Health Secretary Neil Gray has suggested he could start talking to individual councils rather than working through their umbrella group, Cosla.
But that sort of patchwork approach would, by definition, not create the level playing field the care service is meant to provide.
And it ignores the fact that even SNP-led councils have serious concerns.
In the consultation, Glasgow City Council said the “main thrust” of the current proposal was for structural change, and that there was “no evidential basis that this will achieve any improved outcomes for those who rely on care and support services”.
The council was “strongly opposed” to plans for a care service board and the strategy drafted by ministers.
Another SNP council, in Dundee, said it was “undecided” – stating that “more details are still needed about the cost and benefits”.
And that was still about the most positive response going.
Given how important councils, health boards and union staff are in delivering care on the ground, it’s all but impossible to imagine how the proposed system could work without them on board.
And the concerns voiced by a wide range of groups are not a narrow, quick-fix kind of problem – particularly for a government in the grip of a budget crunch, with 18 months to run until the next election.
Most people agree that improving standards in care would be a good thing, and that a care service could, in principle, be a good thing.
But there is an awful lot of work to be done, and many bridges to be built, if the current proposal is ever to get off the ground.
