Richard Simpson MSP

Welcome to Richard Simpson MSP's biography pages

Richard Simpson MSP

Here you can find out about your MSPs' political activities and how to get in touch with them.

  • Member for: Mid Scotland and Fife
  • Party: Scottish Labour

Richard is a member of the following Committees:

Richard is a member of the following Cross-Party Groups:

Parliamentary Activities

Search for other Speeches made by Dr Simpson

Meeting of the Parliament 25 November 2014 : Tuesday, November 25, 2014
Dr Richard Simpson (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab)

After the Vale families called for an inspection regime, I lodged motion S3M-02697, on 9 October 2008, entitled, “Regret for Continuing Complacency on Reducing Clostridium Difficile Hospital Infections”. In that motion, I called for an immediate move from health board to individual hospital reporting and for an inspection system similar to that which had been introduced in England in 2007. It was April 2009 before the health inspectorate started its very welcome work. Does the cabinet secretary therefore agree with Lord MacLean that we need to look at other jurisdiction reports as they come out on the issues that also affect our people?

Five years on from the outbreak, does the cabinet secretary—who has properly indicated that we have made enormous progress on C difficile—think that the system is working well, when the Hairmyres report showed that Lanarkshire NHS Board left a senior infection control post vacant for five months this year?

I conclude by saying that I am glad that the cabinet secretary agrees with the MacLean report that we need an independent and robust inspection system with enforcement powers, as Labour has been calling for since 2011, but I hope that she agrees that it needs to apply to all aspects of healthcare.



Meeting of the Parliament 20 November 2014 : Thursday, November 20, 2014
Dr Richard Simpson (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab)

We have.



Meeting of the Parliament 19 November 2014 : Wednesday, November 19, 2014
Dr Simpson

I was not.



Meeting of the Parliament 19 November 2014 : Wednesday, November 19, 2014
Dr Richard Simpson (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab)

The inspection system is clearly welcome, but I must say that I called for it two years before it was introduced, and it was introduced in England two years earlier.

The cabinet secretary has made great play of the role of the non-executives: having them walk round and make sure that things happen. How does he feel about a situation in which there has been an unannounced report, a discussion with the board about the problem, then a follow-up report that showed that a ward that was supposedly deep cleaned had not been deep cleaned? Where were the non-execs in all that? That part of the problem is even more unacceptable.

The problem is not being taken seriously by boards because our inspection system can only report to the cabinet secretary—I appreciate that he is trying to deal with the problem—and it does not have the teeth to enforce the sort of cleaning that we all want to see.



Health and Sport Committee 18 November 2014 : Tuesday, November 18, 2014
Dr Simpson

This bill is a fairly limited one. We have heard that codes of conduct might need to be reviewed. Another of the submissions that we received suggested that we should consider the legislation’s compatibility with the Adults with Incapacity (Scotland) Act 2000 and the 2003 act, and that a wider review was needed.

The topic is broad and I do not want to prolong our discussion unnecessarily, but the act is limited, and some people have said that we need to consider issues such as autism and learning disability and where they lie within the act—those are two issues in relation to which capacity is an important issue. I invite people to put on record whether there are any issues that they think we should recommend that the Government addresses as part of a broader review that goes beyond this act, and whether that should happen in the near future or is something that we do not need to go for at this point.



Health and Sport Committee 18 November 2014 : Tuesday, November 18, 2014
Dr Simpson

I have a question on this topic, which I think is very important. I am grateful for the evidence that we have had so far. As I understand it, the reason for increasing the extension period from five days to 10 days is to reduce the number of repeat hearings. That was the issue identified in the McManus report. As Jan Todd has said, the number of repeat hearings has reduced quite significantly already. The exceptionality rule seems to be very important here. If the extension is going to save a repeat hearing and the patient, their named person, the person advocating on their behalf or their legal representative seeks an extension of five or 10 days, that does not seem to me to be of critical importance, because the individual is seeking to avoid having more than one hearing. If that was laid down as exceptionality or if the whole 10-day period was considered exceptionality, would that be okay?

