Contents
- Scottish Parliament Thursday 24 February 2000
- E-commerce
- Children (Physical Punishment)
- Holyrood Project
- Question Time
- First Minister's Question Time
- Local Government Act 1986 (Section 2A)
- Code of Conduct
- Decision Time
- Beaufort's Dyke
Question Time
SCOTTISH EXECUTIVE
Livestock Farming (Mineral Supplements)
To ask the Scottish Executive what plans it has to outlaw the use of mineral supplements in the livestock farming industry. R (S1O-1215)
I assure Alex Johnstone that we have no plans to outlaw the use of mineral supplements in the livestock industry.
As the member might be aware, we are consulting on an EC decision that would require the introduction of controls on certain non-feed applications such as drenches or pastes. However, it is important to state that products such as feed blocks, licks and free access minerals are usually classed as complementary feedingstuffs and are, therefore, outwith the scope of the decision on non-feed use of additives.
I thank the minister for his answer. I am sure that farmers across Scotland will be delighted to hear that, given the concern that has been caused.
Could the minister outline how such a misleading interpretation of the directive managed to find its way into the press in recent weeks?
I was horrified when I read the extensive articles, which seemed to give the impression that Alex Johnstone stated.
The directive is not as clear as it might be—I do not think that that will come as a surprise to any member who has read EC directives. The point that was missed was the separate treatment for products that are designated as complementary feedingstuffs. Those who read the directive did not see the linkage to that exemption, which gave rise to the claim that there was a general prohibition on the use of those additives.
I welcome the minister's reassurance that mineral licks are not to be banned, as was suggested in the media.
In the event of some animal feed blocks being removed from the dietary supplement for livestock, what alternatives would be available to ensure the well-being of farm livestock in the future?
I am concerned by the suggestion that there should have to be such a withdrawal. If products such as feed blocks, licks and free access minerals are classified as complementary feedingstuffs, I am at a loss as to why they should be withdrawn and what would give rise to the necessity for an alternative. I am happy to examine that issue and respond to Mr Munro.
Housing Stock Transfer (Glasgow)
To ask the Scottish Executive when the steering group established to discuss the transfer of Glasgow's housing stock last met, what was discussed and who attended the meeting. (S1O-1190)
The Glasgow housing partnership steering group last met on 11 February and it is due to meet again next week. The group is preparing a framework to allow all interested parties to be fully engaged in developing a transfer proposal. Membership of the steering group includes Glasgow City Council, the Executive, the Glasgow Alliance, Scottish Homes and a housing association director.
Does the minister accept that, so far, in the 18 months' discussion on wholesale stock transfer, the people who should have been at the centre of that discussion—tenants and council workers—have, sadly, been kept in the dark? Will the minister give a clear commitment today to Glasgow tenants that if they reject the transfer, the Executive will still take responsibility for the city's £950 million capital housing debt?
Tommy Sheridan's contention is that people have not been involved. In recent weeks, I have met tenants, unions and housing associations. As soon as a proposal is on the table, everyone will be fully involved. The difference between Tommy and me is that I am content for Glasgow tenants to make decisions about their future and not for politicians to seek to make those decisions on their behalf.
Does the minister accept that she and her Executive are effectively blackmailing Glasgow City Council and the tenants of Glasgow? Despite the wholesale stock transfer process having no support among the tenants, she is effectively saying to those tenants, "Accept the transfer and the abolition of municipal housing in Glasgow or we will not give you any money to invest in the necessary repairs and renovation."
It has been the demand of purportedly left-of-centre parties for a good two decades that the burden of Glasgow City Council's debt should be lifted from the 80,000 tenants and the responsibility moved to the country's taxpayers. The Executive has already given that commitment. The difference between Tommy and me—and indeed the Executive—is that we think that we need to go better, and to take the opportunity of £1,000 million of new investment in the city, and not sit around and wait for ideologically pure investment before we start dealing with the very real housing problems there.
