Rural Affairs and the Environment
Nature Conservation Marine Protected Areas
A statement setting out the principles to be followed in designating MPAs in offshore waters adjacent to Scotland was laid in the Scottish Parliament on 12 March 2010. We recently consulted on a draft marine nature conservation strategy as well as draft guidelines on the selection of marine protected areas.
As the cabinet secretary is aware, there is a commitment to establishing a coherent network of MPAs by 2012, covering all our marine species in their full range across Scotland’s waters. It seems strange that seabirds are currently omitted from the draft list of priority marine features, which will be used to steer the designation. The Natura network on its own will not be able to cover the full species diversity and range of seabirds.
The member raises the important issue of protecting the unique bird species that we have in Scottish waters and in Scotland as a whole. As the member knows, we have consulted on the priority marine features that would be considered when designating marine protected areas. We are considering the responses to that consultation. I will certainly take on board the member’s concerns in that regard. However, I point out that many of our seabirds are already protected under the birds and habitats directives, so protection is largely already in place. We are considering the responses to the consultation on what we take into account in designating the marine protected areas.
The cabinet secretary is aware that not only seabirds but all Natura species appear to have been left out. Given the requirement under section 68(2)(a) of the Marine (Scotland) Act 2010, what is the scientific basis for excluding Natura species from the draft list of priority marine features, particularly with reference to cetaceans?
I can only refer Robin Harper to my previous answer. When we are looking at priority marine features, not everything can be a priority. Therefore, we have to take into account to a certain extent what is already protected by legislation elsewhere and may not therefore require the designation of a marine protected area. However, that is why we held the consultations: to listen to the views from the various stakeholders and members of the Parliament about what should be in the final list of priority marine features.
Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Meetings)
I met a range of ministers from DEFRA on 23 June, when we discussed a wide range of issues including how the Scottish and United Kingdom Governments will work together in future on both domestic and European business. I used the opportunity to outline the distinct nature and policy needs of Scotland’s farming, food and marine sectors.
I congratulate the cabinet secretary on securing further discussions on the devolution of animal health and welfare budgets following his recent talks with DEFRA. That is a major step forward for Scotland, which I hope that everyone recognises.
The member raises a very important issue about the future of Scotland’s livestock sector in particular. We have always had a concern that although we have policy responsibility for animal health matters in Scotland, we have not had the budget. We need that important part of the jigsaw to be put in place. While there is a delay in devolving the budget, which most people in Scotland want to see—particularly our farmers and all parties in this chamber—the longer we leave it, the more likelihood there is of the budget in London reducing, which means that our share over time will become less.
Biomass Plants (Ministerial Statements)
On 2 June, at a conference on forestry in the low-carbon economy, the Cabinet Secretary for Rural Affairs and the Environment highlighted the contribution that biomass can make to renewable energy targets and recognised the particularly important role of relatively small-scale biomass plants that produce heat or combined heat and power. The full text of the speech is available on the Scottish Government’s website.
I agree that small-scale biomass for heat or combined heat and power is acceptable. Will the minister urge her ministerial colleagues to reconsider their enthusiasm for large-scale biomass electricity plants such as the one that is proposed for Leith docks, in my constituency?
All members of the Scottish Government are aware of the challenges that we face with respect to wood supply and we are aware of a variety of pieces of research on the matter.
I welcome the minister’s comments and draw her attention to the comments of Stuart Goodall, the chief executive of the Confederation of Forest Industries, who said:
I will not be drawn, even by a member of my party, into discussing individual projects and planning applications. I have made it clear that we are aware of the problems in respect of sustainability—we are aware on a joint ministerial basis. I assure members that we understand and fully accept the concerns of the wood fuel industry and the questions that have arisen about it.
Is the minister aware that members of the Wood Panel Industries Federation, including the Egger UK plant in my constituency, have expressed concern that the increase in demand in wood for biomass is creating difficulties for the industry? Has she discussed the matter with the UK Government? Will she make representations about the impact that there will be on the economy in my constituency and throughout Scotland if manufacturers cannot access the raw materials that they need to manufacture their wood products?
The concern that the member describes has been widely expressed by the industry. We have met industry members to listen to their concerns and discuss how we might move forward. As I said, at a recent meeting we recognised the important contribution of the industries in the context of carbon and employment. We also welcome the increasing contribution that wood is making to the production of renewable energy.
What specific support is available to help rural communities to develop small-scale biomass plants?
A very successful biomass scheme is currently in operation; I am sure that Jamie McGrigor is aware of that. Companies in my constituency have benefited from the scheme and I would be surprised if many members do not have companies in their constituencies that have benefited equally from it.
