Contents
- General Question Time
- First Minister’s Question Time
- Protection of Asylum Seekers and Refugees
- Parliamentary Bureau Motion
- Human Trafficking and Exploitation (Scotland) Bill: Stage 3
- Human Trafficking and Exploitation (Scotland) Bill
- Decision Time
First Minister’s Question Time
Engagements
To ask the First Minister what engagements she has planned for the rest of the day. (S4F-02975)
Engagements to take forward the Government’s programme for Scotland.
Presiding Officer,
“Let’s end the old Westminster way of doing things, which has caused misery for Scotland’s most vulnerable. We have the opportunity to chart a different economic path—one which benefits the whole of society.”
Those are not my words but the words of Michelle Thomson in the Scottish National Party’s general election manifesto. They ring somewhat hollow now that we know that the Crown Office is investigating the economic path that that SNP MP went down.
Just eight months after her lawyer was struck off for his involvement in her property deals, Michelle Thomson was selected to be the SNP candidate for Edinburgh West. Will the First Minister tell Parliament whether anybody in the SNP—Nicola Sturgeon, SNP politicians or SNP officials at any level—was aware of the allegations about Michelle Thomson before they were printed in The Sunday Times?
I recognise that there is a lot of interest in the issue, but I remind all members that questions to the First Minister should relate to matters that are within her general responsibility. This is not a matter on which she is obliged to respond.
I am more than happy to respond, Presiding Officer. As I said yesterday, the SNP did not have prior knowledge of any of the issues. As I also said yesterday, I acknowledge that serious issues have been raised—serious points that, if they were to be proven, would be of significant concern.
It is important to stress that Michelle Thomson maintains that all her business dealings were within the law and strongly denies any wrongdoing. This may be an unfashionable view, but politicians, like anyone else in our society, are entitled to a presumption of innocence. I would have thought that a political party that has spent this week advocating a kinder politics would have been the first to acknowledge that fact.
A police investigation is under way into the matters. It is important that that investigation is allowed to proceed without anyone seeking to prejudge its outcome. Michelle Thomson decided to step aside from the SNP while that investigation is undertaken. That is the right thing for her to have opted to do. It is now incumbent on the rest of us to allow that investigation to proceed to a conclusion.
The First Minister is right and I am not prejudging anything, but I ask her—[Interruption.]
Order.
No, no. We need to look at the facts, which are undisputed. A tribunal issued a damning verdict—that is a fact. A lawyer was struck off—that is a fact. The Crown Office was made aware of concerns—that is a fact. Vulnerable families lost out. If the First Minister is saying that no one at any level in the SNP knew about the nature of Michelle Thomson’s business dealings, does that mean that nobody asked Michelle Thomson?
Kezia Dugdale is right when she says that it is a fact that there has been a solicitors discipline tribunal. She is also right to say that it is a fact that a solicitor has been struck off. Neither of those things proves the guilt of any other person. I simply make the point that I made earlier on: however tempting it is for all of us in the hurly-burly of politics to prejudge issues, politicians, like everyone else, are entitled to a presumption of innocence.
I said yesterday and have said again today that the SNP had no prior knowledge of the issues. As I also already said, Michelle Thomson denies any wrongdoing. Therefore, I presume that she would maintain that there was nothing for her to have brought to the SNP’s attention.
Our party vetting procedures are robust, but we keep them under review, as I hope every political party does. I also put it forward—again, I expect all political parties to acknowledge this—that, although we make all reasonable checks and ask reasonable questions, by definition, it is not reasonable to expect that we can investigate matters of which we have no knowledge.
It is ridiculous to suggest that any political party—the SNP or anybody else—would allow a candidate to go forward for selection knowing that there were serious problems about that candidate’s integrity.
I repeat that a police investigation into aspects of these matters is under way. I, as the leader of the SNP, and as First Minister, will always act in a way that I think is appropriate, but I will be driven in doing so by facts, not by insinuation.
I am not asking the First Minister to comment on the specifics of a live investigation. [Interruption.]
Order.
I accept that criminal matters are for the police. However, this is also a moral matter, which I would expect the First Minister to comment on. We have vulnerable families losing out for the financial gain of others, and vulnerable people being taken advantage of as their homes are snapped up at knock-down prices. Does the First Minister agree that profiteering from vulnerable families is just plain wrong?
Although Kezia Dugdale disagrees with me on a range of issues, as she is entitled to, I hope that she would accept that my commitment to social justice and helping vulnerable people is, like hers, beyond question. If there are matters that are proven to have been done wrong, those will be serious issues to which the SNP will respond.
