SCOTTISH EXECUTIVE
Ferry Services (Orkney and Shetland)
To ask the Scottish Executive what action it is taking to ensure that the change of shipping company providing the ferry services to Orkney and Shetland in October 2002 proceeds smoothly and without disruption to those lifeline services. (S1O-3968)
We are committed to maintaining lifeline ferry services to the northern isles. Transitional arrangements are primarily a matter for P&O Scottish Ferries and NorthLink Orkney and Shetland Ferries, but we are in discussions with both companies about a range of issues, and we are doing all that we can to ensure a smooth transition to the new contract.
The minister will be aware that in order for the contract to start in October next year, the current contract must be extended from the end of this financial year. Will he ensure that those arrangements are finalised without undue delay? Will he also examine the issue of shore-based staff—including those in his own part of Scotland—whose uncertainty continues because no arrangements have yet been made on that matter?
Yes. On the first point, we are in detailed discussions with P&O Scottish Ferries about the transition period and about extending the current contract. That company has accepted in principle that it is prepared to do that, and we are carrying forward the discussions.
Further to that answer, the minister will be aware that many of the ferry services start from and return to Aberdeen harbour. Will the minister assure us that the moves to close down the rail-freight head at Aberdeen harbour will be stopped by the Executive?
Mr Davidson knows, even if others do not, that that matter is not related in any way to Orkney and Shetland ferries.
Scottish Economy
To ask the Scottish Executive what assessment it has made of the long-term trend rate of growth in the Scottish economy and what effect its policies will have on this rate (S1O-3965)
Scottish Executive data show that the average annual growth rate of gross domestic product in Scotland since 1963 has been 2.1 per cent. The average rate since 1991 has been 2.2 per cent. The Executive remains firmly focused on the medium and long-term challenges that are faced by the Scottish economy to increase competitiveness and boost productivity.
Does not the evidence suggest that in recent years, despite the record number of initiatives, strategies and policy documents—even record numbers of ministers—the long-term trend rate of growth is not improving, and that it actually is getting worse? It has not topped 4 per cent in a quarter of a century, and is currently the lowest growth rate in Europe. I do not blame the Minister for Enterprise and Lifelong Learning for that, but does she think that she would benefit from having the same powers at her disposal as she would in every other normal country in Europe? If she did, would not she have the opportunity to make an impact on growth in the economy, and start to make a difference? Why does the minister not trust herself, as I do, with the Scottish economy?
I think that we have just had revealed to us the source of the promise that was made recently by the leader of the SNP that he was going to set a target to double Scotland's growth rate. Before we try to set targets for matters that are beyond our control—I am thinking in particular about the events of the past month—the SNP leader, or his economics spokesman, should enlighten us on the matters that they can control. For example, what is their target for corporation tax? What is the target for raising personal income tax, which the SNP leader has hinted at? Indeed, we should be enlightened about not only the target that must be reached for the SNP to enter the euro, but on whether the SNP wishes to enter the euro. On none of those matters has the SNP been prepared to set a target. Those are matters in which taking tough policy decisions—not the cash confetti that we see from the SNP—is the way to make economic policy.
I am grateful to the minister for confirming that under a Conservative Government a healthy rate of economic progress emerged in Scotland. The sad feature is that it is now in dubious hands, in the form of the Scottish Executive and its counterparts at Westminster. Can the minister confirm that in view of recent worrying developments in the Scottish economy, she is in dialogue with her counterpart at Westminster, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and with his colleague, the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry? Is that dialogue seeking a reduction in the oppressive taxation regime that affects Scotland, and does that dialogue have any relevance to the oppressive burden of regulation that currently dogs Scottish business?
I should say for the record that throughout the years of Conservative government in Scotland—1979 to 1997—the growth rate was lower than it has been under the Labour Government in the past five years.
Paramedics
To ask the Scottish Executive how it is monitoring the pilot project in Tayside whereby paramedics deliver clot-busting drugs before patients are taken to hospitals for emergency treatment. (S1O-3989)
It is for NHS Tayside to ensure that appropriate measures are taken to monitor local services.
Is the minister aware of the concern among the people of Angus that they are being used as guinea pigs in an experiment and of the concern over the closure of the coronary care unit at Stracathro hospital? Will he ensure that that CCU remains open until the paramedic pilot scheme is tried, tested and proven or—best of all—will he keep the CCU open?
I am sure that Andrew Welsh knows that the medical director of Tayside University Hospitals NHS Trust gave a guarantee yesterday that there would be no closure of the coronary care unit until robust evaluation of the community services that are provided by paramedics has been carried out.
