Plenary, 01 Jun 2000

Meeting date: Thursday, June 1, 2000

Official Report 617KB pdf

---

Question Time

---

SCOTTISH EXECUTIVE

---

Local Authority Boundaries

To ask the Scottish Executive whether it has any plans to reorganise local authority boundaries. (S1O-1821)

Presiding Officer, I take this opportunity to thank you and the Deputy First Minister for your choice of ties this afternoon, which display the Glasgow city tartan.

That is definitely out of order.

Under the existing legislative provisions, the next statutory review of local authority boundaries is not scheduled to take place until 2004 at the earliest. However, we receive representations from communities to identify how communities can be looked after through the existing local authority provision in Scotland.

I thank the minister for his reply. Is he aware of the campaign that is being organised in the Cumbernauld area of my constituency? The campaigners, some of whom are in the public gallery today, are calling for their area to be used as an experimental unitary authority, with new structures for strategic planning, major transport and crime investigations, and education which could be dealt with through the Scottish Parliament. Will the minister consider the request that is being made by my constituents?

We are awaiting the report by Richard Kerley into local government, which will have implications for local authority boundaries. Most local authorities want a period of stability, following the turbulent period of reorganisation a few years back, and we are trying to reflect that in the present structures. One of the commitments that most councils should be engaging in centrally is having a good decentralised structure, to ensure that the needs of communities in diverse areas are represented in the decision-making process. I welcome contributions on that, and I hope that Cathy Craigie can be at the forefront of that.

I endorse the sentiments of Cathy Craigie's question. Does the minister recognise the real strength of feeling in the Cumbernauld area, as endorsed by the leaflet that has been distributed today? Does he recognise that, for people in that area, local government is neither local nor good government? Without restructuring the whole of local government, we must pilot new ways of devolving it—as happens in every other European country—so that it is closer to the people, not remote as it is in North Lanarkshire.

I do not necessarily share Mr Wilson's perspective on local authorities. I have visited more than 30 local authorities throughout Scotland, and know that they want a period of stability. They want to represent the wider communities that exist in their areas, and will be able to do so to the ministerial team as part of the discussions that will take place post-Kerley.

The Local Government Committee has been in correspondence with councillors from Cumbernauld. We felt that, when we discuss the role of the boundary commission later this year, this issue should be acknowledged. Does the minister agree that that is the appropriate way in which to proceed?

As I said, we await the Kerley report. In due course, the Executive and the Parliament will consider its recommendations fully. If there are any implications for the work of the local government boundary commission, we will take them into account. Because of a number of concerns that have been raised with us during visits to local authorities over the way in which the commission has handled submissions to it in the past, we are in the process of examining the commission's work.

---

Education

To ask the Scottish Executive what steps it is taking to recognise and address the increase in recent years in the percentage of teenage girls leaving school with no qualifications. (S1O-1858)

We have commissioned a research project that aims to identify factors that influence the relative attainment of boys and girls and to provide advice on how good performance by both genders can be achieved. That will report at the end of the year.

I thank the minister for those encouraging comments. However, I remain concerned over the lack of job opportunities for teenage girls. What is the Executive doing to widen the consultation with, for example, education authorities, career services and employers' organisations to encourage young girls, while they are still at school, to get the qualifications that will allow them to take up opportunities in the workplace? What is the Executive doing to tackle the stereotyping of jobs for girls?

Like Mrs Godman, I am concerned about the stereotyping that goes on, especially in later years at school, when boys tend to go for science and maths and girls tend to go for languages and other subjects. That has a knock-on effect on their job prospects. The freedom of choice that people have at school should be a true freedom of choice and not one that is based on stereotyping. I hope that the study that we are undertaking will tell us not only why stereotyping develops but how we can deal with it.

Does the minister think that the worrying rise in the number of under-age pregnancies is a factor in the lack of achievement to which Mrs Godman's question refers? Is he concerned about the rise in that number, and is he concerned about the way in which sex education is delivered in schools?

I am somewhat surprised that Mr Gallie should ask whether anyone is concerned about teenage pregnancies—the numbers of which, incidentally, are not rising, but static. I am sure that everyone in this Parliament, without exception, is concerned about unplanned teenage pregnancies. I am surprised that Mr Gallie should suggest otherwise.

