Two for the price of one.  Yes, two eminent professors Sir Michael Marmot, University College London and Sir Harry Burns, University of Strathclyde appeared before the Health Committee at the Scottish Parliament last Tuesday morning to give their expert evidence on health inequalities.

Sir Harry Burns highlighted the change in society and the lack of empathy and compassion that currently exists to the plight of the poor.

In making his point he quoted an American churchman who he met at an event in Scotland; “What we need is a compassion that stands in awe at the burdens the poor have to carry, rather than stand in judgement at the way they carry it.”

Thinking about what would we do in their circumstances he suggested would be a good starting point for transformation in our society.

Sir Michael Marmot pointed out; “the problem with poverty is not that people are shirking work, it is that they are not paid enough.  Our taxpayer’s money is subsidising employers to take on low paid staff.  We are in effect saying that it is okay not to pay them much and that we the taxpayers will make up the difference.”

Later that day, an attempt to ensure that all workers are paid a Living Wage was voted down in Parliament.

If only the chamber had heard the powerful and compelling evidence of those professors earlier in the day, members may have shown greater empathy and understanding and voted for the right of the people in Scotland, to be paid the Living Wage.

To live without fear of neglect, to live as independently as possible, to be treated with dignity and respect, these are all things we hope for when we grow old.

We also want this for our elderly parents and relatives who have looked after us over the years. Indeed, we can be left heart broken when we find they are not getting the care they deserve.

This is why when the Health Committee published the findings of its inquiry into the regulation of care for older people in November 2011, we urged the Scottish Government to conduct a review of the national care standards to ensure that these fundamental human rights were at their heart.

At that time, the former health secretary Nicola Sturgeon responded positively and committed to a review. It’s taken over two years, but finally, the Scottish Government announced in Parliament last week that a public consultation on the standards will be launched this month.

Worryingly, however, it would appear that there may be further delays to come. In response to my question the present health secretary Alex Neil failed to provide an assurance that the new standards will be published by the end of the parliamentary term.

The need for urgent change was highlighted, when in a recent hospital inspection Healthcare Improvement Scotland found a frail elderly patient who was assessed as unsafe to swallow food or drinks, had been left without nutrition for 10 ten days after staff were unable to fit a feeding tube.

We can’t afford to wait another two years for action to be taken. It’s time we ensured that dignity, compassion and kindness are at the heart of all the care we provide for our elderly.

Last week in Parliament politicians gathered to discuss the Scottish Government’s latest child poverty strategy.

It gave us an opportunity to express a shared ambition and commitment to tackling the issue, and allowed us to recognise that where there is political will, we can make progress as Labour did when in power.

MSP’s from Labour and the SNP voiced their concerns that the welfare reforms being brought forward by the Coalition government will only make matters worse.

Condemning the Coalition is all good and well, but child poverty must also be seen in the context of the Scottish Government’s wider policies. And here their actions fail to match their ambition.

They have said they will eliminate child poverty while at the same time making decisions which will have the exact opposite effect.

They have cut college funding as we know to our cost, leading to a significant reduction in the number of women being able to access further education at James Watt College, hurting their chances of developing their skills and their careers.

They have cut the urban regeneration budget in Inverclyde by 70% making it tougher for our area to attract industry, businesses and create jobs.

They have also cut the housing budget leading to an increase in rents. Indeed, since the SNP came to power, the average weekly rent charged by social landlords in Inverclyde has increased to £73 – the third highest in Scotland.

And only last week, they failed to support Labour’s calls in the Scottish Parliament to pay workers on government contracts the Living Wage.

None of these decisions made by the SNP will help achieve their stated aim of tackling child poverty. As it is often said, you judge politicians not by what they say, but by their actions.

One of the biggest achievements of the Labour Government was to introduce the National Minimum Wage which gave more than one million workers an average pay rise of twelve percent.

 But 15 years have passed since this landmark piece of legislation and for many people times have changed for the worse.  Austerity has led to working hours being slashed, increases in temporary and part-time work and the abominable zero hour contracts. To make matters worse, earnings have plummeted and the cost of living has gone through the roof.

 As a result, the fastest growing group in poverty are those in work. This is a challenge that politicians from all sides must address.  Part of the solution is to ensure that all workers are paid at least a living wage of £7.65.