However, I repeat that we are dealing with an individual who denies wrongdoing, who denies any breach of the law and who denies that she has acted improperly. I do not have access—neither, incidentally, does Kezia Dugdale—to all the information and circumstances that the police will be able to access. That is why it is important for all of us to allow the police to do their job. A police investigation is under way. It is appropriate that that investigation is thorough and robust and comes to a conclusion. The rest of us should be prepared to allow that to happen.
I asked the First Minister whether she thinks that profiteering from vulnerable people is right or wrong. This is a First Minister who claims that nobody in the SNP knew anything about this. I will take her word for that. However, now she does know. She knows that an elected representative in her party acted in a way that is unacceptable. [Interruption.]
Order.
This is someone whom the SNP knew. Fiona Hyslop, already in trouble herself, spoke of Mrs Thomson’s knowledge of business and her passion to make Scotland a better place. Angela Constance is on record as celebrating Michelle Thomson’s compassion. Alex Neil said that Michelle Thomson
“demonstrated commitment to how business can be used to support social justice.”
This is the First Minister who made Michelle Thomson her shadow business secretary. The First Minister has spent two days running away from Michelle Thomson as fast as she can. Is it not the case that, for the past two years, Michelle Thomson has been at the heart of everything that the SNP stands for? [Interruption.]
Order. Let us hear the First Minister.
One fact that Kezia Dugdale omitted from that long list of mudslinging was this one: that today, following the issues coming to light, Michelle Thomson is currently not a member of the SNP, because she decided, while the investigations are under way, to relinquish the party whip and, as a result of SNP rules, that means that her party membership is suspended. That was the right and responsible thing for her to do in the circumstances.
I have no intention, on a matter that I recognise is serious, of getting into a party-political exchange. I simply point out that it has not always been the case that, when Labour politicians have been accused of serious offences, they have found themselves outside the party while investigations have been undertaken.
I repeat what I said earlier. I have onerous responsibilities as First Minister and responsibilities as leader of the SNP. I will always seek to discharge those responsibilities to the very best of my ability, but I will do so on the basis of the facts that are before me. I will do that in this case and in every other case. That is the responsible and appropriate way for me to proceed.
Prime Minister (Meetings)
To ask the First Minister when she will next meet the Prime Minister. (S4F-02977)
No plans in the near future.
Let us try going through all that again.
Members: Oh!
Order, order.
We already know that the Crown Office and Police Scotland were asked whether they would investigate the case in July last year. We know that the Law Society of Scotland raised it with the Crown Office in December; that journalists have been investigating it all summer; and that the police were called in nearly three months ago. Yet the First Minister is asking us to believe that nobody in the Scottish National Party—the party of Government—from the constituency in Edinburgh West right up to the chief executive and the leader herself knew anything about the case until they read about it in the paper almost two weeks ago. Does the First Minister think that that sounds believable, or did somebody somewhere turn a blind eye?
I think that reasonable people listening to the answers that I am giving today will opt to believe that what I say is the case. Why? Because I would not stand here and say that it was the case if it was not.
Ruth Davidson says that we all knew that the Law Society and the Crown Office, and journalists all summer, were investigating the case. Did she know any of that before The Sunday Times published those stories? I certainly did not know those things until they came to light in the media. If Ruth Davidson is saying that everybody knew, presumably she would have known but, unless she is saying so, I take it that she did not. [Interruption.]
Order.
The fact of the matter is that we had no prior knowledge of those issues. We now know about the allegations that have been made—I stress the word “allegations”—and there is now, as is entirely appropriate, a police investigation into them. I am happy and keen for the investigation to be thorough and robust, and at its conclusion I will take whatever action the facts determine to be necessary and appropriate. I think that it would be fitting for all politicians to take exactly the same approach.
The First Minister is in charge when it suits her, but when the wheels come off she is constantly surprised by what is going on. She is surprised by T in the Park and by Government loans to Scottish National Party donors, and now she is surprised by this.
The First Minister cannot have missed the sort of business that Michelle Thomson was involved in and which she boasted about in public view on her own website. As the First Minister says that she has read the papers, she must have read the responses from the vulnerable people who are hurt and angry at the way in which they have been treated in order to profit the First Minister’s former business spokesperson.
This morning, Michelle Thomson’s solicitor said that she wants to come back to front-line politics as quickly as possible. Today, the First Minister has mentioned the police investigation a number of times. Let us put the police investigation to one side for a moment—
Members: Oh!
