Skip to main content

Language: English / Gàidhlig

Loading…
Chamber and committees

Plenary, 01 Apr 2004

Meeting date: Thursday, April 1, 2004


Contents


Question Time


SCOTTISH EXECUTIVE


Enterprise, Transport and<br />Lifelong Learning


Science Centres

To ask the Scottish Executive what support it is giving to the science centres in the four main cities. (S2O-1884)

The Deputy First Minister and Minister for Enterprise and Lifelong Learning (Mr Jim Wallace):

The science centres in the cities have all benefited from support either directly from the Executive or from the Scottish Enterprise network. The value of support provided directly by the Executive to those centres since 1999 has been around £1 million. We are currently considering what funding might be made available in future.

Robert Brown:

The minister will be aware that the study that the Executive commissioned on the matter was presented to ministers on 17 March. The interest is in the long-term future of the science centres and the contribution that they can make towards encouraging science in Scotland. Will he give an undertaking to provide serious funding to meet business targets if, in return, the science centres deliver on measurable targets?

Mr Wallace:

Robert Brown is correct to say that we commissioned consultancy work on the science centres. A number of issues remain to be sorted out and, following the receipt of the consultancy report, I hope that we can resolve them shortly. We indicated to the centres that we stand ready to discuss any short-term funding difficulties that they might have, but that we also want to look to the long term. Our aim is to ensure that the science centres in our four cities are preserved for the long term.

Brian Adam (Aberdeen North) (SNP):

Will the future funding for the science centres recognise their different origins? I am thinking in particular of Satrosphere, which was not set up with Millennium Commission-type funding. Will the minister guarantee that the funding that the science centres receive will be granted on the same basis?

Mr Wallace:

I recognise that the science centres have different origins and that a number have been supported by local authorities or by Scottish Enterprise. I have visited Satrosphere in Aberdeen on more than one occasion. Since 1999, it has received £385,000. It would be wrong to say that every science centre will get exactly the same, but we want to consider the options in partnership with the other stakeholders before we enter into any new financial commitments with the centres. However, it is our objective to ensure that the centres—Satrosphere in particular—are maintained and have a long-term future.


Southern Distributor Route

To ask the Scottish Executive what discussions it has had with the Highland Council regarding the completion of the southern distributor route linking the A9 to the A82. (S2O-1866)

Scottish Executive officials met Highland Council officials on 13 January 2004 to discuss the council's proposals for an Inverness southern distributor route.

John Farquhar Munro:

I am sure that the minister is aware that traffic in Inverness would be considerably reduced if the southern distributor road were extended to link the A82, the A9 and the A96, crossing the River Ness and the Caledonian canal. Given that the three roads are trunk roads, will he undertake to investigate how the Ness crossing can be completed in the near future with Executive support?

Nicol Stephen:

As I said, officials are involved in discussions with Highland Council and, to that extent, the Executive supports the project. However, I guess that John Farquhar Munro is referring to significant financial support. The approach that we have taken is that the project is an Inverness scheme—it is being promoted by Highland Council and that section of road would be a non-trunk road, so the council would be responsible for the funding of the route. I appreciate that, in linking several trunk roads, the project could have benefits for traffic in Inverness. That is one of the reasons why roads department officials are trying to be as helpful and supportive as possible.

Fergus Ewing (Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber) (SNP):

Does the minister acknowledge that the matter is of long-term significance to the people and the economy of Inverness and the Highlands, that John Farquhar Munro's point is well made and that the Scottish Executive has a responsibility to intervene and to be proactive? I draw the minister's attention to the proposed planning advice note that contains new guidelines on the crossing of waterways. It says:

"Severing or adversely affecting inland waterways should be avoided."

Will those guidelines be respected and adhered to in connection with any new development, whether trunk or non-trunk?

Nicol Stephen:

I certainly agree with the guidelines. We are investing more in waterways—when I was last in Inverness, I was pleased to announce £2.2 million of extra funding for Scotland's waterways and I saw the excellent work that is being done on the canal network to bring it up to modern standards. Given the potential of our waterway network for tourism and for the whole economy of an area such as Inverness and the Highlands, I want to encourage that potential and to continue to invest in it.

I understand Fergus Ewing's point, but it is primarily for Highland Council—certainly in the first instance—to produce its detailed proposals for the funding of the road. Scottish Executive officials stand ready to offer support and advice. As I have told the Parliament before, if Highland Council wishes to produce detailed proposals, I will certainly consider them.


M8 (Renfrewshire)

To ask the Scottish Executive whether it is intended to create any new accesses to, or egresses from, that part of the M8 that passes through Renfrewshire. (S2O-1840)

The Scottish Executive is considering a proposal to introduce a new junction on the M8 in Renfrewshire, but no decision has yet been made.

Miss Goldie:

The minister will be aware that the application in question relates to a junction that would serve a potential residential development of 2,300 houses at the former Royal Ordnance factory site in Bishopton. Can he confirm that, in the consideration of that application, proper regard will be paid to the existing pressures on infrastructure in that community, particularly those that affect the habitations of Bishopton, Erskine and Inchinnan? Can he further confirm that, in any assessment of the application, regard will also be paid to the implications for the emergency services if, with the proposed increase in residential development, there were any reason why the M8 had to be closed and traffic diverted?