Is the minister aware of the long distances that must be travelled from north Angus and the Mearns to Dundee? Will he instruct Tayside Health Board to ensure that it puts patient care first and that the pilot scheme is not put into operation until we are clear about patient safety?
It is precisely because of long distances that the issue of pre-hospital thrombolysis—or the use of clot-busting drugs—has arisen in the first place. It was because of such circumstances that the coronary heart disease task force flagged up the procedure. The procedure is particularly appropriate for the area that was described by Murdo Fraser. As I have said, the procedure will be evaluated robustly by the medical director and the local managed clinical network for coronary heart disease before any decision is taken to close the coronary care unit at Stracathro.
Hospitals (Length of Stay)
To ask the Scottish Executive whether a medical needs assessment is carried out on patients on entering hospital for the purpose of determining their length of stay, or whether length of stay is determined solely on the basis of the type of medical procedure to be undertaken. (S1O-3979)
The length of stay of patients in hospital is determined through continuous assessment of their individual clinical needs.
I thank the minister for his reply. I am sure that he will be as concerned as I am about the removal of orthopaedics from Edinburgh royal infirmary and the present centre of excellence at the Princess Margaret Rose hospital to the new Edinburgh royal infirmary. The contemporary trend for quicker throughput of elective surgery patients can mean that patients entering hospital who have other existing conditions and who require a longer period of rehabilitation can be pushed, rather than progress at their own rate. What plans does the Executive have to counter that?
I am sure that Margo MacDonald knows that the length of stay in hospital has been declining throughout Scotland, the United Kingdom and further afield. That is because of changing patterns in care. There is no fundamental difference between Lothian and the rest of Scotland or further afield. There will be an excellent new hospital and orthopaedic suite at the new Edinburgh royal infirmary. I do not think that it is right for Margo MacDonald to raise concern and alarm about that among people in Edinburgh. I have every confidence that there will be an excellent orthopaedic service in the new hospital and that there will also be enough beds in the new hospital, if those matters are the hidden agenda of Ms MacDonald's question.
Given that the length of stay for many patients is substantially extended by hospital-acquired infections—such patients take up more than 10 per cent of NHS beds in Scotland—will the minister ensure that measures are taken to reduce such infections and, consequently, length of stays in hospital?
We have taken a series of initiatives this year to deal with hospital-acquired infections and clean hospitals, which is a separate issue that also causes concern. Mary Scanlon can be assured that we are vigorously tackling what I admit is a serious problem.
As length of stay in hospital affects not only patients, but family and friends who want to visit patients, does the minister agree that locating hospital services centrally is vital and that therefore the best location for any new general hospital in the Forth valley would be the site of the Royal Scottish national hospital in Larbert?
Dennis Canavan would not expect me to become involved in decisions on the precise locations of health services in Forth valley. Some decisions are most appropriately taken locally. We are determined that important strategic decisions and priorities will be led from the centre by the Scottish Executive and the Scottish Parliament. The precise location of services is not a question for me.
Children's Hearings
To ask the Scottish Executive what progress is being made with regard to the proposal to deal with certain children between the ages of 16 and 18 within the children's hearings system. (S1O-3958)
A feasibility study has been conducted. The group that led that work has reported to Scottish ministers, who are considering the group's recommendations. We expect to announce our proposals soon.
As the minister knows, I have taken much interest in and am a great supporter of the children's hearings system. I urge the minister to ensure that when he produces his proposals, he makes adequate resources available to the children's hearings system and social work authorities, to ensure that the proposals work in the best interests of young people and the wider community.
I will certainly do that. If we proceed—perhaps by way of pilot schemes—additional resources will be required not only in the children's hearings system, but in other areas, such as social work services and the voluntary sector, which might be required to put in place new progressive programmes to allow for appropriate disposals.
Is the minister aware that the existing system is woefully inadequate in terms of dealing with offenders who are under 16? Is he also aware that anybody who has any idea of the working of the system has the greatest concern about the scope of the system being increased to cover offenders who are over 16?
I disagree with Bill Aitken. If the Executive decides to proceed with the proposals, primary legislation will be required, so the Parliament would be able fully to scrutinise all our proposals. Our priorities will be to maintain public safety and to ensure that the measures to deal with such minor offenders are robust and challenging.
Renewables Obligation (Scotland)
To ask the Scottish Executive what discussions it has had with the Office of Gas and Electricity Markets regarding the provision of transmission infrastructure for new renewable energy developments associated with delivery of the proposed renewables obligation (Scotland). (S1O-3978)
Regulation of the transmission system is a reserved matter, but it is crucial to delivery of our commitment to increase renewable energy generation in Scotland under the ROS. We therefore keep in close contact with the regulator, Ofgem—the Office of Gas and Electricity Markets—the Department of Trade and Industry and the owners of the Scottish transmission network on the subject of renewable energy.