 While people directly in the public sector are currently paid a living wage, those employed by companies on public sector contracts are offered no such guarantee.  Currently there are still four-hundred thousand people in Scotland who are working for less than the living wage.

 Given that Scotland’s public sector spends approximately £10 billion on procurement every year is it not reasonable that this spending power be used to deliver better wages for working people?

 A living wage would boost the earnings of a full-time minimum wage worker by over £2,600 a year. It also has the potential to increase productivity, reduce staff turnover and improve skills in the workplace. Further, if people have more money in their pockets, the more they will spend, and as a result, more money will be put back into the local economy.

 Given that the majority of politicians’ support a living wage for all workers. And given the Scottish Parliament has the powers to achieve this. It’s time to make work pay.

The Scottish Parliament’s health committee which I convene recently launched a call for views on the Assisted Suicide (Scotland) Bill.

The proposed legislation introduced by independent MSP Margo MacDonald, will provide a means for certain people who are approaching the end of their lives, to seek assistance to end their lives at a time of their own choosing.

 The MSP’s previous attempt to change the law was unsuccessful, but she believes the public now has greater awareness of the issue giving her new Bill a better chance of passing.

 As my mailbag will confirm, this is a topic that has polarised public opinion and there are clearly strong views on both sides of the debate.

 There is no doubt that legalising assisted suicide would be a huge change in how we treat people at the end of their lives, and there are a number of important moral and ethical issues that need to be explored as part of this debate.

 This is why as a committee, we want to hear from as wide a range of people as possible – from GPs, pharmacists and the wider medical profession who would have a role in assisting in a person’s suicide to the third sector, police and legal profession.

 Hearing from the experts is important, but we also want to hear from members of the public who are for and against, as well as individuals who may be affected by the proposed legislation.

 We will use these views as a platform for debate as to how people are treated at the end of life.

 To submit evidence to the Committee you can email HealthandSport@scottish.parliament.uk by Friday 6 June. To read more about the consultation you can visit the Scottish Parliament’s website at http://www.scottish.parliament.uk

As a community with an industrial past and living with the impact of industrial disease such as asbestos, today at Greenock’s Clyde Square we marked International Workers’ Memorial Day.

The memorial day has been held here in Inverclyde for over 20 years. Of course, the clue is in the title, this is an event to remember not only friends and family who sadly lost their lives locally, it is also held to remember workers who have been killed in industrial disasters throughout the world.

This week also marks the one year anniversary of the Bangladesh factory collapse which killed over 1,100 workers. Tragedies such as this show that we still have a long way to go to ensure that all workers throughout the world are treated with proper regard, and that the fundamental human right to work in a safe and healthy environment is upheld.

Campaigners believe there are a number of things that must be done to try and prevent such disasters from ever happening again.

First, we need stricter enforcement with higher penalties for breaches of health & safety laws to send out a clear message that failings will not be tolerated.

Second, we need to support organised Labour movements throughout the world who will stand up for workers and drive changes for the better.

Third, we need to prevent companies in the UK from benefitting from the lack of health and safety standards that lead to disasters such as the Bangladesh factory collapse.

And finally, we – the consumers – also have a role to play, by sending out a clear message to the big brands that we will not accept people being forced to work for on poor wages and in dangerous conditions.

Caring for older people in a homely setting or close to home is an ambition shared by all politicians and people alike.

But to ensure that this ambition is realised everyone would agree that we must do more to support the estimated 650,000 unpaid carers who live in Scotland.

Recently I attended a conference hosted by the Inverclyde Carers Council at the Tontine Hotel in Greenock which was led by Irene Pollard – who as a result of her experience as a long-term carer does an excellent job chairing the council.

During the conference we discussed the Scottish Government’s consultation on its plans to give greater support to carers.

Given that there are now more people than ever before who are caring intensively, for more hours each week, the government is proposing that local authorities should carry out carers’ assessments to identify if they have the full support they need in relation to the person they are looking after.

 The government also suggests that carers should have greater access to information and advice to help them in their caring role.

 Further, it wants to give carers a greater say in the planning, shaping and delivery of services they use so that they better reflect their needs.

 When the results of the consultation are published in the summer, Inverclyde Carers Council will be able to have their say.

The Scottish Parliament’s health committee which I convene will also be examining the proposals.

