LEADING social care organisations have called for all political parties to back the full implementation of a National Care Service in Scotland in the wake of the pandemic.
An open letter backed by 30 charities and providers says the vision of the Scottish Government-commissioned Independent Review of Adult Social Care, which was published in February, must not be “watered down”.
One of the most radical steps outlined in the report, by former NHS Scotland chief executive Derek Feeley, was moving accountability for social care from local government to Scottish ministers.
When it was published councils – which are currently responsible for social care in their area – raised concerns over the removal of “local democratic accountability”.
Health Secretary Jeane Freeman said there would be work with local authorities to find the “best way” to secure the review’s recommendations and the “spirit of its intent”.
The SNP has pledged in its manifesto to begin establishing a National Care Service in the first year of the new parliament, with Nicola Sturgeon saying it will be a “top priority”.
Other Holyrood parties have set out differing approaches to a national care system in their manifestos.
Both the Conservatives and the LibDems have rejected the idea of centralisation, while Scottish Labour says it does not believe “huge structural change” is necessary.
The open letter, signed by key organisations including Scottish Care, Inclusion Scotland, Health and Social Care Alliance, Carers Scotland and Carers Trust, states: “We believe that the vision of a national system but with local accountability is critical and we are deeply concerned that there should be any attempt to water down or diminish the development of a National Care Service.
“The current system of social care being commissioned and resourced by local authorities has simply not worked especially for those who matter most – those who use care support.”
It adds: “We call upon all political parties not to limit the vision contained in the Feeley Report and to ensure that preserving the status quo of local governance and commissioning is not accepted. We owe it to the thousands who today and into the future will use social care supports and the thousands who work to deliver care both unpaid and paid, that we create a new system with those people at the heart of the re-design.”
The letter has also been signed by deafscotland, Glasgow Disability Alliance, Coalition of Carers in Scotland, Spaen, Disability Information Scotland, C-Change Scotland, Shared Care Scotland and Disability Equality Scotland.
A statement from Inclusion Scotland said those working within social care, disabled people and their unpaid carers have long been frustrated at “well-intentioned plans” which result in little or no change.
“Human rights should never be a matter of cost or scales of priority but need to be progressed and met for people on an equal basis, whoever they are and wherever they live,” it said.
“Feeley’s vision provides a blueprint for achieving this and disabled people are ready to co-produce the report’s recommendations at every level.
“We would like to see broad commitment to the report as until now local democracy has not been accountable for people needing adult social care support, nor does it comprehend its full value and purpose to both the individual and society at large.”
Dr Donald Macaskill, CEO of Scottish Care, said the pain of the pandemic meant there was a need to build a new future and “not simply tinker with the models of the past”.
He said: “This letter expresses the very real concern from those who provide care services and those who use them that the vision of a National Care Service is in danger of not happening because of the desire of local authorities to retain much of their existing control and influence.
“The voice of those who matter most – those who use supports, who deliver unpaid care and those who professionally provide that care cannot be drowned out by a desire to resist change.”
Dr Jim Elder-Woodward, chair of the Scottish Independent Living Coalition, said it was feared the “brand new world” outlined in the report would not happen, and the current “broken system” would continue with just “one or two peripheral tweaks”.
“We all agree the system is broken. There needs to be a fresh start, with national accountability and local implementation,” he added.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here