Elder Care

Speech by Ross Finnie on Thu 29th Oct 2009

Elder Care

The Deputy Presiding Officer (Alasdair Morgan): The next item of business is a debate on the reshaping of the future care of older people.

Ross Finnie (West of Scotland) (LD): As always, the difficulty in being the last of the front-bench spokespeople to speak in a subject debate is that all the useful statistics that have been provided by the various organisations have been copiously articulated by all the previous speakers.

It is given and accepted that Scotland's ageing population is graphically illustrated by recent population statistics. We know that. As Mary Scanlon said, we are talking about a valuable section of our community, which is a point that I want to share. In general, we should regard the fact that we are able to live longer as an achievement-something to be proud of, not as a great challenge; we should not think, "Oh dear, what a pity." Of course, the purpose of the debate is to acknowledge that sections of that community need our special care and attention. Since last we debated this subject, the only real difference other than the exponential growth of that population-is that difficulties that are largely a consequence of the financial crisis have arisen.

On individuals' ability to look after themselves-which we wish to encourage-real problems are arising with pension arrangements. That is not a matter for this Parliament, but it is a vital component of our attention to care for the elderly. It is clear that those problems will cause elderly people real concern, because their pension provision may not meet-and is not meeting-their expectations. My colleague Robert Brown will expand on that point in his speech.

Another issue is the impact on carers. Johann Lamont and Mary Scanlon made much of those who care. Recently, a lot of care in Scotland has been provided through, and funded by, charitable organisations. How tragic it is, therefore, for us to read some of the material that has emerged recently from the Princess Royal Trust that shows that not only have those smart bankers fraudulently obtained their bonuses, but those who worked for Lloyds TSB have brought an eminently great charitable organisation to a shuddering halt. I hope that, as they live on their inflated pensions, they might have some conscience about what they have done to hundreds of thousands of people in our community. The carers who, with charitable support, were able to offer such vital care to our elderly people are now in danger of being unable to do so. The tragedy of our banking crisis and the rapacious prosecution of self-interest by those who ran those banks is now being seen by those of us who operate in the community. That is one of the major differences since we last debated the subject.

Johann Lamont and Mary Scanlon majored on the issue of our being able to get care out of the institutional setting and into the community setting. I make no apology for getting into the same territory. As we look forward, we have to do so very carefully indeed. I think that there is unanimity in the chamber about the need to get care out of the institutional setting and into the community, but we have to be honest and admit that real difficulties are emerging not just in that transfer but in the way in which care homes and less-than-institutionalised arrangements are operating, how firms and other organisations are being employed and how they are deploying that service.

The "Panorama" investigation and the Herald article are not lone examples. There are problems about the nature of care that should not be described as institutional for individuals whose preferred option might be to live in their own homes but for whom that is not an option. The model that has been designed throughout local authorities cannot be said to be in any way providing a satisfactory alternative. Mary Scanlon is right: we need to look very carefully at that in taking this whole issue forward. In addition to the "Panorama" programme, there is the issue that Rhona Brankin raised earlier about inappropriate prescription of drugs. Regardless of whether that constitutes elder abuse, it still has to be roundly condemned.

The minister should also be aware that, as local authorities struggle with the mantra of getting people out of institutions and into communities, clear examples throughout the country-I know of an example close by in the West of Scotland, in Renfrewshire-show that the bedblocking statistics focus almost exclusively on the local authority's inability to be satisfied that the provision that it can make is suitable. Sadly, that means that we return to increased bedblocking and the consequent incurring of unnecessary costs and cost burdens for social care budgets in the local authorities that are affected.

Shona Robison: I do not want to make a big issue of the matter, but does Ross Finnie acknowledge where we are with delayed discharge, which is the preferred term? We have a small number of delayed discharges-one is too many for me; I want none-but we are a million miles away from the days when hundreds of people were in beds but who should not have been. The latest figure is 55: it was 627 in 2006-07. Does he acknowledge that we have made progress? There is a way to go, but we are a long way from where we were.

The Deputy Presiding Officer (Trish Godman): Mr Finnie should finish now.

Ross Finnie: I am happy to accept the more refined term "delayed discharge".

What the minister says might be right. My point is not about the total numbers; my point is that it is clear in some local authority areas that any increase relates singularly to elderly people for whom appropriate care is not available in their communities. Renfrewshire Council's budget this year shows that the council expects an increase in its social care spending as a result.

The debate is about a huge, vital and multifaceted subject. It concerns a section of our community who demand and deserve the best care. Elderly people are a vital component and they should not only be cared for, but be in a condition to make a much-valued contribution to society. They should not find themselves a blight or a burden on our society.