Plenary, 03 Mar 2005

Meeting date: Thursday, March 3, 2005

Official Report 722KB pdf

---

First Minister's Question Time

Before First Minister's question time, I ask members to join me in welcoming to the public gallery His Excellency Abdelwahad Radi, the president of the Parliament of Morocco, who is accompanied by a delegation of members from that Parliament. [Applause.]

---

Cabinet (Meetings)

To ask the First Minister what issues will be discussed at the next meeting of the Scottish Executive's Cabinet. (S2F-1481)

At the next Cabinet meeting we will discuss our progress towards building a better Scotland.

That will not take long.

I draw the First Minister's attention to the fact that, today, Tony Blair is making one of his rare visits to Scotland—indeed, they are almost as rare as the First Minister's visits to hospitals. [Interruption.] The First Minister is motioning that he cannae hear me, and I want him to hear what I have to say.

On the assumption that Mr Blair agrees to give him an audience, I want to suggest some issues that the First Minister might like to raise. The First Minister will recall that, just a few weeks ago, Parliament voted to retain all six Scottish regiments. Will he act on that decision, raise the issue with the Prime Minister in the strongest possible terms and, on our behalf, demand that all six regiments be retained?

I have already made those points publicly and privately. I will also point out to the Prime Minister the absolute hypocrisy of a Scottish National Party that claims to defend the regiments when it wants to disband all the regiments and the whole of the British Army.

I asked the First Minister a simple question: will he today represent to the Prime Minister the clear views of this Parliament, to which he is accountable? However, he failed to answer that question, so I will ask him another one.

Does the First Minister recall that, just last week, Parliament voted to reject Tony Blair's plans for identity cards? Everyone in Scotland will have to fork out at least £85 for those useless bits of plastic when what communities really need to make them safer is more police on the streets. Will the First Minister act on that decision of Parliament, raise that issue with the Prime Minister and tell him in no uncertain terms that his ID cards are not wanted in Scotland?

I could have done so, if the SNP had voted for the Liberal Democrat amendment, which sought to reject ID cards, instead of voting for a motion that noted them. I disagree with the Liberal Democrats on this matter, but at least they voted for their policy. The SNP was more interested in making a political point.

I assure Nicola Sturgeon that, if I have a chance to raise those issues with the Prime Minister tomorrow, I will make two things clear to him. First, I support his attempts to ensure that the United Kingdom is as secure as it possibly can be. Secondly, I will remind him that the partnership Government in Scotland has increased police numbers in Scotland to record levels and has ensured that more police officers are out on the street on operational duties than there have been for years. I will also point out to him that the SNP and others opposed the very reforms in our courts and prisons that have allowed those police officers to get out from behind their desks and back on to the streets.

The First Minister can twist and turn, but he has yet again failed to answer a simple question. Will he represent this Parliament's democratic decisions to the Prime Minister? I think that the people of Scotland will begin to wonder which side he is on. Is not it the case that Tony Blair is out of touch with, does not listen to and is not trusted by the people of Scotland? All he needs is a handbag and he would be a dead ringer for another Prime Minister who failed to take heed of the Scottish people's wishes.

The real question is this: should the First Minister, instead of kowtowing to the Prime Minister, not put forward the Scottish Parliament's democratic decisions and stand up for the Scottish people's interests?

I will be very happy to let the Prime Minister know that, last week, the so-called revolutionary SNP that is going to transform Scotland managed to vote for a motion that noted his ID card scheme.

However, I will also ensure that the Prime Minister knows that, because of this Parliament and devolved Government, Scotland now has more police officers than we have ever had before; that they are clearing up crimes at a record rate; and that that is happening because the reforms that we introduced but which the SNP opposed mean that more of them are on operational duties and are out there doing the work that they signed up to do.

Perhaps the First Minister might answer my question this time. This Parliament has voted to save the Scottish regiments and to reject ID cards. Will he represent to the Prime Minister the clear democratic views of the Parliament to which he is accountable or will he simply kowtow to him as he always does?

