Chamber
Plenary, 23 Nov 2006
23 Nov 2006 · S2 · Plenary
Item of business
Adult Support and Protection (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
I beg Christine Grahame's pardon.
It may come as a surprise to members, although I hope that it does not, to learn that we are all getting older. We hope that we will continue to be able to live independent lives and will be in full control of our faculties for the rest of our lives, but it is a fact that a significant proportion of us will not. That means that we will require care and support, possibly in a regulated care setting. I hope that we will find ourselves in a setting in which the care is—as it is in the majority of cases—sympathetic, loving and safe.
It is not just in old age that care may be required. As the minister has said, people are now living longer with medical conditions that cause incapacity, such as strokes. Many people have increased dependency needs, require care and are less able to protect themselves from abuse or to deal with issues of poor care.
Young people with complex needs also move from the children's system into a very different adult world. It has become clear from previous work that has been undertaken by the Parliament—the Adults with Incapacity (Scotland) Act 2000 and the Mental Health (Care and Treatment) (Scotland) Act 2003—that further measures are needed, so we have this bill.
From what everybody has said, I think that it is recognised that the bill is a well-intentioned and, arguably, needed extension of the protection that the Executive has already given to those with incapacity. As many other members have said, this is undoubtedly a complex area and the bill perhaps involves intervention to a greater extent than has heretofore been the case in people's private family lives. The bill is not only about care that is given in the regulated sector, in which people have a job to do and it could be argued that they should be doing that job properly to the standards against which it can be measured. It also covers people who are cared for, often at great personal sacrifice, in their own homes by relatives. I and others in the chamber are members of the newly formed cross-party group on carers. We have heard evidence in members' business debates of the stress on individuals of caring for a loved one with incapacity.
A considerable amount of concern has been expressed in the debate about the detail of some of the measures and about their potential impact. However, the bill will set up a system whereby there will be a single point of control, and that can only be a good thing. It will place a duty on agencies to investigate suspected abuse or harm, will provide new powers to carry out assessments, will create a range of options for intervention and—crucially—will extend the powers to designate individuals who should not be allowed to work with people who require care. The extension of the vetting and barring process will be a significant benefit. The bill will do a number of other things, too, so at this stage we should agree to its general principles. However, as Roseanna Cunningham has pointed out, we should not simply go through a rubber-stamping exercise.
It should be acknowledged that there are major concerns. I hope that the minister will give some indication of the extent to which he acknowledges those concerns and how that recognition will influence his approach to stage 2. I invite him to comment on whether he agrees that, as things stand, there is a danger that we will create a hierarchy of legislation involving the Adults with Incapacity (Scotland) Act 2000, the Mental Health (Care and Treatment) (Scotland) Act 2003 and the bill, and that people might pick and choose the provisions that they will apply.
I urge the Parliament to support the bill's general principles on the basis that there is a gap in the existing legislation that requires to be filled, but I support Janis Hughes in her request that the minister and his officials take on board the genuine concerns that have been expressed on some aspects of the bill by members of all parties, and I hope that the minister will give us a clear indication of how he intends to address those at stage 2.
It may come as a surprise to members, although I hope that it does not, to learn that we are all getting older. We hope that we will continue to be able to live independent lives and will be in full control of our faculties for the rest of our lives, but it is a fact that a significant proportion of us will not. That means that we will require care and support, possibly in a regulated care setting. I hope that we will find ourselves in a setting in which the care is—as it is in the majority of cases—sympathetic, loving and safe.
It is not just in old age that care may be required. As the minister has said, people are now living longer with medical conditions that cause incapacity, such as strokes. Many people have increased dependency needs, require care and are less able to protect themselves from abuse or to deal with issues of poor care.
Young people with complex needs also move from the children's system into a very different adult world. It has become clear from previous work that has been undertaken by the Parliament—the Adults with Incapacity (Scotland) Act 2000 and the Mental Health (Care and Treatment) (Scotland) Act 2003—that further measures are needed, so we have this bill.
From what everybody has said, I think that it is recognised that the bill is a well-intentioned and, arguably, needed extension of the protection that the Executive has already given to those with incapacity. As many other members have said, this is undoubtedly a complex area and the bill perhaps involves intervention to a greater extent than has heretofore been the case in people's private family lives. The bill is not only about care that is given in the regulated sector, in which people have a job to do and it could be argued that they should be doing that job properly to the standards against which it can be measured. It also covers people who are cared for, often at great personal sacrifice, in their own homes by relatives. I and others in the chamber are members of the newly formed cross-party group on carers. We have heard evidence in members' business debates of the stress on individuals of caring for a loved one with incapacity.
A considerable amount of concern has been expressed in the debate about the detail of some of the measures and about their potential impact. However, the bill will set up a system whereby there will be a single point of control, and that can only be a good thing. It will place a duty on agencies to investigate suspected abuse or harm, will provide new powers to carry out assessments, will create a range of options for intervention and—crucially—will extend the powers to designate individuals who should not be allowed to work with people who require care. The extension of the vetting and barring process will be a significant benefit. The bill will do a number of other things, too, so at this stage we should agree to its general principles. However, as Roseanna Cunningham has pointed out, we should not simply go through a rubber-stamping exercise.