---

Genetically Modified Organisms

To ask the Scottish Executive when it was first informed that seed contaminated with GM seed had been sold to Scottish farmers. (S1O-1823)

The Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food informed the Scottish Executive in a letter dated 15 May that seed contaminated with GM seed had been sown throughout the UK. The sequence of events from the Scottish Executive's perspective was that on 5 May an official in my department was made aware, in the margins of a meeting in London, of an unspecific contamination case. Our further inquiries about the precise nature of the problem elicited the letter of 15 May.

That answer makes the position worse than we thought rather than better. Does the minister know how many acres in Scotland were planted with those seeds after MAFF knew about the matter on 17 April? What is the sense of individual farmers' being asked to sue a multinational such as Advanta? Is it not incumbent on the Administration to compensate farmers for their losses after 17 April, when MAFF knew? Should MAFF not foot that bill, and then seek to recover the costs from Advanta?

I regret that I still do not have the full details of the number of acres that were sown with contaminated crop. Through work within our department, through co-operation with the National Farmers Union of Scotland, and following a meeting with Advanta in London this morning at which the Scottish Executive was represented by a senior official, I am pleased to say that we are now getting co-operation in going through the network of distributors to establish which farms are affected and, in particular, which ones have been distributed contaminated seed as opposed to the ones that have simply purchased it.

There are two issues in relation to compensation. I hope that Alasdair Morgan will accept that even although other parties might interfere in a fault, in law that fault still rests with the principal and in this case the principal is, without doubt, Advanta. I met with the National Farmers Union of Scotland on Monday. It made it very clear that it is not prepared to hang about on this but it is nevertheless happy for us to ensure that the responsibility that Advanta has is made very clear to Advanta.

At the meeting this morning with Advanta that I mentioned we made it very clear that it should recognises the damage it is doing to its reputation and that it should take action. I hope that we will have a few days in which to press that claim before looking at the wider picture.

What was Advanta's response? Did it acknowledge its responsibility and will it pay compensation to the farmers who should be ploughing the crops up?

I do not wish not to respond to that question. I hope all members will realise that I say very sincerely that the purpose of our attending that meeting was to make Advanta absolutely aware of its responsibility and the need for an early settlement. I do not wish to go beyond that, except to say that the official present at the meeting, with whom I spoke just before entering this chamber, regarded the meeting as constructive. It is important to conduct such a very important discussion for Scottish farmers, at least for the next few days, in some degree of—

In view of the fact that the French and Swedish Governments have already asked their farmers to plough such crops in, will the Executive guarantee interim compensation, to allow farmers immediately to plough up the GM-contaminated crops without fear of financial loss, before they flower and further pollute the countryside? Will it make such financial assistance and guidance available in advance of the imminent flowering of the GM-contaminated, spring-sown oil-seed rape plants, and will such guidance advise farmers how to prevent the spread of contamination from wind-blown GM pollen and subsequently from fresh GM seed drop? What representations will it make to ensure that the compensation claims raised with Advanta are processed soon?

If Mr Harper had been listening to my answer to Mr Morgan, he would have known that I was pressing Advanta to settle quickly.

On the danger of the crops currently growing, Mr Harper is right: we have a very short window of opportunity. About 15 June is the date we have to meet, given the seed-sowing pattern.

On interim compensation, I can only emphasise that we have an agreement with the NFUS that we establish absolutely that Advanta is primarily responsible. I will not make any statement that gives any impression to Advanta that I am about to step into its shoes. That is not sensible in terms of achieving an answer to the final part of Mr Harper's question, ensuring that Advanta should settle quickly. If I were to think I would step into Advanta's shoes, that would be a recipe for prolonging the process unnecessarily and against farmers' interests.

On guidance and advice, that was the substance of the meeting that was held with the NFUS on Monday: that we establish the farmers' rights under the arable payments scheme, which we are pursuing diligently with the European Commission, and that we must understand and explain what we are doing and particularly what happens if some crops germinate.

In the light of the obvious breakdown in communications between MAFF and the Scottish Executive, what measures are being put in place to ensure that a similar debacle does not happen again?

I am pleased to say that I have received a full personal apology from Mr Nicholas Brown, the minister in charge. We both recognise that this matter goes quite deep in terms of the organisations that were first handling it. We have agreed to have an early meeting, with our officials, to explore carefully exactly how this matter was mishandled and how there came to be such a gap. We are both quite clear at our own levels that this simply cannot happen again. Those are the reasonable steps that I can take at this time.