Miss Sturgeon's question is not even accurate. I repeat that it is all very well to come along here and vote for motions and ask questions about regiments, but she wants to disband those regiments and the whole British Army. The Scottish National Party wants to break up the British Army, take Britain and Scotland out of NATO and ensure that we are left defenceless as a result. For the SNP to say that it stands up for the Scottish regiments is simply untrue. Nicola Sturgeon should be honest enough to admit it and have enough principles to stand up for what her party really believes, instead of coming along here to make political points when she is hiding the policies of her party that she will have to stand on at an election, whenever it comes this year.

---

Prime Minister (Meetings)

I think we know the answer to my question already.

To ask the First Minister when he will next meet the Prime Minister and what issues will be discussed. (S2F-1482)

I might also take the chance to mention to the Prime Minister that the Conservative party—the great defender of Britain's security down through the ages—also decided on a matter of real principle last Thursday to note the fact that he has an identity card scheme.

I would be delighted if the First Minister did so. He might suggest that some of the money that will be wasted on the scheme could be applied to far better effect in Scotland and the rest of the country. In particular, he might examine some of the issues to do with our education system, which I will ask the First Minister about.

In the light of yesterday's report by Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Education, which shows that more than half the schools in Scotland have discipline problems, does the First Minister accept that his previous policy of reducing exclusions and keeping troublemakers in the classroom has comprehensively failed? Does he accept that if we are to tackle that serious problem in our schools, we need to know their extent? Accordingly, will he instruct the Minister for Education and Young People to reinstate publication of annual statistics on incidents of indiscipline in Scotland's schools?

I absolutely support the Minister for Education and Young People in his decision to ensure that in Scotland we have more accurate information on violence and discipline in schools than we had previously. I absolutely support the Minister for Education and Young People in his decision to ensure that head teachers use exclusions more effectively and more regularly, if they are required, than they have done in recent years.

However, I also absolutely support the Minister for Education and Young People in taking forward our policy on school discipline which, I remind Mr McLetchie, is trying to reverse years and years of poor discipline, social deprivation and the difficulties in our society that have led to a decline in young people's behaviour and attitudes, and to the breakdown of families. That has led to the situation in our schools, which has been tackled in recent years by a discipline policy that is thorough and which is hard on people who misbehave in our schools, but which also ensures that those people have a chance to reform their behaviour and to participate in our society. That is the challenge that faces this devolved Government and which we have taken up, but which was ignored in every single year of the Conservative Governments of the 1980s and 1990s. We are now acting on that and starting to make a difference.

It is a long time since the First Minister was in a classroom. According to the statistics that his Government used to publish, there were about 1,000 violent attacks on teachers in our schools seven years ago, but in 2004—the last time figures were published—there were 7,000. This is not about years and years of neglect by the Tories; it is about years and years of neglect by the Scottish Executive.

The fact is that we used to have all the figures every year from every school, but now the Minister for Education and Young People is giving us a survey every three years. It is a fact that the latest figures we have—from 2004—show that there was an attack on a member of staff in a Scottish school every 12 minutes of the school day. However, the Scottish Executive is refusing to update those figures. Is not it the case that parents and teachers need to know, but the Scottish Executive does not want to know? Is not it the case that we do not have a Peacock but an ostrich running education in Scotland?

We used to have a Government of ostriches in this country.

When I was Minister for Education, Europe and External Affairs in 2001, we examined school discipline and pulled together all the different interests in Scottish education and united them around a plan to tackle it. We were trying to turn around years and years of neglect—years and years of Government policies that did not tackle school discipline but imposed bureaucracy on teachers and reduced the impact that they were able to make in the classroom. The reforms of the Conservatives in the 1980s reduced the authority of head teachers, cut back budgets, reduced the use of school uniform and did away with school award ceremonies and celebrations of pupils' success. [Interruption.]

Order.

All those policies were implemented under the Conservative Government in the 1980s and 1990s and are now being tackled and reversed by the partnership Government in a Scottish Parliament that we are proud of and which is now making a difference.

This is truly incredible. The Government that did not tackle discipline in our schools is the Scottish Executive. It is the Scottish Executive's policy of having a target to reduce the number of exclusions that has tied the hands of our teachers and second-guessed their judgment. That is the First Minister's policy. Does he agree that we need to give power back to head teachers and our schools so that they can make the decisions that are necessary to maintain discipline without having constantly to look over their shoulders to local authorities or ministers? We should let them do the job. Would not that be a much more effective way to tackle the problem?

