George Foulkes

It was Carers Week last week, an opportunity for campaigners to highlight and celebrate the incredible contribution that carers make and giving carers the opportunity to share the positive experiences as well as the more difficult ones.

The week focuses on campaigning for greater recognition and support for carers, and informs those who are unaware, of the services and benefits they are entitled to. 

Sarah Boyack MSP and I last week met with a group of carers in the Scottish Parliament organised by VOCAL, an organisation that gives carers a voice, all of whom had their own story to tell. 

Being a carer is already a struggle but is made harder by a lack of support and respite services in Edinburgh and across the Lothians.  Budget cuts are causing a great deal of concern and uncertainty for carers and their families as if funding and support is reduced, they feel they will not be able to cope.

More than three-quarters (76%) of people looking after an ill, frail or disabled loved one do not have a life outside of their caring role, according to new research issued to launch Carers Week last week. 

The results show that huge numbers of carers are left isolated and lonely, missing out on opportunities that the rest of the population takes for granted. 80% have been forced to give up leisure activities or from going out socially since becoming a carer.

The majority of those surveyed can no longer rely on relatives for support either, as these relationships have suffered as a result of caring - 75% say they have lost touch with family and friends.

One of the carers who took part in the survey was Theresa from Glasgow. She cares for 3 people - her 2 sons, one of whom has Down's Syndrome, and her registered blind mother. She balances full-time work with caring, Theresa says:

"A life of my own is a daydream. Caring demands are relentless, and costs you your health, relationships and happiness. To have a life of my own, for just one day would be marvellous."

Carers say they simply exist, are marginalised and invisible. Unable to socialise, to have romantic relationships, or even to consider having children, the impact on carers is emotional, mental, physical, and fiscal. 4 out of every 5 carers say they are worse off financially, while more than half (54%) say they have had to give up work.

Despite saving the UK economy £87 billion annually by relieving pressure on health and social services, carers are not being supported in the vital role they play for both their communities and society. Almost all carers questioned agreed a life of their own would be achievable if they received breaks, a decent income and were given support in times of crisis.

Carers need and deserve change. Better access to advice and information, improved funding for breaks, and support and flexibility for carers at the workplace are all needed urgently. Only then will carers get a real chance at a life of their own, and the opportunity to do some of the things that the rest of us take for granted.

In the responses to the survey, carers have consistently highlighted what they need to have a life of their own, especially:

• Access to relevant and practical information, to help them with their caring role
• The opportunity to take a break when they need it
• Support at times of crisis
• Financial support
• 3,282 carers took part in the survey, both online and by post, which was carried out by Carers Week between 18 February - 7 April 2010. 65% of those surveyed were heavy-end carers, responsible for 50+ hours of care each week.

I will be raising budget concerns with the Chief Executive of NHS Lothian at its next board meeting and making representations on behalf of carers across the region. 

Sarah Boyack MSP is working closely with carer's organisations and others to support their campaign and make sure that carers get a better deal despite funding pressures.

I will be lodging a motion in the Scottish Parliament next week to raise awareness of the issue and gather support in Parliament. 

I attended one of the regular meetings with NHS Lothian last week where I raised concerns regarding the future funding of the service.

The Scottish Health Minister had promised to protect frontline services in the face of budget cuts but at the meeting, the Vice Chairman of the Health Board highlighted the reality of these cuts to his staff and the overall efficiency of the service.

NHS Lothian has already announced that nearly 2,000 jobs will go this year with at least 333 of these being nurses.

My colleagues, Sarah Boyack, Mary Mulligan and I raised a number of questions regarding future staffing and service levels across NHS Lothian Board areas. I informed the Board Members that I have received a number of representations from constituents who are understandably concerned about possible job losses and diminution of services as a consequence of redundancies.

Board members emphasised to me that the role of nurses has become more skilled and specialised to the extent that they are more actively supporting junior and qualified doctors in their role. For the Scottish Government to claim it is protecting frontline services yet cut nursing posts is contradictory and unacceptable.

Jackie Baillie MSP has been working hard in her role as Shadow Cabinet Secretary for Health and Well-being to hold the Scottish Government to account on this issue and to ensure that services nationally are protected. My labour colleagues and I will continue to work with her and urge Lothian Health Board to protect local staff and services.

Campaigners this week welcomed a decision to grant a reprieve to an historic B-listed cinema in the Edinburgh threatened by demolition.