European Union Support Scheme Rules (Breaches)
My officials made progress at the meeting with European Commission officials on 9 June 2010 and are now working on clarifying future implications for the industry with United Kingdom colleagues. Details will be announced in due course, but the member will understand that this has to be worked out carefully.
During a debate on 23 June that was initiated by my colleague, Liam McArthur, the Minister for Environment stated that the meeting had taken place, that it had been useful, and that officials were working out the details with UK colleagues. If the cabinet secretary cannot give some indication of when tangible action will be taken on the issue, perhaps he can indicate when farmers in North East Fife and other parts of Scotland can expect a more proportionate penalty system to be put in place, so that the punishment is apportioned adequately to reflect the violation in question.
All parties and the Scottish Government share the desire for a much more proportionate penalty regime. We took the opportunity of the Royal Highland show last week to discuss the need for a proportionate penalty regime with Commissioner Ciolos, the European commissioner for agriculture, and the chair of the European Parliament’s Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development, Paolo de Castro. I, along with Iain Smith and others, do not think that it is fair for a cattle farmer to be penalised, for example, 3 per cent of his single farm payment for a couple of identification errors when he might have several score or several hundred cattle and it might be quite easy to make a mistake.
Zero Waste Strategy
The zero waste plan is based on the recognition that most waste is a resource that continues to have a potential value. Conserving, reusing and recovering the value of those resources will be more cost effective in the long term than losing that value through disposal. Where new infrastructure is needed to treat waste, it will be funded through a combination of investment by local authorities and the private waste management sector.
The zero waste strategy recognises that there will be initial costs for local authorities and others. Indeed, on page 3, the plan states that the Government
The member has asked a number of questions; I will deal with as many as I can remember. The SFT is taking a proactive role with a number of local authorities that are looking to procure waste treatment infrastructure. The aim is to ensure that we do so as cost effectively as is possible.
Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Meetings)
Apology accepted; the issue is important. I refer the member to the response I provided to question 2.
I thought that the cabinet secretary might say something like that.
I am looking forward to my new relationship with my DEFRA counterparts in the new coalition UK Government. I found the previous relationship to be challenging at times. Often, DEFRA ministers would say to me, “The answer is no; what’s the question?” I hope that we can have much more of a respect agenda with the new ministers in London.
With regard to the minister’s discussions with DEFRA around the animal health budgets, what assurances was he given, and what timescales were mentioned, with regard to that budget and responsibility being transferred to Scotland?
The member will be aware that the UK Government has made a commitment to work closely with us to achieve the devolution of the animal health budget by 1 April next year, and I am determined that we will stick to that timetable. Of course, we are disappointed that the budget was not devolved for 1 April this year, which was the original plan that had been agreed with the previous UK Administration.
National Scenic Areas (Planning Applications)
Scottish ministers have no powers to intervene once an authority has granted planning permission. All enforcement powers relating to existing planning consents lie with local authorities.
Melrose and the Eildon hills are the leading tourist destinations in the Scottish Borders, and their popularity is likely to increase following the completion of the multimillion-pound plans for Sir Walter Scott’s Abbotsford house. Does the minister share my concern that building the crematorium that was approved by Scottish Borders Council on 11 November 2009 in that national scenic area might not be a sensitive or aesthetically appropriate thing to do, particularly given the difficulty of balancing the demands of catering for the bereaved with the facilities that are expected in a popular tourist destination?
Those matters might well have been relevant considerations for the planning authority. However, I must reiterate that it is for the planning authority to take such matters into account when determining the planning application, and I have no locus to intervene.
Apologies to David Stewart, but I am afraid that I must move on to the questions on justice and law officers.
Justice and Law Officers
Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007
There have been no prosecutions in Scotland under the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007. One charge under the 2007 act has been reported to the procurator fiscal but it was not appropriate, on the evidence available, to indict the company on such a charge. The company was indicted and convicted of charges under the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974.
I welcome the figures that were released by the Health and Safety Executive yesterday that show that there has been a decline in the number of workplace deaths in Scotland over the past year, although the figures obviously reflect declining figures for employment just now and for issues such as industrial disease. I am sure that Mr Mulholland agrees that one workplace death is far too many and that we must have effective deterrents in place to improve the figures greatly as we go forward.
My view is that the existing legislation or legislative framework is sufficient and allows prosecutors and, indeed, investigators and regulators to police the workplace so that if there is a tragedy—I agree that one death is one too many—then appropriate action can be taken.
Tasers (Police Use)
Firearms legislation is the responsibility of the United Kingdom Government. The deployment and use of Tasers is an operational matter for chief constables. Scottish ministers have no role in promoting legislation on Tasers nor in authorising their use. It is for chief constables to ensure that Tasers are deployed in accordance with the law. However, our police are highly professional and we trust them to make sound judgments on the use of Tasers.