Is the minister aware that companies such as Scottish and Southern Energy must charge any new wind power generator not only the cost of connection to the grid, but the complete cost of upgrading the transmission infrastructure? Scottish and Southern Energy is restricted under Ofgem's charging policy from spreading those capital costs equally among all potential new generators, which would reduce the charge to an affordable level.
I am happy to say that we have a forum in which we can do that. The Scottish Executive initiated a study to examine existing network capacity. That study will determine the investment that will be required to meet the renewables obligation target. I am happy to give the member the undertaking that, while balancing what is required with the pricing structure, we will take forward the matters that he has raised.
Does the minister agree that transmission infrastructure is not the only issue that is holding back renewable energy in Scotland? Is he aware that, since new Labour came into office, spending on renewables research and development has declined by 57 per cent? Does he agree that new Labour's rhetoric has not been matched by its actions? Does he further agree that he needs to remove the essential difficulties and awkward splits that were caused by the devolution settlement, to which the minister referred at the Transport and the Environment Committee meeting of 24 October? Would it be simpler for the minister to have all the power and responsibility?
As members are aware, I am always reluctant to take on more responsibility. As Bruce Crawford will also be aware, he is treading on dangerous ground when he asks questions on subjects that are entirely the province of another Parliament. The member may wave a copy of the Official Report at me, but I am not responsible for the Westminster Government.
The minister will be aware that companies bear the cost of the ROS. The fact that the ROS appears in the Scottish Executive's accounts is one of the more bizarre aspects of the resource accounting and budgeting system with which we are all trying to cope.
I am unable to give the member a detailed response about specific projects. I will provide that information for him as soon as possible. However, I can say that there is nothing bizarre in the system. It can be described either as direct or as indirect taxation. At the end of the day, somebody must pay. I see nothing wrong in using the circular method of issuing certificates. Doing so achieves two things: first, it ensures that a source of money is available to buy renewable energy; secondly, it puts clear obligations on the providers—who are in the private sector, after all—to increase the amount of renewables that they use. That is an entirely sensible objective, and one with which Robin Harper should agree.
Free Personal Care
To ask the Scottish Executive what progress has been made in its discussions with Her Majesty's Government regarding the continued payment of attendance allowance to those recipients who will qualify for free personal care from April 2002. (S1O-3996)
The matter is still being considered. Whatever the outcome, the Scottish Executive has given an assurance that the care development group's recommendations on free personal care for the older people of Scotland will be implemented in full.
The minister says that negotiations are continuing. I am sure that he will agree that they must be strange negotiations, when the person with whom he seeks to negotiate, the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, is on record as saying that the matter is closed.
As I said yesterday, the negotiations with the Westminster Government are on-going. Nicola Sturgeon should not expect me to say—yesterday or today—where we might have to find the money. That would weaken our negotiating position. It would be tantamount to saying that we are not going to win the argument. We are having a rational argument with the Westminster Government about the matter. The argument is about a resource transfer in a new situation—a devolution situation. That is the way to proceed, rather than trying to turn it into some constitutional stand-off, which is what the SNP wants to do.
Trunk Roads (Maintenance)
To ask the Scottish Executive whether the contract with BEAR Scotland Ltd enables the company to meet MSPs and, if so, how many such meetings there have been since BEAR Scotland Ltd assumed responsibility for the maintenance of trunk roads. (S1O-3967)
The trunk road maintenance contracts permit the operating companies to provide MPs or MSPs with factual information. However, the Executive remains responsible for trunk roads policy, so questions of policy are handled via the Executive. A number of meetings have been arranged between MSPs, Scottish Executive officials and BEAR Scotland staff. I understand that Mrs Ewing has arranged a meeting for 5 November. I hope that she will find that useful.
I am interested in the minister's reply, because there is a difference between providing information and having meetings. I tried to meet the local officers in my constituency and received a letter that said:
Absolutely not—nothing could be further from the case. As with the previous contract, it is vital, where there are policy issues relating to the Scottish Executive, that our officials are fully involved in providing MSPs such as Mrs Ewing with accurate answers. The reason that we ask MSPs to tell us what information they are seeking is to ensure that, where it is directly appropriate for the operating company to provide that information, it is able to do that. When MSPs request meetings, it is vital that they get the most out of them. That is why a number of meetings have been arranged with colleagues in the chamber. I am happy that there is that transparency; it is important that members get the right answers to the questions they submit.