Might it be helpful if the National Farmers Union took a test case to determine liability in this matter?

What I was attempting to do in the discussions that we held with Advanta today, and in the discussions that I would want to prosecute with Advanta, is to persuade Advanta that it ought to settle without anyone having recourse to go to court. I cannot speculate that it would necessarily do that, but that persuasion is my preferred position, rather than getting into protracted litigation, which could take a very long time and which would involve such questions of test cases. I am reluctant to go much further. We have had an opening with Advanta. We intend to prosecute that with all the vigour we have.

Can the minister give any more information about the on-going discussions at the European level? Can he tell us what the prevailing advice to farmers is about replanting on land that would involve digging up the contaminated seeds?

On the first point, in relation to the European Union, following discussions with the National Farmers Union of Scotland, during which the clear practical problems about re-sowing in the Scottish growing season and about the type of land that is being used for the crop in question, were mentioned, the options open to Scottish farmers are not great. I think that it was technically possible for them to have sown turnip rape, but there are even problems with that. If any other stray pieces were to emerge from the existing crop, they might end up with a fresh crop with the same contamination problem as before.

The NFUS is withholding advice at the moment, and, in particular, is waiting to see whether we can secure a further derogation from Europe to allow farmers to dig up the crop—which would be my preferred position—but not in any way to suffer any loss of arable area payment compensation. Direct conversations between the Scottish Executive and Europe were held yesterday. We have had a very favourable response.

Following my discussion with Nick Brown this morning, we are making a formal application this afternoon to Franz Fischler to try to secure a separate text, which will avoid any doubt that farmers would be able to plough the crop in and still receive arable area payment compensation. I have not seen that text. I hope that we will get it some time next week. We will be having a meeting with the NFUS tomorrow to explain the progress being made, which could greatly assist farmers in Scotland.

Members will recognise that I have allowed this question to run on a long time because of its importance, but we must now try to speed up.

---

National Health Service

To ask the Scottish Executive how interpretation and translation services required by refugees using NHS services are funded. (S1O-1808)

It is for the health service locally to ensure that interpretation and translation services are provided where necessary.

The minister may or may not be aware that there are severe problems with the funding of interpreting and translation services in the health service. In one health centre in Glasgow, 27 languages are now registered, which costs the service over £30,000 in one month, in payments for private interpreting and translation services. In the light of those figures, will the minister agree to take up with the Home Office the issue of the lack of resources that Greater Glasgow Health Board has for interpreting and translation services?

I understand that Glasgow City Council agreed last week to fund interpreting and translation services for asylum seekers when accessing health care. That funding will come from the resources provided to the council by the National Asylum Support Service.

---

Highlands and Islands Transport Authority

To ask the Scottish Executive whether it will support proposals for a Highlands and Islands transport authority to have the ability to purchase petrol and diesel for resale to motor vehicle users in the area. (S1O-1863)

Recently, we have invited tenders for a study of the case for establishing a Highland and Islands transport authority. It is premature to speculate on the outcome of that study, but we will consider carefully how any such authority can best help to address the problems of high fuel costs in the area.

Is the minister aware of the anger in the north of Scotland, where fuel tax and fuel costs are the highest in the world? Is that the real tartan tax in Scotland—a tartan that was spun by the Tories and woven by new Labour? Is it not the case that the last thing that we need in the north of Scotland is another false promise—[Interruption.]

Order.

It is okay. They will behave themselves in a minute.

The last thing that we need in the north of Scotland is another false promise of action tomorrow. We need a reduction in fuel tax today.

I would treat that question with a little more respect if the SNP's budget proposals for the Scottish Parliament election campaign had indicated how the party would fill the gap created by not taking fuel tax into account.

The Executive is working with the Scotland Office and the Treasury to examine ways of mediating in the problem of high fuel costs in the rural areas of Scotland. That is why we have identified money, which is being taken up, to ensure that rural fuel stations can be converted. The costs of such conversion could be passed on to and met by the Scottish Executive, which is why Brian Wilson in the Scotland Office has been able to work with fuel companies to consider ways of reducing costs.

