Hansard

I ask Christine Grahame to let me make a point that I need to make.

We accept and have argued consistently that the resources should come to Scotland, but I will not allow the SNP to use that argument to get into a narrow dispute with London. Rather, we should take a "fruitful"—to use Lord Sutherland's term—and constructive approach to the matter. We are much more likely to resolve financial issues in that way than if we adopt the approach that is being taken by Nicola Sturgeon, which she outlined today. I think that our approach would lead to a much more constructive settlement.

We say emphatically in our amendment that means of ensuring that Scotland receives full and equitable funding should be pursued, but not in the way that the SNP suggests. We will not authorise that approach. I presume that, if our considered amendment is so bad, we will not win any support for it. However, I am pleased to say that the Tories recognise that we are adopting a considered and rational approach. The minister must recognise that as an important signal that she does not have the full authority of the chamber to pursue yet another narrow-minded fight with London.

Labour's amendment addresses other issues, too. When Nicola Sturgeon was in opposition, she insisted that local authorities should have their financial requirements met. I hope that she can tell the chamber today what representations COSLA has made to the Government about the current financial year and what the Government intends to do to address those immediate issues. Can she commit to reporting back to Parliament on that vital matter? If it was important when she was in opposition, it is important today. She really should adopt a consistent approach.

We have considerable sympathy with the Tory amendment, and we will support it because it is rational and consistent. Although it does not rescue the motion, we see the logic behind it. It raises important issues about meeting the expectations of a number of Scots, and it is vital that we address those issues immediately. Elderly citizens in Scotland are looking for a resolution to the issues that the Tories have raised. Although I hope that our amendment will be agreed to, those issues must be addressed.

Lord Sutherland and the members of his group have provided a crucial service to the Parliament, not just because of the recommendations that they have developed; not just because they have produced a strategy for the stabilisation and the crucial sustainability of the policy—if properly directed, although that is still an "if"; and not just because they have facilitated a debate that ensures a greater understanding of what the policy means; but because they have raised the issue of demographic change to the top of the political agenda.

Fundamentally, Lord Sutherland has raised a significant issue in telling us that free personal and nursing care services

"are not delivered in isolation and in most local authorities the services sit within the broader range of community care services."

He has sparked a wider debate about what we, as a country, must care about in terms of the needs of our elderly citizens. We must ensure that they can make the life choices to enable them to live lives of quality, assisted by services of the highest standard.

This afternoon, Irene Oldfather will address the key issues of the standard and appropriateness of services. That is an important debate to have, and it is deeply disappointing that the Government, rather than address the issues that matter so much in the debate, wants to focus narrowly on what will give it an opportunity to fight with the United Kingdom Government. That is deeply disappointing, and the cabinet secretary should be doing better.

I move amendment S3M-1902.3, to leave out from "and urges" to end and insert:

"however, also notes the decision of the UK Benefit Commissioners that continued payment of attendance allowance to self funders would have been a breach of the current benefit rules; further notes the UK Government's Wanless review's suggestion of the alignment of the benefits system, including attendance allowance, with funding for social care, and therefore calls on the Scottish Government to enter into discussions with the UK Government, as part of the UK Government's review of social care, to ensure that Scotland receives a full and equitable share of the overall funds available for care of the elderly; urges the Scottish Government to undertake further work to re-assess all funding streams relevant to the care of the elderly and to come forward with proposals for the sustainable long-term funding of care of the elderly; notes that there is a funding gap in the current financial year, and calls on the Scottish Government to engage with COSLA immediately to achieve a resolution of the problem and report back to the Parliament before the summer recess."