Nicol Stephen:

I can. A full Scottish transport appraisal guidance assessment of the proposal is being carried out. The presumption is against a new access to a motorway of the kind that is proposed and I am sure that all members understand the reason for that. It is important that there is no proliferation of new junctions and interchanges on our motorway network, because the primary purpose of the network is to provide an efficient, non-congested, speedy and safe network. Just as we wish our trunk road network to be as non-congested as possible, it is particularly important that we achieve that in relation to our motorways.

The STAG appraisal is being examined by officials in the transport division. That work is on-going with the consultant who is employed by the developer. Annabel Goldie's point about the wider impact on the communities in the immediate area of Bishopton will certainly be taken into consideration. On her point about the emergency services, I am almost certain that that will be part of the appraisal. I will certainly take on board the points that she has made this afternoon and ensure that her concerns are considered as part of the Executive's assessment of the issue.


Erskine Bridge Repairs

To ask the Scottish Executive what progress has been made in the action to recover the £4 million spent on repairs to the Erskine bridge following the incident involving an offshore floating structure. (S2O-1817)

The Minister for Transport (Nicol Stephen):

An action for more than £4 million was raised in the Court of Session on 28 March 2001 and is proceeding against the six companies that are considered to be responsible for the damage. The court action is progressing and a hearing is expected later this year.

Trish Godman:

Of course, the minister will know that that amazing navigational blunder happened while James Douglas-Hamilton was the minister of state at the Scottish Office with responsibility for transport. However, although I can blame the Tories for a lot of things, I cannot blame James Douglas-Hamilton for that blunder.

The minister's answer has reassured me that he is not overlooking the recovery of the money. I hope that he will be able to convince me that those who are responsible will pay up. I ask him to confirm that Des McNulty and I can make a claim on the money to be spent locally on transport.

Nicol Stephen:

On the final point, we will consider carefully how any funds that are recovered in due course might be used. Clearly, money has been expended on the repair work to the Erskine bridge and the amount that we will sue for will include an appropriate interest payment dating back to 4 August 1996.

The member asked about the legal situation. I am tempted to refer the issue to the Solicitor General for Scotland or the Minister for Justice in the next section of question time—"I used to be a lawyer, but I am all right now," should be my plea at this stage. However, I accept that the vagaries of the court system and the pace at which these things move forward can be frustrating for all involved. Clearly, it would be preferable for a settlement to be reached as soon as possible and I would like things to be speeded up if at all possible. It is good news that the hearing is expected to take place this year. Six companies are involved, which I am told adds significantly to the complexity of the issue, although it explains some of the reasons for the delay. A full briefing on the issue is not something that is best delivered in this afternoon's 20-minute ministerial question time session.


European Higher Education Area

To ask the Scottish Executive what changes will require to be made in higher education to ensure that it is competitive in the European higher education area. (S2O-1883)

The Deputy First Minister and Minister for Enterprise and Lifelong Learning (Mr Jim Wallace):

Scotland is already well placed to meet the principles of the Bologna declaration, which outlines the process that will lead to the creation of a better-integrated European higher education area by 2010. Unlike the systems in many other countries, our system will not require major reforms. We have a well-developed degree system, a national qualifications framework that is at the forefront of European developments and an innovative higher education quality assurance and enhancement scheme. I believe that those and our other strengths will continue to ensure that we are well placed to take advantage of the enhanced opportunities for co-operation and collaboration with our partners in the European higher education area.

Fiona Hyslop:

Obviously, the European higher education area will be a reality by 2010. Does the minister agree that last night's vote at Westminster makes it more likely that the difficulties that the Enterprise and Culture Committee's "Report on Scottish Solutions Inquiry" warn about will come to pass? If we are to compete, particularly with universities in England, for students from the new accession states, some of whom might want to stay and contribute to Scotland's future economy, we will need more than indifference as far as investment is concerned to maintain the quality of research that would have attracted them in the first place.

Mr Wallace:

I noted with great interest the result in the House of Commons yesterday. Even if the result had gone the other way, there would still have been great imperatives for us to try to make the appropriate investment in Scotland's higher education system to ensure that we can be competitive on an international stage as well as in the United Kingdom.

Mr Duncan McNeil (Greenock and Inverclyde) (Lab):

Will the minister assure the chamber that any solutions that are developed to meet the challenges that our universities face will not be to the detriment of the further education sector, which has such a vital role to play in our lifelong learning strategy?

Mr Wallace:

I put on record the Executive's strong commitment to the further education system. Indeed, the figures for investment in further education since the Scottish Parliament was established are considerable. It is important to remember that 25 per cent or thereabouts of higher education in Scotland is delivered through our further education colleges. It is also important to point out that flexibility, the progress that has been made in articulation and the ladder enabling young students to move from further education into higher education are among the strengths of the Scottish higher and further education system.


Wave Power (Commercialisation)

To ask the Scottish Executive what action it is taking to ensure that industry benefits fully from the commercialisation of wave power. (S2O-1938)

The forum for renewable energy development in Scotland has established a sub-group, which is preparing an action plan for the development of the marine energy industry. The sub-group will report to FREDS when it meets in Aberdeen next month.

Shiona Baird:

Is the minister aware that, in Portugal, a mechanism is already in place to promote development of wave energy so that it is attractive to developers? Does he agree that swift action is required if Scotland is to compete with that and to secure the industrial activity associated with wave energy? If so, will he give members some idea of what that action might be?