There is a range of ways in which we can tackle this issue, and we are keen to consider them. I know that the transport conveners of each authority in the Highlands and Islands want to work with us and that is precisely what we want to do.

Last week, Kenny MacAskill, the SNP transport spokesperson, said on BBC Radio nan Gaidheal that he did not believe that the Highlands and Islands merited special treatment by having a Highlands and Islands transport authority. [Members: "Oh."] Does the minister agree that all local authorities in the Highlands and Islands support the establishment of that authority, that there are particular transport difficulties in the Highlands and Islands and that it is irresponsible of the SNP transport spokesperson to deny us the means of devolving decision making to the Highlands and Islands—

Order. Questions must be related to ministerial responsibilities, and the Minister for Transport and the Environment is not responsible for Opposition parties' manifestos.

I will move on to question 7.

---

Housing (Glasgow)

To ask the Scottish Executive why capital investment in Glasgow's council housing fell in real terms from £100 million in 1995-96 to £52 million in 1999-2000. (S1O-1838)

The main reason for the fall in investment was the requirement that the receipts be used to meet the outstanding debt burden. A reduction in the borrowing consent also reflected the transfer of debt on demolished housing into the general services account. That emphasises the need to provide tenants in Glasgow with the opportunity to choose the transfer of council housing, which could generate £1,600 million for housing in that city.

I thank the minister for her rather interesting reply.

Does the minister agree that Glasgow council tenants have been forced on to a starvation diet in terms of capital housing investment? Does she accept that that is part of a deliberate strategy, imposed by new Labour, to force those tenants into accepting that there is no alternative to housing stock transfer?

Furthermore, does the minister agree that the loss of almost £170 million in capital investment over four years has led to a massive deterioration in Glasgow's housing stock, denying many tenants investment in their homes and substituting immediate action for promises of jam tomorrow?

Since Labour came to power, which is the only part of the period mentioned by Kenny Gibson for which we can take responsibility, the resources available for direct expenditure on Glasgow housing stock have remained stable. Those resources have been supplemented by the new housing partnership programme, which was funded in Scotland in large part through our access to receipts raised in the rest of the UK in the first instance. I recall that the SNP made no commitment whatsoever to increasing local authority funding nor, indeed, did it make any commitment to an equivalent of the new housing partnership programme.

The more fundamental point is that the citizens of Glasgow should be given the opportunity to choose community ownership, which is an attractive option for their city. I am sure that they will take that opportunity.

Will the minister change her researcher, so that she can get her facts about the SNP straight?

The minister will be aware that the Scottish Executive wrote to Fife Council suggesting that it should not invest in housing now in order to provide an incentive for tenants to vote yes in its ballot on partial stock transfer. Can the minister tell us whether the same advice has been given to Glasgow City Council? Is Glasgow being starved of cash to provide tenants with an incentive to vote yes in the minister's ballot?

It is rather odd to suggest that Labour has spent three years starving Glasgow of resources when, over the past two years, an additional £12 million has been spent on new housing partnerships in this city. I recall that a mere two weeks ago, in this very chamber, I made it clear that we were allocating an additional £12 million for immediate use as spending on housing in the city, which hardly amounts to starvation prior to a decision on stock transfer. [Interruption.]

Order. There is too much noise.

---

Depression

To ask the Scottish Executive what steps are being taken to address depression specifically among women aged 15 to 24. (S1O-1835)

The 1997 framework for mental health services in Scotland provides comprehensive guidance on services for the prevention and treatment of depression and mental illness. Health boards are expected to work with their partners in local government and the voluntary sector to ensure that the needs of specific groups and communities are met.

Does the minister agree that, given that young women are three times more likely than young men to suffer from depression, we must identify the social and biological factors that contribute to that very high incidence and take further measures to reduce it?

I agree absolutely that we must continue to strive to find reasons for this and comparable problems affecting other groups—the high rate of suicide among young men, for example, has been debated in the chamber. The answers to these questions are complex, but I believe that, with the range of measures that we are taking to plan mental health services effectively, we are starting to examine the issues fully and responsibly. I hope that we can make progress on providing the support and help that different groups need.

Often the organisations that make the best contribution to dealing with stress are local voluntary organisations, many of which are on the verge of extinction because of lack of funds. I visited a group this morning, as part of volunteers week. Will the minister try to ensure that there is adequate funding for voluntary organisations, so that they can develop their full potential in advising, befriending and counselling people with stress?