Is the minister aware that since she became involved in the Glasgow situation, there has been delay and dither? Is she aware that the £13 million allocated almost a year ago has not been accessed, because the steering group has not met regularly and has not made a recommendation? Will she commit the Parliament to involve tenants and unions, and to ensure that the people of Glasgow and of Scotland get best use of the £13 million that could be housing the homeless?
Fiona Hyslop makes a number of important points. First, it is critical that everyone who is an interested party is involved over a prolonged period of consultation before any decision is taken. Her second point concerns the need to protect the homeless—I concur whole-heartedly with that. We look forward to the homelessness task force's proposals on that matter.
The third point is about the £13 million. While we have spent recent months trying to access £1,000 million, which will, if we pull it off, be the largest ever loan of that kind to the public sector, it is important that that £1,000 million dovetails with the much smaller sums coming from the public purse to the city, which are also under consideration. I hope that negotiations will be completed shortly.
Question 3 is withdrawn.
Neurosurgical Services
To ask the Scottish Executive what plans it has to increase the number of neurosurgery beds, neurosurgery intensive care beds and trained staff in order to reduce the number of people dying from head injuries due to a lack of specialist beds in neurosurgical units. (S1O-1221)
Those issues are among a range of issues that will be taken into account by the short-life working group that has been set up by the chief medical officer to consider neurosurgical services across Scotland.
I thank the minister for her reply.
Given that only half of the patients who are referred from accident units to Glasgow's institute of neurological sciences are currently allocated a bed, does the minister agree with Professor Graham Teasdale, president-elect of the Society of British Neurological Surgeons, that one in four of the 60 patients who die in the unit each year do so because of delayed admission? Can the minister therefore guarantee that the shortfall in staff and in specialist and intensive care beds in the institute will be made good, to prevent other needless fatalities?
Time and again, Opposition members stand up in the chamber and cast doubt over the safety and effectiveness of the health services in this country—it is irresponsible and it is wrong. Do I think that everything in the health service is perfect? Absolutely not. Do I think that we need to improve what we do in the health service? Absolutely. That is precisely why, in the area of neurosurgical services, we currently have an expert group, under the guidance of the chief medical officer, considering the provision of those services across Scotland, not on a cost-driven basis, but on a quality-driven basis, to ensure that patients in Glasgow and right across the country get the best possible standard of service.
That is the basis on which we will continue to move forward. We will consider the evidence, we will consider the facts and we will then invest to meet the need that is identified, just as we have done this week—as we always said we would—in response to the Scottish Intensive Care Society audit of intensive care provision. This week we have put an additional £14 million of new money into the national health service in Scotland, half of which is specifically directed to intensive care and high-dependency beds and to medical equipment. That is where need exists, so that is where we have spent.
I am shocked at the complacency—
No, Mr Gibson, we will move on to question 5.
Rural Post Offices
To ask the Scottish Executive what plans it has, within its own areas of responsibility, to assist in securing the future of rural post offices. (S1O-1238)
I share many of the concerns that were expressed during the members' business debate on rural post offices on 27 January. The Scottish Executive will continue to ensure that the UK Government is fully aware of the particular needs of communities in Scotland and will keep closely in touch with developments.
I am pleased to hear that the minister is making representations to London, because automated credit transfers could cost postmasters 40 per cent or more of their income. Has the minister considered making funding available to local authorities to assist post offices with the burden of business rates?
I realise that it is in the Scottish National party's interest to try to stir up doom and gloom across Scotland, but rural post offices can already take advantage of mandatory rates relief. Furthermore, any pensioner or benefit claimant who wants to continue to draw payments in cash through the post office will be able to do so. I hope that rural Scotland will take full advantage of the opportunities that will be created when the new Horizon computer system is connected to post offices across the country in 2001. That will create opportunities for a range of business to be transacted in rural sub-post offices and we should take advantage of those opportunities.