Lewis Macdonald:

I have said many times that Scotland's economic potential in renewable energy should not be taken for granted. I agree with Shiona Baird that we need to be aware of the competition for innovation, business and jobs—that is the reality. However, we must put that competition in context. The renewables obligation certificates that are provided will support renewable energy across a range of methods of generation and will support the creation of additional capacity without a limit to that level of capacity. The tariff support that the Portuguese are providing is for the first 20MW of wave-generated power. We will consider closely the recommendations of the marine energy group next month and I have no doubt that that is one area that the group will cover. I agree with Shiona Baird that we need to keep ahead of the competition and to be aware of other players in the field.

Murdo Fraser (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con):

Does the minister recognise that the large-scale development of onshore wind farms is causing concern in many rural communities, including in areas of Perth and Kinross, which I represent? If we were able to encourage more wave power developments, by mechanisms such as those that the Portuguese have put in place, that would alleviate some of the public concern that, in developing onshore wind only, we are putting all our eggs in one basket.

Lewis Macdonald:

I am sorry that Mr Fraser did not follow my evidence to the Enterprise and Culture Committee a couple of days ago, when I made it clear that wind power and hydroelectricity, for which the Executive is providing support, are part of a chain of new technologies that the Executive wants to encourage. The support that the Executive gives to the existing renewables technologies will help us to make Scotland an attractive location for the developers of new renewables technologies in future.


Further Education Colleges (Glasgow)

To ask the Scottish Executive what progress has been made on plans to reorganise Glasgow's further education colleges. (S2O-1929)

The Deputy First Minister and Minister for Enterprise and Lifelong Learning (Mr Jim Wallace):

Responsibility for the effective management and organisation of the further education sector lies with the Scottish Further Education Funding Council, which is working closely with the Glasgow colleges to ensure the optimum alignment of further education provision in the city. I expect current scoping work on the curriculum, on articulation and progression and on estates options to be completed in May this year. In addition to that work, the Glasgow College of Building and Printing and the Glasgow College of Food Technology have submitted a proposal that they be merged into a single, new institution. Ministers are currently considering that proposal.

Pauline McNeill:

I declare my interest as a member of the board of management at the Glasgow College of Building and Printing.

I understand that the target date to merge the Glasgow College of Food Technology and the Glasgow College of Building and Printing is 1 August. That date is critical, so will the minister assure me that the Scottish Executive will do everything in its powers to ensure that it is met? If it is not, there will be a knock-on effect.

Further to that, does the minister accept that the proposal of a five-college merger in Glasgow has no widespread support among the colleges? Indeed, I do not support it, either. Does he agree that we should instead consider the proposed mergers that are on the table, including that between Stow College and the Glasgow College of Nautical Studies in a magnificent new-build harbour development? I suggest that that, not a five-college merger, is the way forward.

Mr Wallace:

I thank Pauline McNeill for her initiative in giving me a guided tour of the further and higher education institutions within a short walking distance of each other in her constituency, which graphically illustrated the challenges and the opportunities that are before us. I am aware that it was proposed that the new college should come about on 1 August 2004. That may be over-optimistic, given that there still has to be a consultation. Nevertheless, I understand that the colleges had built alternative dates into their planning process, which is a good example of their robust preparation and forward thinking.

As for other options in the Glasgow area, I understand that the 2001 KPMG report gave a range of realignment options. The important consideration is that any proposal should come first and foremost from the colleges. The appropriate time for ministers to consider action is when specific proposals have been submitted to us.

Robert Brown (Glasgow) (LD):

I associate myself with Pauline McNeill's remarks. On a slightly different issue, has consideration been given to whether the reorganisation proposals fulfil the commitment in the Liberal Democrat manifesto and the partnership agreement regarding senior schoolchildren's access to colleges under the general umbrella of the school environment?

Mr Wallace:

As Robert Brown knows, I am always anxious to fulfil Liberal Democrat manifesto commitments that have been taken forward into the partnership agreement. Members might know that, last month at Telford College, I launched a consultation document that fleshes out how we might facilitate the opportunity for pupils to experience and access vocational courses in FE colleges. I look forward to the responses to that consultation.


Justice and Law Officers


Residential Care Programmes (Young People)

To ask the Scottish Executive, following the closure of the Airborne Initiative, what programmes it supports that provide residential care for young people and are designed to divert them from crime and addiction problems. (S2O-1924)

Our aim is to provide the courts with a full range of disposals that meet the needs of offenders, including residential programmes, although residential accommodation is not always the best answer.

Fergus Ewing:

As the Deputy First Minister reminded us, this is an area of sensitivity between the two component factions of the Scottish Executive. In playing my habitual role as mediator and peacemaker, I commend to the warring factions in the Executive the Highland youth advantage scheme, which has operated for around four years with great success in a joint venture between the Northern constabulary and the Army. The results, following reappraisal, show that young people who took the course, having conducted a short life of minor crime, were rehabilitated. Therefore, will the minister take steps to promote the replication of the scheme in every constabulary area in Scotland, so that something that works for young people can operate throughout Scotland?

Hugh Henry:

I make no comment on Fergus Ewing's ability as a mediator or peacemaker within the Scottish National Party. Given some of what happens within the party, he has a hell of a lot of work on his hands.

I accept that, where we can identify schemes that work well, we want to see that good practice spread throughout the country. In many respects, service delivery is the responsibility of local authorities, although many voluntary organisations also make a significant contribution. I will consider with interest the scheme that Fergus Ewing mentioned, but a number of schemes are already proving successful and we would hope to see them taken up throughout Scotland.