The Minister for Education and Young People has made it absolutely clear that head teachers should do their jobs and should be backed up not only by the Government but by local authorities. We also need to ensure that we tackle school discipline across the board, not only by ensuring that head teachers use their authority and the policies that they can implement but by making sure that the whole school takes the matter seriously and that parents accept their responsibilities, too.

Not that long ago, Mr McLetchie voted against a bill that allows us to place orders on parents to ensure that they accept their responsibilities. The problem is not all the fault of the teachers in our schools and it is not all the fault of our head teachers. Parents must also accept some responsibility. If Mr McLetchie had voted for the Antisocial Behaviour etc (Scotland) Bill, he could perhaps—

We did.

You did not vote for the bill all the way through its various stages.

We did.

No you did not.

We did.

No you did not.

We did.

You did not, and we will remind Mr McLetchie every single week of his attitude to those measures, because they are measures that will make a wider difference.

I call Richard Baker, who has a supplementary question on a constituency matter.

Will the First Minister join me in congratulating Grampian police on their use of the new powers of dispersal to tackle antisocial behaviour by a minority of the drivers who congregate on Aberdeen's Beach Boulevard? Does he share my surprise at comments by Mike Rumbles in yesterday's Evening Express, in which he described the measure as "bordering on illegality"? His comments will perplex and upset residents of the area who met police—

Question.

Residents overwhelmingly back the proposals to tackle the behaviour of boy racers that is wrecking the peace of their community.

My support for dispersal orders is on the record and I am proud that Parliament has passed them into law so that they can be used by Grampian police and others throughout Scotland. This week, Grampian police have led the way and I hope that elsewhere in Scotland people who need the peace and security that dispersal orders can bring will see the police and local authorities using them to good effect.

---

Identity Card Scheme

To ask the First Minister how the Scottish Executive will respond to the Scottish Parliament's decision in respect of the ID card scheme proposed by the UK Government. (S2F-1492)

The identity card scheme is being introduced by the United Kingdom Government throughout the whole of the United Kingdom. When the legislation has been fully enacted, Scots who apply for designated services that are the responsibility of the UK Government, such as passports or social security benefits, will face the same requirements as other UK residents. They will not need their ID cards to access devolved services unless the Scottish Parliament decides otherwise.

I remind the First Minister that Parliament has instructed the Scottish Executive to make a full statement on the intended use of the identity database by devolved institutions—it is the database that we are talking about. The Home Secretary intends to force the Identity Cards Bill through before the general election, so we need a statement before the Easter recess. When will we receive such a statement?

I have just made a statement about access to devolved services. Whether to allow wider access to the database is a decision for the Home Secretary. I hope that that is the clarification that Shiona Baird was looking for. If she wants more precise information, she has only to ask.

I am disappointed that the First Minister cannot make a commitment. The rushed process at Westminster creates urgency not only for a statement from the Executive, but for scrutiny of the issues that affect Parliament's powers. Is the First Minister aware that clauses 17(6) and 18(4) of the bill will confer new powers on the Scottish Parliament to create enactments to require identity checks? Surely that will require a Sewel motion. When will we have that motion?

Those clauses will not do what is suggested—Shiona Baird's interpretation is wrong. She has the absolute guarantee from me that a Sewel motion will not be required.

Is the First Minister aware that Home Office minister Hazel Blears told the House of Commons Home Affairs Committee this week that

"some of our counter-terrorism powers will be disproportionately experienced by the Muslim community"

and that it is a reality that Muslims will be stopped and searched by the police more often than the rest of the public?

I do not think that that relates to the question. Please come to the point.

Will the First Minister ensure that Scottish police forces are not party to such behaviour as part of a flawed and highly expensive ID card system? Will he confirm that only the Liberal Democrats in this Parliament and in the House of Commons have consistently opposed ID cards and not feebly noted them as the Greens, the nats and the Tories have?

I agree with Jeremy Purvis that the Liberal Democrats have a principled position on the matter, but I disagree strongly with that position. I will stand by the agreement on devolved services, but I believe that we must protect the security of the United Kingdom and of the people who live in it and that the proposal will contribute to that. At the same time, I want to ensure—as I am sure Hazel Blears does—that our police forces treat every section of the community with due respect and that every section of the community is involved in positively preserving community security. In my discussions with Scotland's chief constables, I will ensure that that continues to be the case.