A controversial planning bid to convert the derelict Odeon Cinema in Clerk Street into a hotel, bar-restaurant and art gallery has been put on hold by Scottish Government independent reporter, Mr J Culshaw. 

I, along with my colleague Sarah Boyack MSP, have been heavily involved in the campaign to save this building and have it restored to its former glory.  I recently visited Elim Pentecostal Church in Notting hill, which was restored, and functions as a cinema, very successfully.  The building is also used for community facilities as well.  This could be mirrored here in Edinburgh.

Odeon campaigners expressed their delight at the granting of a reprieve from partial demolition, declaring that all viable alternatives to its destruction had not yet been "fully explored".

Scottish Government policy dictates that no listed building should be demolished unless it can be clearly demonstrated that every effort had been made to retain it.

Supported by city councillors, the Duddingston House Properties bid intended to retain the outer facade of the 1930's Art Deco building but gut the interior - including its unique cinema auditorium - to fit out the hotel infrastructure.

Save the Odeon Campaign spokesman, Tom Pate, of the Theatres Trust, said he was "confident" the iconic auditorium could now be preserved for future generations and that Historic Scotland would upgrade its listed building status.

"It's very good news indeed and hopefully the next stage will be an upgrade from B to A listing which will give it extra protection," he said.

"I am hopeful there will upgrade it to A, which means the building is of national and international significance.

"In practice the building is now safe because there are people interested in saving the building. The planning application was to demolish the auditorium. Our objection was always to make sure the auditorium was safe."

More than 5,500 people signed a petition calling on Historic Scotland to recommend a public inquiry into the hotel planning bid.

A spokesman for Duddingston House Properties said:

"Clearly we are disappointed but we have not had any offers for the building.

"We will sit down with Historic Scotland and the council to see where we can go from here."

I am disappointed that the Scottish Government stalled on this issue taking at least 3 months longer than it should to intervene and secure a decision on the handling of this project.

I asked why:

S3W-32445 - George Foulkes (Lothians) (Lab) (Date Lodged Tuesday, March 16, 2010): To ask the Scottish Executive what the reason is for the time it has taken to consider the reporter's report on the listed building status of the Odeon Cinema in Clerk Street in Edinburgh and when it will announce its decision.

Answered by Stewart Stevenson (Wednesday, March 24, 2010): Due to the complex nature of the issues involved which require very careful consideration it has not been possible to reach a decision within the three month target period.  Whilst any delay in dealing with this cases is regretted it is not possible to say, at this stage, when a final decision will be made.

Now that demolition has been haulted, I am sure constructive engagement will take place between all parties concerned and the best future use of the Odeon will be agreed.  I am attending a meeting along with my colleague Sarah Boyack MSP next week and will keep you updated on any developments.

Bill Butler MSP has launched a campaign to have Robert Owen of New Lanark commemorated on Scottish bank notes to mark the International Year of the Cooperatives in 2012.   

His motion states: S3M-06086 Bill Butler (Glasgow Anniesland) (Scottish Labour): Bank on Owen— That the Parliament welcomes the launch of the Bank on Owen campaign, which aims to have Robert Owen of New Lanark commemorated on Scottish bank notes to mark the International Year of Cooperatives in 2012; recognises the contribution that Robert Owen made to Scottish society through his pioneering work at New Lanark where he championed co-operative principles and values; notes that the co-operative sector in Scotland is worth over £3 billion to the economy and that the co-operative business model has proven extremely resilient and reliable during the recent global economic upheaval, and would welcome widespread support for this proposal. 

Robert Owen was a social reformer and the founder of the Co-operative movement.  The ideals he explored at the cotton mills of New Lanark were public-spirited and ahead of their time.Owen set up ‘New Harmony’, a model cooperative community in the U.S. After the collapse of New Harmony in 1828, Owen returned home to see his ideas of social reform practised in New Lanark spreading through the trade union movement and in 1834 the Grand National Consolidated Trade Union was formed.