Robin Harper (Lothians) (Green):

The Executive closed down Airborne when it was perfectly clear that the initiative was contributing extremely successfully to reducing reoffending by the difficult people whom it was helping. I have figures on projected savings, such as £2.25 million a year—

You must ask a question, Mr Harper.

The question is coming, Presiding Officer.

It is not coming fast enough.

Will the Executive please publish clear criteria on how it judges projects such as Fairbridge and Airborne and tell us whether it is considering closing down any other such projects?

Hugh Henry:

A number of issues are involved in Robin Harper's question. First, we are continuing to fund Fairbridge for another year, although we have made it clear that we will be discussing with it over the course of the year a rigid set of expectations. Secondly, he asked about other organisations and the withdrawal of funding. Fairbridge and Airborne were, to some extent, unusual, because most projects are funded through local authorities, not directly by the Scottish Executive—only a small number of projects are funded in that way.

I disagree profoundly with Robin Harper's view that Airborne was extremely successful; it was not and I can provide more information on that if he wishes. Airborne was not successful, which is why we took the decision to withdraw its funding. Any organisation that delivers a service to the Executive or to any other funder should expect to be asked questions about its ability to deliver on what it says it will deliver and to have its success measured. I repeat—we have said this time and again—that Airborne was very expensive, did not recruit the number of people that it should have recruited and had a high drop-out rate. We made the correct decision in reinvesting that money elsewhere.

Karen Gillon (Clydesdale) (Lab):

Notwithstanding what the minister has just said, does he accept that some components of the Airborne course were successful? What steps are being taken to ensure that, in the evaluation of the course, those parts that were successful can be passed on as good practice to other projects?

Hugh Henry:

Anything that can be transferred to other organisations will be considered by the voluntary and local authority organisations to see whether it can enhance their ability to deliver locally. I accept what Karen Gillon says. Some aspects of the course may well have something to add to other organisations and I am sure that those organisations will look into that. Some of them are already in discussion with staff from Airborne to see whether there are opportunities for them to use those staff and I wish them well in that.


Security (Edinburgh)

To ask the Scottish Executive whether security will be increased at consulates and other major buildings in Edinburgh as a result of recent world events and what the cost of such increased security would be. (S2O-1869)

The Deputy Minister for Justice (Hugh Henry):

The need for additional security is kept under constant review by the police, taking account of the current threat levels and intelligence. For obvious reasons, it would not be appropriate to reveal the costs that are associated with such measures.

Mr MacAskill:

The minister will be aware that the costs of policing such matters in a capital city are currently being met by the council tax payer in the city of Edinburgh, who is paying higher council tax rates yet is receiving a poorer police service. Does he accept that, as well as capital city status for the nation, Edinburgh requires capital city status for its police to ensure that matters are fully dealt with and that the council tax payer does not have to pay an undue amount and receive a poorer service?

Hugh Henry:

All police forces in Scotland, including Lothian and Borders police, received additional funding in the light of the pressures that arose following the 9/11 incident. On the specific question about other pressures on Lothian and Borders police, we are waiting on information from that police force. We will reflect on that information and we will make a decision about the distribution of resources throughout police forces in Scotland taking account of various factors. We want to be fair to all the forces in Scotland. If one force, such as Lothian and Borders police, has specific needs, those needs will be factored into the decision. When we have received the information and assessed it, we will come to a decision that will be reflected in future years' funding.


Miscarriages of Justice (Aftercare)

To ask the Scottish Executive what support is available to those freed from prison after a miscarriage of justice. (S2O-1841)

The Deputy Minister for Justice (Hugh Henry):

The Executive has systems in place to provide compensation in appropriate cases for those who are freed from prison after a miscarriage of justice. Although support in adjusting to their new circumstances is generally available to ex-prisoners, ministers have decided that there should be a service that makes separate and distinct provision for those who have suffered a miscarriage of justice. The Executive is currently considering the most effective way in which to provide such a service.

Bill Butler:

I am pleased to hear that the Executive has decided that distinctive support should be given to victims of a miscarriage of justice. The deputy minister will be aware that the Justice 1 Committee raised the issue with the Minister for Justice in connection with a petition from the Miscarriages of Justice Organisation. The committee, rightly, was concerned about the obvious gap in provision for people who had been wrongfully imprisoned. What type of support will be made available and who will provide the support service in Scotland?

Hugh Henry:

Bill Butler is right to say that the Justice 1 Committee has considered the matter, which the Minister for Justice has reflected on; she has, indeed, replied to the committee.

The services that might be available could be advice services on benefits, which can often be complicated—and there could be added complications for people in such circumstances. Services could include advice on access to appropriate housing, on financial management and compensation and on how to manage any compensation that has been provided. A range of matters need to be carefully considered.

In some areas, individual organisations could be well placed to provide such advice, but in other circumstances, advice could come from organisations with specific expertise. We will consider such matters. I emphasise again to Bill Butler that there needs to be provision that is separate and distinct from that which is provided to ex-offenders.

Nicola Sturgeon (Glasgow) (SNP):

What mechanisms are in place to ensure that any lessons that specific cases of miscarriage of justice can teach us are learned? On a more specific point, what is the Scottish Executive's position with regard to people who have been freed from prison after miscarriages of justice being charged for board and lodgings that they received while in prison for crimes that they did not commit?

