Seòmar agus comataidhean

The Scottish Government is committed to developing and implementing within this parliamentary term a revised contracting framework for community pharmacy NHS pharmaceutical services, underpinned by a review of existing Control of Entry, funding arrangement and introduction of a Performers List for the Pharmacy profession, as outlined in Achieving excellence in pharmaceutical care: a strategy for Scotland strategy.

Any future amendments to the regulations will uphold the necessity for successful applications to be granted around set criteria. These include neighbourhood requirements, the adequacy of existing pharmaceutical services in an area (from registered pharmacy premises), and the necessity or desirability of to secure adequate pharmaceutical services in an area.

Colposcopy capacity has been impacted by Covid-19, regrettably resulting in longer than usual waiting times in some Health Boards.

In recognition of this, last year we provided over £660,000 additional funding to NHS Ayrshire & Arran, NHS Greater Glasgow & Clyde, NHS Highland, NHS Lothian and NHS Tayside to support capacity in colposcopy provision. The funding was used to enhance capacity through additional workforce and extra clinics, including at weekends.

We will continue to work closely with Boards who are facing challenges in order to remobilise services as soon as possible.

The current guidance can be found on the Central Alerting System (CAS). In the largest clinical trial (RECOVERY RS) CPAP reduced the risk of death or intubation (need to go on a ventilator). CPAP can be delivered via a tight fitting facemask, helmet or hood. Smaller clinical trials of helmet/hood CPAP have suggested that it may have equivalent benefit to facemask CPAP but more data analysis is planned. High flow nasal oxygen is a form of non-invasive respiratory support which can be used to facilitate breaks from CPAP and is better tolerated (more comfortable) than CPAP, but doesn’t improve outcome on its own. Whether facemasks, helmets or hoods are used in clinical practice is a decision left to individual boards and units, however they can be ordered if needed and many boards stock them routinely.

I refer the member to the answer to question S6W-06217 on 16 February 2022. All answers to written Parliamentary Questions are available on the Parliament's website, the search facility for which can be found at: https://www.parliament.scot/chamber-and-committees/written-questions-and-answers

I have asked Teresa Medhurst, Interim Chief Executive of the Scottish Prison Service (SPS), to respond. Her response is as follows:

I refer the member to the answer to question S6W-05574 on 20 January 2022. All answers to written Parliamentary Questions are available on the Parliament's website, the search facility for which can be found at https://www.parliament.scot/chamber-and-committees/written-questions-and-answers

The exact data requested is not held. The Cancer Waiting Times data does not report on average waits, however median waits are reported. The information below is for urological cancers and is provided both for 62-day and 31-day standard. The 62-day standard refers to ‘urgent’ referrals only and waiting times are from ‘urgent’ referral to the start of their first treatment for a newly diagnosed cancer. The 31-day standard is for ‘all’ referrals and waiting times are from the decision to treat to the start of their first treatment for a newly diagnosed cancer. Please note: the waiting times for 62-day and 31-day standards are not comparable as both standards refer to different cohorts of patients.

The Median length of wait between referral to first treatment (62-day standard) for urology cancers in 2017 was 49 days, 47 days in 2018, 45 days in 2019, 39 days in 2020 and 44 days in 2021.

The Median length of wait between decision to treat and first treatment (31-day standard) for urology cancers in 2017 was 12 days, 13 days in 2018, 11 days in 2019, 8 days in 2020 and 11 in 2021.

To note the median values for the year 2021 are based on the data that has already been published i.e. data for the months of January- September 2021.

As previously confirmed in an update to the Public Audit Committee in December 2021, the final costs of the electrification of the route are £221m.

The project enabled new faster, longer, greener trains to operate on the route providing passengers at Stirling with quicker journeys and it also provided step-free access to Stirling Station Platforms 9 and 10 via an upgraded footbridge and new lift.

Works also included a programme of route clearance and major road bridge improvements, notably including reconstruction of Shore Road and Kerse Road bridges in Stirling.

The consultation phase of Scotrail’s review into Ticket Offices closed on 2 February and Transport Focus, the independent watchdog for transport users, will collate responses and also provide their own view in the consultation process. I will await the results of this analysis before making any final decision on this matter.

The majority of investment has been in relation to the Stirling-Dunblane-Alloa electrification and improvement work, and I refer the member to the answer to question S6W-05903 on 21 february 2022 for that detail. All answers to written Parliamentary Questions are available on the Parliament's website, the search facility for which can be found at https://www.parliament.scot/chamber-and-committees/written-questions-and-answers

In addition to the referenced rail investment, we have awarded £500,000 through our Bus Partnership Fund to the Forth Valley Bus Alliance for improvement on key bus corridors in the region. £230,000 of this funding will look at key bus corridors in Stirling.

The member is referred to the answers to S6W-05473 on 24 January 2022 and S6W-06312 on 21 February 2022. All answers to written Parliamentary Questions are available on the Parliament's website, the search facility for which can be found at https://www.parliament.scot/chamber-and-committees/written-questions-and-answers