Karen Kirk’s evidence is that if a specialist report or an independent report is required, there is going to be a repeat hearing anyway, because the period is 30 days and there is no way that that work can be undertaken within the period that we have been talking about today. That would be a quite different set-up. Can I just check that I am clear about that and can I have comments on the first bit of what I said?



Health and Sport Committee 18 November 2014 : Tuesday, November 18, 2014
Dr Simpson

I am interested in a comment that I read in one of the submissions, which relates to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. The SHRC said:

“The recent radical interpretation of Article 12(4) CRPD by several human rights experts advocates that legal capacity cannot be denied on the basis of disability ... that decision-making be supported not substituted (and the removal, therefore, of guardianship) and the abolition of laws providing for the compulsory treatment of mental disorder.”

That is clearly a pretty radical view, but it is out there. I understand that the United Nations has published a general comment on article 12, to that effect.

I should have said that I am a psychiatrist and a fellow of the Royal College of Psychiatrists. I do not know whether the witnesses have read the powerful evidence on people with learning disabilities that we heard from Steve Robertson last week. I cannot see us abolishing compulsory detention in certain circumstances, which is provided for by law. However, given the radical views that are out there, will the amendment to the 2003 act, for which the bill provides, move us in the wrong direction?



Health and Sport Committee 18 November 2014 : Tuesday, November 18, 2014
Dr Simpson

I have one quick comment. I do not think that England has registration of tobacco outlets, but Scotland does. It was one of the moves that were made to control illicit sales. It seems to me that it is only a matter of time before the criminal fraternity get into this area and supply tobacco material to go into these products in some way. Do other people feel that that is likely to happen, and pretty quickly? If so, should we limit sales to registered outlets so that we can make sure that children are not sold e-cigarettes? That is clearly happening everywhere, with the figures ranging from 80 per cent at car boot sales down to 25 per cent—which is the best figure—at supermarkets, according to the Trading Standards Institute report. Should we limit sales? I do not know whether that issue is addressed in the Government’s consultation, although I expect that it is.



Health and Sport Committee 18 November 2014 : Tuesday, November 18, 2014
Dr Simpson

That is helpful.



Health and Sport Committee 18 November 2014 : Tuesday, November 18, 2014
Dr Simpson

I understand from an ASH survey that 50 per cent of 15-year-olds have tried e-cigarettes. Does the Scottish schools adolescent lifestyle and substance use survey include a question about e-cigarettes? How soon will we get information on that?

Vote DetailMSP VoteResult

 
Not VotedCarried

 
Not VotedDefeated

Selection of the Parliament's Nominee for First Minister
Not VotedCarried

Selection of the Parliament's Nominee for First Minister
Not VotedCarried

Selection of the Parliament's Nominee for First Minister
YesCarried

S4M-11567.2 Margaret Mitchell: Lowering the Drink Drive Limit—As an amendment to motion S4M-11567 in
>> Show more
NoCarried

S4M-11507.1 Cameron Buchanan: Progressive Workplace Policies to Boost Productivity, Growth and Jobs—
>> Show more
Not VotedDefeated

S4M-11507 Angela Constance: Progressive Workplace Policies to Boost Productivity, Growth and Jobs—Th
>> Show more
Not VotedCarried

S4M-11494.3 Jackie Baillie: Welfare Benefits for People Living with Disabilities—As an amendment to
>> Show more
YesDefeated

S4M-11494.2 Alex Johnstone: Welfare Benefits for People Living with Disabilities—As an amendment to
>> Show more
NoDefeated