I agree absolutely that the role that the voluntary sector plays in this area and in supporting people with different health and social needs is paramount. We seek to build on that work, not just through the level of funding that we offer to specific groups, but by ensuring that the funding of those groups is sustained. One of the keys to providing effective services, particularly in relation to mental health, is to ensure that agencies work together effectively. All the audit reports and evidence on service provision in this area identity that as a key to effective service delivery. It is important that we support the voluntary sector, but it is equally important that we ensure that statutory bodies such as the national health service and local government work effectively with it.

---

Radioactive Waste

To ask the Scottish Executive what representations it has made to the UK Government or public bodies about the proposals by Babcock Ltd to store radioactive waste from HMS Renown at Rosyth. (S1O-1853)

I understand that Babcock Rosyth Defence Ltd has yet to bring forward detailed proposals regarding its pilot project to store on land the components of the reactor compartment from HMS Renown.

We have been involved by the Ministry of Defence in the preliminary consultation on this proposal and have stressed the need to involve the local community. We note that the proposal would not result in any increase in radioactive material stored at Rosyth. Independent regulators will be involved as the project progresses.

I hope that the minister will agree that it is hardly surprising that the people of Fife are a bit concerned about the continuing storage of intermediate nuclear waste at Rosyth, and that that concern reached new levels as a result of Babcock's proposals. Will the minister make it clear to those who will be responsible for carrying out the environmental assessment that it would be unacceptable for radioactive components to be removed from submarines until the UK finally has its own fully operational long-term storage site for intermediate waste? Will she also recognise that we cannot allow there to be the perception in Fife that Devonport got the jobs and Rosyth gets the waste?

It is important that we understand that this is a pilot project to deal with one submarine's nuclear waste. We are all aware that, in the long run, we as a society have to deal with that nuclear waste. It is important to get across the point that there will be strong local consultation. Any moves to discuss this further would require an environmental impact assessment, which would be consulted on at a local level. Representations have already been made to local councillors and to MSPs. It is important that people do not hype up this issue, that they treat it seriously and look at the details carefully and that none of us falls into the trap of exaggerating what is being proposed. It is important that we have the discussion in the open, and that we have it without going for headlines.

Does the minister agree that nuclear submarines that need to be dealt with are currently being stored at Rosyth? Does she also agree that the current proposal by Babcock will isolate the spent reactors and allow the remaining hulks to be scrapped, and that the Ministry of Defence is actively looking for alternative sites outwith the Rosyth base to store the radioactive waste?

I am happy to confirm that. It is important that we understand that this project is at the feasibility stage. However, I understand that existing float storage capacity is finite, so there is a need for us to look at this issue. I hope that the consultation will fully involve local members and the council, so that local communities can see exactly what is being proposed and, before a second stage of the project can be pursued, that there is a commitment that the independent regulators have to be completely satisfied that a case has been made for progressing safely.

Does the minister agree that a major reason why Rosyth has survived as a dockyard is the expertise that was attained from the maintenance of the nuclear submarine fleet? To what extent will that expertise be put to good use with respect to the storage of radioactive waste at Rosyth?

I appreciate that the issue of expertise is a critical one. In pursuing the discussions on this project, that expertise and confidence will be vital. In persuading the regulators and making the safety case to them, it is important that that expertise is used to the full.

---

Prisons

To ask the Scottish Executive which prisons are currently involved in the manufacture of goods for commercial enterprises. (S1O-1839)

Prisons currently involved in the manufacture of goods for commercial enterprises are Aberdeen, Barlinnie, Dumfries, Dungavel, Edinburgh, Glenochil, Greenock, Inverness, Kilmarnock, Low Moss, Perth, Peterhead, Polmont and Shotts.

Assuming that those ventures are run as a business and therefore generate profit, how much profit is made in each of those prisons, and where does the money go?

May we have a total rather than a figure for each one?

I am afraid that I did not catch the second part of the question. I do not have to hand details of how much profit is made in each prison. Section 68 of the Prisons and Young Offenders Institutions (Scotland) Rules 1994 requires every prisoner to work in prison. In its effort to make work available—as part of its rehabilitation programmes as much as anything else—the Scottish Prison Service seeks to secure contracts on a national basis, specifically to avoid prisons competing with local businesses. In addition, where practical, the Prison Service tries to secure work for products that are normally imported. I am happy to write to Sandra White with the details for each prison.

