§ 1. Mr. DunnachieTo ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement on the future of the elderly in long-term hospital care.
§ The Minister of State, Scottish Office (Mr. Michael Forsyth)The health care needs of the elderly will continue to be the Government's highest priority.
§ Mr. DunnachieWhat steps have been taken properly to assess the elderly before they are committed to long-term hospitalisation or nursing home care? Will the Minister take a leaf out of the book of the Northern Ireland people, who have decided that only consultants involved in geriatric medicine should assess people's needs?
§ Mr. ForsythThe responsibility for care in the community will lie with local authorities and guidance will be provided on that. Health care needs are a matter for the consultants. The hon. Gentleman will be aware that we plan to ensure by April next year that care plans are agreed between health authorities and local authorities so that elderly people's needs from the various agencies can be properly met.
§ Mr. Tom ClarkeWill the Minister tell the House how it would help care in the community if the Greater Glasgow health board went ahead with the proposal to close the Stoneyetts and Birdston hospitals in my constituency? If the chairman of the health board continues to decline the invitation to come to a public meeting so that everyone involved can have a say in the decision, and if the Minister also declines the invitation, will the Minister think again, and encourage the board to think again? Does the Minister accept that if those tragic closures take place, they will be a major blow for community care in my constituency?
§ Mr. ForsythIt is for the Greater Glasgow health board to decide how best to provide for care within its area. Where closure decisions have been taken, they require the approval of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State. On the provision of care for the elderly in Greater 276 Glasgow, I pay tribute to the splendid efforts of Laurence Peterken and the chairman of the board to ensure that better facilities are made available for the elderly and I commend them for being prepared to see the removal of facilities that are not up to standard and their replacement with facilities that are more appropriate to the needs of the next century.
§ Mr. John MarshallDoes my right hon. Friend agree that the number of people being cared for now under this Government is dramatically higher than it was in 1979 and that the amount of assistance being given to the elderly is much higher in real terms than the Labour party ever managed?
§ Mr. ForsythThe assistance provided in the health service is greater not only than the Labour party ever imagined, but than it promised in its last manifesto. The growth in expenditure in the health service is more than the Labour party promised the electorate, although Labour still accuses the Government of not investing enough. My hon. Friend is absolutely right to point out that there is more provision for the elderly. There are about an extra 1,700 beds. Substantially more patients are being treated. This year 900,000 more patients are being treated than in 1979.
§ Mr. DewarIs the Minister satisfied that Greater Glasgow health board can defend its decision to bring in commercial companies to build and operate long-term hospital provision for the elderly on the basis that those profit-driven companies can provide better and more stimulating care than the board's own staff in its hospitals? Are such arrangements really a question of patient care or are they cost-cutting exercises? Can the Minister perhaps comment on the difficulties that he sees ahead in 1992–93 when the Scottish health authorities revenue equalisation —SHARE–formula will take another ³10 million from the Greater Glasgow health board budget, which is already under severe pressure?
§ Mr. ForsythThe hon. Gentleman should know that with the health service reforms the money will follow the patient. As he has been busily opposing them, I am surprised that he is pleading the case for Glasgow in those terms. With regard to private developments and partnerships between the private sector on care for the elderly, there is no choice of the kind that the hon. Gentleman suggests. They are making savings and providing better care for patients. Elderly patients are being provided with up-to-date and state of the art facilities which represent an improvement on the acute facilities with which they have hitherto been treated. At the same time, health boards have made savings on the revenue side.
It is a pity that Opposition Members' dogma leads them to oppose something that is clearly in the interests of patient care and also ensures that resources go further.