Search for other Motions lodged by Richard Simpson
EventIdTypeSub TypeMSP NameParty NameConstituencyRegionTitleItemTextFormattedAnswer DateAnswerStatusIdExpectedAnswerDateAnsweredByMspApprovedDateSubmissionDateMeetingDateProductionStatusIdRecordStatusIdStatus DateOnBehalfOfConsideredForMembersBusinessCrossPartySupportRegisteredInterestSupportCountSupportDateIsEventLinkCurrentMinister
Motion S4M-11590: Richard Simpson, Mid Scotland and Fife, Scottish Labour, Date Lodged: 18/11/2014 Show Full Motion >>
Motion S4M-11171: Richard Simpson, Mid Scotland and Fife, Scottish Labour, Date Lodged: 09/10/2014 Show Full Motion >>
Motion S4M-11170: Richard Simpson, Mid Scotland and Fife, Scottish Labour, Date Lodged: 09/10/2014 Show Full Motion >>
Motion S4M-11169: Richard Simpson, Mid Scotland and Fife, Scottish Labour, Date Lodged: 09/10/2014 Show Full Motion >>
Motion S4M-11168: Richard Simpson, Mid Scotland and Fife, Scottish Labour, Date Lodged: 09/10/2014 Show Full Motion >>
Motion S4M-11167: Richard Simpson, Mid Scotland and Fife, Scottish Labour, Date Lodged: 09/10/2014 Show Full Motion >>
Motion S4M-11046: Richard Simpson, Mid Scotland and Fife, Scottish Labour, Date Lodged: 30/09/2014 Show Full Motion >>
Motion S4M-10948: Richard Simpson, Mid Scotland and Fife, Scottish Labour, Date Lodged: 10/09/2014 Show Full Motion >>
Motion S4M-10844: Richard Simpson, Mid Scotland and Fife, Scottish Labour, Date Lodged: 20/08/2014 Show Full Motion >>
Motion S4M-10359: Richard Simpson, Mid Scotland and Fife, Scottish Labour, Date Lodged: 17/06/2014 Show Full Motion >>
Search for other Questions asked by Richard Simpson
EventIdTypeSub TypeMSP NameParty NameConstituencyRegionTitleItemTextFormattedAnswer DateAnswerStatusIdExpectedAnswerDateAnsweredByMspApprovedDateSubmissionDateMeetingDateProductionStatusIdRecordStatusIdStatus DateOnBehalfOfConsideredForMembersBusinessCrossPartySupportRegisteredInterestSupportCountSupportDateIsEventLinkCurrentMinister
Question S4W-23322: Richard Simpson, Mid Scotland and Fife, Scottish Labour, Date Lodged: 20/11/2014 Show Full Question >>
Question S4W-23323: Richard Simpson, Mid Scotland and Fife, Scottish Labour, Date Lodged: 20/11/2014 Show Full Question >>
Question S4W-23320: Richard Simpson, Mid Scotland and Fife, Scottish Labour, Date Lodged: 20/11/2014 Show Full Question >>
Question S4W-23321: Richard Simpson, Mid Scotland and Fife, Scottish Labour, Date Lodged: 20/11/2014 Show Full Question >>
Question S4W-23314: Richard Simpson, Mid Scotland and Fife, Scottish Labour, Date Lodged: 20/11/2014 Show Full Question >>
Question S4W-23315: Richard Simpson, Mid Scotland and Fife, Scottish Labour, Date Lodged: 20/11/2014 Show Full Question >>
Question S4W-23312: Richard Simpson, Mid Scotland and Fife, Scottish Labour, Date Lodged: 20/11/2014 Show Full Question >>
Question S4W-23313: Richard Simpson, Mid Scotland and Fife, Scottish Labour, Date Lodged: 20/11/2014 Show Full Question >>
Question S4W-23306: Richard Simpson, Mid Scotland and Fife, Scottish Labour, Date Lodged: 20/11/2014 Show Full Question >>
Question S4W-23311: Richard Simpson, Mid Scotland and Fife, Scottish Labour, Date Lodged: 20/11/2014 Show Full Question >>