Order.
On the basis of ethics and integrity alone, will the First Minister welcome Michelle Thomson back to her front bench?
For the leader of the so-called party of law and order to stand up in a parliamentary chamber and say on extremely serious matters, “Let’s just put the question of a police investigation to one side,” frankly beggars belief. [Interruption.]
Order.
There is no doubt whatsoever in my mind that if the allegations—again, I stress the word “allegations”—are proved to be correct, that will represent behaviour that I find completely unacceptable. However, I am not going to judge the outcome when somebody is maintaining their innocence and an investigation has not yet been concluded. It would be incredibly unfair and inappropriate for me to do that. I put it to the chamber and to the public that it is unfair and unacceptable for any politician to ask me to do that. However, when we have all the facts and when the investigation is concluded, I will take whatever decisions and actions I deem necessary. Those decisions will be driven by facts, not by insinuation and the attempts of Opposition parties to stir up political trouble and difficulty. That is the way that I will continue to proceed, and I think that it is the appropriate thing to do.
Cabinet (Meeting)
To ask the First Minister what issues will be discussed at the next meeting of the Cabinet. (S4F-02976)
Matters of importance to the people of Scotland.
Last week, the First Minister told me that general practitioners were happy with her plans for primary care but, this week, the chair of the Royal College of General Practitioners Scotland said that
“The Scottish government needs to act urgently”.
He said that the Government has “stalled” and is “sitting fallow” and that it needs to “stop prevaricating” and to deliver immediate action, not more “promises for tomorrow”. So GPs are far from happy. This morning, Shona Robison addressed the RCGP conference. What new and immediate action did she commit to?
I will give Willie Rennie some more up-to-date information about the views of GPs. As he says, Shona Robison has been making announcements today. Today, Dr Alan McDevitt, chair of the British Medical Association’s Scottish general practitioners committee has said:
“The removal of the QOF system is a significant step towards our vision for the future of general practice in Scotland.
This bold move by the Cabinet Secretary is part of the re-invigoration of General Practice in Scotland.
It will have a positive effect on practices, by reducing workload and bureaucracy, allowing GPs to focus on the complex care needs of their patients.”
That is the view of GPs, or at least the GPs’ representative, on Shona Robison’s announcement this morning. I could read out a lot of quotes from social media this morning from GPs in England who have listened to the announcement and who wish that they could come to Scotland to practise instead.
The First Minister talks about the removal of the quality and outcomes framework, but that is two years away, so it is hardly immediate action. Today—this is what is happening today—NHS Fife told me that it is having to step in to save Methil practice. Yesterday, we learned of pressures in Aberdeen for GPs at night-time, and NHS Dumfries and Galloway has issued a recruitment warning. The First Minister said that she was doing everything that she could, but 99 per cent of GPs said that it was not enough. The truth is that the Scottish Government has been caught napping. Ministers say that everything is fine; everyone else says that it is not. It is like the police all over again. I am trying to shake the Government and the First Minister out of their denial. When will she open her eyes and end the denial?
Willie Rennie says that I say that everything is fine, but I do not say that, which is why, last week, I gave a long list of initiatives, backed by resources, that Shona Robison and the Government are taking. However, the bulk of the answer that I gave to his earlier question was not made up of my words at all—they were the words of Dr Alan McDevitt, the chair of the BMA’s Scottish GP committee. We are working closely and constructively with GPs to deal with recruitment challenges and the pressures that come from the changing demographics of our country and changing patterns of technology in how healthcare is delivered to ensure that we have a system and model of primary care that is fit for practice, not only now but into the years that lie ahead. We are determined that that will be backed by a modern fit-for-practice GP contract. That is exactly the action that people would expect the Government, working with GPs, to take. We will continue to do that and, as we do, I have no doubt that Willie Rennie will continue to carp from the sidelines.
“Clare’s Law”
To ask the First Minister what progress the Scottish Government is making in implementing the so-called Clare’s law. (S4F-02990)
It is right that people in relationships should have the opportunity to seek the facts about their partner’s background if, for example, they have concerns that their partner has a history of violence.
The disclosure scheme for domestic abuse in Scotland, otherwise known as Clare’s law, has proven successful in the pilot areas of Ayrshire and Aberdeen. I was delighted to announce in July the decision to roll out the scheme across the country. As of today, the scheme will be available across Scotland.
