Seòmar agus comataidhean

I do not know what the exact costs associated with that are, but the UK Government has decided to fund the GMC to support the introduction of the regulation of PAs and AAs. Eventually, we will move to the normal self-funding model, which the majority of the regulators, if not all of them, operate.

How we use PAs and AAs in NHS Scotland will be determined by us. That will be the approach that we will take through the group that we have set up. As I mentioned, it will consider the role of PAs and AAs.

We have taken a very different approach from that of the UK Government, about whose approach to the matter the BMA has flagged up concerns. The use of PAs and AAs is a key part of the UK Government’s workforce plan, and a lot of concerns have been raised about the proposed fairly rapid expansion of their use. I understand that, which is why we have taken a different approach here in Scotland. I have outlined to the BMA that we will take much more of an incremental and evidence-based approach to how PAs and AAs will be used in NHS Scotland and how they will be deployed and utilised in the workforce. We have put in place a process to manage that.

We do not intend to replicate the rapid expansion of the use of PAs and AAs that the UK Government is planning in NHS England. We are taking a much more evidence-based approach to their use and how that will be defined, which will be much more limited.

I go back to my earlier answer. There was a debate around that, and it was part of the consultation in which we asked for feedback on which body would be the most appropriate to regulate PAs and AAs. The very clear majority—just under 60 per cent—said that the GMC should be responsible for that. The GMC has also been clear that it believes that it is capable of carrying out that regulatory function, and it has already begun putting arrangements in place to manage the process. It gave evidence to the committee, and we have met with it and discussed the matter.

I used to be regulated by the Health and Care Professions Council; it regulates a range of bodies and different professional groups, and I do not think that that causes confusion for the public. The idea of another regulator taking on an additional bit of regulatory work is not greatly difficult for the public to understand.

No—it will not be sufficient. It is one aspect. Part of the challenge around social care comes from the fact that we, as a society, have not valued it as much as we value other professional groups, particularly when comparing social care with health. That is a wider societal issue, which we have to be honest and open about, but the consequences of not valuing social care are now clear, given the challenge that it now faces.

Pay is one part of the matter. The other important aspect is to see social care as a career of choice, with a career pathway and progression and opportunities stemming from that. We are exploring whether we could do more to create career pathways in social care, to encourage people to go into it and build up experience within it, and to pursue opportunities to go into other professional groupings.

One area of work that we are considering is the potential creation of pathways into regulated professions, perhaps through approaches such as the nursing apprenticeship model, so that someone’s extensive experience in social care will allow them to progress into some of the regulated professions through a different route from those that are available at present. Creating career pathways is critical to encouraging people to go into social care.

As I say, pay is one part of it, but social care has to be a credible career option for people, and we need to do a lot more around that. Some of the work that we are doing is aimed at encouraging people who are going into social care by providing them with specific routes into other professional groupings if that is what they choose at some point in the future.

Is this in relation to people with long Covid not having access to—

Do you mean for long Covid?

We are on a path to understanding long Covid much more effectively. You might be aware that quite a bit of global research is taking place to understand the impact of long Covid and the most appropriate treatments for it.

My understanding is that, as it stands, no single treatment type is appropriate for long Covid patients. We often have to try to provide a holistic form of treatment. For example, the service that is being offered in Glasgow—the long Covid pathway—has a range of different clinical inputs, from physiotherapy, through occupational therapy to psychological services. All of those are about trying to address some of the issues that can present with patients who experience long Covid.

It is fair to say that we are in a learning environment on how we treat long Covid. From some of the patients with long Covid whom I have met, I know that its presentation is variable and they often have different needs. That is why some of our NHS boards look to provide services much more holistically with a range of different supports that can be provided to patients and to tailor those to best reflect patients’ circumstances.

We are all learning more about long Covid. That will continue to influence how we intend to deliver services for patients with long Covid in the future.

The majority of health boards have those pathways in place now. Those that do not are carrying out the work at the moment and I would expect those pathways to be in place this year. The funding has been made available for them this year as part of the £10 million programme so there is no reason for the boards not to achieve that. We will continue to monitor their progress.

Going back to my earlier point, I make it clear that the clinical advice not just at a Scottish and UK levels but at the global level is that Covid-19 should now be managed as a seasonal infection and in the way that we manage other seasonal infections such as flu, because the level of vaccinations that have now been provided to the population gives us much greater protection. Our intention is to continue to manage Covid-19 on that basis.

If the clinical advice changes at some point and we have to take further action, we will respond to that. However, the present advice is that we should continue to manage things as we are managing them and in the way that we manage other seasonal infections.

The responsibility for the delivery of primary care within the local area, and the contract, is directly with the health board. I would expect the local community to engage with the health board, and the health board to engage with them, around how they are addressing the issue of concern around ensuring adequate general practice services in their area. I would expect the health board to be proactive in doing that. If it is not and there is a need for it to do so, I would be more than happy to ensure that it engages with the community in Braemar. It is important that there is a level of local understanding of the most appropriate way to deliver services locally in the primary care setting.