically necessary operation should be curtailed because of budgetary or other financial concerns. Funding for NHS Borders will increase to £207.7 million, which is a 44.8 per cent increase in real terms since 2006-07. In addition, NHS Borders will receive £987,000 to target specialties such as ophthalmology and radiology as part of the first tranche of funding to reduce waiting times.
I was contacted by a constituent who had gone through the whole process of being referred and put on the waiting list for a double hip operation. He was asked whether he would be willing to go to the Golden Jubilee hospital for his treatment and he agreed to that. I have to say that the treatment was very good, the operation was successful and he was very happy, although only one hip could be done at a time—we know that that is the clinically recommended approach. However, at his 12-week assessment he asked when he would be admitted for the operation on the other hip and he was told that there were no plans to do his other hip and that he would have to go back to the beginning and start again.
My question is not about my constituent himself but about the concern that he raises. When he tried to find out why NHS Lothian—it was that health board—had not approved having both hips done, which is the treatment for which he was referred, the only whisper that he got back was that the budget that was allocated was for only one hip. That raises some concerns.
Will the cabinet secretary assure others who might face that issue that they will not have the same experience?
If Ms Ballantyne emails me with some of the details of that case, I will look into the issue specifically. I am pleased that her constituent’s first operation went well. The situation that Ms Ballantyne described does not make sense to me and it does not sound correct. If she sends me the details I will look into it and, as soon as I have an answer I will ensure that she has an answer, too.
To go back to the first question that Michelle Ballantyne asked, on budgetary considerations, does the cabinet secretary agree that it is a bit rich for the Tories to talk budgets when their proposal to cut tax for the richest would have taken £500 million out of our budget, which pays for an awful lot of medical staff?
Ms Grahame is correct to say that the Tories’ proposal would have reduced our health budget by that amount. Fortunately, the Parliament took a different view. That money represents a significant number of nurses, doctors and allied health professionals, all of whom are committed to delivering the quality of healthcare that the Government is committed to and to ensuring the reduction in waiting times that I intend to see over the next period, as I have made very clear.