It should be acknowledged that there are major concerns. I hope that the minister will give some indication of the extent to which he acknowledges those concerns and how that recognition will influence his approach to stage 2. I invite him to comment on whether he agrees that, as things stand, there is a danger that we will create a hierarchy of legislation involving the Adults with Incapacity (Scotland) Act 2000, the Mental Health (Care and Treatment) (Scotland) Act 2003 and the bill, and that people might pick and choose the provisions that they will apply.
I urge the Parliament to support the bill's general principles on the basis that there is a gap in the existing legislation that requires to be filled, but I support Janis Hughes in her request that the minister and his officials take on board the genuine concerns that have been expressed on some aspects of the bill by members of all parties, and I hope that the minister will give us a clear indication of how he intends to address those at stage 2.
In the same item of business
The Deputy Presiding Officer (Trish Godman):
Lab
The next item of business is a debate on motion S2M-5042, in the name of Andy Kerr, that the Parliament agrees to the general principles of the Adult Support...
The Deputy Minister for Health and Community Care (Lewis Macdonald):
Lab
We introduced the Adult Support and Protection (Scotland) Bill principally to provide support and protection for those people in our communities who are vuln...
Christine Grahame (South of Scotland) (SNP):
SNP
Has the minister discussed the civil shrieval procedures that would have to take place? I see no mention of them. Will they be like interim interdicts? How w...
Lewis Macdonald:
Lab
We have taken appropriate advice on the procedures, to which I will be happy to return in the course of the afternoon to give Christine Grahame more detail o...
Shona Robison (Dundee East) (SNP):
SNP
The bill has had what I would describe as a difficult birth. Perhaps that is because, as I understand it, its origins lay with the Bichard proposals, from wh...
Mrs Nanette Milne (North East Scotland) (Con):
Con
This may be a somewhat repetitive debate.As we know, the general purpose of the bill is to provide an overall framework of support and protection for adults ...
Euan Robson (Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (LD):
LD
I am particularly pleased to take part in the debate. Legislation in this important area is clearly necessary.The reforms in part 1 of the bill are, frankly,...
The Deputy Presiding Officer:
Lab
It may be helpful if I indicate that at this stage in the debate I am not applying the normal time limits.
Euan Robson:
LD
Thank you. In that case, I will be slightly more expansive than I would otherwise have been.It is clear that statutory adult protection committees will be va...
Roseanna Cunningham (Perth) (SNP):
SNP
It is often said that the committee system is the heart and soul of what happens in the Scottish Parliament, combining as it does the functions of select and...
Janis Hughes (Glasgow Rutherglen) (Lab):
Lab
In my time on the Health Committee, we have scrutinised a raft of legislation on many subjects, and the bill is definitely up there with those that have enge...
Christine Grahame (South of Scotland) (SNP):
SNP
As some members might know, I come to the bill against the background of the Miss X case, in which a lady with learning difficulties suffered horrific abuse ...
Section 9, entitled “Examination of records etc”, says in subsection (1):
"A council officer may require any person holding health, financial or other records relating to an individual whom the officer knows or believes to be an ad...
Lewis Macdonald:
Lab
I seek clarification from Christine Grahame as to which places she thinks should not be included in the bill, because I think that the intention is evident.
Christine Grahame:
SNP
Such situations occur when people have capacity and against their will, but the bill would allow a council officer to go to their bank and look at their bank...
Euan Robson:
LD
The point is that if we put such committees on a statutory footing, there will be no doubt that they should exist. Although the Borders committee was born of...
Christine Grahame:
SNP
I cannot agree. The process is happening in many places in Scotland. The chief social work inspector could make plain through her guidance that that is what ...
Christine May (Central Fife) (Lab):
Lab
I think that I may be the only non-member of the Health Committee to participate in the debate so far.
Roseanna Cunningham:
SNP
No. Christine Grahame is not on the committee.
Christine May:
Lab
I beg Christine Grahame's pardon.It may come as a surprise to members, although I hope that it does not, to learn that we are all getting older. We hope that...
Dr Jean Turner (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (Ind):
Ind
When I first started to read the bill, I realised that there was a need for people to be able to enter patients' homes to assess them but, as I read through ...
Christine May:
Lab
Does Dr Turner agree that some of the dreadful cases in the past have arisen because of reluctance to share such information?
Dr Turner:
Ind
Christine May is correct. People need training in how they should use and share information. I believe that people should share information. I also believe t...
Helen Eadie (Dunfermline East) (Lab):
Lab
I am in no doubt why the people of Scotland need the Adult Support and Protection (Scotland) Bill. It is clear to me, having sat through the Health Committee...
Christine May:
Lab
Yes I am.
Helen Eadie:
Lab
I am so sorry—I meant Christine Grahame, not Christine May.The response to those questions by Adrian Ward of the Law Society of Scotland was compelling. He s...
Shona Robison:
SNP
In which cases would the member think it appropriate to override the views of an adult with capacity who did not want an intervention?
Helen Eadie:
Lab
I will return to that point later in my speech. The point was covered by a Mr Graham, a physician who gave evidence to the committee on the bill.Mr Ward cont...
Robin Harper (Lothians) (Green):
Green
During the previous session of Parliament, in 2002 to 2003, I tried to have hate crime legislation extended to all the groups that are identified under Europ...
Euan Robson:
LD
It should be clear to the minister from the debate that parts 2 to 4 of the bill will not cause him a great deal of difficulty. The interest will focus on pa...