I hope that as a result of this process together we can make life better for carers and those who they care for.

December 19th, 2011

PUNCH AND JUDY 

Anyone looking for the usual Punch and Judy Show at the Scottish Parliament on Thursday morning would have been bitterly disappointed.

Instead of the usual fights in a debate about elderly care services, a spirit of consensus broke out as the Scottish Government adopted Labour’s idea of integrating health and social care budgets and it was backed by all the parties.

This is an attempt to tackle the pass-the-parcel approach to elderly care that leaves people waiting in hospital beds or sent home without the proper support in place.

But like any reform, the challenge will be in the implementation and we will have to work together to ensure this works in the interests of the people who rely on this care.

That mood of consensus was in stark contrast to the debate on sectarianism the day before.

In bringing forward new laws intended to punish offensive behaviour, the Scottish Government achieved something thought impossible, uniting Rangers and Celtic fans, the churches and the academics and political commentators against their approach.

Rather than listen and build a consensus, the SNP used their majority to force through these laws.

With power comes great responsibility, and the test for this legislation now will be the impact it has on sectarianism, for better or worse.

We also had unemployment figures, which saw a worrying rise again here in Inverclyde.

It means the Scottish Government’s so-called Plan B isn’t working and the cuts to the URC among other things make the task of attracting jobs and businesses even tougher.

Whether it’s reforming social care, tackling sectarianism and creating jobs, there are always lots of good intentions.

So as the parliamentary year draws to a close, we need more than warm words and rhetoric to take on the challenges facing Scotland.

5^TH December 2011

WORKING TOGETHEIR

It has been a fractious week in politics, and this time it spilled on to the streets.

Around 300,000 workers took to the picket lines in protest at the public service cuts, angered by a UK Government they feel has betrayed them.

Pay freezes, cuts to services and jobs, recruitment freezes and now pension reforms have been too much for workers who are now being told to expect the pain of the economic downturn to last longer than expected.

I spent some time going round the picket lines and the sense of frustration was palpable for many of them.

It sparked the usual blame game in Holyrood and Westminster, as the political parties tried to shift the focus on to each other – the truth is they are both to blame.

For those watching from outside, it would have done little to cheer those on strike on a cold and rainy day.

Yet buried among those fall-outs and protests was some good parliamentary work, across party lines, that I believe could make life better for some of the most vulnerable in our community.

As convener of the health committee, I worked with SNP and Tory colleagues to conduct an inquiry into the regulation of care of elderly.

I am sure many of us will have experience, whether it be your grandparents, or your mum or dad, or even an elderly friend of relative, where gaps in the care system have let them down.

This week, we produced a cross-party report that challenged some of those failures and pointed out some ways we can address the complex needs of our ageing population.

Our report found that fundamental to that ambition is ensuring dignity for our elders and respect for those who provide that care by giving them the training, skills and pay that go with such a demanding job.

It is something we can’t afford to get wrong.

November 28th, 2011

A CAMPAIGN LOST

Better to have campaigned and lost, than never to have campaigned at all.

But the decision by the UK Government this week to close the coastguard centre was a sad one for Inverclyde, and one that I hope the Shipping Minister Mike Penning does not come to regret.

For many people, it took for the threat of closure before they realised the important work, and indeed the wide range of work, that our coastguards do.

Those workers at the Clyde Coastguard Centre, proud of the work they do, the knowledge and skills they have acquired and lives they have saved, have approached this adversity with great dignity.

They put forward a compelling and forensic case for the retention of the Clyde Coastguard, exposing the myths and the political posturing at the heart of this decision.

It was a campaign that united political parties and communities, working across rivalries and boundaries to take on this serious threat.

Sadly, it was in vain, as confirmed this week.

We know move on a difficult stage, one of vigilance, where we monitor this new system that insists it can keep safe the longest coastline in the UK remotely from Belfast.

I remain to be convinced, as do the experts at the Clyde Coastguard centre that this is unachievable, and the necessary stress tests have been carried out.

I take no satisfaction from saying I was right when I said this was a sham consultation and that the UK Government were intent on forcing through this cost-cutting exercise.

I only hope they are proved right and a health or environmental disaster is not a consequence of this decision.

If this gamble does not pay off, there will be serious repercussion for those who put cost-cutting over safety.