Has the minister been in discussion with the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, Stephen Byers, about the proposed subsidies for rural post offices? Does the minister have any further details about those subsidies and to whom they will be paid?
I cannot announce anything yet, but as Mr Mundell knows, the performance and innovation unit at the Cabinet Office is considering ways of developing opportunities for post offices and of ensuring that the national network is maintained and extended. Many options are being considered. As soon as there is anything to report, I will do so.
Does the minister agree that some of the media coverage of the issue of rural post offices has been misleading and that rather than suggesting the closure of rural post offices, the Westminster Government is investing a vast amount of money to support post offices in acting as agents for building societies?
I will resist the temptation to say anything unkind about the Scottish press, because I am sure that it is always entirely objective in everything that it reports. However, as I said in reply to the initial question, it is depressing that people are talking about the threat of closures and so on, when the new system will create genuine opportunities. That is what we need in rural Scotland.
Crofting
To ask the Scottish Executive what plans it has for the future of the crofting industry in the Highlands and Islands. (S1O-1224)
John Home Robertson. I am sorry, the minister is Ross Finnie.
Thank you, Presiding Officer. I hope that that was not a case of mistaken identity.
Not at all.
The Scottish Executive will continue to support the crofting communities. We will also increase the opportunity for those communities to manage their own sustainable development through the crofting community right to buy and by modernising crofting law.
Bearing in mind the fact that the price of sheepmeat remains low and is likely to fall to rock bottom next autumn, has the minister made any progress with the EU Commission on help with the cull ewe scheme, particularly with regard to transport assistance? Crofters in the Highlands and Islands need a way of disposing of their old sheep, rather than having to shoot those sheep themselves, which is distressing. Does the minister agree that that is a matter of great importance on the grounds of environmental concerns and animal welfare?
I have made my position clear—and last autumn I saw the relevance of Mr McGrigor's point. I regret that a state aid scheme for cull ewes is still well beyond my gift. The European Commission has not moved on the matter. However, as I have indicated to the chamber before, it is clear that the question of fallen stock is being addressed by the Commission. It is a matter that I constantly raise at UK level to ensure that we press forward. However, I do not think that there is any prospect of a cull ewe scheme. That might be very damaging, but the sheep improvement scheme will be of great assistance.
I will continue to press the point that fallen stock is a real problem—and not only in the crofting communities, but throughout Scotland.
Does the minister recognise that the hinted-at proposal to shift the development function of the Crofters Commission to Highlands and Islands Enterprise is causing a considerable stramash among the crofting community? Those people are very worried about it.
I thought that "stramash" and "very worried" were translations of the same term. Jamie Stone is aware that that proposal from the five-year review group was the very reason why I put the matter out to consultation. It seemed to me that two of the proposals in the review—to transfer functions to HIE, and possibly to change the crofting counties agricultural grants scheme—were very controversial. Clearly, if there is a stramash in the commission, I shall hear about it and I shall certainly take account of it.
Has the minister met the Crofters Union to discuss its concerns about the transfer of developmental aid to Highlands and Islands Enterprise?
Yes—we have had some preliminary discussions, but, as I said, I have put the matter out for consultation, as that seemed to be the most appropriate way of allowing people from as wide a range as possible to express a view on those two controversial proposals. I will take account of the responses and I will have further meetings with the Crofters Commission and the Crofters Union before I come to a final decision.
Education (School Selection)
To ask the Scottish Executive what plans it has to change the arrangements governing parental choice in the selection of schools and whether or not it will consider further amendments to its proposals. (S1O-1223)
We have proposed several legislative changes in the Standards in Scotland's Schools etc Bill, which was published on 20 January. Any further amendments proposed during discussion of the bill will of course be given full consideration.