Hugh Henry:

On lessons that can be drawn, all parts of the justice system reflect carefully on conclusions. Obviously, we expect the police to consider how any case has been handled and the Crown Office reflects on how things have been taken forward. If there was anything upon which ministers with responsibility for justice had to reflect and decide, that would be done. We must consider carefully any miscarriages of justice that have been identified, not only for the sake of those who have suffered but to ensure that no one else suffers in such a way in the future.

On the more specific point, about the treatment of compensation, charging for board and lodgings has not been the practice in Scotland and ministers in Scotland have no intention of introducing such a practice.

Colin Fox (Lothians) (SSP):

What lessons can we learn from the appalling miscarriages of justice in the cases of Joe Steele and T C Campbell, now that they are over? Can the minister provide the Parliament with any confidence that such travesties will never happen again?

Hugh Henry:

My comments to Nicola Sturgeon apply equally in response to Colin Fox. We will consider carefully the outcome of the specific cases that Colin Fox mentioned and any decisions that must be made. However, it is a bit early for us to draw specific conclusions at the moment.


Public Fear of Crime

To ask the Scottish Executive how it will deliver on its commitment to reduce the public fear of crime and to monitor it statistically. (S2O-1826)

The Deputy Minister for Justice (Hugh Henry):

Under the Executive, police numbers in Scotland have reached record levels and that is delivering results. We want to make Scotland a safer place, in which people feel safer. Our aim—which we share with the police service—is to reassure the public where it is right to do so. Numerical measures help, but they are not the whole answer. Measuring fear of crime in a way that guides policy is a complex matter and we are working with the Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland and others on how best to do that.

Miss Goldie:

I thank the minister for his response and direct his attention to the justice section of the Scottish Executive's annual evaluation report, which was published yesterday. In brackets after target 1, which relates to reducing serious violent crime, is the word "SLIPPAGE". Under target 3, which is about reducing fear of crime, there is no entry. That is explained further on by the words:

"we have not supplied a ‘met', ‘on course' or ‘slippage' assessment"

because the milestones are not available. Does the minister agree that such targets are questionable? I was comforted by what he said in his response about the continuing relevance of such targets, but would not it be far more practical and meaningful to the public to provide a much more visible form of policing in our communities, which would really reduce the fear of crime?

Hugh Henry:

I am not sure that the Conservatives learned anything from our debate in the chamber yesterday. The matter was referred to again today; we heard people urging caution on politicians who try to dictate to journalists and broadcasters how they should operate. There seems to be an inference in Annabel Goldie's question that politicians should dictate to chief constables exactly how they should police local communities. There is an important distinction between what politicians do and how chief constables and police boards reflect policy in local communities.

On the wider issue about the fear of crime, a working group from the Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland and other bodies is considering the matter and we will reflect on the outcome when that group reports back.

Johann Lamont (Glasgow Pollok) (Lab):

I trust that the minister accepts that the fear of crime is often generated by lack of confidence in the justice system, particularly among victims of crime.

The minister is aware of the dreadful circumstances around the killing in my constituency of Mr James Mitchell by his neighbour Mr Drummond. That case highlights a range of examples of the failure of the justice system to take proper account of victims' rights. I ask the minister to comment on the most recent example of that failure. Despite assurances about the right of the Mitchell family to be kept informed prior to any parole decision, the family was left to find out from a journalist on the Evening Times that Mr Drummond had been released on 48 hours' unsupervised leave as part of preparation for parole. That news has left the Mitchell family distraught and fearful.

Will the minister, as a matter of urgency, ensure that there is a full review of the system of preparation for parole to meet the understandable fears, not just of my constituents, but of victims and their families, that the parole arrangements do not recognise their rights and put them at further risk of crime? In monitoring the fear of crime, I suggest that a useful starting point is the victims of crime.

Hugh Henry:

I share Johann Lamont's concerns about the victims of crime. That is why we have put so much emphasis on supporting not only vulnerable witnesses, but the victims of crime.

In relation to the specific distressing case that Johann Lamont describes, I can well understand how badly the family feel about that. I know that Johann Lamont has raised the matter with the Solicitor General, and Cathy Jamieson, the Minister for Justice, is also aware of it. They will both look closely at what happened and if improvements can be made, they will be made.


Alcoholic Drinks (Home Deliveries)

To ask the Scottish Executive what legal restrictions exist on direct home deliveries of alcoholic drinks. (S2O-1913)

The Deputy Minister for Justice (Hugh Henry):

The home delivery of alcohol requires a licence under the Licensing (Scotland) Act 1976, which restricts home deliveries in several ways. The permitted hours for purchase and delivery are 8 am to 10 pm on Mondays to Saturdays and 12.30 pm to 10 pm on Sundays. A contract for sale can be made only within those hours, but delivery can be made at other times. The seller has to keep certain records about the order and the customer, and those records must be carried by the person who delivers the order.

Cathy Peattie:

Does the minister share the concern of my constituents who received a flyer offering what it called "drinks on wheels", a home delivery service for alcohol including beers, spirits, alcopops and Buckfast? The flyer gives a freephone number that is available between 11 pm and 5 am on Friday and Saturday nights. Will the minister consider what can be done to stop that?

Hugh Henry:

I deplore the illegal sale or provision of alcohol by any organisation. The company to which Cathy Peattie refers, like other companies, is required to operate within the constraints that I outlined. However, we certainly do not want to take action that would restrict responsible suppliers who arrange home deliveries. The Nicholson committee discussed the matter and we cover the issue in the draft white paper, which says that we intend to give consideration to the matter. We need to strike a balance between the use of modern technology by responsible companies and ensuring that the police and other agencies take appropriate action when people flout the law.


