Seòmar agus comataidhean

Ministers have had no meetings with representatives of Serco Caledonian Sleepers Limited since 4 December 2015.

No. This information is commercially sensitive.

There has been no request for payment of this kind. Any future request will be considered in the relevant terms of the Caledonian Sleeper Franchise Agreement, and in the context of the process, including the involvement of the relevant trade union, agreed as part of the franchise.

Ministers met with representatives of Serco Group (in relation to Caledonian Sleeper operations) on:

23 March 2015, at the official launch of the franchise;

14 December 2015.

Ministers met with representatives of Serco Caledonian Sleepers Limited on:

23 March 2015, at the official launch of the franchise;

24 November 2015.

There have been numerous meetings between officials and representatives of both Serco Group and Serco Caledonian Sleepers Limited during mobilisation and operation of the franchise.

The franchise agreement specifies the schedule of meeting between officials and representatives of Serco Caledonian Sleepers Limited since the franchise commenced on 31 March 2015. The most prominent of these is the per-period (four weekly) franchise performance meeting. The purpose of this meeting and the nature of required supporting reports is described at schedule 11, paragraph 6 of the franchise agreement.

Within the UK, it is the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) who has responsibility for the safety of medicines. The Scottish Government received an update from the MHRA concerning the dangers of prescribing sodium valproate to women of child bearing age on 21 January 2015 and this was forwarded on to NHSScotland the same day.

NHS service change should be an open, transparent and inclusive process in which options are developed and discussed with the people and communities who are potentially affected. That engagement should be proportionate to the proposed service change, with major service changes subject to a wide-ranging public consultation where all reasonable steps are taken to take account of differences of view. Reaching a consensus view amongst stakeholders can frequently be difficult and the evidence finely balanced.

Responsibility for decision making and accountability rests with the boards and they have clear guidance to follow. They are supported in what can be a complex and often controversial process of informing and involving people by the Scottish Council, which also quality assures the process in cases of “major” change. This will be an on-going dialogue, which usually takes the form of emails, phone calls and meetings. Where patients, members of the public and MSPs have expressed views as part of the engagement process, these views should be taken into account by both the board and the Scottish Health Council. Notes of meetings and related papers can be accessed on request.

The Scottish Health Council budget for the current financial year is £2.3 million. Of that, £2.09 million relates to staff costs, the balance being for non-pay, office and other operational costs. The budget provides for the full range of Scottish Health Council activities supporting and monitoring the way NHS boards carry out their Patient Focus and Public Involvement responsibilities.

Since the Scottish Government’s CEL 04 (2010) guidance on ‘Informing, Engaging and Consulting people in Developing Health and Community Care Services’ issued in February 2010 there have been six service changes confirmed as ‘major’ service changes by the Scottish Government.

The Scottish Health Council (SHC) agreed those changes constituted ‘major’ service change in four of the six instances; in the case of the other two, these were confirmed as ‘major’ service changes at an early stage by the Scottish Government and so a view from SHC was not required to inform the decision. In none of these instances did the SHC disagree when an NHS board proposed major service change.

Five out of the six major service changes undertaken involved elements of closure or transfer of services, with the sixth involving a new build facility with services transferring across.

The procurator fiscal would not routinely correspond with a member of the public’s employer however much depends on the circumstances of the case and there may be situations where this will take place. For instance, the employer may be a victim or a witness and have a legitimate interest to request information from the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service which may give rise to correspondence being issued depending on any data protection issues that arise. The accused may be a regulated worker involved in working with children or other vulnerable groups and the allegations may raise concerns regarding the suitability of that person to be employed in such a situation. In such a situation it may be proportionate and necessary in the public interest to disclose information to the employer having taken into account the interests of the accused, the interests of justice and the protection of the interests of the public.

In relation to reports alleging criminal behaviour by a member of the public or an off duty police officer the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service endeavours to respond to all correspondence it receives within 20 working days and will generally correspond with any individuals or organisations who have a legitimate interest on a case by case basis and in accordance with data protection principles and constraints. However, where the allegation involves a police officer on duty the fiscal’s office would also normally correspond with the Professional Standards Department of Police Scotland and may, in certain circumstances, correspond with the Police Investigations and Review Commissioner.