I thank the minister for his willingness to consider amendments. Is he aware of—and, if so, could he respond to—the Scottish Parent Teacher Council's submission on requests for placing? It said that the council was seriously concerned about the proposed changes to legislation, and that it felt that the changes would not be understood by parents and would lead to many more challenges in the courts—challenges that the council believes would be accepted by sheriffs. As in other areas of education, would it not be better to leave parents' rights well alone?
We have in no way threatened parents' rights. Choice is at the foundation of the Executive's policies. Anyone who has been a member of Parliament for some time will be aware that the biggest complaint about the placement scheme is that a parent who arrives late in a catchment area cannot get their children into the local school. We have responded to that complaint; we are trying to ensure that we are responsive to parents' wishes and children's needs.
Does the minister recall giving consent to South Ayrshire Council to raise the number of pupils in primary 1 above 30? Under such circumstances, is it not the case that teaching staff should be supplemented? Will the minister look into the situation at Ayr Grammar, and take appropriate action?
Any consent to an increase in class sizes is temporary, and allows the school to get organised so that it can deliver lower class sizes by the target date that we have set. We are confident that we will achieve that. What we do, we do in the best interest of the child.
Bus Lanes (Glasgow)
To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the ministerial statement by the Minister for Transport and the Environment on 10 February 2000, whether it is aware of the concerns of local traders in Glasgow regarding the possible loss of business due to the proposed introduction of new bus lanes. (S1O-1209)
The Executive is aware of the concerns of local traders in Shettleston Road about the impact of Glasgow City Council's proposals for the Faifley to Baillieston quality bus corridor. However, that is a matter for the city council as the local roads authority, and any concerns or comments should be directed to it.
I thank the minister for her reply; however, it is not only the Shettleston Road traders who have objected to the proposals. Is the minister aware of a recent survey carried out in the Maryhill and Victoria Road areas of Glasgow in which, respectively, 82 per cent and 75 per cent of traders claimed that bus lanes had a detrimental effect on their trade? Although the minister says that it is a matter for the local authority, she said in her statement that she would consult local government on such issues. Will she meet and consult the traders and residents who are concerned about Maryhill and Victoria Road as well as those who are concerned about the Faifley to Baillieston bus route?
It might be helpful if I outline to Sandra White the process that is appropriate in this circumstance. The local authority is carrying out important consultation on the routes, and I strongly urge all traders and anyone else who is interested in the issue to get involved in that consultation. From experience in my constituency, I know that the detail of any proposals will always be important to local people. I understand that Glasgow City Council has organised meetings and workshops for March, which will include discussions about proposals for the Shettleston Road route. I hope that everyone will get involved in the process and will make their views known at the right stage.
Unlike other cities in Scotland, is not Glasgow unique in that many distributive trades front on to main arterial routes into the city? If customers no longer have access to those businesses, they will inevitably close, with a loss of jobs. In those circumstances, will the minister consider pointing out to Glasgow City Council, at least on an advisory basis, that it should think again about this issue?
As I said to Sandra White, the important issue is that consultation involving Glasgow City Council, local residents, community groups and traders is taking place. Furthermore, a formal consultation process is taking place on traffic orders, and there is a specified way in which the matter will proceed. The council should listen to local views and take them on board in light of its overall transport strategy for tackling congestion and improving the economy and the environment in those areas.
Digital Hearing Aids
To ask the Scottish Executive whether it has any plans to introduce pilot studies on the use of digital hearing aids. (S1O-1196)
Susan Deacon.
Iain Gray is answering this question.
I call Iain Gray, who is not Susan Deacon.
There have been some strange cases of mistaken identity this afternoon.
I am reading what is in front of me.
Digital hearing aids have been available in Scotland through the NHS since June 1999. A wider choice of digital aids will be available from 1 April. A comparison of two of those aids is included in a research project that is under way in Fife.
I am sure that the minister is aware that digital hearing aids provide an improved quality of life. Will he examine the funding of hearing aids, and the criteria that are applied to such funding, to prevent the breakdown of supplies when health boards are suffering from budget overspends?