Under Owen’s management the cotton mills and village of New Lanark became a model community, in which the drive towards progress and prosperity through new technology of the Industrial Revolution was tempered by a caring and humane regime. New Lanark had the first Infant School, a crèche for working mothers, free medical care, and comprehensive education, including evening classes. Leisure and recreation were not forgotten; there were concerts, dancing, music making and pleasant landscaped areas for the benefit of the community. The village attracted international attention. While at New Lanark, Robert Owen demonstrated management policies that are now widely recognised as precursors of modern theories relating to human resource management, as well as skilful and ethical business practice. His work inspired infant education, humane working practices, Co-operation, trade unionism, and garden cities. It inspires New Lanark Conservation Trust, the independent Scottish charity which is dedicated to restoring and caring for the historic village of New Lanark in Southern Scotland.

In 1841 he wrote the following words: "It is therefore, the interest of all, that every one, from birth, should be well educated, physically and mentally, that society may be improved in its character, - that everyone should be beneficially employed, physically and mentally, that the greatest amount of wealth may be created, and knowledge attained, - that everyone should be placed in the midst of those external circumstances that will produce the greatest number of pleasurable sensations, through the longest life, that man may be made truly intelligent, moral and happy, and be thus prepared to enter upon the coming Millennium". 

In 1844 the Rochdale Pioneers started a co-operative enterprise in Lancashire which developed into the modern Co-operative Movement.

I think there would be few that would not welcome Robert Owen receiving wider recognition for his contribution to ensuring a fairer and equal society in which our financial sector was ethical and accessible to all.   To have him on our bank notes would be a constant reminder to us all that communitarian and humanitarian ideals are what makes us united and prosperous and that individualism, short termism and greed are what destroys and divides us. 

If you wish to find out more about Bill’s campaign please visit the following website:http://www.facebook.com/group.php?v=wall&ref=ss&gid=372167091433

I was recently contacted by a campaign group called "Children are unbeatable" asking if I agree that legal reform should be implemented to give children the same protection under the law on assault as adults, and promoting positive, non-violent discipline. I firmly support this view and believe that children should be protected under the law against violence.

I have listened to the arguments for and against law reform on the smacking of children and while I recognise that the right balance has to be struck between parental rights and responsibilities and child protection, I cannot accept that inflicting pain and fear on a child as a justified and effective form of discipline is a reasonable practice.

I often hear, "it never did me any harm" or "they need to be taught a lesson" and this is a hard position to get people to move away from, partly because of parental loyalty but also because they believe it to be true.  True or not true, it does not mean that it makes it the best and right way to discipline a child.

In fact, the result is often confusion, fear, mistrust and a cause for bad behaviour. 

Many children, unfortunately, do not get the time and attention from their parents or carers that is needed for them to feel safe, secure and loved.  Therefore, they seek this attention in any form it comes.  For example, if being smacked and shouted at is the only consistent attention that they get, they will repeat the behaviour that results in them being smacked.   So, when arguing that smacking stops bad behaviour, why then are they smacked for repeating the same types of ‘bad behaviour'.

For example, if Sarah aged 4 was smacked for refusing to get in the shopping trolley, then surely she would never repeat this behaviour again.  Why then, the next week is Sarah being smacked for not getting into the shopping trolley? This suggests that the child has not learned from this form of discipline yet the cycle continues.

If Sarah, however, may have been told that if she does not get into the trolley she will not be allowed to play with her favourite toy, attend her friend's birthday party, or get her weekly treat, then she would learn that if she does not do as she is asked then she misses out on something important to her as a consequence. 

This approach empowers the child to decide how she wants to behave and what result she wants.  If followed through by the adult, the child is likely to do as she is asked to avoid being deprived of something important to her, therefore, in the long term this becomes an effective tool, educations the child about boundaries, responsibility and consequences while avoiding physical punishment. 

I know many children who have never been smacked and they are well-behaved children.  This then proves alternatives to physical violence work, yet there is little or no proof that smacking prevents or stops bad behaviour.  So why is it still happening?

Hurting another adult person is against the law. So why is hurting a child any different?

Children are vulnerable and cannot fight back, therefore it is up to us as adults to protect them from harm.  This campaign is not about criminalising parents, it is about encouraging people to try another approach, to move away from hurting their children and informing parents of the damage smacking can cause emotionally as well as physically. 

Over 30 years ago, I helped to lead the campaign that resulted in banning the ‘belt' in schools and all the terrible predictions of those who opposed us have not materialised.  This is the next step in stopping legalised cruelty.

I find it hard to justify a system that seeks to protect adults yet leaves children obviously less able to protect themselves, more vulnerable.

To support the campaign or find out more about it then please visit: http://www.childrenareunbeatable.org.uk/