May I repeat the second part of the question for you? Where does the money go?

The money stays within the Prison Service and makes a contribution towards the running of prisons.

---

Asylum Seekers (Health Care)

To ask the Scottish Executive what measures are in place in Glasgow to ensure that refugees and asylum seekers who live in the city receive timely, appropriate and accessible health care services. (S1O-1837)

The Greater Glasgow Primary Care NHS Trust is taking the steps it considers necessary to ensure that asylum seekers receive the same health care services as any other resident in the area.

Will the minister commit to investigating fully the report of the Audit Commission, which was published today, to establish its relevance to Scotland so that we can learn from and avoid the mistakes that have been made in England and Wales? If additional funding is necessary to avoid those mistakes, will the minister commit to asking the Treasury for extra money?

The Audit Commission report—as Ms Fabiani probably knows—is about the lessons to be learned from the interim arrangements introduced in England in November 1999. Those interim arrangements do not extend to Scotland, so the situation that was examined is not extant in Scotland. Nevertheless, some of the findings will be useful for Scotland. The Convention of Scottish Local Authorities is aware of the report and is getting a copy on publication.

We have undertaken to examine, 18 months into its operation, how the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 is operating in the areas that are devolved to us. Any action that we take then will depend on the outcome of the findings that are relevant to what is happening here in Scotland.

---

Ministry of Defence (Housing)

To ask the Scottish Executive whether it has made representations to the Ministry of Defence concerning the disposal of surplus MOD housing in Helensburgh. (S1O-1811)

Yes. Negotiations continue between Defence Estates, Argyll and Bute Council, Scottish Homes and Dunbritton Housing Association.

I thank the minister for that answer. It is nice to know that the Scottish Executive makes representations on some reserved matters. Does the minister agree that it would be correct and honourable if the Ministry of Defence transferred all surplus housing in Scotland to the local authority or housing associations to assist in tackling the shortage of affordable rented housing?

I am pleased that Lloyd Quinan has raised this matter, because he allows me to tell members that the local MP, John McFall, and the local MSP, Jackie Baillie, have got this matter to the point at which there is going to be a satisfactory conclusion to the discussions.

On the rather pathetic preamble to Mr Quinan's question, it would be good if the SNP acknowledged that the MP and the MSP have been working with all concerned. On 30 May there was a meeting with all parties; there is to be a meeting soon to finalise the negotiations and I am delighted to say that local representation has won through. Whether it is a reserved matter or a devolved matter, this is partnership in action. The SNP may not like it, but it will provide a satisfactory solution to the homes issue in Helensburgh.

Mr McLeish, I failed to hear in that fulsome reply what the satisfactory solution is. That is what we want to know.

I could have prefaced my answer by saying that this is a reserved matter, but most people in the chamber, apart from the SNP, acknowledge that that is the reality. It is also important that this Parliament recognises, with a bit of humility, that the local MSP, the local MP and the MOD are dealing with the issue and they will come up with a satisfactory solution, details of which will be made available to the wider public at that stage.

---

Schools (Security)

To ask the Scottish Executive what plans it has to make resources available to local authorities to allow security upgrades of schools to be made. (S1O-1830)

Substantial resources have been, and continue to be, made available to authorities for the improvement of school security.

Following the Dunblane tragedy, it was agreed that all schools should have a security audit. The minister is bound to be aware of the Educational Institute of Scotland report that revealed that 20 per cent of all schools have still had no security audit and, worse, that a quarter of those that have had an audit have not had the work carried out. What steps will the Executive take to ensure that the audits are completed and that the resources needed to carry out the work are made available?

Following the Dunblane tragedy, £40 million over three years was made available to schools to deal with security. Since then, £13.3 million has been built into grant-aided expenditure to deal with security issues. Considerable funds are available year on year for schools and local authorities to address security. We will keep this matter under review. I am confident that schools and local authorities will continue to develop their policies in this area.

Will the minister explain to the parents of Kennoway Primary School pupils why Fife Council has told them that there is no money to carry out the security work that has been identified as necessary?

I suggest that the member take that up with Fife Council for a change. I greatly deprecate the undermining of local authority functions by the Parliament.