To ask the Scottish Government what steps it is taking to improve access to general practitioner appointments. (S6O-03775)

Last November, the Scottish Government published the “General Practice Access Principles”. That report sets out a clear framework for the core principles of how GP services should be delivered—they should be delivered equitably, sensitively, reasonably and appropriately, making the most effective use of the resources and systems that are currently available.

We continue to work with all the relevant partners to effectively implement those principles, including through our commitment to the on-going recruitment of primary care multidisciplinary teams as well as 800 more GPs. Healthcare Improvement Scotland has already worked with more than 100 general practices to improve access arrangements.

I thank the cabinet secretary for that answer, but the current situation remains a disgrace. The move to the increased use of same-day-only appointments, which are rationed at 8 am, simply does not work for the elderly, the disabled or people with young children.

The latest in the long line of complaints that I have had from constituents includes one from an elderly couple in Dumfries—they will probably give me a clip round the ear for saying that the next time I see them—who tried on four occasions to get a doctor’s appointment. On day 1, there was a permanent engaged tone at appointment time, so they were unable to speak to a human voice. On day 2, it was the same again—there was a permanent engaged tone. On day 3, having spent 10 minutes getting to the front of a queue, they got a human voice, but there were no doctors available. Only on the fourth day, when they decided to complain to the practice, did they get an appointment. Does the cabinet secretary think that that is acceptable?

What Oliver Mundell narrates is clearly not acceptable, and I believe that we should see access to GPs improving. We are seeing an increase in the demand on our primary care services, and GPs are under pressure as a result of managing more complex cases. However, it is the responsibility of individual practices to ensure that they have an appointments system that works not just for them, but—most importantly—for their patients. I would be keen to hear more about the case that Oliver Mundell brought up, so that the health board can look into whether the practice in question is fulfilling the terms of the GP contract.

The Scottish Government’s “General Practice Access Principles” states that GP practices should

“use digital resources ... where appropriate and when people choose, to meet people’s needs.”

Deaf people or those with anxiety may find it more difficult to book appointments over the phone, and services such as Near Me are not available everywhere. Does the Scottish Government have further plans to support GPs in adopting digital infrastructure where they are not able to provide such services?

I thank Foysol Choudhury for narrating the complex picture of how people choose to access their health services—in this case, primary care services. He is right to say that digital solutions are available for some people who are able to use them, but I am clear that that will not work for everybody, as he has set out. Therefore, we are supporting practices to be able to invest in not only the access requirements that I set out to Oliver Mundell, but digital services, where that is possible, and I would like more such support to be provided. We will continue to support boards in that work.