General Questions


Blood Donation

To ask the Scottish Executive how it plans to increase the level of blood donations in Scotland. (S2O-1891)

The Scottish National Blood Transfusion Service has stepped up its new donor recruitment campaign and is asking existing donors to make special efforts at this time.

Donald Gorrie:

The minister is aware that there will be a big loss of donors because many of them will not be allowed to donate their blood as a result of the medical problems that have arisen. Will he assist the blood transfusion service in producing imaginative efforts to recruit donors—perhaps by using personalities, clever gimmicks or advertising—to break through to many more people and attract them to blood donation? There will be a significant problem if the gap is not filled.

Malcolm Chisholm:

The Scottish National Blood Transfusion Service has put a great deal of effort this year into preparing for 5 April, when the change will take place. It already has a new advertising campaign and is conducting research for more targeted campaigns later in the year. Donald Gorrie's suggestion about the use of celebrities is a good one. As I said in my statement two weeks ago, a range of activities is taking place. For example, the better blood transfusion programme has made good progress and is now being supported by 18 transfusion practitioners.

Mrs Nanette Milne (North East Scotland) (Con):

The minister will be aware that I have lodged a motion encouraging the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body to make facilities available for MSPs and parliamentary staff to donate blood. To date, the motion has been supported by 34 members, which is a substantial number although it is still well short of the total. Will the minister join me in encouraging more members to sign the motion and to let their constituents know that they have done so, in order to show the public and our staff that the Parliament is prepared to take a leading role in encouraging increased levels of blood donation across the country?

Malcolm Chisholm:

I am not sure that it is appropriate for me to encourage members to sign parliamentary motions. As I said in my statement two weeks ago, Nanette Milne has headed up a highly commendable initiative, which I am sure will be heeded by the parliamentary authorities. She will understand that the motion is properly for the Parliament rather than the Executive, but I commend her proposal in general terms.


Local Government Funding Formula

To ask the Scottish Executive whether the indicators that underpin the funding formula for local government are being reviewed. (S2O-1861)

The Minister for Finance and Public Services (Mr Andy Kerr):

The indicators that underpin the funding formula for local government are under periodic review. The formula is agreed with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities and takes account of deprivation, rurality and metropolitan and island costs.

Richard Lochhead:

Does the minister accept that the current funding formula hits north-east councils hard—especially Aberdeenshire Council and Aberdeen City Council—and leaves local citizens with overstretched local services? Since reorganisation, £63 million has been cut from Aberdeenshire Council's budget. Aberdeen City Council receives the lowest funding per head of any local authority on mainland Scotland.

Does the minister accept that grant-aided expenditure does not adequately take need into account given that, although the formula uses some 100 indicators, 75 per cent of the funding is distributed on the basis of 12 indicators, of which 10 are concerned with population and school rolls? That discriminates against north-east councils. Will the minister take into account the councils' campaign for a fair share of local government funding and give a guarantee that he will review the funding formula, which is clearly not working for the north-east of Scotland?

Mr Kerr:

Of course, I need to live in the real world, where there is a need to ensure that resources are distributed fairly across Scotland. I will work with COSLA, which represents all local authorities in Scotland, on considering how we best distribute resources. Aberdeen City Council received an 8.5 per cent increase in 2003-04 and will receive an increase of 4.7 per cent in this coming year. It has also received £1.9 million in floor support and £6.7 million from the quality of life fund. I could go on.

The Executive has placed faith in local authorities by giving them unprecedented resources to deliver for their communities. I have always said that we are challenging but fair. I do not claim that local authorities are awash with cash and I acknowledge that they could do more if they had more money. However, we must be responsible about the amount of money that we take from the pockets of taxpayers and businesses up and down Scotland and ensure that we fund local authorities fairly and that they spend that money wisely.


Rural Schools

To ask the Scottish Executive what its position is on the importance of rural schools in maintaining sustainable rural communities. (S2O-1827)

The Minister for Education and Young People (Peter Peacock):

All schools make an important contribution to their communities. Over time, service provision across Scotland changes in the light of changing local circumstances. It is for local councils to determine how best to serve the needs of their diverse communities.

Rhona Brankin:

The minister is aware of proposals for rural school closures in my constituency of Midlothian. I am glad that he acknowledges the important role that local schools play. Given that the Department for Education and Skills has implemented a presumption against the closure of rural schools in England, does the minister agree that there is a strong case for guidance in Scotland to be strengthened? As he knows, the Education, Culture and Sport Committee of the Scottish Parliament published a report in July 2000 that made that point to the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities and Audit Scotland, but very little progress appears to have been made in the intervening period. Will the minister address the issue as a matter of urgency, so that no rural school closes unless the closure is clearly in the best interests of educational provision in the area?

Peter Peacock:

I recognise Rhona Brankin's concerns about schools in her constituency, as she has spoken to me about the issue more than once in recent weeks. She is right that, a year or so ago, COSLA abandoned its work to produce a code of practice on such matters. We have made it clear that we are prepared and want to produce a new guide for parents that stresses what the respective roles of local authorities and ministers are. I will try to move that process along as quickly as I can.