I had a useful meeting with BEAR Scotland yesterday. We discussed a range of issues, including landscaping. As the minister will know, Aberdeen has been a highly successful competitor in Britain in Bloom and is rightly proud of its roses.
That may be, but we must have a question.
Does the minister agree that the provision of high-quality landscaping along trunk routes in cities must be addressed?
I am aware that that is an important issue to the people of Aberdeen, which is why it is important that the local authority, the trunk road company and the Executive work together to address the matter.
I am due to meet BEAR Scotland shortly under the system that the minister has outlined. One of the issues I shall raise is that of winter maintenance, which is a big concern in Caithness and Sutherland, particularly with regard to the co-ordination between BEAR Scotland and the local authority. Local people fear that the standard of maintenance could fall. Will the minister assure me that she too will take up that issue in whatever way she feels best? It is important to my constituents.
Absolutely. I am well aware of the issues that Jamie Stone has raised with me and with the operating company. The Executive has already had a winter planning conference, involving the local authorities, the operating companies, the police—crucially—and the motoring organisations. The plans are now in place. I have arranged for details of a briefing that I gave yesterday to be put in the Scottish Parliament information centre so that members can see for themselves what arrangements are being made.
What does the contract with BEAR Scotland, and indeed Amey Highways Ltd, say about customer service in relation to direct dealings with members of the public? Is the minister aware of the concerns of members of the public who have tried to contact Amey and have either been put through to a remote call centre, where there is no awareness of the geography of the south of Scotland, or to an answering machine that advises them to contact the police?
It sounds as if there are some specific issues that must be addressed. If the member writes with the details of the problems, I would be more than happy to write to him and deal with those matters properly.
Audiology Services
To ask the Scottish Executive whether it has considered the introduction of a scheme similar to the NHS digital hearing aid pilot project in England. (S1O-3974)
The Executive has initiated a wide-ranging review of audiology services to address the wider issues of hearing aid provision. That is being progressed in consultation with the Public Health Institute of Scotland. We are monitoring progress of the pilot studies in England and will consider constructively the results when they become available, but have no plans to introduce a similar scheme in Scotland. NHS Scotland has already introduced 11 different types of digital hearing aids on to its central contract range.
Is the minister aware that more than 20 trusts in England have already gone digital, and that all patients in England will have access to digital aids within three years? If digital aids are bulk-purchased, the cost can be dramatically reduced, from the current price of £2,500 each to something like £250. Despite much pressure and despite the items that the minister has approved, health boards such as Grampian Health Board have still given no date for when they will go digital. Digital aids are not available. Will the minister take action to put the situation right for the people of Scotland?
Susan Deacon and I are both concerned about the situation, but I remind Mike Rumbles of the wider review that is taking place. I accept that digital hearing aids are an important part of that agenda. I met representatives from the Royal National Institute for Deaf People over the summer, and Susan Deacon will meet them in a few weeks' time. We are certainly keen to see progress on the matter. The review will report next year and we will watch the progress of the English pilot studies. Members should remember that it is only in the pilot areas that the provision to which Mike Rumbles referred is available. Where someone would benefit clinically from a digital hearing aid, it certainly ought to be available.
The minister is aware of my interest in the matter and of the Royal National Institute for Deaf People's postcard campaign on the issue. He said that he would monitor the findings of the projects that are under way in England. Will he liaise with his Westminster colleagues and ask to be involved in seeing the research work and the outcome of the English projects? Will he put that information to good use for deaf and hard-of-hearing people in Scotland?
As I said, we are certainly keen to monitor the results of those projects. It is clear from what I hear at this early stage that some people can benefit greatly from digital hearing aids. That reinforces what we already know. There is some dispute among clinicians about how much advantage digital hearing aids might have, and it looks as if some people will benefit more than others. However, the principle that I outlined, which is stated in Scottish Executive guidance, is that if someone will benefit clinically from a digital hearing aid, it should be available.
I have been contacted by a 93-year-old man who has not been able to access a digital hearing aid on the NHS despite an assessment that it would benefit him. Does the minister agree that Scots requiring digital hearing aids on the NHS should have the same access to them as their counterparts in England? Does he accept that that is clearly not the case at present, as only 1 per cent of Scots who require a digital hearing aid have access to one? Instead of talking about reviews, will he give a commitment to roll out a programme of digital hearing aids across the NHS in Scotland?