I appreciate the minister’s point, but I am sure that he is aware of the view of a number of human rights groups and solicitors who specialise in the field that both the use and possession of Tasers are legally dubious. Has the Government taken legal advice in that regard? If so, would the minister make it available to members? Further, has the Government instructed any research to be carried out in respect of disturbing reports of a link between use of those guns and nearly 300 deaths in Canada and America? If it has not, will the minister commit to do so?
No, we have no intention of carrying out such research. The research to which the member referred relates to matters across the Atlantic ocean, and we do not believe that it is relevant here. We have great faith in our police and we believe that they act proportionately and legitimately. Tasers are necessary for the protection of others as well as for the protection of officers in difficult circumstances.
Drugs (Impact on Communities)
It appears that those claims were in the main based on the views of drug dealers interviewed as part of a 2005 Joseph Rowntree Foundation report entitled, “Understanding Drug Selling in Communities”.
Although I am aware that Professor McKeganey is quoting from the work of others in his paper, does the minister not agree that it is naive and foolish in the extreme to cite in detail so-called benefits of drug dealing in such an uncritical way—in a way that could, in fact, be used to justify almost any crime? Does the professor not realise that the immense harm caused by drugs-related crime is mainly to the communities in which the drug dealing takes place and that, far from bringing benefits to such communities, drug dealing and illegal drug use are a source of great misery? Is the professor a fit person to advise further on national drug policy?
I agree with the member that the effects of drug dealing on communities are entirely bad and extremely damaging. I pay tribute to the work of the police and, in particular, the Scottish Crime and Drug Enforcement Agency, in having conducted, over the past couple of years, some of the most successful policing operations ever in the history of Scottish policing against drug dealers. I also pay tribute to all the people in alcohol and drugs partnerships throughout Scotland—many of whom I have visited over the past few months—who are doing good work to try to remedy the most serious problems caused by drug addiction that face Scottish society.
I am sure that the minister will agree that, along with recovery, the key issue in tackling drugs misuse is, indeed, dealing effectively with drugs-related crime. What consideration has been given to making greater use of drug treatment and testing orders for those convicted of such offences and whether they might now be extended to apply to a wider range of drugs offences than is currently the case?
I certainly recognise that DTTOs play a part. Indeed, I discussed the issue when I visited Campbeltown on Monday and met the Argyll and Bute alcohol and drugs partnership. I spoke to some individuals who had been through the DTTO procedure, which involves, as an alternative to custody, submitting to drug testing and regular appearances before the sheriff. We have shown our commitment to DTTOs by supporting them and by, in a pilot scheme, extending them to lower tariff offences. I hope that we will show that commitment further in early course. I appreciate that there is widespread cross-party support for these measures.
Antisocial Behaviour Orders
Statistics on the number of antisocial behaviour orders issued to adults and under-16s between October 2004 and March 2008, by local authority area, can be found on the Scottish Government website. However, we prefer to focus on the good preventive work being done by practitioners, which reduces the need for enforcement action after the event. For example, I am sure that the member will acknowledge, as I do, the good partnership working taking place to prevent alcohol-fuelled antisocial behaviour in Fife, which I saw first hand when I visited the Fife equally well project last October.
I am aware of such local initiatives. The Rosyth partnership is a further example. What measures does the minister propose to take to allay concerns about the lack of the use of antisocial behaviour orders in Fife, and in particular the west of Fife and the town of Rosyth? Members of the community council in Rosyth have relayed concerns to me about antisocial behaviour around homes that have lain empty for far too long, and antisocial behaviour is of increasing concern to local people.
Although antisocial behaviour orders are a mechanism that is open to a local authority to use where it considers it appropriate, we do not believe that the orders are the solution to the problem. In fact, I well recall that the previous Administration devoted £7 million over four years to junior antisocial behaviour orders. Only four ASBOs were issued over that period, which means that they cost well over £0.5 million each. We believe that that money would have been far better spent following the Scottish Government policy of using early intervention to prevent the reason for the antisocial behaviour occurring in the first place, whether that is alcohol, drugs or knives. We want to be tough on crime and tough on the causes of crime.
I am glad that the minister recognises that antisocial behaviour orders are not the silver bullet that they are portrayed to be by some. Will he therefore commend the new community safety unit in West Lothian as a sterling example of collaborative working, bringing together the police, the local authority and the West Lothian youth action project? The unit’s activities are complemented by a £150,000 investment by the council in diversionary activities for young people on Friday afternoons after school and at weekends.
I entirely agree with Angela Constance about the example she used. Surely it is better to divert youngsters from becoming involved in antisocial behaviour through programmes such as the one she mentions in West Lothian and others that operate throughout Scotland to help to turn around—as I believe is the meaning of the Latin from which “divert” derives—the behaviour of young people rather than issue them with an ASBO, which some of the hardened core are actually proud to receive.
