MINISTERS are under renewed pressure over the patient waiting lists scandal after the head of Scotland's spending watchdog said the Scottish Government failed to heed early warning signs.
Auditor General Caroline Gardner told MSPs health boards and the SNP administration should have investigated initial signs of issues with the management of patient waiting lists.
Audit Scotland cast doubt on the accuracy of waiting times figures for thousands of patients awaiting treatment north of the Border in a damning report published last week.
It exposed a culture that focused on boards hitting the Government's treatment times targets but not on how the results were being achieved.
The investigation came after the deliberate manipulation of waiting list figures in NHS Lothian. It found some evidence similar tactics may have been employed elsewhere.
Speaking to Holyrood's Public Audit Committee, which is considering whether there has been widespread manipulation of the figures, Ms Gardner said: "We think the focus of attention during 2011 for both the Scottish Government and NHS boards was on whether the 18-week treatment target time was being achieved, rather than how it was being achieved.
"If NHS boards and the Government had been looking at the other information which was available, such as the increasing use of social unavailability codes, that should have raised some warning signs which would have merited further investigation."
NHS managers are being called into the Scottish Parliament to answer questions as the probe continues.
The scandal began in 2011 when it emerged NHS Lothian had been suspending patients from waiting lists to meet treatment times guarantees.
It marked people as being unavailable for operations and appointments for "social reasons" such as being unable to get time off work or being on holiday so they would not appear to be queuing too long.
Audit Scotland's report showed the use of social unavailability codes rising across NHS Scotland from 8% of cases in 2008 to 30% in 2011, and then dropping after the scandal was exposed.
Convener Iain Gray asked Ms Gardner: "Is it your view there was information available to which either the NHS boards or the Scottish Government turned a blind eye, or failed to notice?"
She replied: "It is true that information was available ... on the increase in use of social unavailability codes during that period. That information should have rung warning bells both for the health boards and for the Scottish Government."
She said the information "wasn't acted upon".
Health Secretary Alex Neil has denied any widespread massaging of figures and pointed to new IT systems when asked about the drop in the use of social unavailability codes.
Jackie Baillie, health spokeswoman for Scottish Labour, said: "When asked, Audit Scotland made it clear that, even with IT constraints, there was no reason for health boards to fail to properly document the use of social unavailability.
"The Auditor General again stated the code was used by staff in specialties with the greatest demand. She also emphasised that the IT system, while not perfect, did not explain the dramatic rise and fall in the use of the code."
Ms Baillie added: "Even after the waiting times scandal, the most recent statistics, published this week, can't be relied upon."
Patients are no longer marked as socially unavailable in the same way and explicit agreement is sought from patients if they want a delay to treatment.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article