Budget overspends should not interfere with an essential service such as the supply of hearing aids. Of course, digital hearing aids might not be the best solution for all patients, and decisions about which hearing aid best meets clinical need would always be made by the clinician in charge of that patient's care.
To ask the Executive what plans it has to increase screening for hearing difficulties—
I am sorry. Please go on. I did not understand your opening words.
Shall I start again, Sir David?
You do not start a supplementary with the phrase, "To ask the Scottish Executive".
What are the Executive's plans to improve screening for hearing difficulties in young children before they go into school?
Was that all right, Sir David? [Laughter.]
As Mr Davidson knows, pre-five health is a priority for the Scottish Executive. I do not have the details of plans to hand, but if Mr Davidson would like to write to me, I would be happy to supply the information in writing.
Is the minister aware that over 700,000 people in Scotland suffer from hearing loss? Is he further aware that while hearing aids play an important part, lip-reading classes and the development of lip-reading skills can also be of great benefit in challenging the exclusion and isolation that are caused by that problem?
Will the minister explore the importance both of directing people towards lip-reading classes at the stage of diagnosis and of funding for the training of lip-reading tutors and lip-reading classes? Such classes would play an important part in including in our society those who suffer from hearing loss.
As Johann Lamont knows, there are various ways in which people who suffer from deafness are able to communicate. Indeed, we had an excellent debate recently on British Sign Language. Already, some funding through section 9 and section 10 Scottish Executive grants goes to support the training of interpreters and teachers in both those areas.
West of Scotland Water
To ask the Scottish Executive whether it is aware of the difficulties that the residents of Moffat in Dumfriesshire are experiencing with their water supply and what powers it has to require West of Scotland Water to take the necessary remedial action. (S1O-1192)
The Executive is aware of the concerns of some residents of Moffat about the quality of their new drinking water supply. There is no evidence that the new supply fails to meet the standards set in the Water Supply (Water Quality) (Scotland) Regulations 1990, but if failures occur, the Executive has the power under the Water (Scotland) Act 1980 to require West of Scotland Water to take remedial action.
I advise the minister that West of Scotland Water has changed summarily the supply of water to Moffat, producing a water supply that carries with it an unattractive and unpleasant residue. Given that the people of Moffat pay water rates for that water, does the minister agree that it is they who should determine whether the quality of that water is acceptable, not West of Scotland Water?
It is important that West of Scotland Water abides by the guidelines and procedures to identify standards of water quality. I understand that a meeting was held on 14 February with local residents and that, subsequent to that meeting, West of Scotland Water will conduct a detailed investigation into the complaints that it has received from some residents in Moffat. A report on that investigation will be provided to the community council at its meeting on 28 March. I hope that that will allow the debate to go forward, that the concerns of local residents can be addressed effectively and that the residents can then get proper feedback from the water authority.
Necrotising Fasciitis
To ask the Scottish Executive whether there have been any reported cases of necrotising fasciitis in the area covered by national health service trusts in Lanarkshire during the past two years, how that level of cases compares with the national average and what action it plans to take to maintain public confidence in the light of any recently reported cases. (S1O-1187)
As I said in the chamber last week, Lanarkshire Acute Hospitals NHS Trust has assured me that there are no cases of necrotising fasciitis in its area, and that there have been no problems with that infection within the trust's hospitals, including Monklands hospital, for at least the past three years.
I thank the minister for that answer, which gives some comfort.
With respect to all hospital-acquired infections, what additional training might be provided for clinical staff in the NHS in Scotland to ensure that standards and practices are widely known and strictly adhered to?
Elaine Smith's question raises the importance of training in this area. I give an assurance that training is important and is receiving on-going attention.
The reasons for hospital-acquired infection are complex, and it is a growing problem worldwide, not simply here in Scotland. We know that one of the best ways in which we can deal with it is by ensuring that staff are well briefed and trained, and have appropriate handling procedures, including very basic hygiene procedures such as regular hand-washing. We work continually with the health service across Scotland to provide appropriate advice and guidance to that effect. We will continue to do that to ensure that patient safety is maintained at all times.
