To ask the First Minister what specific plans the Scottish Executive has to avert any adverse consequences of winter pressures on the provision of NHS services this winter. (S1F-576)

As Ben Wallace knows, after the experiences of last winter a great deal of effort has gone into planning. The winter performance group established by the Scottish Executive reported in August and a winter planning conference was held last month. Most importantly, substantial additional spending of £60 million has been specifically allocated to action that will guard against difficulties in the coming winter.

Can the First Minister tell us why the Executive did not inform the flu vaccine industry of the need for an increase in the production of the vaccine until 22 April this year, exactly one month after the appropriate deadline, which may lead to a shortage of supply this winter? Will he therefore give us his personal assurance that he is satisfied that the Executive's measures that are now in place will avoid a repeat of the crisis that we saw last year in the NHS?

I do not blame Ben Wallace for making that point, because there has been much speculation about it in the press. However, I am told that there will be 900,000 doses of flu vaccine available for use in Scotland. That is a 75 per cent increase on the 520,000 doses that were available last year. We are confident that that substantial increase will benefit the population and will guard against a flu epidemic, with all the pressures that it puts on individuals and on hospital services. I hope that that increase will be widely welcomed.

I have a letter from the Scottish Pharmaceutical General Council, whose chairman, George Romanes, writes:

"I was surprised to read the negative coverage which appeared . . . last weekend about the supply of influenza vaccines . . . It is therefore our opinion that most of the hype surrounding the shortage of vaccines is unfounded."

I hope that that is so.

Does the First Minister agree that the

"adverse consequences of winter pressures" necessitate the local delivery of certain health services such as the consultant-led maternity service that is based at Wick general hospital?

I am not going to be tempted—even by the charm of Jamie Stone—to discuss the immediate future of the maternity unit at Wick, although I am sure that it gives great satisfaction to those who use it.

We are satisfied that standards will generally rise if we invest wisely in the health service. As Mr Stone knows, the Arbuthnott committee—the findings of which are being implemented—as well as dealing with some of the problems of areas of high deprivation recognised openly, and in practical ways, the problems of delivering services in rural areas.

There is always a contest and tension between the advice that is received from the medical world about the best way in which to deliver quality services, and the loyalty that a community feels towards an individual hospital. Getting that balance right is not easy.

That concludes First Minister's questions.

On a point of order. Can the Presiding Officer advise us how the matter that arose in the First Minister's replies to John Swinney and Fergus Ewing can be pursued? The First Minister said that section 23 of the Scotland Act 1998 is a power that has not been invoked. Can you tell us how it can be invoked? Can you, as the Presiding Officer, force the Executive to release the relevant documents, or would it require action in the Court of Session to force the Executive to obey the law?

At the moment, the papers that were referred to have been requested but not required. Therefore, that is a hypothetical question. Discussions are continuing between ministers and conveners of committees, and I leave the matter in their hands.