---

Sectarianism

To ask the First Minister what action is being taken to address sectarianism among Celtic and Rangers football supporters. (S2F-1493)

Representatives from Celtic and Rangers and their supporters' organisations were involved in the summit that we held in Glasgow on 14 February. They gave a clear commitment to playing their part in getting rid of bigoted behaviour from all parts of Scottish society.

Does the First Minister agree that we should have a realistic expectation of what football clubs can do to tackle sectarianism? They can do more—for instance, they can identify and exclude fans who offend. Does he agree that the strategy will not succeed unless we acknowledge that sectarianism is a wider problem in Scottish society than the notion of the 90-minute bigot and that the agenda concerns tolerance and understanding of the history and culture of all Scotland's communities?

It is precisely because we want to provide additional powers in football grounds to ban people who are involved in sectarian and other behaviour that we are pursuing banning orders for football fans in our proposed police bill, which is now the subject of consultation.

We recognise that the problem of sectarianism goes far wider than football grounds and football clubs. We acknowledge the action that football clubs have taken and we support them in that and urge them to do more.

We will act on marches and parades and, with councils, on registration of people who sell paraphernalia outside football grounds. We will also act through, for example, the pack that we will produce this month for Scottish schools, to educate the next generation in the principles of respect and tolerance that we hope will underpin their behaviour.

In his letter of 10 February to me, the First Minister rejected my proposal for an award along the lines of investors in people to recognise football clubs' good efforts to tackle sectarianism. Will the First Minister explain why he has rejected such a proposal in favour of one that regulates through licensing and does not incentivise clubs—using the stick and not the carrot—when the majority of Scottish Premier League clubs, including Celtic and Rangers, have supported my scheme?

It would be crazy to duplicate a scheme and the Scottish Football Association, which is the body that is responsible for the management of football clubs in Scotland, gave strong support to our initiative at the summit against sectarianism. The SFA licenses clubs and includes within those licences very strict conditions on clubs' approaches to sectarianism and related issues. The SFA has the best people to implement such a scheme and to ensure that clubs meet high standards and are recognised and rewarded for that.

Since it is generally acknowledged that misuse of alcohol plays a major part in the most violent aspects of sectarian misbehaviour, does the First Minister think that the new Licensing (Scotland) Bill will help to deal with football hooliganism in general, and particularly sectarian hooliganism at football matches?

A major purpose of the Licensing (Scotland) Bill is to tackle the binge drinking and abuse of alcohol that takes place in Scotland, and which occasionally has an impact in and around football matches and on football supporters as well in other areas. The Licensing (Scotland) Bill, which was introduced this week, will give us the opportunity to put in place a tougher regime for those who abuse alcohol. As a result, I hope that it will reduce violence, intimidation and disorder around football matches and other major events.

Question 5 has been withdrawn. The member is ill.

---

Fresh Talent Initiative

To ask the First Minister what contingency plans the Scottish Executive has devised in the event of failure of the fresh talent initiative. (S2F-1491)

I should thank Sandra White for her positive and confident statement about Scotland's future. I think that it is representative of the Scottish National Party today.

I can think of only one initiative to attract fresh talent back to Scotland that has failed in the past year and that was the leadership election of the Scottish National Party.

I cannot say that I thank the First Minister for his reply, although it was what I expected. Perhaps I can give him some ideas on how we can attract to, or keep fresh talent in, Scotland; it would certainly happen with independence.

Does the First Minister agree that many skilled Scots leave the country each year because of the lack of opportunities and the lack of financial incentives from a Government that is more used to rhetoric than to action? What does the First Minister propose to do to keep the young talent we already have in Scotland? How does he propose to support working Scots couples who wish to have more children but are prevented from doing so by a Government that has failed to implement the right set of economic incentives that would allow them to have a family and to stay in and belong to Scotland?

As this is the day before my party conference starts, I do not think I will have a better opportunity to explain to Sandra White the benefits that our Government has managed to bring in during the past eight years at Westminster. First of all, we have some of the best child care provision that Scotland has ever seen; that will be expanded after the general election should the Government be re-elected. Secondly, Scotland also has a better system of benefits than ever, including maternity and paternity benefits.