Drugs (Impact on Communities)
I refer the member to the answer that I provided to question 3, from Dr Ian McKee, on that subject.
Does the minister agree that drug dealing is entirely negative and devastating to families and communities? He will be aware that on 23 June, the Daily Record described Professor McKeganey as “a crackpot”. Will he confirm that the Scottish Government has lost all faith in Professor McKeganey and his pronouncements?
I agree with the Daily Record’s criticism of the views that were presented, although as a minister I would not use terms of that nature. However, I pay tribute to all the people throughout Scotland who are attempting to deliver the drugs strategy “The Road to Recovery”, with—I am pleased to say—the support of every MSP, and alcohol and drugs partnerships, many of which I have visited; I will visit one in Musselburgh next week. The partnerships do good work. They help people to recover from drug addiction and they help families to get back sons and daughters lost to the consequences of drug abuse. They do a marvellous job for Scotland. Let us praise them and not be too distracted by the views of those on the fringes.
Antisocial Behaviour
The Scottish Government is committed to making our communities safer and stronger. In March 2009, Councillor Harry McGuigan of the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities and I published our shared vision for tackling antisocial behaviour in Scotland, entitled “Promoting Positive Outcomes: Working Together to Prevent Antisocial Behaviour in Scotland”, which was developed in partnership with COSLA and other national partners and received cross-party support when it was debated in the chamber on 2 April 2009. The framework empowers local agencies to focus on addressing the causes of antisocial behaviour before it occurs, resolving such behaviour when it occurs and working together more effectively.
Obviously, everybody would like to prevent antisocial behaviour from occurring. In light of the adoption of so-called park antisocial behaviour orders by Strathclyde Police and Glasgow City Council to address the issue of youths using parks as battlegrounds or meeting places for underage drinking sessions, will the minister and the Scottish Government support other local authorities that adopt such measures and can he tell me what financial support he could offer to enable them to do so?
We entirely support local authorities that decide to use the powers that are available in applying for antisocial behaviour orders where those are appropriate. The ASBO is one of the tools in the box and it is up to local authorities to decide whether to use it. I and my friend Councillor Harry McGuigan, of Mr Whitton’s party, are united in our approach to tackling antisocial behaviour, as are the police, the fire service, the Crown Office, Victim Support Scotland, Youth Scotland, voluntary workers and virtually every person who is involved in tackling antisocial behaviour in Scotland. They know that we must tackle the causes, not just deal with the symptoms.
Question 7 was not lodged.
Tasers (Police Use)
There is a lot of déjà vu about this afternoon.
As I explained earlier, the Scottish Government has no role in setting policy on the use of Tasers by police forces in Scotland. Policy and legislation on Tasers are reserved to Westminster and their deployment is an operational matter for chief constables.
I want to pursue the Scottish Government’s claim that the police in Scotland do not require ministerial approval to possess or use Tasers because of the principle of Crown immunity. Does the cabinet secretary claim that Crown immunity applies to chief constables? Does he agree that that is a very wide-ranging claim? Will he elaborate on what it means in practice? Does it mean, for example, that a police force could not be sued for reckless or negligent use of a Taser or for intentional but unjustified use of a Taser? Given the fact that Tasers are firearms, does the cabinet secretary allege that the police also have Crown immunity in connection with the deployment and use of other firearms? If so, is that not the most extraordinary claim to be heard in the Parliament in many years?
No, it does not mean that. That is a claim that I have never made. I can only repeat what I said earlier. In respect of Crown immunity, section 54 of the Firearms Act 1968 does not apply section 5 to Crown servants. The police are Crown servants, which means that the police are exempt from the whole of section 5, including section 5(1), which contains a requirement for Scottish ministers and others to provide authorisation for the purchase, possession and use of Tasers. Basically, we have no control over what they do. Clearly, if an officer or a force acted inappropriately, whether with a firearm or with a Taser, they would face potential action. However, the Government is required to sign off regulations relating to individuals; we do not have any requirement for police officers to be in touch with us.
Antisocial Behaviour (South Lanarkshire)
We are pursuing the policies that I outlined earlier. In addition, on 1 March I announced £20,000 of funding for South Lanarkshire Council’s successful bid in our community wellbeing champions initiative. That will enable the council to develop further its positive communities model, engaging with a range of community and tenants groups to identify and prioritise local issues and influence the direction of those resources.
I congratulate the council on securing that funding.
I am entirely aware of the problems that Karen Gillon mentions—as a constituency MSP I have encountered them, as she has, in the many surgeries that I have held. I will certainly engage with Alex Neil on the matter.
Previous
Rugby (Broadcasting)