NHS (Tayside)
To ask the Scottish Executive whether it will make a statement on the establishment of the task force set up to oversee the management of NHS services in Tayside. (S1O-1233)
On 15 February, I announced the creation of a high-level task force to work with Tayside Health Board and the two local NHS trusts to ensure that health services are delivered efficiently and effectively throughout Tayside.
I welcome the task force, but how will it be able to wipe out the £10 million to £20 million revenue deficit in Tayside without cutting services and staff? If the outsiders succeed in creating greater efficiency and curing the problem, will the system then simply be handed back to those who created the situation in the first place?
I will deal first with the question of finance and then with the question about the future.
It is worth putting the situation in context. The projected overspend of Tayside University Hospitals NHS Trust accounts for one third of the projected overspend for the whole of Scotland. The projected overspend has doubled in the past six months, is twice that of Edinburgh and Glasgow combined and four times that of neighbouring Grampian. The extent of the projected overspend in Tayside is therefore clear cause for concern, which is why I took the unusual step of sending in a task force.
We must get to the bottom of the situation. We must examine all the reasons why question marks have been raised about the running of the health service in Tayside. The task force is working closely with local management to do that.
I stress, as I have done repeatedly, that we are interested in finding solutions. I will not prejudge the outcome of the exercise. I am not interested in getting scalps or apportioning blame. I am interested in restoring the confidence of the public in Tayside in the services provided by the NHS in their area.
I agree with the minister that the projected overspend is cause for concern. Given that, for months, the minister has refused to acknowledge that she has any locus on the problems with health services in Tayside, will she tell us at which point and for what specific reason she changed her mind and agreed to establish the task force?
Shona Robison's account of the past year is inaccurate, to say the least. If people look at the record of question time, they will see that, in response to regular questioning on the issue from a range of local members, I have continually said that we have examined the situation in Tayside and worked with people there in an attempt to resolve the situation locally.
I repeat the point I made earlier. I believe that national intervention in local decision making and local problems should be kept to an absolute minimum. However, when I see a pattern emerging that indicates that the problems are so deep-rooted and profound that local resolution will not be possible, I take action, which is exactly what I have done.
Will the minister give an assurance that there will be no reduction in the treatment available in Tayside and that there will be no health service rationing? Will she also ask the task force to look into the question of the £176,000 that was allocated to Tayside Health Board for drug treatment a year ago, but which was distributed only in January this year? Many drug agencies in Tayside believe that the money has not been allocated for that purpose, but has been set against the deficit.
One of the things that has concerned me enormously about the situation in the NHS in Tayside is the fact that for many months the public have received a fog of different messages about the future of services in the area. We must have effective financial management in Tayside, just as in any other part of the country, but high standards of patient care must also be ensured. The reason why the task force is working with local management is to ensure that the people of Tayside get well-managed, high-quality services. I certainly want that to be the outcome.
I thank the minister for taking the initiative of intervening in the situation in Tayside, which has been causing all of us enormous concern for a considerable time.
Is the minister able to reassure Parliament and the community in Tayside that the management executive will take a more sympathetic view towards allowing the financial difficulties to be managed over a larger number of financial years than previously?
Can the minister assure us that some of the worst fears that some of us—not just on this side of the chamber, but across the chamber—have about significant changes in health service availability in Tayside will not be realised because of the need to manage the situation within a budget that is largely unrealistic for the provision of care in an area of Scotland as wide as the one that we represent?
Although Mr Swinney raises a number of important points, I think that a number of his assertions are ill founded. I hope that, at the conclusion of the process, we will have some clarity around a number of the issues raised.