Existing guidance makes it clear what procedures local authorities have to follow. It is a primary consideration of local authorities to have the educational interests of the whole community in mind when they make any decisions about changes in school provision. Local authorities are under a statutory duty to provide adequate and efficient education for their area and to comply with the provisions of the Standards in Scotland's Schools etc Act 2000.

The member referred to the presumption against closure that exists in England and Wales. The rural situation in England, in particular, is very different from that in Scotland. Schools with as many as 800 pupils may be regarded as rural schools, whereas in Scotland a school with 800 pupils would be regarded as a pretty big urban primary school. That said, at the time that the DFES issued its guidelines indicating a presumption against closure, Brian Wilson, who was then the minister responsible for education in Scotland, issued guidance in relation to what he called a test of proportionate advantage. That involved weighing up the financial advantages of a particular school closure against any educational disadvantages and the effect on local communities of a change in educational provision. As we all know, Brian Wilson is an extremely able and wise politician. It is right that his advice was listened to at that time. He set out a good test and local authorities should still have regard to it.

Chris Ballance (South of Scotland) (Green):

In last week's debate on the closure of Borders rural schools, I put a question to the Deputy Minister for Education and Young People that he declined to answer. I would like to put the same question to the minister. Will he commit himself to making the wishes of parents a priority when making decisions about proposals for school closures that come to him?

Peter Peacock:

If proposals for school closures come to me, I will take the advice of my officials, as I always do. When considering any such matters, I also take advice from Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Education. I am bound to check whether the local authority in question has followed the procedures that we have set out for it. If I find deficiencies, I will take appropriate action. The clear statutory position is that we devolve responsibility for local matters to the level at which decisions are best made. Local councils have a far better view of their communities and how they work than I have, sitting in Edinburgh. That is the statutory position that I want to defend.

Jeremy Purvis (Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale) (LD):

Given the impact that proposed closures in my constituency in the Borders and in Midlothian will have on already fragile communities, will the Education Department ensure that it works with both the Environment and Rural Affairs Department and the Development Department to stress that proposed school closures have a wider impact on rural communities?

Peter Peacock:

I referred earlier to the test of proportionate advantage, which was designed specifically to guide local authorities on the considerations that they must take into account when they examine these difficult and important matters. As I said in response to Rhona Brankin's question, local authorities must weigh up the financial benefits of closure, which parents often perceive as driving the proposals, against the impact of any changes on the education of young people and on the communities that are affected. That is a good test and we should continue to apply it.

Lord James Douglas-Hamilton (Lothians) (Con):

I welcome the minister's conciliatory tone on this pressing issue, but does he acknowledge the very urgent need for national guidelines that contain a presumption against the closure of rural schools? Indeed, there is all the more need for such guidelines, given the proposed mass closures of such schools in Scotland and the fact that in England only a very few schools have been closed.

Peter Peacock:

I have indicated that I take these matters seriously, and I acknowledge that parents have very serious concerns. However, I must also point out that local authorities have to make very serious considerations and manage their future provision in a way that will deliver the best education for all the children under their care.

I have mentioned the test of proportionate advantage. The Scottish ministers took that position at the time that English ministers chose the route that they went down. We have clearly set out the guidance that local authorities must have regard to. For example, they must take account of parents' representations before they reach any decisions. I repeat that the test of proportionate advantage is the right one for local authorities to consider in weighing up local decisions. I do not think that, fundamentally, our guidance is in any way wrong.

Christine Grahame (South of Scotland) (SNP):

I add my voice to those of members who want the new guidance to be issued urgently. The minister's own department parked the idea a year ago, when it was said that the guidance should include a presumption against rural school closure. I heard what the minister said about the differences in England, but I think that such a presumption is essential.

Will the minister consider this matter against his own commitment in the Lib-Lab coalition document "Building Our Future" to place

"The school at the heart of the community"?

How can we support any rural school closure if the community in question opposes it? Surely the minister must issue the guidance with such a presumption soon.

Peter Peacock:

I have already answered the point about the presumption in my responses to Lord James Douglas-Hamilton and Rhona Brankin. As I said, I recognise that local primary schools in rural areas play an important part in their community; however, any local primary school plays an important part in its community.

The fact is that populations in Scotland shift and change and, in certain communities, decline. As a result, local authorities are required to consider modern provision for their schools and the future provision of education in their areas. They need to take account of the issues that I have covered today—and which I am happy to cover again in the future—when reaching decisions on these matters.


Mohs Micrographic Surgery

To ask the Scottish Executive whether the national health service regional planning groups have made any progress in making Mohs micrographic surgery more widely available. (S2O-1821)

Discussions on the matter are under way, but it is too soon to give a definitive answer on the proposed way forward.

Mr Macintosh:

I am grateful for the minister's answer and his response to my parliamentary question on the same subject on 26 February. At that time, the minister agreed that the Mohs service should become more widely available in Scotland and stated that the national services advisory group felt that the service was too low cost and low volume to justify national organisation.

Is the minister aware that, in 2002-03, the costs of at least four national services were of the same order as the proposed cost of the Mohs service and that three national managed clinical networks supported by the national services division cost less than £50,000 a year? Moreover, is he aware that the proposed volume of the Mohs service is 200 patients per year? We should compare that with patient figures for national services in 2002-03, which varied from 13 patients for simultaneous renal/pancreatic transplantation to 357 patents for adult cystic fibrosis.

Malcolm Chisholm:

As Ken Macintosh has reminded us, the national services advisory group came to the view that the service should be developed at a regional level. I do not think that any hard-and-fast rules apply to the criteria, although I outlined some general criteria in my previous response.