The scheme means that anyone who feels that they may be at risk of domestic abuse will have the right to ask for information about their partner. That sends a strong and unequivocal message that abuse is unacceptable and that we are committed to action that can help to reduce the risk of further harm.
I thank the First Minister for that answer and the very welcome roll-out today. Does she agree with me and the many organisations that have campaigned for Clare’s law that Police Scotland’s disclosure scheme for domestic abuse is absolutely vital for defeating the scourge of domestic violence in Scotland?
Yes, I absolutely agree with that and I hope that everybody would. We want to stop domestic abuse in all its forms, and this scheme gives us another very important tool to help to do that. Put simply, it has the ability to save lives.
The scheme is not the only thing that we need to do to combat domestic abuse, which is why we are also taking forward a range of other measures to prevent and eradicate domestic abuse. In March, I announced another £20 million over the next three years to step up our work to tackle violence against women and girls. That money will be used to drive innovation and improvement within the justice system, tackle perpetrators of domestic abuse and increase public awareness.
I think that the collection of initiatives that this Government is taking, which I hope is backed by cross-party support, will help us in the years to come to make sure that we are not just taking a stand against domestic abuse but reducing the impact of domestic abuse in our communities.
I, too, welcome the rolling out of Clare’s law, but I am disappointed at the lack of progress made on the delivery of the equally safe strategy. The strategic board for implementation was supposed to have reported six months ago but has yet to meet. It will be sad if the first Government led by a female First Minister was to go down in history as the one that had done least to tackle violence against women.
Members: Oh!
Order.
Will the First Minister take the opportunity to make progress on the implementation of equally safe this afternoon by backing my proposed amendments to the Human Trafficking and Exploitation (Scotland) Bill?
I have to say that I found aspects of that question by Rhoda Grant deeply depressing. I am a politician and I am as capable as any politician in this chamber—perhaps more capable than some—of being party political on a variety of issues, but this is an issue that we should not be party political on.
Given that I have just stood here and announced the start of the complete roll-out of a pioneering innovative scheme to help reduce domestic violence, and given that I have just talked again about the additional £20 million resource that I decided to invest in measures to reduce domestic violence, I think that for Rhoda Grant to come up with the comment that she made is not worthy of the member.
Rhoda Grant does raise an important point about the equally safe strategy, and she will be aware that we are making progress in taking forward the commitments in it. I am happy to write to her with a detailed report, and she will see some reference to the issue in the programme for government that was published just a few weeks ago.
This is an issue on which not only me but I think everybody across the chamber is determined to see real progress, so for goodness’ sake, whatever else we may divide on, let us get together and say that we are going to tackle and eradicate domestic abuse in this country.
I welcome Clare’s law and the other initiatives that the First Minister announced in her first answer, but I can tell her that at the cross-party group on men’s violence against women last night there was some discussion about the specific offence of domestic abuse that was in the consultation paper. Can she tell us why there has been a delay in introducing such a law, and can she give a categorical guarantee that such a law will be introduced in due course?
I think that anybody who has listened to my comments on that law will have a very strong sense of my commitment to introducing it. There has not been a delay in introducing the law; what we have done is consult on the general principle. We are now moving forward to consult on the specific wording of a new offence of domestic abuse. We are doing that because there are differences of opinion, as Malcolm Chisholm will know, given the sterling work that he has done on the issue over a long number of years. On something as important as this, the view is that it is vital that we get it right.
I believe that a specific offence of domestic abuse will allow us to capture more aspects of domestic abuse than the current law enables us to do. I am absolutely committed to introducing such an offence, but I am committed to doing it properly so that it has the desired effect of helping the many women who currently suffer abuse in forms that the current law is not well suited to dealing with.
“Learning the Hard Way—Survey of Further Education Members” (Response)
To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government’s response is to the findings in Unison Scotland's college staff survey report, “Learning the Hard Way—Survey of Further Education Members”. (S4F-02978)
The progress that we have made in recent years through college reform is largely due to the commitment and professionalism of college staff across Scotland. I take this opportunity to express my gratitude to all our college staff for the role they play in the success of our colleges.
Our priority is to build on that, ensuring that staff continue to be well led and supported. It is important to understand properly the views that staff express generally and, in particular, through staff surveys such as the one that Iain Gray has commented on. The Cabinet Secretary for Education and Lifelong Learning will discuss the survey’s findings at her next meeting with Unison Scotland and will commit to taking forward whatever needs to be done to address the concerns that have been expressed in the survey.