I am determined that we maintain a high level of patient care throughout the process. I am also concerned that we look to the future. Part of the task force's remit is to work with local health authorities in Tayside, to proceed with the review on change and with the development of services in the future. We have to be willing to embrace change, and to do so enthusiastically, but that has to be managed effectively and with proper, open consultation and engagement. I hope that Mr Swinney will take part in that process in Tayside.
Agrimonetary Compensation Scheme
To ask the Scottish Executive whether it will make representations to Her Majesty's Treasury regarding participation in the European Union agrimonetary compensation scheme for Scottish farmers. (S1O-1197)
I am fully seized of the case for agrimonetary compensation to be paid. As payments must be made on a United Kingdom-wide basis, I have already taken steps to raise the matter with my counterparts in the other Administrations. Consideration is therefore currently being given to the case for making payments at both a ministerial and an official level.
I will inform Parliament of the decision on payment at the appropriate time.
I am glad the minister is seized, but I hope it was not painful.
Is it not the case that, while other suggested forms of aid to farmers may be against European Union rules, agrimonetary compensation is specifically allowed? Is it not the case that it is not an open-ended commitment, but time-limited? Is it not the case that it merely remedies a problem which is not of the farmer's making, but which is the result of Government policy? Surely the case for it is undeniable.
As I said to Mr Morgan in my initial reply, I am very seized, whether it was painful or not, of the need for the payment. Nevertheless, it can be made only on a UK basis. I wish to pursue that vigorously with my UK counterparts. I do not wish to reveal the nature of the discussions, or to reveal the negotiating hand. I can only assure Mr Morgan that I am taking every step to pursue the case. As I said earlier, I will inform Parliament of the outcome.
When will Orkney Islands Council know whether it will receive approval from Brussels to introduce the winter keep disaster aid scheme this winter? Why has it taken so long to have it approved this year compared with last year, given that the situation is worse this winter? Is the minister aware that Orkney farmers are having to pay £87 per tonne for bought-in feed, compared with £25 per tonne in Aberdeen?
I hope that Maureen Macmillan is aware that, unfortunately, there was a change in the rules governing the scheme, and that trying to align the application with the new rules has caused delays in some cases. Because of the change in the rules, it was necessary to seek further information from Orkney Islands Council. The council produced that information on 21 February. The matter is now being progressed. I hope that it will be in time, and I am conscious of the danger that any delay in the scheme's approval will represent in Orkney.
Freshwater Fishing
To ask the Scottish Executive what measures it is taking to improve access to freshwater fishing. (S1O-1186)
My officials and those of Scottish Natural Heritage are currently completing a comprehensive review of freshwater fishery matters, including the issue of access for anglers. I believe that there is widespread interest in this matter, and I intend to issue a consultation paper on the subject in the spring.
I want to increase opportunities for anglers, both locals and visitors, subject to the obvious priorities of good management and conservation.
Will the Executive fulfil the Labour party's commitment to a radical overhaul of the Freshwater and Salmon Fisheries (Scotland) Act 1976? Will the minister confirm the Executive's intention to ensure that the statutory right of access to the countryside will include access to water as well as to land? If there are any outstanding problems in that respect, will he arrange for further consultation with the Access Forum, instead of simply giving in to pressure from the big landowners?
I feel like prefacing my remarks by saying that I am grateful to my erstwhile friend for asking a helpful question.
The main priority must be the conservation of fish and the protection of the environment. As Mr Canavan knows, there are grounds for alarm about salmon and sea trout stocks. We intend to address that problem rather urgently.
I understand the concerns that Mr Canavan and a lot of other people have expressed about certain aspects of the 1976 act and about the complicated and antiquated legislation that applies to other aspects of Scottish fisheries. That is why I am keen to work with anglers and other interested parties to improve the management of freshwater fisheries and to increase access for Scots and visitors who enjoy this sport.
What about the Access Forum?
The Scottish Executive is committed to land reform and issues of access, which are obviously relevant.
Previous
Holyrood Project