The important point is that the service should be developed as quickly as possible. There are strong arguments for that to be done on a regional basis, not least of which is that we do not want a single centre for this particular form of surgery. Although a national service is often concentrated in one place in Scotland, it is more appropriate to develop the service on a regional basis in three centres.

Progress is being made on the matter. Although people might have concerns about the money, the funding basis is the same for national and regional services. The money is top-sliced from the general allocation to NHS boards. The money will be in place and I am confident that that is the right way of making progress.


Rural Post Office Network

To ask the Scottish Executive what assessment has been made of the social and economic impact on rural communities of the rural post office network. (S2O-1890)

The Deputy Minister for Environment and Rural Development (Allan Wilson):

A number of research reports have been commissioned by the Postal Services Commission to evaluate the social and economic impact of the rural post office network on rural communities. The studies indicate that the services that are provided by post offices bring significant social and economic benefits to rural communities.

Roseanna Cunningham:

The minister will be aware that the current rural post office network is safeguarded until 2006 and that the network will thereafter be under review. Does he agree that there will be an opportunity to argue for a different approach in Scotland, rather than there being a UK-wide, one-size-fits-all policy? Does he further agree that, to strengthen that argument, either the Executive or the enterprise network in Scotland must instruct a study of the network's current socioeconomic impact on fragile rural communities?

Allan Wilson:

I agree that there may well be an opportunity to examine the specific needs of rural Scotland in greater detail than has perhaps happened historically. As Roseanna Cunningham knows, we engage with the Department of Trade and Industry in an interdepartmental manner to discuss how best to revitalise the network. That does not necessarily mean that we will continue to do things as they have always been done. We want to modernise the service so that it can meet the real needs of the rural service customer. In that context, I will be pleased to consider whatever proposals may be made along those lines.


Genetically Modified Oil-seed Rape

To ask the Scottish Executive when it expects the results of farm-scale trials on genetically modified, winter-sown oil-seed rape. (S2O-1951)

We expect that the results of the trials of winter-sown oil-seed rape will be published as a series of scientific papers in an independent peer-reviewed scientific journal before the end of the year.

Eleanor Scott:

The minister will be aware that oil-seed rape is a species that poses a very high risk of contamination to other crops and wild plant species, and that when GM oil-seed rape has been grown in other parts of the world it has resulted in the devastation of non-GM oil-seed rape cultivation. Does he agree that that crop could never be grown in Scotland without causing similar irreversible damage to Scottish agriculture, and will the Executive use all its legal powers to prevent any future cultivation of that crop?

Allan Wilson:

I understand that the Green party, having only last week described me as a puppet of the biotechnology industry, will be smarting from having organic egg on its face following the decision that was made this week by Bayer CropScience.

I agree with the Greens about the fact that winter-sown oil-seed rape is a significant crop in Scottish agriculture, with approximately 30,000 hectares being grown annually. We will, as ever, take a science-based, evidence-based, case-by-case approach to whatever the farm-scale evaluation results show. We will have those results reviewed by our scientific advisers and I will probably invite them up to Scotland so that Eleanor Scott and others can make their views known directly to them. However, as a part C consent is a prerequisite for national seed listing, as no GM part C consent has been sought for winter-sown oil-seed rape and as no national seed listing application has been received or considered, there is no prospect of the scenario that Eleanor Scott describes taking place in the immediate future.

George Lyon (Argyll and Bute) (LD):

As the minister is well aware, Bayer CropScience has decided that it will not attempt to grow Chardon LL GM maize in the UK on a commercial basis. Does he agree that that decision is a direct result of the tough, restrictive regime that the Executive proposed to introduce, while working within the law, before granting consent for the commercial growing of Chardon LL, and that the Scottish Executive will indeed deliver a voluntary GM-free Scotland?

If you just say yes, minister, I can fit in another question.

Allan Wilson:

I have much pleasure in agreeing with the member for Argyll and Bute. This must be turning into a very embarrassing exchange for the Opposition parties, but I agree that that decision is a vindication of the strict regulatory regime that we have imposed in Scotland and in the UK. As our colleagues down south have said, we make no apologies for that.


Key Workers (Housing)

To ask the Scottish Executive whether it will establish a scheme for housing key workers in areas of high economic pressure, such as Edinburgh. (S2O-1902)

As part of its review of affordable housing, the Executive is examining whether the cost of housing in pressured markets is affecting recruitment of key workers.

Sarah Boyack:

I welcome the minister's commitment to address the issue. Does she acknowledge the crisis in Edinburgh, where ranges of key workers are now being excluded from the housing market and cannot afford to live in the city? Does she recognise that the extent of our problem is such that we must not just deal with the select few but meet the needs of 1,000 households every year in Edinburgh? That is a key problem that we must address urgently.

Ms Curran:

I am happy to acknowledge that we should turn our attention to the concerns of not just the elite few in Edinburgh, but the majority of the city's population and other people who might seek to live in Edinburgh and its environs. I have had many discussions with Sarah Boyack and I am sure that they will continue. I have also had discussions with City of Edinburgh Council about all the housing issues in Edinburgh. We have considered affordability, supply, the operation of the market and, as we said this morning, the operation of the planning system. Our review of affordable housing is under way and we are undertaking substantial work. I assure Sarah Boyack and members that we will consider the needs of Edinburgh in particular, as well as those of other areas of Scotland.