However, those are not solutions to Scotland's depopulation. We need to ensure that people in Scotland stay in Scotland. I welcome young Scots experiencing the rest of the world, but I also hope that many more of them will choose to stay here. They will do so because our economy is growing, because there are more jobs in Scotland than in any other European country apart from Denmark and because, as we saw in yesterday's survey, we in Scotland have some of the best cities in the whole United Kingdom; cities where people enjoy an exciting, modern and dynamic lifestyle.

We will also attract fresh talent from elsewhere. We will not do that through the girning and moaning of a Scottish National Party that does not believe in its country and which does not believe Scotland is worth living in. I believe that Scotland is the best small country in the world and I believe that Scotland is worth living in. People will want to come here and when they do, they will get a welcome from this partnership Government.

People do want to come here and in my constituency we have a large and growing number of citizens from eastern Europe—Poland, in particular. However, I tell the First Minister that we have a problem with their knowledge of the English language. Those people are often highly qualified, but because of their lack of English, they are doing fairly menial jobs. Does the First Minister agree that we must try to co-ordinate efforts among councils, enterprise agencies and the Scottish Executive to ensure that those welcome workers are taught English as quickly as possible?

There are a number of schemes in our colleges and elsewhere to encourage people who come to this country to learn English or to improve their skills in English. Those are good schemes, but we are currently committed to a review of them following a request from the Scottish Refugee Council. We will look to improve the schemes further in the years to come.

Listening to the First Minister today, one would not think that population decline was a serious issue in Scotland. The First Minister will be aware that more than 600 million European Union citizens currently have a right to live and work in Scotland without recourse to any fresh talent schemes. Why does the First Minister think that so few of those 600 million EU citizens currently exercise that right?

That is yet another distortion of the facts from the Conservative party. The number of people who come to Scotland from elsewhere in the EU as a percentage of the overall numbers of people who come to Britain has increased dramatically since the fresh talent initiative began. That is a good sign that we are sending out the right signal to Europe that we are a welcoming country that wants to attract people to come and make a contribution to our society and economy. When they do that, we ensure that we have a strong economy with more jobs in Scotland than we have ever had. Those people can make their contribution to a growing economy that would not exist if the Conservatives were to get back into power.

Why, if everything is so rosy in our country, are so many people leaving?

Yet again, we have that constant refrain from the SNP that is not true. Scotland has been a country of out-migration for at least one century if not for two. Now, at the start of the 21st century, the balance between in-migration and out-migration in Scotland is level for the first time in a very long time. In any other country in the world, nationalist parties would celebrate that rather than try to run it down. The only people in Scotland today who are running down this country and who do not believe that it is the best small country in the world are in the Scottish National Party and the Conservatives. Both parties should be ashamed of that.

Given all that the First Minister has said and given his best intentions, which he has related to us, will he tell me why—if all that he has said is true—top scientists are leaving the Hannah Research Institute in Ayrshire? Why has Britain's probably most-respected diabetes expert had to move south of the border? If all that the First Minister said is true, that would not happen, so why is it happening?

It is happening because we do not lock people up in this country and refuse them opportunities to move around and develop their scientific skills elsewhere. Actually, that is exactly what the SNP wants to do—it wants to hold people in. We used to think that it wanted border guards to keep people out, but now it wants them to keep people in. That party gets more ridiculous all the time.

I tell Mr Gallie that scientists are coming to this country all the time. It will always be the case that some will choose to move and to develop their research skills elsewhere. Last year I spoke to David Lane from the University of Dundee, who has gone to Singapore. He will return to Scotland, but he has gone to stretch his mind, to develop his knowledge and to make contacts for Scotland while he is there. He will continue to manage his unit in Dundee while he is abroad. There are many other people like him, but there are also many others who are coming to this country. One of the reasons—

Look at the Hannah Research Institute.

Wait for it. One of the reasons why so many people are coming here, and why so many more will come here, is that Scottish higher education is about to get the biggest-ever level of investment in one, two or three years of investment over the course of the current spending review. That is in stark contrast to the cuts that would exist in the budget were the Conservatives to win any general election this year.

Meeting suspended until 14:00.

On resuming—