There are pilot studies in England, but it is quite misleading to say that more people in England have a digital hearing aid than in Scotland. If one takes population differences into account, the numbers who have a digital hearing aid in Scotland are more or less the same as in England. That is not enough people, as I have acknowledged, and we are determined that more people who can benefit from them will have access to digital hearing aids. Matters are not helped by making inaccurate and exaggerated references to a situation in England that does not exist.
Has the minister taken on board the massive cost savings that Mike Rumbles identified? I accept that there are many burdens on health service budgets, but does Mr Chisholm recognise that the benefits of those cost savings achieved south of the border could perhaps be relayed north and that individuals could be allowed to make a privileged purchase if that was their desire?
One of the good things that is happening is that the cost of digital hearing aids is falling. I am sure that we all welcome that. I agree that that is important, not least because I have responsibility for older people—many people who need hearing aids are older people. That is an important part of our many-faceted strategy for older people. We are determined that there will be progress on the issue, and I assure members that that progress will come soon.
Scotland Week
To ask the Scottish Executive whether Scotland Week in Brussels fulfilled its objectives. (S1O-3983)
Yes. Scotland week 2001 in Brussels, which was arranged by a partnership of Scottish organisations, fulfilled its objectives. Scotland contributed distinctive Scottish ideas to current European Union policy debates and we took the opportunity to promote Scottish trade and tourism.
I welcome the fact that the Executive maintains a high profile for Scotland in the EU, notwithstanding the girning that comes from the SNP from time to time. Did the Executive take the opportunity to encourage Scottish business to prepare for the new euro currency, both immediately and in anticipation of early British membership of the euro? Is he satisfied that the Scottish tourism industry—including Royal Mile shops and Edinburgh taxis—will be prepared to accept euros from tourists who want to spend euros in Scotland in 2002?
We are conscious that a number of Scottish and British businesses are preparing well in advance of the introduction of the euro to a number of European states in January. The process is a two-way one. We must ensure that Scots are prepared and are not left with European currencies that go past their sell-by date, if I can put it that way, early in the new year—that applies to at least one European nation. We must ensure that Scots are aware of the situation and take immediate steps to convert their currency into either British currency or into euros in January.
Does the minister recognise that one week's lobbying in Brussels is no substitute for independent membership of the Council of Ministers? I am not girning, but standing up for Scotland. Does not he realise that the difference between devolution and independence is that, instead of being in Brussels for one week, we would be there for 52 weeks of the year, fighting for Scotland?
The way in which that policy is regularly put forward by the Scottish nationalist party—
The Scottish National Party. [Interruption.]
Order.
No, the nationalist party. As put forward by the nationalist party, the policy is more about sitting down for Scotland than standing up for it. That party might want to sit down for Scotland in the EU, but it must recognise that that would reduce Scotland's influence and impact. Through devolution, Scotland has the best of both worlds in the EU.
I agree with the minister that Scotland week was a success. However, will the minister agree to consider what will be done at future Scotland weeks? As well as seeking to extend Scotland's influence in institutions in Brussels, we should take the opportunity to engage in a dialogue with other regions of Europe with which the Executive is developing a partnership.
That would be a helpful development. Scotland week in Brussels involved all the main political parties that are represented in the Scottish Parliament. We want to continue the process. Despite the girning of some members, it is important that all parties are involved in Scotland week and will continue to be involved at the European level.
I attended two seminars at Scotland week in Brussels.
Did you?
Yes, I did. One seminar was on fisheries and was attended by a large number of delegates from other European member states. The second seminar was on the future strategy for Scottish agriculture, which the chamber recently endorsed.
Will the member ask a question?
I could not help but notice that every delegate, bar two speakers, came from Scotland. We could have held the same seminar in Edinburgh at considerable saving to the Scottish taxpayer. How can ministers ensure that, at future seminars, a wider European audience is procured and thus that the objectives for the week are met?
We should welcome the fact that both seminars were well attended. If there was a specific problem with the attendance of delegates from other areas at the second seminar, we can perhaps learn from that for future Scotland weeks. It might be that the nature of that event meant that it was more appropriate for a Scottish audience. For the event to take place in Brussels is not necessarily a bad thing—it allows people to go and learn about the institutions and influence the European agenda.
On a point of order, Presiding Officer. As a mere back bencher, I promise not to take four minutes.
You are allowed three minutes.
If I am unlucky, I will get 30 seconds.
My answer is that it is not appropriate. Only ministers answer questions at question time. Any member can make a personal statement, but personal statements—as I have said twice in the last two weeks—have not been used at all. They are exceptional and must have my permission. I would certainly not agree to a personal statement on that matter, which is a political argument.
Previous
Presiding Officer's Ruling