���˿���

I have lodged amendment 1 in response to calls from stakeholders, and an emphasis by the committee in its stage 1 report, on the need for a co-operative approach to patient safety. I whole-heartedly agree with that principle, and therefore I am keen to clarify, with this amendment, that we expect such a co-operative spirit to extend to all public authorities that have functions relating to healthcare, as well as to healthcare providers.

I do not feel able to support Carol Mochan’s amendment 28, because, although we are all hopeful and expectant that a spirit of collegiate working to improve patient safety will extend as far as possible, I am mindful that we cannot propose to Parliament an amendment that is outside its competence. We are just not able to impose a duty on the Patient Safety Commissioner for England.

I move amendment 1.

In respect of amendment 1, our aspiration for the patient safety commissioner is that they work in a co-operative way as much as possible. Although I am unable to support Carol Mochan’s amendment 28, due to its seeking to impose a duty that is outwith our competence, I do not disagree with the spirit in which it has, I think, been lodged. In the event that the member moves the amendment, though, I urge members not to support it, on account of the competence issues that it presents.

Amendment 1 agreed to.

Although I have moved an amendment to drop section 4, recognising that there is existing legislative provision in the Equality Act 2010, I whole-heartedly encourage any steps by the commissioner to embrace the spirit of such communication in their public-facing activity.

Amendment 2 agreed to.

Section 5 agreed to.

Section 6—The planning process

Amendment 3 moved—[Jenni Minto]—and agreed to.

Section 7—Frequency of planning

Amendment 4 moved—[Jenni Minto]—and agreed to.

Section 7, as amended, agreed to.

After section 7

Amendment 5 moved—[Jenni Minto]—and agreed to.

Amendment 21 moved—[Sandesh Gulhane].

I am not able to support the amendment. The committee, in its stage 1 report, called on the Government to confirm that the commissioner will be able to address matters arising at the intersection of health and social care. I am happy to confirm on the record today that the commissioner’s role is about safety in healthcare, and there is nothing in the bill that would prevent the commissioner from dealing with healthcare that is provided in a social care context or any other context.

I hope that Paul Sweeney will accept that confirmation and will not press amendment 33, which, rather than clarifying matters, might create some doubt about whether the bill’s reference to “health care” includes healthcare that is provided in contexts other than social care. I therefore ask Paul Sweeney not to press amendment 33.

First, I thank the convener and the committee for inviting me along and for recognising the quite dramatic experiences that women have had as a result of transvaginal mesh surgery.

It is clear that, when we started setting up the surgery system for women who have been impacted, we wanted to design the processes with those women in mind and ensure that we did the right thing for them. There have been lots of discussions and surveys with women who have been impacted to find out how they feel the service should operate. Taking that learning on board has been incredibly important.

There is some advice on the NHS Inform website, but creating pamphlet literature to support women is incredibly important. We have listened to the women in order to ensure that it contains the right information, whether it is about the pathways for the referral system in the NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde service or the independent service.

I am pleased that we have listened to the women and are able to provide them with the information that they have highlighted is needed.

I am afraid that I cannot, but Greig Chalmers might be able to.

NSS has been sending out information to health boards, each of which has an individual who has been tasked with the responsibility of ensuring that there is an understanding of the complex mesh service in their health board area.

I refer the member to my earlier answer about the responsible officers in each health board, who have direct contact with NSS and the complex mesh surgical service.

To be fair, we are learning from the women who have experienced the situation that a lot of services could be improved. That is why I know that a lot of listening has been done. I appreciate that, at the start of this process, the women did not feel as though they were being listened to. So, to support them even more, listening has been absolutely key.

If anyone has experienced surgery, they will know that the best information that they can get is as much information as can be given, and a simple letter is sometimes not enough. That is why post-surgery phone calls to women have been introduced. That is incredibly important. I have suffered some surgery, and I know that you really do not take on board what people are saying during the first 24 hours after surgery. So, we need to find ways of keeping women more informed after their surgery.

It is also important to keep their families informed, because that is where the women’s main support will be once they have left the hospital environment. Improvements can be made, and I hope that that will happen. We have talked about the accountable officers in the health boards and how sending additional information to GPs should provide the level of support that women rightly expect.

That is a natural follow-on. Given that the service is improving its support for pre-referral and post-referral people, there has to be an indication on the patient’s records that that has happened, so that GPs and local health boards and their officials recognise that additional support may be required.

I have had meetings with groups that have concerns about treatment for other women’s conditions, and they have talked about that issue as well. I do not want to increase the pressures on the women’s health plan, but there is something to think about more holistically across health delivery for women in Scotland, to ensure that their aftercare is appropriate to their surgery and the support that they have had around it.