The survey findings are not hard to understand. They show that 90 per cent of staff think that colleges are underfunded, 64 per cent think that college services have declined, 77 per cent do not expect them to improve in the next year and 69 per cent blame the Scottish Government. Rather than expressing her gratitude to our hard-working college staff, does the First Minister not think that she should apologise?
I will continue to take the view and approach that I think is right and work with our college staff to make sure that our colleges continue to deliver excellent education for our young people. As I have said previously, when we look at resource budgets, we can see that, in cash terms, this Government is spending more than Labour did when it was in office. We will continue to make sure that our spending decisions give priority to education, given the importance that we attach to it.
I also point out, as I have done many times before, that in every one of the past three years we have exceeded our target to maintain the number of full-time equivalent places. The number of full-time students under the age of 25 has increased by 15 per cent, the number of full-time students who are over 25 is up by 25 per cent and the number of women who are studying full-time courses is up by 15 per cent.
We are also investing heavily in the college estates. More than £530 million has been invested in the college estate since 2007.
Those are the commitments that we will make to making sure that we have a quality college education sector. The staff who work in that sector are vital to that commitment so we will continue to listen to them, to respond to them, and to work with them to deliver further improvements.
Earlier this year, Audit Scotland’s report “Scotland’s colleges 2015” noted:
“The SFC met students as part of its six-month post-merger evaluations to discuss issues such as changes to learning and teaching, enrolment and access to the college. Feedback indicated that there had been little adverse effect on students.”
Is the First Minister aware of whether that remains the position?
I am certainly aware of the Auditor General’s report, which was published in April. It is, I think, the most current evidence-based assessment of the state of the sector, and it draws on surveys and other feedback, indicating that our reforms have had no adverse impact on students.
That is backed up by the evidence that shows that more full-time students are achieving recognised qualifications. The number of students who are achieving higher national certificates and higher national diplomas has increased by more than 20 per cent since 2007. There has been a 34 per cent increase in the number of students progressing from college to university with advanced standing since 2009-10.
The proof of the pudding is therefore in the eating. We now have a college sector that enables more young people to get the qualifications that they need either to go further in education or to go into the workplace. That is perhaps one of the reasons why we are seeing youth unemployment at a much lower level now than it has been in the past.
Business Innovation
To ask the First Minister what steps the Scottish Government is taking to increase business innovation. (S4F-02982)
On Monday this week, I was pleased to announce that a new innovation fund totalling £78 million will be available to stimulate business innovation. The fund will comprise £31 million of European regional development fund money and will be matched by £47 million of funding from Scottish Enterprise, Highlands and Islands Enterprise and the Scottish Further and Higher Education Funding Council.
The fund will enable a range of key activities that are aimed at increasing the number and level of companies that are investing in innovation to stimulate greater business and university collaboration. It will also supplement the work of our innovation centres, with the particular aim of shortening development cycles for small and medium-sized enterprises that are creating new products and services.
Will the First Minister advise how the fund will work alongside the progress that is being made on the Scotland can do strategy? Does she agree that it is important that we see Scotland as an attractive place not just to do business but to start businesses?
I absolutely agree. I want Scotland to be seen as a great place—the best in the United Kingdom—to do business, set up businesses, expand businesses and invest in businesses.
Mark McDonald mentioned an important component of our strategy: Scotland can do—a title I love—is a route map to our becoming a world-leading, entrepreneurial and innovative nation. I know that Labour does not like the idea of Scotland can do, but I like it a lot. [Interruption.]
Order.
Since the launch of the strategy in November 2013 we have invested in entrepreneurial talent and expanded our range of business innovation support tools. We are also building a £124 million network of innovation centres, which will enable industry to make best use of our world-class university research and expertise, and we will showcase Scotland’s fantastic capacity for innovation through our planned network of innovation and investment hubs in Dublin, Brussels and London.
In every sense, we as a Government are putting our confidence in Scotland, which is probably why Scotland is putting its confidence in this Government.
How much of the £78 million that was announced on Monday is new money?
If Gavin Brown had listened to my answer to Mark McDonald, he would be aware that the money that I announced on Monday is a combination of money from the European regional development fund and money from our enterprise agencies and the Scottish funding council. It is additional money, which will augment the work that the agencies continue to do. It is estimated that it will enable our enterprise agencies to work with an additional 1,000 companies to help and support them to become more innovative.
The message that we want to send out is that, if there are big ideas out there in our companies, we want to help those companies to bring them to fruition.
That ends First Minister’s question time.